John O'Neill resigns

[waratahjesus]

Source: The Daily Telegraph

He remained optimistic about rugby but a dated governance structure was the main "barrier to success".

The findings of a review into Australian rugby's governance - conducted by former Sports Minister Mark Arbib and former Major General Peter Cosgrove - is set to be handed down on October 22.

"I initiated the review in 2008. Have a good read of it (the findings)," O'Neill said.

"It will explain a lot about the shape of the game, the circumstances and why modernisation of the governance of Australian rugby is not a nice-to-do thing, it's an absolute essential thing to do.

"Otherwise, the future is not that bright. We are hamstrung with a governance structure from the amateur days."The ARU board has two independent directors but is largely still federated.

O'Neill said he'd recently had a conversation with a leading politician who hailed the long-standing, independent AFL commission model. "(He said) they have been able to implement strategy without political interference. It really struck a chord. I thought, 'That's it in a nutshell'," O'Neill said. "I am convinced the AFL model is the gold standard. Priority No. 1 is to a move toward better corporate governance. A completely independent board, no one with a reliance to be elected.

"Once that is set up, I am very optimistic. Because then the hard decisions won't be that hard, they'll be devoid of politics. The barriers to progress are substantial if we stay as we are. But if you improve the governance ... you can accelerate."J

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-a-stern-warning/story-fn8tk0tu-1226494755216

 

[TOCC]

Can you read a balance sheet?
After the losses for ARC had been accounted for, the ARU was worth 25% more in 2007 than it is today!
You are not listening re the revenue, Before JON,in 2007 we had the same revenue as the Kiwi's.4 years of JON and they have increased their revenue and ours has reduced by $10M.
Please explain how this is a good result!
Name one other business where revenues are decreasing and it is considered a good thing.
Tell me how reducing shareholders funds is a good thing.

Yep we will earn some coin next year when the lions visit, but this is not JON's doing,they are scheduled to come every 12 years.

It's actually a negative, that despite being at the helm for 12 odd years, the business is still reliant upon once off events (RWC, Lions) to keep the joint afloat until the next one.
Had he hung around until after the Lions, he would have trumpeted the profit for the year,the increase in shareholders funds everyone would hailed him a hero, just as they did the first time around.
Only problem is he lumps his replacement with a business model that he has never been able to get to work despite 2 go's and 12 years.
Hopefully his replacement can build a sustainable business model that works year in year out.

If i may just intervene here...

They key differences between 2007 and 2011 revenue wise, in 2007 the Wallabies played 5 matches but in 2011 they only played 3 which impacted on the gate revenue which was $14million in 2007 but $9million in 2011... Without knowing the finer details this may also explain the 5-10% drop in revenue in sponsorship and broadcast rights from 2007 to 2011.

The other fundamental difference was the IRB grant, in 2007 this was $7.9million but in the 2011 reporting period this was only $4.2million...

2003: $32million profit($289million revenue)
2004: $4.3million loss ($65million revenue)
2005: $5.6million profit ($67million revenue)
2006: $3.8million profit ($79million revenue)
2007: $3.7million loss ($76million revenue)
2008: $4.9million profit ($78million revenue)
2009: $5.7million profit ($71million revenue)
2010: $2.2million profit ($72million revenue)
2011: $4.1million loss ($68million revenue)

They are the posted operating profits, the ARU also hedges its funds which is why the balance sheet fluctuates more then what is purely indicated on in the above list.
JON has negotiated that the ARU be given $7.5million(pounds) for attendance in the 2015 RWC and a further $10million(pounds) in compensation to the 4 members of the Rugby Championship to split.. So that equates to approximately $15million(AUD) in compensation for attending the 2011 RWC as opposed to the $4.2million the ARU received in 2011.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Funny timing.
TOCC s fiscal analysis got me thinking: JON would have a fair idea of the 2012 accounts and we won't see any official 2013 accounts until after he was planning to leave anyway. Maybe JON is looking at figures that tell him that in a non RWC year the ARU is going to post a loss?

waratahjesus are we seriously still waiting for a review from Cosgrove that was commissioned in 2008?
No wonder WW1 took so long if this the way the military functions.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[emuarse]

They say you're never too old to learn, wj, but I think I'll pass on turning ambidextrous at my stage of life.
.

Bruce, are you calling yourself a boring wanker (never thought I'd see the day)?

 

[Scarfman]

Don't forget, guys, the the ARU is essentially a not-for-profit enterprise. To put that differently, they need to make money from the top level of the game to regrow the bottom level of the game. If they don't support the bottom level of the game there will be no more top level of the game.

The problem is when you have administrators being judged on short-term performance. The ARU ought to be judged on success (player numbers + wins) at junior and lower levels of the game, more so than the top level. Everyone on this board know that rugby's attention to schools is pathetic compared to league, and especially AFL.

I supported rugby league in 1979. From 1980, when I went to a high school that played rugby, I have played and supported rugby. It's pretty simple.

