SA Footy

As most of you are aware the saga between the Norwood Football Club and the Highlander Hotel has been ongoing for some time, to the point where Norwood have gone from being one of the most profitable clubs to now the leagues worst performer due to lack of funds comming in. Feb 2007 sees the next round of the battle played out in the Supreme Court.

From the little that I have heard on the media it does not appear to be going well for Norwood at this stage. The Highlander Hotel has spent massive amounts of money on its redevelopment and is quite clear that they do not want the Norwood Club anywhere nearby.

Although it is not how the SANFL might operate, I think it is time that they stepped into this and got some of the problem sorted out.

My proposal would be for the SANFL to assist Norwood with a loan to purchase a hotel in their area as near as possible to the Highlander and compete directiy with them. The owners of either the Windsor or the Modbury Plaza might well sell up if made the right offer.

Another thing to consider is Wallis Cinema. They are a South Australian Company yet outside of the Piccadilly at North Adelaide do not have a Cinema in the Northern Suburbs. The last complex that they built at Mt Barker was done in conjunction with a hotel. So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Surely if the SANFL, Norwood and Wallis sat down for a discussion on this and a local hotel was willing to sell up or move this could be a winner for all three of the parties?

Never happen, if the SANFL spent money on Norwood then other clubs would get a smaller dividend and possibly another club would go under.
The SANFL didn't do one thing to assist North when they were close to going under so I'd expect the same lack of help to Norwood.
Especially as it'd get rid of the bye.

DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

Dutchy wrote:DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

the last time the league helped/bailed out anyclub was woodville & west torrens (1990), & the league only did it if both clubs agreed to a merger, so i can't see that happening unless they ressurect 'the norwood-sturt' cartel

Sojourner wrote:So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Sounds good in theory, but you're forgetting that on the corner of the Parade & George Street
across the road from the Bath Hotel & just two screw punts East of Norwood Oval is
that huge cinema complex run by Hoyts as well!

Sojourner wrote:So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Never happen.
Mr Wallis is a Sturt man thru & thru.
'Aint that right Snaggletooth?

Punk Rooster wrote:

Sojourner wrote:So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Never happen.
Mr Wallis is a Sturt man thru & thru.
'Aint that right Snaggletooth?

Spot on Punk!
But living in Glenelg's zone, played cricket for the Bay Seahorses!

Snaggletooth Tiger wrote:

Punk Rooster wrote:

Sojourner wrote:So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Never happen.
Mr Wallis is a Sturt man thru & thru.
'Aint that right Snaggletooth?

Spot on Punk!
But living in Glenelg's zone, played cricket for the Bay Seahorses!

That was "Junior"...

Sojourner wrote:As most of you are aware the saga between the Norwood Football Club and the Highlander Hotel has been ongoing for some time, to the point where Norwood have gone from being one of the most profitable clubs to now the leagues worst performer due to lack of funds comming in. Feb 2007 sees the next round of the battle played out in the Supreme Court.

From the little that I have heard on the media it does not appear to be going well for Norwood at this stage. The Highlander Hotel has spent massive amounts of money on its redevelopment and is quite clear that they do not want the Norwood Club anywhere nearby.

Although it is not how the SANFL might operate, I think it is time that they stepped into this and got some of the problem sorted out.

My proposal would be for the SANFL to assist Norwood with a loan to purchase a hotel in their area as near as possible to the Highlander and compete directiy with them. The owners of either the Windsor or the Modbury Plaza might well sell up if made the right offer.

Another thing to consider is Wallis Cinema. They are a South Australian Company yet outside of the Piccadilly at North Adelaide do not have a Cinema in the Northern Suburbs. The last complex that they built at Mt Barker was done in conjunction with a hotel. So maybe Norwood and Wallis could go in together for the site as a win win. Norwood get to compete with the Highlander and have a club of their own and Wallis get a crack at Hoyts Tea Tree Plaza.

Surely if the SANFL, Norwood and Wallis sat down for a discussion on this and a local hotel was willing to sell up or move this could be a winner for all three of the parties?

Some interesting lateral thinking there.

A few comments:

Despite all the challenges, Norwood is not the leagues worst performer - this year at least. A loss of $60k was a good result given the lack of a gaming income stream at present.

Norwood has not asked for financial help from the league or any other clubs. As I understand however, it has provided financial assistance to other clubs in the past however when they have needed it.

Norwood has not started tin rattling yet.

The Supreme Court Civil Registry does not currently have a listing for the Highlander or Norwood parties. I confirmed this only last week when I spoke to someone there specifically about this matter.

