Some serious Questions should be asked.

[1967]

I don’t think the “shares” in the betting agency or laundry’s pubs are offered in lieu of salary.
I believe it’s an offer to the player to invest their money in the business and earn a return. This return is higher than what they would be able to achieve investing the funds elsewhere.

You could be right mate …. but after reading what the Nrl approved for the Storm so they could keep their players … it’s made me realise we have no f****** idea what these power clubs are offering these players to get them to sign and to stay with them.

The Roosters have some of the richest and powerful people in Australia aligned with them, Willie Mason talks about it in one of his podcasts, who knows what they’re offering these players … but somethings going on when a club like that with basically no junior teams or development can last in this game and never miss finals footy every year for 28 years in a row ?

The end point is, it’s unfair, it makes for one sided competitions and it’s ruining the game, it also ruins coaching careers and loses fans …

As a lot of people have said, it’s time for a complete overhaul of the SC system ..

 

[1967]

Buzz presented it as a story so he could do the follow up the next day saying the NRL said no. Funny how it happened on a Sunday, I'm not sure the NRL unless it was properly presented by the Bulldogs to the NRL could say no until the finer details were asked.

He’s a muppet, we all know what the media is like, Laundy probably said to someone he’d love to have Tino at the club and he’d be willing to offer stakes in a pub to get him …

Next minute .. LAUNDY TO OFFER TINO PUB DEAL

we saw that last week when Gould said in his presser that he wasn’t going to mention past management ..

Next minute GOULD STILL BLAMES HASLER FOR BULLDOGS FAILS ..

He said nothing if the sort …

None of that should turn our attentions away from the important part of the article of what the Nrl approved for the Storm, that shit needs investigating ..

 

[DinkumDog]

I feel the article about the Laundy’s wanting to offer Tino a pub partnership, dropped a very telling piece of information that needs further explaining.

It’s states that when the storm had a bunch of their players off contract, to keep them, the chairman Matt Trip sort and was granted approval by the Nrl to offer players investments in his booking firm, Betr.

Clubs needs to stand up and ask some hard questions, how did this all work, was it part of the SC, classed as TPA’s, did the players have to buy in, were they offered a guaranteed income return, or was it just here you go, we’ll give you this $150k investment opportunity if you stay at our club.

I’m not sure what the beef is?
Storm was all done above board and NRL approved.
If anything it might be a precedent for what The Laundys are allegedly offering. It’s not TPA (not PAYG) or cap related (not paid by the club). It’s an investment incentive to get players to a club. Survival of the fittest.

 

[hayes]

I’m not sure what the beef is?
Storm was all done above board and NRL approved.
If anything it might be a precedent for what The Laundys are allegedly offering. It’s not TPA (not PAYG) or cap related (not paid by the club). It’s an investment incentive to get players to a club. Survival of the fittest.

What's the difference between real estate investment or business investment?

 

[1967]

I’m not sure what the beef is?
Storm was all done above board and NRL approved.
If anything it might be a precedent for what The Laundys are allegedly offering. It’s not TPA (not PAYG) or cap related (not paid by the club). It’s an investment incentive to get players to a club. Survival of the fittest.

So are you 100% honestly saying Dink, that before this article came out …. you were aware that the Storm were approved to offer this investment deal to their players.

 

[DinkumDog]

So are you 100% honestly saying Dink, that before this article came out …. you were aware that the Storm were approved to offer this investment deal to their players.

Yes. It was in the news when it happened.
In fact I posted about it in the past.

 

[1967]

What's the difference between real estate investment or business investment?

Has anyone in the press come out and publicly stated that the Nrl have approved a club to offer real estate investments?

 

[DinkumDog]

What's the difference between real estate investment or business investment?

Exactly. Nothing. No doubt there would be provisions in the Storm deal too - players aren’t allowed to bet under their NRL contracts anyway, nor would they be allowed to have anything to do with the operations of the company including contact with staff etc. And I imagine that they cannot sell their shares until they retire. No way the NRL allowed this without some serious scrutiny and the Storm would’ve been foolish to do anything other than above board after getting done for cap breaches in the past - that cost them two premierships and a boatload of money. I doubt Matt Tripp would be up for risking that, he’s too smart.

 

[bcmf]

That’s the problem with this bush league shit the nrl run. Journos are also at fault for perpetuating incorrect info.

I would have thought this would fall under a TPA (third party agreement). To get around the cap inclusion for this, you’d need to get this from a unrelated party. Chairman of a key sponsor isn’t one of those, I’d assume.

but you know who cares cause the chooks would be doing this shit regularly

 

[1967]

I have no problems with the Storm implementing these strategies by the way, I have no problems with whatever it is the Roosters are doing …

My problem is the Nrl picking and choosing who they’ll allow to implement these types of strategies, and what it’s doing to the game and to the clubs that don’t have this volume of rich and powerful backing ..

