• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Australian Rugby / RA

charlesalan

Sydney Middleton (9)
I would guess not. Effectively, his contract value would be $100k higher than what he was paid each year but he only gets it if he's there for the full term of the contract.

I am speculating though.

Performance based remuneration in not for profits is pretty uncommon and I certainly don't think would be good practice.
I am sure NFP do have performance based KPIs that are not related to revenues and expenses.
 

Ignoto

Peter Sullivan (51)
I is a lawyer, not some ignorant plebian (who doesn't do much fucking work eh, if you hadn't noticed). Also lol at the bold bit. S'like $500 tops. I had already factored in cost of silks etc. The Courts fees are covered by the filing fee (or should be).

Plus, what the fuck is the point in a silk having a junior and an instructing solicitor for a one day matter? What the fuck are you paying for.


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

Ken Catchpole (46)
I haven't seen the full financials yet but a couple who say they have them (and can cite the page number) seem to suggest it is correct.


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.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
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)
Player development mate. Everyone loves a winner.

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)
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'.
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)
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.
What about advice for a Senate Inquiry?
 

charlesalan

Sydney Middleton (9)
What about advice for a Senate Inquiry?
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)
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.
They may have sought advice anyway. I would have, at the very least to understand what i was in for.
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Anyway, moral of the story is that Clutz are fucken theives, just like most top tier firms. Your billed time is always massively inflated and the majority of the work they do for you is actually done by overworked juniors on 60k a year.

Fucken 'top tier' firms.
 

Brumby Runner

Jason Little (69)
I would guess not. Effectively, his contract value would be $100k higher than what he was paid each year but he only gets it if he's there for the full term of the contract.

I am speculating though.

Performance based remuneration in not for profits is pretty uncommon and I certainly don't think would be good practice.

Not heard of the massive numbers of performance based contracts now in the various public sectors?
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
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.
 
Top