During the meeting, the topic of the team's repayment of its stadium loan came up and Selinger was extremely pointed when it came to his bottom-line concerns.
"The premier told them they had to make their payments," said a government source.
The Bombers were supposed to begin payments of $4 million a year in 2014 but they talked the province into accepting just $1 million a year for the next three years so they could satisfy the loans they undertook for last-minute stadium upgrades above and beyond their original stadium debt to the province.
The club is now scheduled to make payments of $3.5 million on bank loans as well as $1 million to the province in 2014.
To be honest, I find this surprising as the Bombers are averaging an impressive 31, 507 at IF after 7 games this season and should have a cash surplus of approximately $5 million in reserve for just such liabilities.
Could be due unexpected write downs and/or an unforeseen operating budget in the new stadium that needs to be trimmed.
The Bombers will be fine long term once management gets a handle on the particulars and the club starts winning again.
The article says that this was said during a meeting surrounding discussions around the planning of the Grey Cup. So the Bombers were probably fishing for some kind of "relief". Changing the Bombers Charter would probably be a good thing anyway.
Its worked pretty well for Edmonton and Saskatchewan.
Also prevents against nepotism and other issues.
Elected boards with term mandates prevents board members from becoming "lifers" or exploiting the position for personal gain.
Gives an opportunity to anyone to run for a board position instead of being appointed.
Prevents clics from forming and covering up for each other.
Accountability to the community OWNED team and OWNED building.
Firstly, I wasn't aware that the Board structure in Winnipeg was much different than Edmonton or Saskatchewan, but let's assume for the moment that the latter two actually have a "fan" component...whatever that is.
You're assuming or suggesting that the members of the Bomber Board (which I'm not on nor have I ever been) are not fans?
Given the fact they don't get paid, spend hundreds of hours on football club business and have to own at least one pair of season tickets and buy/sell tickets to the various dinners and fundraisers suggests to me they're not only "fans", but perhaps "superfans".
In fact, it could be argued they're better fans than Joe Q. Public who simply buys a pair of season tickets or worse yet,
the "fan" that watches only on TV or at a local bar....which makes the club only minimal money.
But, let's say the Bombers created a chair for the average "fan". How is the person selected? Are they willing to dedicate the necessary time and/or resources? Do they bring anything concrete to the table in terms of football or business experience? Can they be trusted with sensitive/confidential information? What defines a "fan" exactly?
Then, please explain how one "fan" on a Board of 10 or 13 or 15 would prevent your issues of " ...nepotism and other issues" or "....prevents board members from becoming "lifers...." or "....exploiting the position for personal gain..." or " ...prevents clics (sic) from forming and covering up for each other...". Speaking of Winnipeg, I think back to the 80's when Cal Murphy had his half his family working for the football club....and he was the Coach/GM!
Finally, the Boards in all three cities are accountable to the community...not sure how a "fan" BOD member would change that.
Look, I'm not suggesting the Bomber BOD gets off scot free here...there's lot for Bomber fans (myself included) to be PO'd about but you could say the same about the Eskimos lately too. I just don't think the idea of a "fan" director is necessary, or worse, workable.
I think what the Premier is talking about is having elections when the board appoints members. Typically the terms are staggered so that there is always continuity on the board. So for example if two positions opened up, why not allow the public residents of Manitoba to vote on those appointments ? So let's say there is an opening for the Secretary position. You could have 20 people run for the position, their resume could be published and let the community vote on who they feel is deserving of the position. Instead of having the board choose who is allowed in the "club".
Alternatively you could have one position on the board that is voted by the community to provide transparency. That appointment could be for one or two year terms and an individual could only serve once.
Term limits are also a good idea. It is not a good idea to have someone like Asper be a permanent fixture.
The problem in Winnipeg is they are still paying for high priced contracts of past GM Joe Mack, Ex-President Garth Butchko and so on, yes the team is making money at the gate but going out just as quick on past stupidity and bad deals.
Hopefully in time they will straighten out their finances and team??
Also that 10 million dollar loan was absolutely stupid. How can you take a 10 million dollar loan to buy extras and not even close in your press box. Now they are finagling side deals with Asper to fix the press box, because they are broke. In fact I think they haven't even paid the 800k they still owe the city from like 10 years ago. So they probably went to the government asking for money to finance their Grey Cup, then tried to get the gov to allow them to postpone some of their loan payments and that's when the Premier blew his top. Letting it out to the public was a serious warning shot IMO. This way if they default the government will hold the high ground to clean up the bums running that organization.
When I wrote earlier this season the Bombers were Broke, we had DeeBoy and his Winnipeg crew asking the thread be taken down :lol: Of course they haven't been seen in months
I don't see how this is attempting to get out of paying...it is going to a creditor to attempt adjusting payments. It would be like if you bought a house and found out you had to put 10K into the roof, got a loan to do so, and went to the bank to defer some mortgage payments.
They’ve already gone to their creditor and got their payment adjusted/cut by 66 percent. This is the third time they are going to the well. They got the city to forgive the 800k, they got their rent reduced from 3 million to 1 million already. This is the third time in less than a year!
That's all we need, three teams losing money. I can understand the hardship of CFL teams trying to keep in the black when they have to pay out $4 Million a year towards their stadium. Hamilton will be paying out up to $2 Million a year towards their new stadium. If the players union is demanding a raise in the salary cap too, it's going to be tough to get in the black.
I don't understand why some people seem to take satisfaction in hearing that the Bombers have financial problems, when there are the huge financial problems with the Argos.
