ARU fee structure change for 2015

[Brendan Hume]

I can negotiate with the bank. Seems an odd situation when its put that way.

Chris, does NSW Rugby provide support to your club or region? If they don't receive funding from the ARU in 2015, will that support (if any) continue?

 

[Quick Hands]

I can be corrected on this , as I can't find a current list of ARU Board Members, but don't all of the current directors come from a corporate and/or banking background? Most notably the big 2 - CEO and Chairman.

Standard operating procedure when needing funds is to cut services and pass costs down, is it not?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Current board is

• Cameron Clyne

• John Eales AM

• Michael Hawker AM – Chairman

• Paul McLean MBE

• Bill Pulver – Chief Executive Officer

• Dr Brett Robinson

• Ann Sherry AO

• Geoffrey Stooke OAM

• Nerolie Withnall

These directors can live with a drop in player numbers.

They can't live with an insolvent organisation. It could be a career killer and that's not even mentioning the possible personal liabilities. That pretty much explains the last year or two of ARU decision making

 

[Quick Hands]

Current board is

• Cameron Clyne

• John Eales AM

• Michael Hawker AM – Chairman

• Paul McLean MBE

• Bill Pulver – Chief Executive Officer

• Dr Brett Robinson

• Ann Sherry AO

• Geoffrey Stooke OAM

• Nerolie Withnall

Thanks for that.

These directors can live with a drop in player numbers.

But can the game?

 

[TSR]

Well, I guess my argument would be that the first will lead to the second in time anyway.

I actually look at that list and think - gee, there are some good names there. People who I would've thought were well suited as stewards of the game. And I am not critical of everything they've done. But I do think this move is short sighted.

 

[Quick Hands]

Well, I guess my argument would be that the first will lead to the second in time anyway.

I actually look at that list and think - gee, there are some good names there. People who I would've thought were well suited as stewards of the game. And I am not critical of everything they've done. But I do think this move is short sighted.

There's nothing wrong with any of them either on a personal or professional level. The issue is that most of them are coming at issues from a similar perspective, so they're not reflecting the full range of life experience (particularly rugby-wise). There's a huge amount of corporate and financial knowledge there, and it's necessary that there are people of that calibre running the game. What there doesn't seem to be much of is people with experience of the game in non-traditional areas or in country areas.

Geoff Stooke has played 400 games for his club in Perth, so he should know the struggles faced at that level. But the others?

As is widely known, the Chairman and the CEO went to school together, live in the same suburb and have as close to an identical rugby and life experience as any two people could, so it's unlikely that either of them are going to question each other's basis for decision-making.

 

[Chris McCracken]

Chris, does NSW Rugby provide support to your club or region? If they don't receive funding from the ARU in 2015, will that support (if any) continue?

From an ARU perspective, we have a development officer who is extremely willing, organised and knowledgeable. From a club perspective, we get a SmartRugby course run here each year. Other than that, he is is spread incredibly thin. He is a good friend and loves to help, but he needs more help than he gets. The Western region he covers is MASSIVE.

NSW have never really provided any support direct to the club. A few years ago, they gave us a signed Waratahs jersey, but that is the only NSWRU/Waratahs contact I've seen at club level.

We have actually gotten more support from the Brumbies. They have done some awesome things for us (organising trials with schools in the ACT, tickets to Brumbies games, meeting players, etc) even though we're not in their service area.

That said, there is a distinct scent of NSW doing more in the country at the moment. It would appear there are more blokes from outside Sydney employed there and events like the trophy tour are positive.

In my recent experience as part of the Zone executive, I found most support comes through NSW Country, even though that is somewhat limited. Most of their funding is through NSWRU, as well. Things like Country Champs and the Country rep teams are user-pays but the tournaments cost, as well.

Of course, NSW refused to pass on the levy last year and haven't added an element to the NPF levy, either. So, those are supportive, as well. In that respect, there is around $2K last year and whatever they could have reasonably passed on this year.

The last two years have seen NSWRU appearing to wake up to the 'bush'. Perhaps the cuts will affect that, but I don't think our club will see that directly.

 

[namtrak]

.......
These directors can live with a drop in player numbers.

.......They can't live with an insolvent organisation. It could be a career killer and that's not even mentioning the possible personal liabilities........

This.

I suspect the noise from the Country Unions will only get louder come 2015 season launch, particularly when nominations for teams are called for.

 

[HighPlainsDrifter]

I'd like the ARU board to individually state why they accepted their seats , what are the positives that they see for the game and the negatives (corporate speak would be "challenges" ) , what they think they have individually brought to the table ,and, where would each board member like the game to be in say 1yr then 5yrs . ..Or am I asking too much ...? And don't refer me to an "Annual Report" they are usually a dollar short and a year late .

 

[Chris McCracken]

I don't think you're asking too much, but if you expect any more than lip service and a half-scripted positive political response, then you'll be disappointed.

That's not a slight on the ARU board, it's just the way those sorts of statements are done.

 

[kiap]

Well, I guess my argument would be that the first will lead to the second in time anyway.

That's fair enough.

I actually look at that list and think - gee, there are some good names there. People who I would've thought were well suited as stewards of the game. And I am not critical of everything they've done. But I do think this move is short sighted.

If you accept that these names are generally good people who want to oversee the game the right way, then we should try to look at why this decision has gone through. It's not about making them popular with the grass roots of the game, and I doubt that it's happening for fun.

ARU money is being clawed out left and right. It's not quite at the stage of trying to get blood from a stone: the "stewards of the game" aren't doing it for free yet (although they did cut their own remuneration); the elite players aren't taking a cut (although those in the NRC had to take unders) . . . but basically it's a funding squeeze.

