ARU fee structure change for 2015
- Thread starter namtrak
- Start date
- Status
Brendan Hume
Charlie Fox (21)
Love this:
“An organisation that ignores its shareholders or takes them for granted, except on the handful of occasions where it has no choice but to seek their endorsement, should not be surprised when it meets a cold reception.”
“While the Wallabies might be the financial engine of Australian Rugby, the community Game is its beating heart.”
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
what I found intriguing is that Arbib seems to have grasped the nature of the relationship between the unwashed and the powers that be better than any current member of the board
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
It seems like they are getting advice from the same place as the mad monk.
Totally oblivious to what is going on around them.....
Totally oblivious to what is going on around them.....
Maybe Bill Pulver should announce the introduction of ARU knighthoods.
The first one could be awarded to Robbie Deans.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Arbib isn't personally liable if the ARU trades while insolvent. That changes your thinking.....
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
That is a crock of shit.
That's like the mad monk saying the budget is in a mess,and the only option is to have a Medicare co payment.
Community rugby is not the only avenue to trim costs.
And it's not just the costs,it's the way they are insisting rego fees are to be paid from now on.
BTW,,I am not aware of any Directors who have been sued for insolvent trading either.
That's like the mad monk saying the budget is in a mess,and the only option is to have a Medicare co payment.
Community rugby is not the only avenue to trim costs.
And it's not just the costs,it's the way they are insisting rego fees are to be paid from now on.
BTW,,I am not aware of any Directors who have been sued for insolvent trading either.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
I don't think they are a good idea either.
All I'm saying is that I can understand why the board is acting the way they are. They have to trim tens of millions of dollars out of the budget or could be personally liable. They also want to be employable on other boards at the end of it.
Most of them (excluding Hawker) haven't even been around long enough to blame for getting into the problem
They have to have different thinking to a consultant like Arbib.
Brendan Hume
Charlie Fox (21)
This made me laugh. A lot.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
The point is,it appears the only area they have targeted is the grassroots,which is a neglible part of their expenses.but it is a major part of their customer base.
It does not help things at all if by reducing your expenses by $3M,you lose $2-3M in income because you have pissed off your customer base.
I call bullshit on the personally liable bit as well.
Directors being sued for insolvent trading is as rare as rocking horse shit.
Brendan Hume
Charlie Fox (21)
The fees will only raise $5M though.
It needs to be very clear to people that this is not about bailing out the ARU - the money is being raised entirely from the community game, for the community game.
The problem we have, is that there is no transparency about what the community game actually means to the ARU or the States, there is no budget, planning, outcomes or accountability for the expenditure.
There has been no flagged review into the efficiencies of the current community rugby plan - it assumes that the existing model is good, and that if the professional game can't pay for it, then the community game must. And yet, many within community rugby believe the current model doesn't work - the only reason there hasn't been more push for change is because the people spending the money were also the people making the money - if the ARU and states choose to piss away their revenue, who am I to argue?
It treats rugby clubs as tax collectors, without any explanation of what those taxes will be used for. The plan has been developed outside the community rugby space and imposed on the people who actually run community rugby.
And on your note about the Directors looking to future employment prospects - it would shock me if that were behind any of the motivation for the actions of the board, and if it were, those members need to stand down from their positions. The stipend for the directors is measly, so its not like they need the money. If their worried about being tarnished by the ARU, they should leave.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
You've missed the point: Arbib's statements recognised and described the relationship. He also seems to have understood that since the relationship was symbiotic the unwashed needed to be consulted.
That has nothing to do with whether the Directors fear trading while insolvent: it is only about how you communicate and consult thereby managing the relationship.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
I don't think the ARU Directors like the idea of consulting lesser mortals. I doubt many of them would even know what to say to one of us ordinary folk.
Like the Gods on Mount Olympus they expect unwavering loyalty no matter what they do and they brook no questioning. Michael Hawker chairs a recent ARU meeting with Bill Pulver on his right hand side.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Yes
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
I wonder how Mr Larrett and the ARU are going with their pursuit of the "non-compliant" and other dissenters?
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
As in understand it, the NSWRU is adamant that it will be team based while the ARU sent a letter to the QRU (and presumably others) stating emphatically that everyone was paying the individual NIL.
So either it's still a pissing comp, someone is lying or I've fallen behind.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
Chris McCracken
Jim Clark (26)
There has been no formal announcement. NSW are saying they haven't accepted the individual insurance, but haven't made a statement about it yet. Andrew Larratt's message posted earlier threw a spanner in the works.
- Status