Australian Rugby / RA

[Wilson]

Agree with all of that - what I'm saying is that won't get to a $30m shortfall, or even "largely" get there

From the PWC creditors report - The Rebels were spending around $7.2m on player's salaries, with RA revenue of $5m, so they were around $2m gap too

Match day is expensive, hard to tell what it costs for specific teams but the Reds spent ~$3.7m on it in 2023 for example. If that's standard you're looking at $15-17 million cost increase on player salaries and match day. Cost increase was about $26m, it seems reasonable to describe that as largely driven by that amount.

 

[Braveheart81]

The article says $5m cost for the Rebels. There was a $1m or so loan forgiven to the Brumbies. There were also those rumors of Waratah debt which no one can get visibility on due to the consolidation of NSWRU reporting in 2023, and then into RA reporting in 2024.

There was no debt. We could see that in the NSWRU 2023 financials.

We obviously need to see the financials but it seems like the cash loss couldn't be that significant. Potentially some non-cash write-downs elsewhere?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Match day is expensive, hard to tell what it costs for specific teams but the Reds spent ~$3.7m on it in 2023 for example. If that's standard you're looking at $15-17 million cost increase on player salaries and match day. Cost increase was about $26m, it seems reasonable to describe that as largely driven by that amount.

Reds had $3.7m revenue from matchday!

and $2.2m expenditure.

It does seem like there is a bunch of Super Rugby team's revenue that isn't accounted for in the AFR report

Anyway, I'm probably just spinning my wheels at a poorly written article, and I need to wait until the report is published.........

 

[Wilson]

Reds had $3.7m revenue from matchday!

and $2.2m expenditure.

It does seem like there is a bunch of Super Rugby team's revenue that isn't accounted for in the AFR report

Anyway, I'm probably just spinning my wheels at a poorly written article, and I need to wait until the report is published.........

Oh my bad, that'll teach me for skimming the report.

I do think it's probably a bit of a throw away line to explain the cost increase (as opposed to the losses specifically), but arguably anything above 30% ($8m) could reasonably be described as 'largely driven by', assuming there was no other category that made up more than that. Hard to see what line items could come in year on year bigger than those two.

 

[Tomthumb]

I mean not to unduly defend the Waratahs because i think they are atrociously run but… surely Super Rugby is the problem here.

It's Rugby in general. 9 of the top 14 clubs in France are in the red, quite a few English clubs are struggling to survive, Welsh rugby is on it's knees

Rugby inflated player salaries artificially to try and compete with French billionaires over paying for players and being ok with making a loss. Players salaries are supposed to be directly linked to income, yet rugby seems to just pay players numbers out of a hat meaning unless you are funded by a billionaire you're going to struggle to make ends meet

There is no universe where Taniela Tupou is worth 1.2 mil per year, yet he was paid that just to stop someone else over-paying him. That isn't a business model

 

[LeCheese]

There is no universe where Taniela Tupou is worth 1.2 mil per year, yet he was paid that just to stop someone else over-paying him. That isn't a business model

To be honest I think this is somewhat revisionist. His 2020/21 form absolutely commands that - and with a new team, greater RA oversight, etc., I can understand why they believed he would be able to get back to his best. Now though, it looks like that ship has sailed - but I suppose that was the benefit of a 1yr contact for RA.

 

[Tomthumb]

To be honest I think this is somewhat revisionist. His 2020/21 form absolutely commands that - and with a new team, greater RA oversight, etc., I can understand why they believed he would be able to get back to his best. Now though, it looks like that ship has sailed - but I suppose that was the benefit of a 1yr contact for RA.

There is no way it makes any sense from a business point of view. I'm not taking a shot at him, I'm just saying there is no real way for RA to recoup that money. It's a bad investment from a business point of view and I'm glad Peter Horne seems to be taking the same line with player negotiations

We cant always complain about RA being broke and then say it's a good decision to spend 1.2 mil a year on any one player

 

[Ignoto]

I'm not going to justify whether Taniela is or isn't worth the money solely on his performances on the field.

But that salary also keeps one of the most marketable players in Australian rugby. Between his antics when he was younger at the Reds and general social media presence he is one of the more recognisable players in our sport.

In case you haven't paid attention, some of our best players have public personalities that rival led balloons. So there is a need for having personable players in the media (both social and mainstream) selling our sport.

 

[PhilClinton]

I think the reality is somewhere in-between what you're saying Cheesie and Thumby.

At the time of Taniela being offered that big contract he was playing very well AND he was being pushed as the face of rugby in Australia. There was a well-received TV advertisement which featured him. Seems things went downhill from that.

I think the bigger issue is that no one in our playing group really gets marketed well. So based on that, for the money we are spending, it's really just about keeping those guys in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) and trying to win the competition which isn't really working.

The other issue we have vs the codes who actually push their superstars into the spotlight is that once our players get a big enough profile, they head overseas and the fanbase doesn't get to watch them each week. At least in the NRL/AFL if a star player moves teams for more money, they are still playing the same comp.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think the bigger issue is that no one in our playing group really gets marketed well. So based on that, for the money we are spending, it's really just about keeping those guys in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) and trying to win the competition which isn't really working.

Is anyone in Australian rugby getting paid overs to win Super Rugby?

I wouldn't have thought so. They are paid well to play for the Wallabies.

