NRL put Knights on auction block with hopes of a $20 million sale

rhugh89

Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
NRL put Newcastle Knights on auction block with hopes of $20 million sale

April 20, 2016 - 5:00PM

The NRL will seek bids for an historic auction of the Newcastle Knights after June 30, as it continues to restructure ownership of its debtor clubs, with the Dragons and Wests Tigers scheduled to have different shareholding by the end of the month and the Titans next.

While St George Illawarra and Wests Tigers had a combined debt of $12 million to the NRL, the Knights are currently only $1 million in hock to headquarters, meaning a sale price which more than covers debt will yield the NRL a handsome profit, attracting the criticism it is profiting from one of its 16 clubs.

Historic ownership and debt were major factors in the restructure of the Dragons and Wests Tigers, but the Knights are owned by the NRL and run by a seven-person board of a mix of four independents, two NRL appointees and one community leader in former ARL chief executive, John Quayle.

The NRL therefore will adopt an auction approach to the sale of the Newcastle club, seeking a figure between $10 million and $20 million.

The NRL's Head of Club Services, Tony Crawford, said that "at the point we exit our shareholding, we clearly have an eye to the market around football clubs, but equally we will ensure the new ownership acts in the interest of the club, the community and the game".

While past owner Nathan Tinkler has been lampooned for his stewardship, he did leave the Knights debt-free and with $6.7 million in cash from day one of the NRL takeover.

Certainly, other debts have surfaced and the club has a $2.5 million over three years loan facility with the NRL, with $1 million already drawn and the possibility of calling on a further $1 million.

The new owner will need to buy a competitive team, insofar as the NRL inherited an ageing roster following Tinkler's dictate to former coach, Wayne Bennett, to "win me a premiership".

The obvious buyer of the Knights, the wealthy Wests Newcastle group of seven licensed premises, claims to be a reluctant partner.

"We see ourselves as owners of the last resort," said the chief executive of the Wests Group, Phil Gardner, who sits on the board of the Knights as an appointee of the NRL, rather than his employer.

While the NRL under former chief executive Dave Smith saw the Wests Group as a logical partner of the Knights, being a stable community-based organisation with a membership passionate about their NRL team, Gardner hinted there may be other interested potential investors.

"There will be interest from unusual people when the ownership issue is approached," he predicted, a reference to local half-billionaires who attended a recent meeting to discuss third-party opportunities with players.

While the NRL has made it clear existing debts have to be satisfied in conjunction with ownership restructures, Gardner denied that inheriting debt was a roadblock to a Wests Newcastle takeover.

"We have not had any discussion with the NRL over debt because there has been no discussion with them over ownership," he said.

However, other sources insist Gardner, a sharp negotiator, put up his hand for ownership of the Knights with a $1 offer the day the NRL took it over.

He certainly presents a parlous position of the Knights in the post-Tinkler days.

"We got an empty money bag from Tinkler," he said, "But the NRL has been fantastic for the Knights, particularly Tony Crawford who has done a great job.

"They saved the day. We were looking at liquidation. The club was in a terrible position.

"We're a test tube baby," Gardner added, describing Tinkler as "a power of one", a single owner who burnt off all other commercial opportunities in Newcastle.

"Somewhere there is an outcome, and we've been a consistent supporter since the Knights were formed in 1988.

"In any year, we could have taken them over but we've never moved to even part ownership because we always thought of the Knights as a separate entity."

"The game is incredibly expensive to run.

"Even billionaires find it hard to stay.

"Third-party deals have pushed the expenses out further," he said, treading the delicate path of NRL-appointed board member and representative of a potential buyer.


http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...f-20m-sale-20160420-goaorw.html#ixzz46LmE1DDp

 
I feel like chicken tonight.

- - - Updated - - -

On a serious note, the NRL are dreaming if they think someone will give them 20 mill for an organisation with virtually no assets except a few signed contracts and a few balls that currently makes a loss, and probably will forever.
 
I guess you need to start high so you can be negotiated down. The NRL don't want to own a club and the Knights are losing money anyway, anyone who can prove that they can run (finance) the club long term should be given the keys for free. I can hardly see there being one willing buyer let alone enough to make for an auction.
 
