charlesalan
Sydney Middleton (9)
I am sure NFP do have performance based KPIs that are not related to revenues and expenses.
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
Ignoto
Peter Sullivan (51)
I double checked, you're right on the $2.7m being for 'one off' legal fee's, so I was mistaken in the ARU using it for the new entity. BUT, the other costs still apply of what cutting the force means on the advice given to the ARU both in removing the force and dealing with SANZAAR.
In terms of the print bundle cost. Yeah sorry, but that $500 doesn't even cover the time charged by external parties to print (which CU use as a FYI).
I'm not too sure if you're serious about why you would brief a SC + Junior for 'one day'. The ARU were clearly going to fight it in court if they lost arbitration. For an event that lasted 6-8 months (the ARU would have engaged CU before announcing the cut), that $2.7 with all costs considered is pretty 'reasonable'.
Jimmy_Crouch
Peter Johnson (47)
Jimmy_Crouch
Peter Johnson (47)
Yep it is.
2017
Non-executive Directors (salary incl super) $186,150
Executive Directors (salary incl super) $775,000 Incentives $500,000
Total Directors Income includes $315,000 which was subsequently donated to AFR and $35,000 which was donated to other charity organisations.
So from that we can glean that Pulver donated at least $145,000 AFR and up to $180,000 to AFR plus another charity in 2017?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
I think there are some more fundamental problems with the financial side of rugby that wont be cured by player development over one generation.
The player development that occurred in the amateur era has lasted us until the last 7 8 or maybe 10 years and a player development driven recovery rugby would presumably take a similar time - say 13 years.
I don't think we have 13 years until the life support gets turned off.
If RA had any brains they would be talking up a comp based in an Australian/NZ time zone NOW so they can have the fans on board and sell it as a goer when the TV rights next come up.
I am convinced that we have to abandon playing across every time zone on the globe - including a Northern summer in Japan.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
So my memory may be off, but i'm pretty sure there was an arbitration and an appeal, the appearance for the appeal being a day. It seems unlikely that a further appeal would have been any longer than a single day.
If i'm briefing a silk for 3 days of appearance and she/he requests a junior i'm going to be wondering what it is they bring to the table, if they can't wrap their heads around a pretty straight forward brief themselves.
A two week long resumption matter, maybe. You know, something with tens of thousands of pages of documents and hours of cross examination.
Edit: plus you need to start using a cheaper commercial printer my man.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
What about advice for a Senate Inquiry?
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
No idea, honestly.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Yep - page two of the financial statement
charlesalan
Sydney Middleton (9)
Corporate expenditure (p 16 concise fin report) includes $2.8 m legal costs associated with reduction of Super Rugby teams while note 3 ( p 14 same report) states the One-off legal costs of $2.696 m.
Wouldn't have thought ARU would have needed legal brief for the senate inquiry, they were merely answering questions and making a statement.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
They may have sought advice anyway. I would have, at the very least to understand what i was in for.
charlesalan
Sydney Middleton (9)
but then you are a lawyer
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
So, not an incentive BH. More like a reward?
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
Not heard of the massive numbers of performance based contracts now in the various public sectors?
I am speculating but it was a five year contract that he served out in full. He was paid $500,000 in the final year of the contract but no other extra payments in any other year.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
But it was apparently noted in the report as an incentive payment, according to Jimmy_Crouch above.
Which would be an incentive based on completing his contract if I am right.
Just seems more unlikely that the one year they pay the CEO a large additional payment is the most controversial year in recent history where they have made a substantial loss (outside of the government grant money). Seems hard to believe the board would have approved it if it wasn't contractually obliged.