 

[I like to watch]

They key differences between 2007 and 2011 revenue wise, in 2007 the Wallabies played 5 matches but in 2011 they only played 3 which impacted on the gate revenue which was $14million in 2007 but $9million in 2011. Without knowing the finer details this may also explain the 5-10% drop in revenue in sponsorship and broadcast rights from 2007 to 2011.

The other fundamental difference was the IRB grant, in 2007 this was $7.9million but in the 2011 reporting period this was only $4.2million.

2003: $32million profit($289million revenue)
2004: $4.3million loss ($65million revenue)
2005: $5.6million profit ($67million revenue)
2006: $3.8million profit ($79million revenue)
2007: $3.7million loss ($76million revenue)
2008: $4.9million profit ($78million revenue)
2009: $5.7million profit ($71million revenue)
2010: $2.2million profit ($72million revenue)
2011: $4.1million loss ($68million revenue)
......

The drop in revenue for the Wobs looks OK from your explanations, however why didn't the AB's suffer similiarly?
look at our 2006 & 2010 figures to remove RWC from the equation.
Still a reduction of some 10% in revenue.
BTW don't know where you got 2005 numbers from.
The best litmus test for me is ticket sales for Tests, when they sell out quickly, it translates to strong sponsorship and corporate support,and the big bucks that comes with it.
I don't think a Test ticket is the prized possession it was 4 or 5 years ago.It makes sense that corporate support would mirror this reduction in demand.

 

[I like to watch]

Don't forget, guys, the the ARU is essentially a not-for-profit enterprise. To put that differently, they need to make money from the top level of the game to regrow the bottom level of the game. If they don't support the bottom level of the game there will be no more top level of the game.

The problem is when you have administrators being judged on short-term performance. The ARU ought to be judged on success (player numbers + wins) at junior and lower levels of the game, more so than the top level. Everyone on this board know that rugby's attention to schools is pathetic compared to league, and especially AFL.

I supported rugby league in 1979. From 1980, when I went to a high school that played rugby, I have played and supported rugby. It's pretty simple.

I agree totally, JON has been remunerated on financial goals, his philosophy has always been get the Wobblies winning and everything else looks after itself. Which is fine if they are winning,but they are not.Compare his financial goals and the subsequent poor level of health at the grass roots with how the Kiwi's do it.
I have cut and pasted one of the first pages of the AB annual report

2011 PERFORMANCE W E I G H T I N G A C H I E V E D
Game Development 10% 3/10
Winning All Blacks 35% 34/35
Outstanding Competitions 20% 10/20
Effective Structures 20% 16.5/20
Positive Global Presence 5% 5/5
Inspirational RWC 2011 10% 10/10
100% 78.5/100

 

[redstragic]

The drop in revenue for the Wobs looks OK from your explanations, however why didn't the AB's suffer similiarly?
look at our 2006 & 2010 figures to remove RWC from the equation.
Still a reduction of some 10% in revenue.
BTW don't know where you got 2005 numbers from.
The best litmus test for me is ticket sales for Tests, when they sell out quickly, it translates to strong sponsorship and corporate support,and the big bucks that comes with it.
I don't think a Test ticket is the prized possession it was 4 or 5 years ago.It makes sense that corporate support would mirror this reduction in demand.

The cost of taking the family to a test is tragic. The day before the Gold Coast test, an email came around offering seats for $10. This just shows they got the strategy wrong and panic to fill the stadium so it looks good on tv.

 

[TOCC]

The drop in revenue for the Wobs looks OK from your explanations, however why didn't the AB's suffer similiarly?
look at our 2006 & 2010 figures to remove RWC from the equation.
Still a reduction of some 10% in revenue.
BTW don't know where you got 2005 numbers from.
The best litmus test for me is ticket sales for Tests, when they sell out quickly, it translates to strong sponsorship and corporate support,and the big bucks that comes with it.
I don't think a Test ticket is the prized possession it was 4 or 5 years ago.It makes sense that corporate support would mirror this reduction in demand.

oh absolutely i agree the revenue drop and the lack of overall revenue growth in that period is disappointing, i was just highlighting that there are year to year factors which can influence the revenue, specifically between 2007 and 2011...

However i think the $12-15million in compensation the ARU will receive in 2015 for the RWC is a very good step in the right direction..

 

[TOCC]

Funny timing.
TOCC s fiscal analysis got me thinking: JON would have a fair idea of the 2012 accounts and we won't see any official 2013 accounts until after he was planning to leave anyway. Maybe JON is looking at figures that tell him that in a non RWC year the ARU is going to post a loss?

waratahjesus are we seriously still waiting for a review from Cosgrove that was commissioned in 2008?
No wonder WW1 took so long if this the way the military functions.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The review wasn't commissioned in 2008, i think the article is suggesting it was first proposed in 2008..
The review and the 'team' undertaking the review were only put together in April this year..

 

[Lindommer]

JON left the joint booby-trapped for his successor.