Its nice to see fans of other clubs being so supportive of Norwood continuing in the SANFL after nearly 130 years. We've seen the effect of the Crows on the SANFL. We've seen the effect of the Power on the SANFL and the Port Magpies. Take Port or Norwood out of the competition and see what effect that would have other than the obvious one of removing the bye.

The club is turning the corner and doing so pretty much solo. Its been said before, I know, but stay tuned for further developments.

You have to feel sorry for the poor struggling Pokie Baron !

Dutchy wrote:DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

Ironic considering your avatar there.

As Wedgie said North were not afforded any help when we were struggling in the early 2000's and in fact the only club that offered support was Centrals and to a lesser degree the Eagles who were monitoring our Sefton Park appeals as they were moving their pokies to the their present Port Road location. The SANFL was so silent in it's lack of any support it was deafening! There are people on our board who will never forget that fact and in some way it has motivated North to be in the very sound financial position we currently have. Those same board members believe if North had gone under it would have suited the SANFL's agenda re an 8 team comp.

Whilst we all wish to see all 9 clubs financially viable to ensure a strong SANFL it is up to each club to stand on it's own feet and solve their own woes as most have done - although South were gifted a generous "peppercorn" rent on Noarlunga from the State Govt. Norwood's current plight is a result of poor business decisions by previous boards over the years including buying the Norwood Community Club with out thinking that they could never put their own pokies in because of the legislation re pokies in shopping centres once the SAJC removed theirs. They should have invested that money into buying a freehold/leasehold hotel with pokies to get them back on their feet as North did with the Northern Tavern and then look at the options about setting up their currently stored inactive pokies elsewhere, again as North did with Grand North.

If Norwood received any loan/cash from the SANFL then pandora's box would really spring open and I'm sure the SANFL could not want to put itself in that position? Norwood have enough "wealthy" supporters and businesses surely that could underwrite any borrowings to ensure the club's future. I'm sure the board have looked at this option (or have they?)

BPBRB wrote: Norwood's current plight is a result of poor business decisions by previous boards over the years including buying the Norwood Community Club with out thinking that they could never put their own pokies in because of the legislation re pokies in shopping centres once the SAJC removed theirs.

Two points here. For once, Drebin's 'inside information' is flat out wrong. Norwood didn't finish up operating the pokies at the NCC thanks to the monstrous duplicity on the part of a leading SAJC figure. To say that there was a conflict of interest would be an understatment of the highest order.

Secondly, buying the NCC will turn out to be the soundest investment the NFC ever made. While the return isn't as short term as its supporters would like the NCC property will turn out to be one of our saviours.

Barto wrote:

Dutchy wrote:DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

Ironic considering your avatar there.

WTF has that got to do with the SANFL????

Dutchy wrote:

Barto wrote:

Dutchy wrote:DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

Ironic considering your avatar there.

WTF has that got to do with the SANFL????

Has farg all to do with the SANFL,but alot to do with your belief of League Administration having nothing to do with a clubs financial predicament.

topsywaldron wrote:

BPBRB wrote: Norwood's current plight is a result of poor business decisions by previous boards over the years including buying the Norwood Community Club with out thinking that they could never put their own pokies in because of the legislation re pokies in shopping centres once the SAJC removed theirs.

Two points here. For once, Drebin's 'inside information' is flat out wrong. Norwood didn't finish up operating the pokies at the NCC thanks to the monstrous duplicity on the part of a leading SAJC figure. To say that there was a conflict of interest would be an understatment of the highest order.

Secondly, buying the NCC will turn out to be the soundest investment the NFC ever made. While the return isn't as short term as its supporters would like the NCC property will turn out to be one of our saviours.

For what purpose then did the NFC buy the NCC? Apart from an asset that can be borrowed against how much income will it actually generate and is it fully leased/functional presently and if not what are the plans for it long term? Seems many people connected with the NFC can't even answer that? As for "inside" info - one of my previous bosses was a board member of the NFC who retired from the board not so long ago and with a few reds under his belt quite happily tells all and sundry about Norwoods woes past, present and future but I guess likle all clubs there are various stories doing the rounds and which one's are actually true who knows other than those curently in power?

Booney wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Barto wrote:

Dutchy wrote:DOnt know why its the SANFL's problem???? Sure they can give advice, but they should NEVER assist financially to just one club

Ironic considering your avatar there.

WTF has that got to do with the SANFL????

