^ the first half of that makes perfect sense if it's a loan, not so much if it's an advance against future dividend payments. The second half puzzles me as it surely couldn't have been in the figures given to the auditors even as "potential additional income" or some such. Or am I missing something? Like, is it a bailout loan after all & seperate from (and/ or instead of) the advance described in the article I linked?
Well, this is what The Australian's article says:
"The Australian can reveal a $16 million loan to save Rugby Australia from potential bankruptcy is under threat with auditors still refusing to sign the beleaguered body's 2019 financials.
World Rugby has agreed to provide lifesaving funds to RA, but only on the condition that they provide audited results for 2019.
The Australian understands the perilous state of RA's financial situation has auditors, in turn, currently refusing to sign the financial accounts until the loan has been confirmed."
So based on that, it sounds like there were real doubts over whether or not RA could continue as a going concern at the time the 2019 accounts were handed to the auditors.