Dunno about that. JON was sidelined by two ARU directors at the time (neither of whom lasted very long after their ill-fated endeavour) who convinced him he no longer had the board's confidence. These two thought JON was getting too big for his boots and disliked standing in his shadow. The truth was the wider board weren't aware of the actions of these two, there was no issue re the board's confidence. Unfortunately, JON took them at their word and resigned. JON hadn't planned to go and certainly didn't "booby-trap" the ARU to make life for his successor difficult. If anything the ARU's finances were in rude health and the outlook for the game was extremely optimistic.

 

[waratahjesus]

The cost of taking the family to a test is tragic. The day before the Gold Coast test, an email came around offering seats for $10. This just shows they got the strategy wrong and panic to fill the stadium so it looks good on tv.

Strategy isn't wrong at all, tv is the secondary thought to gate. As the games were out to tender and booked on 5-10 year contracts it means the local council/state government and probably stadium itself garunteed money to the ARU. The prices set aren't exclusive to the ARU, there are many factors including free transport that are included in the ticket price.

I don't know where rugby sits but I know that some of the A-league teams receive as little as 10% of the gate.

 

[Ruggo]

Go look into the management world of AFL for the next man. We want somebody who can run and prosper a sporting code right across its spectrum. AFL are the total masters of this. Understanding of rugby is irrelevant as new thoughts and ideas will help the game prosper.

 

[redstragic]

Go look into the management world of AFL for the next man. We want somebody who can run and prosper a sporting code right across its spectrum. AFL are the total masters of this. Understanding of rugby is irrelevant as new thoughts and ideas will help the game prosper.

Carmichael has brought so much to the Reds, in the old days it was about 90/10 men to women and few kids, now it is probably closer to 60/40 and there are tonnes of kids at the games. He has really shown how to reach a wider audience.

 

[Badger]

Go look into the management world of AFL for the next man. We want somebody who can run and prosper a sporting code right across its spectrum. AFL are the total masters of this. Understanding of rugby is irrelevant as new thoughts and ideas will help the game prosper.

Agreed. The price tag could be out of the ARU's reach. IIRR, the ARLC offered the AFL 2IC a $1.5mil package. Maybe lower down the food chain or one of the AFL club CEOs.

I reckon the ARU should have a look at the Swans' CEO. As an outsider looking in, they come across as a very well run organisation going up against the other football codes in Sydney. Furthermore, he could bring some insight into their "no dickheads" policy and apply in rugby.

 

[Ruggo]

Carmichael has brought so much to the Reds, in the old days it was about 90/10 men to women and few kids, now it is probably closer to 60/40 and there are tonnes of kids at the games. He has really shown how to reach a wider audience.

Jim is a very good example.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Dunno about that. JON was sidelined by two ARU directors at the time (neither of whom lasted very long after their ill-fated endeavour) who convinced him he no longer had the board's confidence. These two thought JON was getting too big for his boots and disliked standing in his shadow. The truth was the wider board weren't aware of the actions of these two, there was no issue re the board's confidence. Unfortunately, JON took them at their word and resigned. JON hadn't planned to go and certainly didn't "booby-trap" the ARU to make life for his successor difficult. If anything the ARU's finances were in rude health and the outlook for the game was extremely optimistic.

We'll just have to disagree on the man.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The review wasn't commissioned in 2008, i think the article is suggesting it was first proposed in 2008..
The review and the 'team' undertaking the review were only put together in April this year..

The quote is

"I initiated the review in 2008. Have a good read of it (the findings)," O'Neill said.

Initiate: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/initiate

So, even allowing for the possibility that JON was just showing how far ahead of the game he was and didnt mean to suggest that he had actually taken the first step as long ago as 1998, it took 3 years to actually start the thing.
FFS - you can't have it both ways.

 

[Slim 293]

Agreed. The price tag could be out of the ARU's reach. IIRR, the ARLC offered the AFL 2IC a $1.5mil package. Maybe lower down the food chain or one of the AFL club CEOs.

I reckon the ARU should have a look at the Swans' CEO. As an outsider looking in, they come across as a very well run organisation going up against the other football codes in Sydney. Furthermore, he could bring some insight into their "no dickheads" policy and apply in rugby.

And for those outside the traditional rugby states, the most well known rugby union personalities play for the Swans.........

 

[waratahjesus]

The quote is


Initiate: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/initiate

So, even allowing for the possibility that JON was just showing how far ahead of the game he was and didnt mean to suggest that he had actually taken the first step as long ago as 1998, it took 3 years to actually start the thing.
FFS - you can't have it both ways.

It comes back to the board. I think the underlying faith that somehow JoN had total amnesty in decision making is a bit of a myth. He may well have wanted it in 2008 but let's face it, NSW & QLd have the ability to vote anyone down at the moment. Any review of power would erode that, leaving any vote on the subject doomed to failure. As TOCC has brought up the fact that government funding is on the line is probably why it has gotten off the ground.