So much for all the malarkey about how well the Board is doing and making a profit lol!

And I think the NRL still tell us only what they want too. Maybe the $20million may not be so much profit when all debts are cleared.
 
Last edited:
The only way the licence for the Knights would be worth 20 mill to anyone would be if it could be bought by someone like Perth or PNG and the team moved to a new location.

Even Tinkler didn't pay for it. He had to guarantee he would boost money for the juniors by 1 mill and would prop up sponsorship to 10 mill a year, and makeup any shortfall.

I just saw again on the news that the NRL could make a tidy profit from selling the club (which they got for nothing, and apparently have spent nothing on, just given a loan they expect paid back).
Wests won't give them a red cent - not in a million years - and not even Tinkler was silly enough to offer cash up front - so 20 mill is complete fantasy stuff.
 
I sincerely am scared of what type of idiot that would buy a money pit like us.

Especially with all the terms and stipulations the NRL will be putting on us.
 
They are kidding themselves if they think someone would pay 20m for the knights brand an nrl lic.
Someone has added a zero for *****s and gigs
 
People spend $15 on a cup of coffee. People also spend hundreds of dollars going to Sterosonic and similar dance music festivals. People have no problem spending ridiculous amounts of money on things that are sh*t. Why should the Knights be any different?
 
Really??
99% of people have $200 in hand at some point each week.
0.00000000000000001 can afford to punt 20m into a business with a 30% chance of a profit.
Put it this way, 22million people in Austalia and on % no one will buy the knights for 20m.
Marvin whateverthefunk his last name is... mite be that one man willing to punt 20m for our club, though i 1000000% think he is a BAD IDEA.
 
I think Cappie Wests will not get involved in a $1million a year loss business. I was at the 15 August 1995 anti SuperLeague Meeting at Harker Oval and the Board and members will not want to go tht way again.
 
Members don't get a say any more mate, and neither do the board.

A Knights member these days is nothing more than a season ticket holder or, in the case of a non-ticketed member, the owner of a pile of red and blue junk.
 
Raed again slots ~ referring to the maggots Board and members. No need to tell me that mate. Paid thousands and thousands since 1987 and did not want Tinkler and now disenfranchised by the NRL. Ahh well having left Newie for my late wife's health, I guess Foxtel is cheaper than a season ticket in the stand.
 
I love knights and I remember when they won the 97 gf my parents and about 30 friends went into town and partied didn't see them for 2 days ! My parents are still knights fans but I see alot of the friends who were knights fans, juring the Johns era ..have now jumped ship in recent years , a few almost came around when we signed Bennett..results/media/fans/money
 
If they are "sold" it needs to be on the same basis as they were "sold" to Tinkler - not a big pot of money given to the NRL to spend on Sydney clubs, as seems to be the "plan" we are hearing about.
Like the sale to Tinkler, we need to get a deal where a lot of money is tipped into the Knights, especially the juniors and the coaching and training setup.
Tinkler's plan of buying Bennett and giving him all the resources he wanted was a huge failure - and a new owner could learn from that - but the fundamental principal of spending a lot of money on the club structure is what we want from privatisation - not to generate a pot of cash for the NRL that will be spent anywhere but Newcastle.
IMO, if a Newcastle based "half billionaire", as mentioned in a few articles, was keen to buy into the Knights, he should only do it if the money stays in town. If he gives the NRL 20 mill, he must insist it is spent on something like an academy like the new one at Penrith, but in Newcastle - but ideally, all his money should be spent on the Knights.
 
Last edited:
Spot on Billy. Latest whisper is (surprise surprise) Coote to the chooks on a multi million four year deal. We do not need our sale money going there.
 
Cootes staying at the cowboys. Put your house on it.

Any person willing to buy a club for 20 million has rocks in their head in my opinion. Until clubs learn how to make themselves self sufficient which is a long way off as all they do is wait for nrl grants and whinge for more.

It will just be another Tinker scenario when they realise they are leaking monet the size of the Hoover Dam.

League has to be one of the only organizations in the world where most clubs aren't proactive in getting into a profit themselves. It really is amateur hour with most clubs and their CEO's on my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top