While 2014 may have been an annus horribilis for the ARU, the way I read it is that 2015 will be the real revenue crunch. There should be a sufficient increase in the next TV deal to get back on their feet but until that comes in, the game is almost skint. Net assets at that point could possibly be down to under $0.5m (near enough to zero).

So should the ARU forego the extra participation levy or impose the participation levy?

It's not really a situation of business as usual. One of the consequences of imposing the levy is stories like this: Wallabies need to take a hit so grassroots rugby can survive. Brings it to fore again (and to the franchises and RUPA, front and centre).

A levy itself is a valid way to go but unfortunately the amount may be too high for some. There'd need to be additional actions taken to keep some clubs in the game.

 

[Chris McCracken]

So should the ARU forego the extra participation levy or impose the participation levy?

The participation levy itself is not really as much of an issue as the way it has been introduced and the difference it makes to the business model of clubs.

If there had been some consultation, it was perhaps a little less (at least in year one), happened before the club was due to set their own fees and allowed clubs the flexibility to offer different terms to players who can't afford an up-front fee, we'd have a different story.

In fact, number one is consultation. In fact, with that, the other stuff would have been well known.

 

[Quick Hands]

The participation levy itself is not really as much of an issue as the way it has been introduced and the difference it makes to the business model of clubs.

If there had been some consultation, it was perhaps a little less (at least in year one), happened before the club was due to set their own fees and allowed clubs the flexibility to offer different terms to players who can't afford an up-front fee, we'd have a different story.

In fact, number one is consultation. In fact, with that, the other stuff would have been well known.

^^^And what we unfortunately continue to see from the ARU are decisions like this, without consultation and without explanation.

What is the board's plan for the game? Where do all the parts of the whole fit? What precisely is the funding model? What do clubs get for the NPF?

Of all bodies, the NSWRU seem to be leading the pack - no state fee and they've just advertised a whole lot of paid development officers for the state. Who'd have ever thought they'd be described as best practice?

 

[kiap]

Certainly, although they are brassic lint, skint. Kick it around just in case a few more coins fall out that were stuck down the back of the couch. Sugarcoat it.

In terms of the charge being a little less, the avenue there is to carve out a small slice from the professional side of the game. But in year one before the new broadcast deal that's going to be a hard task.

 

[Brendan Hume]

And what we unfortunately continue to see from the ARU are decisions like this, without consultation and without explanation.

What is the board's plan for the game? Where do all the parts of the whole fit? What precisely is the funding model? What do clubs get for the NPF?

If we look at what the ARU and the states are saying, the levies is being imposed to continue to "administer, service and develop" the grassroots of the game.

The ARU aren't (supposedly) using the funds to prop up the top tier - although the grassroots are being seen as a liability that can have funding cut.

If the ARU and States are not able to fund this aspect of the game, fair enough, but to unilaterally impose a levy which sees organisations which have a poor history of managing their finances taking an ADDITIONAL $90K out of my region alone is not a good solution.

The ARU and States should provide the opportunity for local regions to manage their own development in a way that is sustainable, and targeted to the needs of the local area.

 

[mudskipper]

The new levy will kill small clubs and country rugby...
The ARU dont own the game... I recommend country clubs go it alone and collectively insure themselves and run their own competitions and dont pay a dollar to the ARU...
Furthermore I'd love to hear what Rupa has to say about this too...
I heard about these proposed levy costs in kaye 2013 sitting on a junior club board... Its utter BS Mr Pulver
As a volunteer junior board member it makes me angry thinking about charging young families to subsidise the ARU first tier. And as for support from them
Its a complete joke as its nearly zero...

 

[kiap]

The new levy will kill small clubs and country rugby.
The ARU dont own the game. I recommend country clubs go it alone and collectively insure themselves and run their own competitions and dont pay a dollar to the ARU.

A country split—that still involves playing actual rugby— ain't going to happen next season, or probably ever.

Furthermore I'd love to hear what Rupa has to say about this too.

Their purpose is to represent (and get what they can) for the professional players.

I heard about these proposed levy costs in kaye 2013 sitting on a junior club board. Its utter BS Mr Pulver

As a volunteer junior board member it makes me angry thinking about charging young families to subsidise the ARU first tier. And as for support from them
Its a complete joke as its nearly zero.

That may be so.

As well as trimming out the fat, there is a need for the ARU to keep higher tier player payments in check. If the amateur players are to get a bit more of the share of funding, the pro players will need to take a bit less. However, most of the pro players' deals are carried over from seasons ago and locked-in. In that case, there is no way that they can now force those to players take a 2015 cut without breaching contracts. It's going to be a longer process than something that will be solved before the start of the Super season in a couple of months.

So the ARU (it wouldn't matter much who is in the chair when solvency is potentially on the line) is squeezing and cutting elsewhere. Their ongoing negotiations with the first tier players need to be changed to give the grassroots better funding.

The RUPA, instead of being an ally, is really a competitor to the grassroots. But they don't want to be so greedy as to kill the grassroots off.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The RUPA, instead of being an ally, is really a competitor to the grassroots. But they don't want to be so greedy as to kill the grassroots off.

Exactly. The pro players get something like 30% of all player generated revenue guaranteed through the collective bargaining agreement

 

[Quick Hands]

Exactly. The pro players get something like 30% of all player generated revenue guaranteed through the collective bargaining agreement

And while I'm certainly not in any way defending the NPF, the problem the ARU face is that rugby is truly international and players can earn much more playing elsewhere.

I've always thought that the RUPA is the sporting version of the Metalworkers Union and the ARU is the sporting version of Holden.

 

[mudskipper]

I know what Rupa represents but as I said I love the here a statment from them about the levy tax on junior players...