Ben
Years ago

South Dragons Situation

I know theres a thread on this but can anyone give the facts of what has happened as I heard Germander pulled out of ownership because of the salary cap issue can anyone shed light on this and Mcpeake apparently walking out on the Tigers.

Topic #19817 | Report this topic


kmtw  
Years ago

Why would you want to loose $1-3 million per year with BA in charge if you disagree with them.

Businesses and thats what the teams are(how ever not profitable) will choose what the do and when not BA.

BA should be if at all there to facilitate what is required by the league not dictate how much they have to loose.

Reply #234670 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Ruffy Germinder pulled out of backing the Dragons as he wanted to be put on the BA board and they all voted against it.

He cracked the sh^ts and left.

Reply #234705 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

KMTV

you really have it in for BA don't you? you might want to take a more disinterested view.

the notion that BA dictate what a team will lose is silly. The dragons lost close to 3 mill in their first year in the NBl without BA...

8 of 16 AFL teams are expected to lose money this year despite the AFL's massive distributions and other 'hardship' funds

almost every NRL team will lose this year - and melbourne a mint

3 a-league sides are now effectively being underwritten by FFA - melbourne victory are counting a one million dollar loss this year

professional sport in this country is basically a losing proposition - do you understand this?

Reply #234713 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

Every mofo wants their 'people' on the freaking Board- do you think BA haven't experienced these stunts before?
No sooner do they have one assclown resign from the Board who never shouldn't been on it, the next team in line who has a sense of entitlement that doesn't get to pull the same stunts that have bitten BA on the ass before just pulls out?
No wonder they are getting called short-sighted- BA have seen all this before and once people like that entrench themselves in for wrong reasons they're hard to get rid of- if your interest in Australian basketball is solely dependent on you getting on the Board or not, you have no freaking right to be there.
What a selfish cop out- glad BA stuck to their guns on that one too!

Reply #234715 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

never once has it been suggested by anyone with any legitimacy that geminder wanted "on" the BA board. i would reckon they would have accepted him with open arms...

Reply #234726 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

Yes that's right, because more owners and co-owners on the Board, particularly from Vic clubs that want to run the show is a good thing, right?
They are still detoxing from the last one.

Reply #234763 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

HAHA, the Board is now the Board of BA, not the NBL Board. It acts in effect as a commission. With Seamus leaving, Geminder given his excellent corporate knowledge and contacts, would have been a great addition. I think if he was serious about joining then he would have been warmly accepted. My point is that someone saying he wanted on at all is questionable information - nothing has ever come to light saying geminder wanted a place on the board.

Reply #234764 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

HO it not coming to light has no bearing on the fact that he and Cowan assumed it would be a natural progression- they will no longer have owners or co-owners on the Board end of story.
In Brisbane at the Bullets relaunch function when a friend asked several questions one of which was do they see how unprofessional and unethical it is, they unequivocally said yes it won't be happening again.
Even McPeake started out as someone who could be admired for his business skills and contacts- they all go down the same road because they can't separate what's in the best interests for the club and what's in the best interests for their League.
There are plenty of people out there who are worthy of being a replacement on the Board who are not owners and that is what they will pursue when the time is right- they have bigger fish to fry today tomorrow and for the forseeable future.
Please don't be so naiive about how you're sure this particular one will be a bit more upstanding than the last- BA have learnt their lesson on that and so should the rest of us.

Reply #234768 | Report this post


LA Boy  
Years ago

HAHA- Bullets got dug out of the grave?

http://www.brisbanebullets.com.au/

BTW it definitely is unprofessional to have a team owner on the board like that. Weird idea from BA (NBL?) to allow that in the first place.

Reply #234769 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

Wholeheartedly agree.
Even when Eddy was around and sticking his hands into this and that, as someone who is Brisbane born and bred even I had a problem with it and how it would look for us from the outside.

Reply #234771 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

LaBoy- They shut the website down not long after we folded and the club no longer came up in search listings.
A few weeks after that they must've anticipated they'd use the domain name again and are paying it in preparation for a return hopefully in 2010- the tombstone has been on there for a little while now.

Reply #234772 | Report this post


LA Boy  
Years ago

only just checked that out before, was a pretty funny cartoon. I guess Bullets will be formally introduced to the league next Easter!

Reply #234783 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

HAHA, you speak from a position of knowledge but you have none.

There is nothing in the new BA constitution to prevenmt an owner of a team being a board member. So to say it will never happen again is naive in the extreme.

The board needs to be made up of the best people. You balance COI by your make-up of the Board - you will never ever, given the need for some people to be representative, remove the possibility of COI, but a good Board manages that. Gaze is there ostensibly to give a players point of view, Thoday is independent, Sias is independent - there is already therefore some balance. McPeake was reputed to be a fairly effetcive Board member on most issues, but he is no heavyweight corporate in the sense Geminder, Thoday and Sias are. McPeake at best, by definition, is an SME owner operator.

#234705 suggested that the Dragons are out because Geminder cracked it because he did not get on the Board. I am just saying that there is no evidence this occurred - you seem to believe it. I try to filter what people say here thats all.

Reply #234823 | Report this post


HAHA  
Years ago

HO you have absolutely no idea who knows who- I have absolutely nothing whatsoever to prove to you.
I know what conversations have taken place because I was in them- if that makes you feel uncomfortable in some way, too bad.

Reply #234825 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

sorry HAHA, where once on this forum ever have i claimed to know anyone ?? I don't generally appeal to authority (its a really poor quality way of arguing you see and generally smacks of desperation) when i argue here and i don't normally attack people - no need for that. I have nothing to feel uncomfortable about.

Calm down, deal with the facts as they are known, not rumoured. If you have a close contact, good luck to you, thats nice, but it does not make you an oracle.

Argue my point eh? - maybe some evidence will emerge that Geminder wanted on the board and BA said no, but until that happens its pure speculation from #234705... and yourself at this point. And, even if Geminder wanted on the board and BA said no, there needs to be a more than circumstantial link to the Dragons being withdrawn for your theory to hold weight - it seems to Geminder and the Dragons have a crisis of confidence in BA and the proposed new season, looks to me like they are priming themselves for a second season entry.

BTW..... there are lots of people here who have good contacts, Isaac does, Dicko has produced some great information at times which shows he does but they are not always right.

Reply #234845 | Report this post


Camel 31  
Years ago

If Dragons have no confidence in BA first season - there's no guarantee they will get back in , whenever they feel like it - Gaze said.

Reply #234848 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

I think Germinder just pulled his backing and Cowan can't (or doesn't want to) shoulder it alone.

BA/NBL is an easy target for an outgoing shot.

Reply #234917 | Report this post


LA Boy  
Years ago

your shoulder needs to be superman strong to be losing money alone

Reply #234923 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

Or if you can't cover it, scale back expenses. Works for Townsville.

Reply #234931 | Report this post




 

Reply to this topic

Random name suggestion for anonymous posters: Rhea 65

Rules:You must read the Terms of Use. No spam, no offensive material, no sniping at other clubs, no 'who cares?'-type comments, no naming or bashing under 18 players. Learn how to embed YouTube videos or tweets

Please proof-read your post before submitting as you will not be able to edit it afterwards.



Close ads
Dunk.com.au - Custom basketball uniforms
Punch - insightful time tracking
PickStar - The best place to book sports stars

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



Invoicing clients? Stay productive with Punch, the insightful time tracker that earns you more.

Special offer: $30/month Pay $100 for lifetime access. Sign up now!

.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 12:24 pm, Tue 2 Jun 2020 | Posts: 834,721 | Last 7 days: 748