Look at Panthers for instance, they don’t have the backing that clubs like Souths, Bronco’s, Storm and Roosters have, so the cap has punished their success, losing players like Kikau, Leniu, Crichton, Burton, and a few others … if they had that same type of backing they wouldn’t lose those big name players like that, they’d go to their backers, come up with investment, property and outside strategies to keep them …. it’s only their junior pathways and development that’s keeping them up the top, these other Storm/Roosters clubs don’t lose big name players like that, plus they don’t develop or give a lot back to the game, it’s money that keeps them up the top and the Nrl sanction it ..

This is what Gould in a round about way is saying when he says when you’re down the bottom, it’s so hard to crawl back up to the top … because if you don’t have the big name rich backing, you’re not going to compete and pull the big name players with outside investments and added money incentives … you have to go the Bullfrog/Panthers way and take the time to develop your own ..

It’s a very unfair unbalanced competition and it favours the rich and powerful .. that’s what I have a problem with ..

I’ll finish by saying, going of some of their past decisions, the Nrl have contradicted themselves allowing players to invest in a gambling platform .. I don’t believe that would be approved for 85% of the Sydney clubs, I believe it was only approved because it’s important for the Nrl to have a strong Melbourne side …

 

[1967]

Yes. It was in the news when it happened.
In fact I posted about it in the past.

Oh ok, thanks Dink, I never saw that … if I had I’d of certainly been questioning how fair to the game and other clubs that arrangement was ..

 

[DinkumDog]

Oh ok, thanks Dink, I never saw that … if I had I’d of certainly been questioning how fair to the game and other clubs that arrangement was ..

There were definitely questions asked:

Storm players to invest in online bookmaker owned by chairman

amp.smh.com.au

 

[Bad Billy]

I’m pretty sure the initial investment is included in the cap, but the returns aren’t. Just like any other investment really.
The perk Laundy is offering is the “opportunity to invest”.

 

[B-Train]

Yes. It was in the news when it happened.
In fact I posted about it in the past.

Yeah that Melbourne deal was reported numerous times a while ago and plenty of people raised their concerns then. This isn't new and was scrutinised in the media

 

[Grunthos]

I spent years in media and advertising and grew to not trust the "smartest guy in the room."
All this smells like 2002 again with way too many smart guys for my liking...

 

[Doggystyle99]

Nrl amateur hour again lol… honestly the worst organisation in the country

 

[DinkumDog]

Yeah that Melbourne deal was reported numerous times a while ago and plenty of people raised their concerns then. This isn't new and was scrutinised in the media

The main ‘question’ here is that NRL sanction of this arrangement says that ‘such a deal can’t be used to entice players to sign at any club’ so it’s a retention play and that rules out what the Laundy’s are allegedly proposing. Also a grey area if a club could offer a one year deal to a player with a PO and then re-sign them to a bigger deal including investments then. Kind of like how we told Burto not to take up his PO before he extended. The NRL might not register such a contract though, 1 year with a PO might be easy enough to sniff out. There must be more detail we don’t know because you’d be crazy to try something like this unless above board. I’m happy for the Dogs to sail as close to the wind as possible though if it gives them an edge.

 

[DinkumDog]

Look at Panthers for instance, they don’t have the backing that clubs like Souths, Bronco’s, Storm and Roosters have, so the cap has punished their success, losing players like Kikau, Leniu, Crichton, Burton, and a few others … if they had that same type of backing they wouldn’t lose those big name players like that.

Panthers (the licensed club, not footy club) prints money. Not exactly sure of the arrangement between the licensed and footy clubs but I imagine there’s a contribution just like there is at Belmore.

Re: roster - ‘investments’ won’t necessarily make players stay. It’s near impossible to keep a premiership (let alone dual) winning squad together because player values rise with success and competitive demand and that’s where the cap kicks in but equally why it’s vital to have pathways sorted so there’s always young kids coming through looking to get a crack in the NRL. That’s what Gus is trying to set up for the Bulldogs.

 

[John Matrix]

Im not a fan of how TPA are managed/lack of it but we need to abuse it like the other clubs do to gain fairness.

You snooze you lose.

 

[bulldog butch]

The system is broken. By no means should the chairman of a club be able to offer shares in his own company.

If every club is allowed to skirt the rules it's ok. But I really think the NRL still has clear bias with certain clubs. Look at Soiths and their medical retirements verse us still having to pay Josh Jacksons money in our salary cap because he's been given a club job.

The NRL will deny us the chance to pay anyone under Laundies proposed deal. I'd almost bet my nuts on it.

Didn't Jai Arrow say he was enticed to souths because Russell could help with his girlfriends acting career aswell.....