Has farg all to do with the SANFL,but alot to do with your belief of League Administration having nothing to do with a clubs financial predicament.

still cant see the revelance of this towards Norwood and the SANFL

BPBRB wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:

BPBRB wrote: Norwood's current plight is a result of poor business decisions by previous boards over the years including buying the Norwood Community Club with out thinking that they could never put their own pokies in because of the legislation re pokies in shopping centres once the SAJC removed theirs.

Two points here. For once, Drebin's 'inside information' is flat out wrong. Norwood didn't finish up operating the pokies at the NCC thanks to the monstrous duplicity on the part of a leading SAJC figure. To say that there was a conflict of interest would be an understatment of the highest order.

Secondly, buying the NCC will turn out to be the soundest investment the NFC ever made. While the return isn't as short term as its supporters would like the NCC property will turn out to be one of our saviours.

For what purpose then did the NFC buy the NCC? Apart from an asset that can be borrowed against how much income will it actually generate and is it fully leased/functional presently and if not what are the plans for it long term? Seems many people connected with the NFC can't even answer that? As for "inside" info - one of my previous bosses was a board member of the NFC who retired from the board not so long ago and with a few reds under his belt quite happily tells all and sundry about Norwoods woes past, present and future but I guess likle all clubs there are various stories doing the rounds and which one's are actually true who knows other than those curently in power?

Your ignorance is astounding, even with your insider who, by the sounds of it, thankfully isn't there anymore!!
The NFC NEVER had any intention of placing pokies in the NCC at any time!! I dont care what you've heard!! The reason for buying the NCC was because they were able to at a very good price!! Simple as that!! A purchase which has turned out to be very smart one!!

The SANFL will not hand out money to one Club, thats a fact and nor have Norwood EVER asked for it from them or any other Club.
Norwood have, however, helped other Clubs in the past whether it be financially or by their supporters marching in a rally with them (North)

I hope as an SANFL supporter that all nine Clubs are back on track very soon. Remember if it wasn't for one very genorous man, we may well be talking about North in the past tense!! Thankfully that hasn't happened!!

Norwood WILL be back financially soon! That is also a fact! So for those who want to see the end of Norwood!! Bad luck!! Wont happen!! For those true SA football fans! The future is bright!!

Sojourner wrote:As most of you are aware the saga between the Norwood Football Club and the Highlander Hotel has been ongoing for some time, to the point where Norwood have gone from being one of the most profitable clubs to now the leagues worst performer due to lack of funds comming in. Feb 2007 sees the next round of the battle played out in the Supreme Court.

From the little that I have heard on the media it does not appear to be going well for Norwood at this stage. The Highlander Hotel has spent massive amounts of money on its redevelopment and is quite clear that they do not want the Norwood Club anywhere nearby.

Stop you right there. Norwood made an application to transfer its liquor license. It was successful. It seems there's been no appeal against that decision. Norwood made an application for a pokie license (or to transfer its existing pokie license, take your pick). It was successful. The Highlander has appealed. No idea how that translates to 'does not appear to be going well for Norwood', other than the obvious fact that Norwood would like to see the appeal decided in its favour ASAP.

Sojourner wrote:My proposal would be for the SANFL to assist Norwood with a loan to purchase a hotel in their area as near as possible to the Highlander and compete directiy with them. The owners of either the Windsor or the Modbury Plaza might well sell up if made the right offer.

That's only a good idea if you want to see this drag out in the courts as long as humanly possible. New site = new liquor license application plus new pokie application. All of the evidence has to be prepared again, two hearings conducted again, two new decisions made, following which two sets of rights of appeal kick in again. Big step backwards.

Squawk wrote:The Supreme Court Civil Registry does not currently have a listing for the Highlander or Norwood parties. I confirmed this only last week when I spoke to someone there specifically about this matter.

That isn't so surprising, as appeals from pokie-granting decisions aren't made to the Supreme Court. They're made to the Licensing Court of SA. There is no further right of appeal after that.

BPBRB wrote:For what purpose then did the NFC buy the NCC? Apart from an asset that can be borrowed against how much income will it actually generate and is it fully leased/functional presently and if not what are the plans for it long term? Seems many people connected with the NFC can't even answer that?

Be patient on this one but be assured that all of your well meaning fears are unfounded.

BPBRB wrote:As for "inside" info - one of my previous bosses was a board member of the NFC who retired from the board not so long ago and with a few reds under his belt quite happily tells all and sundry about Norwoods woes past, present and future but I guess likle all clubs there are various stories doing the rounds and which one's are actually true who knows other than those curently in power?

Exactly.