Despite what we fans may want, Super rugby is pretty much just a way to get sufficient guys playing pro rugby at a sufficient level so that a "competitive" national team can be put out.

 

[PhilClinton]

Is anyone in Australian rugby getting paid overs to win Super Rugby?

I wouldn't have thought so. They are paid well to play for the Wallabies.

Despite what we fans may want, Super rugby is pretty much just a way to get sufficient guys playing pro rugby at a sufficient level so that a "competitive" national team can be put out.

They're being paid overs to remain in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) so we don't have to use a Giteau Rule selection on them or open the flood gates and allow all overseas selections.

 

[dru]

They're being paid overs to remain in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) so we don't have to use a Giteau Rule selection on them or open the flood gates and allow all overseas selections.

To me that just sounds like argumentative agreement. Same diff as (only) being paid overs for the Wallabies. BTW Strewth I'd suggest that a couple of 3rd party deals for Mungo crossovers with no guarantee of making the international squad might meet a category of being paid overs for Super (Albeit with a Wallaby target). Numbers are largely irrelevant though.

 

[stoff]

There was no debt. We could see that in the NSWRU 2023 financials.

We obviously need to see the financials but it seems like the cash loss couldn't be that significant. Potentially some non-cash write-downs elsewhere?

They posted a $5m loss that year, and there was a $1m+ loss the to the tahs the season prior when they reported the tahs separately. Agree they had cash, but also negative equity. NSWRU’s 2024 position will explain the scale of the cost of the Tahs, but could well be similar if not more than the Rebels.

 

[Tomthumb]

They're being paid overs to remain in SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) so we don't have to use a Giteau Rule selection on them or open the flood gates and allow all overseas selections.

This isn't a sustainable business model

 

[Braveheart81]

They posted a $5m loss that year, and there was a $1m+ loss the to the tahs the season prior when they reported the tahs separately. Agree they had cash, but also negative equity. NSWRU’s 2024 position will explain the scale of the cost of the Tahs, but could well be similar if not more than the Rebels.

I agree with all that. That's the key point that when the Waratahs were transferred to Rugby Australia there weren't a bunch of outstanding liabilities or loans that needed to be repaid that came with it.

I'm not sure how you get to your final point saying it could be similar to the Rebels. There were not years of debt outstanding to the ATO or loans from directors that had helped prop the organisation up.

 

[Mick The Munch]

I agree with all that. That's the key point that when the Waratahs were transferred to Rugby Australia there weren't a bunch of outstanding liabilities or loans that needed to be repaid that came with it.

I'm not sure how you get to your final point saying it could be similar to the Rebels. There were not years of debt outstanding to the ATO or loans from directors that had helped prop the organisation up.

Yes there were - "Subsequently, it has been since reported that the Waratahs were also in financial strife, and that the degree of their outstanding debt is now understood to be much worse than was indicated at the time. To say Melbourne Rebels board members and administrators are watching the situation with interest would be an understatement."

The Waratahs, self-inflicted pressure, and the crippling weight of expectation

With the winds of change blowing through Australian rugby, the current fortunes of the Waratahs are causing furrowed brows

www.rugbypass.com

 

[Braveheart81]

Yes there were - "Subsequently, it has been since reported that the Waratahs were also in financial strife, and that the degree of their outstanding debt is now understood to be much worse than was indicated at the time. To say Melbourne Rebels board members and administrators are watching the situation with interest would be an understatement."

The Waratahs, self-inflicted pressure, and the crippling weight of expectation

With the winds of change blowing through Australian rugby, the current fortunes of the Waratahs are causing furrowed brows

www.rugbypass.com

Brett's article was written three weeks before the NSWRU annual report came out.

There is no evidence of "outstanding debt is now understood to be much worse than was indicated at the time" in those financial statements and as such you'll probably find very little commentary on that going forward because there was nothing to support it.

 

[drewprint]

'No wounds': Eddie chats Wallabies in Coogee return

'That's the only way I can stay sane'

www.nine.com.au

"I don't have any wounds," the 65-year-old former hooker said.

"You (journalists) might have wounds, I don't have any. What goes on, goes on mate. You make decisions, you move on with it.”

This really shits me. Maybe more than it should. I don’t mind him saying he doesn’t have wounds (how could he say otherwise, even if he does) but he then can’t help himself but to go into smartarse mode and have a dig at the journos. A light hearted jab to some, but to me it grates. Funny is it Eddie? Ok, if we’re playing that game, how about all the fans? I’ve got fucking wounds coming out the wazoo pal, me and a tonne of other punters you burnt. It means something to us mate. Gah. Beat it back to Japan.

 

[Derpus]

'No wounds': Eddie chats Wallabies in Coogee return

'That's the only way I can stay sane'

www.nine.com.au

"I don't have any wounds," the 65-year-old former hooker said.

"You (journalists) might have wounds, I don't have any. What goes on, goes on mate. You make decisions, you move on with it.”

This really shits me. Maybe more than it should. I don’t mind him saying he doesn’t have wounds (how could he say otherwise, even if he does) but he then can’t help himself but to go into smartarse mode and have a dig at the journos. A light hearted jab to some, but to me it grates. Funny is it Eddie? Ok, if we’re playing that game, how about all the fans? I’ve got fucking wounds coming out the wazoo pal, me and a tonne of other punters you burnt. It means something to us mate. Gah. Beat it back to Japan.

The bloke doesn't deserve your anger.