Would we know if we were?

Mmm 1 + 1 = 3

I’m as nervous as anyone regarding the Bulls finances, but having followed the paper trail as far as I know how, I do think there is nothing to see here.

There was talk months ago of Lowe trying to sell his share of the bulls, presumably to finance his retirement following his heart attack. At the time Koukash made a Statement to say that he had been offered the share but wasn’t interested. It was an odd out of the blue statement, but at the time he was undergoing a split of his own so I suppose I can understand him taking the defensive.

It appears that after trying to find another partner Chalmers bought out Lowe himself through one of his companies.

Do I think we should have a keen interest in the bulls ownership and finances? Hell yes! Do I believe that anything of note has happened that causes me concern? Not at all. Following the heart attack Lowe was partner in shares only. Had the not recovered from his illness then who knows who would have gained a 50% stake in the bulls. As it stands it appears that we have one owner, and that he is working tirelessly to make the bulls a self sufficient business.

These are my opinions, and I’m not an expert in such things, but I’m happy that we have a team to support, and an owner who appears to know what he is doing.

This sniping between club owners in the press isn’t very edifying and in my opinion only serves to make people more divided which is the last thing the game needs. I was critical of Chalmers when he took over as he said nothing in the press when many of us had a great deal of questions. Now I think I’d rather see him keep his counsel rather than get into slanging matches with others. The Workington streaming statement was a PR shambles and his columns on the new structure – while meaning well, I think – are not helping the situation. He’s not as smart as he thinks.

As for Hudgell he’s just another tin pot club owner. HKR are hardly the mode business either and are there largely because their owner and others cover the losses – like most RL clubs apart from Leeds. He’s never been a fan of ours and was one of those that voted to deny the Bulls their TV money back in 2012 and instead share it amongst themselves. That move more than anything scuppered the Omar Khan Bulls and led to Administration number 2 and Marc Green coming on the scene. So Hudgell is partly culpable for the situation the Bulls find themselves in. His comments about the opaque goings on that led to Chalmers and Lowe taking over to me seem to gloss over the role he and others had in engineering that.

While the bills are being paid most fans aren’t really that bothered about who the owner is or how much of the club he owns. I’ve no idea how good or bad the finances are. I doubt we’ll find out much either. The next accounts will cover the disastrous 2017 season so we won’t see how steady the ship is now until next year. It’s only when the wheels are coming off do you find out. We ought to find it easier now we’re mainly part time. However the overheads of Odsal and having a full academy, reserves and lots of backroom staff will be bigger than most L1 clubs. I guess we just hope we’re covering the bills by careful wage bill management and increasing sponsorship and crowds. It’ll probably get us back into the championship but longer term I doubt whether Chalmers has the cash to cover the losses that will be made to make an assault on SL. The cynic in me suggests that may be why he’s not cosying up to SL bosses – he can’t afford to run us in that division. Or maybe I should take off the tinfoil hat.

It's interesting when you fully read the article, it kind makes Hudgell look a little silly?

"With a bachelor's in marketing and honours' and master's degrees in finance from Massey, he worked as an associate lecturer at the University of New South Wales.

In business, after giving up his football dream, he spent seven years in Sydney, eventually as a group managing director and CEO of a travel company that boasted 550 staff and an annual revenue of $A280 million. "

Along with being Chairmen of NZRL you could almost accuse Hudgell of first class Trumpery.

I does seem to good to be true and yes you could imagine there is someone bankrolling the club. But how many season tickets were sold? And at what price? They aren't give-away tickets anymore. And how many sold after the announcement of Kear? You could say that the act paid for itself.

He knows what he's doing, I mean we're not nearing 50 in squad numbers yet and I understand, given the recent history, people may question who he's doing it for. But to try paint him as a lost child in a world of grown ups is a bit strange. Then he's got Damian Irvine as a sounding board... he's hardly clueless.

I'd take offense to the insinuation that some of us are unintelligent just because we choose not to interrogate every little action the club does or does not do. And why... because its none of our business.

We are not share holders, nor are we being held against our will in continuing to follow the club. Why should AC have to justify everything?

I don't particularly care where the money is coming from. I pay my money to watch a game of rugby; end of!!!

And I'm sure Mr. Chalmers would love more fans like you. I'm sure Mr. Green would have too.

I'd say the way you are about it is how a lot of fans are. I didn't mean it to sound like I was saying you were thick. But I'd say there's a large amount of fans like you who don't want to know what's going on behind the scenes and just want to turn up, give the club money and watch the game. Those are the fans that keep clubs going a lot of the time. Entirely their choice and if that's what makes them happy, good on em. But it can often be the equivalent of the child sticking his fingers in his ears when his parents were arguing, because if he can't hear them, then everything's fine isn't it?

Well said bullinenemyland
Some one else on the same lines as me... if people want to know where the monies are coming from I have a great idea for you.. JOIN THE BOARD

I don't understand people who believe they have some kind of 'right' to know what is going on in the background.

No business or organisation, operates with full public disclosure of all its dealings via social media, well, apart from the current American government, of course. Somethings need to be kept under wraps for obvious business reasons - not least so competitors don't get hold of the information and use it against us, but also because the club is responsible for a lot of personal information belonging to its employees, who also have a right to privacy.

So answer this, when you order a coffee from a vendor do you ask him to provide an update on how he is supporting his business financially before you agree to buy it?

When you subscribe to Sky/Virgin/Netflix do you ask if they have paid all their taxes correctly and on time?

When you book your well earned holiday, do you check that the cabin crew have all be paid their wages for the month before you buy the plane ticket?

You may say its different but really it is not. Chalmers is running a business first and foremost. Therefore it is entirely up to him, and him alone to decide how that business is run and it is up to you whether to buy the product or go elsewhere.

It's no different to any other business in the UK and i'd guess if you did ask those questions you'd be told where to go.

If you genuinely can't see the difference, I rescind my comment where I wasn't suggesting you were thick.

The companies you list, their customers have no love for those companies. Part of being a regular customer of a sports club is having an affection for it. If you don't have that affection, you're unlikely to be back very often. If the business owner wants to keep all things to himself, it's entirely his choice. He has no obligation to keep people informed. But if he DOES keep people informed and be honest and open, those customers with the love and affection for his club are likely to stick around because they feel the club loves them back. If he doesn't, there's every chance quite a few of them won't bother (and I speak from experience having seen a grand total of two games this year). It's as comparable to a friendship or loving relationship as it is to a business/customer arrangement.

You seem intelligent enough to understand that.

Also think that if those companies were in trouble they wouldn't go around their customers with a bucket asking for contributions.