Rob42
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Globally, the All Blacks are way bigger than the Wallabies - they have brand recognition in the US and Europe well beyond the rugby market, something the Wallabies can only dream of.
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
Globally, the All Blacks are way bigger than the Wallabies - they have brand recognition in the US and Europe well beyond the rugby market, something the Wallabies can only dream of.
Set piece magic
John Solomon (38)
I think we should definitely go for the PE option. We won't be as highly valued as the All Blacks clearly. As for potential growth, I'm sure in the process we will make the point that a winning wallabies bledisloe cup side is highly valuable. They'll then look at the cash flows from that, times them by the low probability of us winning the bledisloe cup, and add it to the valuation... so it won't be that great
10-15% is about right, I see no governance problem, they'll be a minority shareholder that basically has to be kept in the loop and will ask for sensible decisions to be made but doesn't have the voting power to f**k the place up anymore than it is already is
10-15% is about right, I see no governance problem, they'll be a minority shareholder that basically has to be kept in the loop and will ask for sensible decisions to be made but doesn't have the voting power to f**k the place up anymore than it is already is
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Now, I'm crook. And a bit sleep deprived. So perhaps it's obvious and I'm missing it but. Are those costs that were cut annual or over X years? Because if they are annual. ARE. YOU. F@#KING. KIDDING. ME!!! All this talk of there not being enough money for this or for that and all this time it was being spent on corporate excess. I mean.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
I'm for PE if any funds received are structured in such a way that it doesn't immediately get consumed by the very top and instead flows into the community game via things such as club seeding programs and accessibility programs. While I'm fine with a little bit of it finding its way to the professional game. I would much rather see it spent on getting more people playing and engaging with the game because long term that's how you grow the overall value in the professional game. More bums on seats and eye on TV/devices.
Set piece magic
John Solomon (38)
McLennan reckons RUgby AU is running better on less staff which is pretty funny
Rob42
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
No doubt there was some corporate excess there, but I think those savings also include cutting development officers and other roles that were assisting to develop the game at the grassroots.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Not sure and it's hard to say whether it was all corporate excess, but he had a crack at past management for that exact reason. Wouldn't be fucking surprised either, given the wealth of A-Class cockbags we have floating around the game here.
He also said that they won't be throwing big money at top players. I've been saying it for ages but, i think we are only a few years away from full eligibility for overseas based players.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Things is, there really weren't a heap of them to start with so a lot of the expenses in that regard would have made up a fairly small portion of the cuts. Certainly nothing remotely close to $30m worth. That money could have been redirected to hire a bunch of extra DO's plus more.
WorkingClassRugger
Michael Lynagh (62)
Or at the very least without any noticeable decline. Looking at the streamlining undertaken thanks to Covid I have to wonder what would be achievable at the respective franchises.
It's easy to decide a whole lot of staff aren't needed in a year when there are only a handful of home tests with minimal crowds, no 7s, no under 20s etc.
McLennan blaming those involved in the past for the losses is fine and an obvious tactic but I think it will be interesting to see what happens to the headcount when things return to normal.
I don't think the implication that there were a lot of roles within RA that were completely unnecessary will really stand up.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
When things return to normal eh? I approve of your optimism.
Past administration is an easy target because they actually did fucking suck at their jobs, in a serious way. McLellan would be a fool not to lean on that, given the circumstances he's working in.
He probably does need to bring in more staff, but at least he has something to build with now. A new TV partner, a newish comp with a bit of a resurgence in popularity and the core of a potentially strong Wallabies side, coaching and playing.
The only thing missing is his heartfelt thanks to Raelene for setting half that shit up for him.
It's 100% likely that the organisation is functioning better with less staff. It's easier to manage less people.
It's also 100% likely that some previous roles that were redundant during COVID will become necessary again.
The reality was they just couldn't carry those people through COVID so they had to go.
A substantial amount of those costs were because nothing was happening. If you don't host 3 test matches during the season because the July tour gets cancelled you save millions of dollars of expenditure.
If 7s players and staff go from getting paid decently to only getting paid JobKeeper then it saves a lot.
If pro players cut their salaries drastically you save millions.
Etc. etc. These are single year costs but a lot of them will come right back.
Cutting $8m out of the member unions is going to hurt rugby around the country massively if it doesn't come back.
It's also 100% likely that some previous roles that were redundant during COVID will become necessary again.
The reality was they just couldn't carry those people through COVID so they had to go.
A substantial amount of those costs were because nothing was happening. If you don't host 3 test matches during the season because the July tour gets cancelled you save millions of dollars of expenditure.
If 7s players and staff go from getting paid decently to only getting paid JobKeeper then it saves a lot.
If pro players cut their salaries drastically you save millions.
Etc. etc. These are single year costs but a lot of them will come right back.
Cutting $8m out of the member unions is going to hurt rugby around the country massively if it doesn't come back.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
I disagree, I think their will be plenty of roles that won’t be filled when things ramp up again.
I would be very surprised if the new guy just pulled out his predecessors org chart, and filled in the blanks.
It’s a higher hurdle to justify funding a new role, than to continue funding one.
hifflepiff
Charlie Fox (21)
I foresee a lot more current Wallabies going overseas. I imagine the Gilead laws will have to be widened again within a few years.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Sad state of affairs of further player cuts to wages given premium already top league players earn. On separate note reading in weekend Australian about twiggy and silver lake in private equity discussions with RA.
To me more then private equity needed to fix our game. To my mind still the best opportunity was the world league to raise the profile of our game and also feed in large sums of money top down. Sad it got scuppered by NH 6 nation countries as still big missed opportunity to mind.
You’ve been watching too much Handmaid’s Tale.
I agree with that. I just think it's a reality that a fair chunk of the headcount will have to come back.
What COVID has done though in forcing such a big reduction in staff numbers is given RA a chance to reorganise how the various teams and roles fit together within the organisation.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Who thinks it is twiggy who has provided $40m loan facility to RA...do wonder
From what we know of Andrew Forrest, he wouldn't provide $1 unless there were agreed changes to structure and governance.
As none have been announced or voted on by the member unions then I reckon that you can rule out Forrest.
Suggest that it's more like junk bonds (bridging finance) as RA have convinced holders that private equity is at an advanced stage of discussions.