Melbourne Rebels 2024

[Members Section]

Very very Tim North KC being a bastard and knowing every inch of his shit.

He has gone nuclear here hasn't he, geez I hope he doesn't drag this out through the courts & break everyone. Problem is we are not dealing with some bloke who did blow every weekend & land a law degree after 4 yrs we are dealing with a KC who has made his whole career out of knowing every inch of the law & arguing about it.

The sooner Jacinta Allen sponsors us $1m & we get this merger through the better.

Another day another new low for rugby in this country

 

[Mick The Munch]

OK you grumpy lot Let's turn this thread into how we can get every single Rebels fan (and their mates) to AAMI park - if not for the Brumbies game, the Super Round -

Who here got experience in running campaigns?

Let's show the Vic Govt or any wealthy Sugar Person (*note I'm very woke) that the Rebels are worth investing in.

 

[KevinO]

OK you grumpy lot Let's turn this thread into how we can get every single Rebels fan (and their mates) to AAMI park - if not for the Brumbies game, the Super Round - has anyone got experience in running campaigns.

Let's show the Vic Govt or any weathly Sugar Person (*note I'm very woke) that the Rebels are worth investing in.

You can purchase tickets to Super round, it's not run by the Rebels.

 

[Mick The Munch]

You can purchase tickets to Super round, it's not run by the Rebels.

correct

 

[RugbyReg]

Interesting that RA is responsible for part of the tax bill for player wages, my assumption would be the higher paid players tax is over 50% of that bill. So those Wallaby Top up figures might need to be shown, Tahs and Brumbies debts are probably related to RA player wages as well.

Anyone know how it works? If, say, Kellaway has a contract of $500,000 and the Rebels pay $200,000 and RA pay $300,000, does AK (Andrew Kellaway) get a pay check from each or does RA pay the Rebels the $300,000 and AK (Andrew Kellaway) just gets one pay check?

 

[The Honey Badger]

Anyone know how it works? If, say, Kellaway has a contract of $500,000 and the Rebels pay $200,000 and RA pay $300,000, does AK (Andrew Kellaway) (Andrew Kellaway) get a pay check from each or does RA pay the Rebels the $300,000 and AK (Andrew Kellaway) (Andrew Kellaway) just gets one pay check?

dont know and good question, I suspect the latter

 

[KevinO]

I suspect that it's one paycheck, otherwise he would be paying two different tax rates with one being taxed at a lot higher rate then if they are combined.

 

[Strewthcobber]

For what it's worth, RA declared nearly $30m for "Player payments, RUPA and team costs" in the last financial statement.

We don't know what the Rebels spent as they don't publish their reports.

The Reds declared $9.5m for "Reds Team expenses" which doesn't seem like it would be enough to cover Wallaby salaries for the team as well, but who knows

 

[Highlander35]

I suspect that it's one paycheck, otherwise he would be paying two different tax rates with one being taxed at a lot higher rate then if they are combined.

Does tax withholding matter at the scale (200k+ into the top threshold) you're talking about? Like, legit, what would stop RA giving a cheque at purely 47% withholding and the rebels doing a standard one?

Not that I don't think it's not a single paycheque, and RA is (or should be) providing the full amount of the payment liabilities inclusive of super contributions, PAYG withholding, payroll tax etc.

 

[Rebel man]

My understanding is that until the administrator can determine that the business can keep trading they wouldn't be able to sell tickets. Based on the current position they would be insolvent and would need to reach agreements with creditors on delaying payment of those debts to effectively maintain solvency before they can start trading again.



I don't see how that would be the case. Players are employed by the Rebels and the debts have arisen over the past few years.

If Rugby Australia has taken over employing the players then they would be liable for new debts to the ATO but not the old ones.

It’s because the rebels and RA sign off on a players contract not solely the rebels. So he is saying it’s a joint liability.

He isn’t talking about now RA is solely responsible for the contracts

 

[Rebel man]

Fuck the merger. I am not supporting it

 

[Members Section]

Fuck the merger. I am not supporting it

Its very much looking like its the merger or no team at all

 

[Rebel man]

Its very much looking like its the merger or no team at all

Well there goes my memberships then.

 

[Rebel man]

It would be a massive step backwards for the game in Melbourne to tie yourself to one ethnic group and alienate anyone else.

I get selling the game to a population that are already rugby fans is a quick fix but it does not set the game up to be successful in Melbourne.

 

[Braveheart81]

Anyone know how it works? If, say, Kellaway has a contract of $500,000 and the Rebels pay $200,000 and RA pay $300,000, does AK (Andrew Kellaway) (Andrew Kellaway) get a pay check from each or does RA pay the Rebels the $300,000 and AK (Andrew Kellaway) (Andrew Kellaway) just gets one pay check?

I would be very surprised if they are not paid separately with the Rebels paying one salary and dealing with the withholding and reporting obligations and Rugby Australia doing the same with the Wallabies component.

It’s because the rebels and RA sign off on a players contract not solely the rebels. So he is saying it’s a joint liability.

He isn’t talking about now RA is solely responsible for the contracts

I just can't see it working like this in reality though. The ATO will chase the Rebels directors with director penalty notices well before they go elsewhere. This is a simple thing for the ATO. The Melbourne Rebels owe them money and haven't paid it and the directors become personally liable for those unpaid debts on a joint and several basis. The process is pretty punitive. The ATO gives notice that they intend to apply director penalties and then if the debts remain unpaid after that notice period the debts get piled on the personal accounts of those directors with the ATO. Interest then starts accruing on a personal basis on that debt.

Any attempt to recover money from Rugby Australia would be the Rebels taking RA to court and trying to prove some liability for those outstanding amounts. Obviously the Rebels have a prominent KC on their board but they still have to fund the litigation.

 

[Rebel man]

I would be very surprised if they are not paid separately with the Rebels paying one salary and dealing with the withholding and reporting obligations and Rugby Australia doing the same with the Wallabies component.



I just can't see it working like this in reality though. The ATO will chase the Rebels directors with director penalty notices well before they go elsewhere. This is a simple thing for the ATO. The Melbourne Rebels owe them money and haven't paid it and the directors become personally liable for those unpaid debts on a joint and several basis. The process is pretty punitive. The ATO gives notice that they intend to apply director penalties and then if the debts remain unpaid after that notice period the debts get piled on the personal accounts of those directors with the ATO. Interest then starts accruing on a personal basis on that debt.

Any attempt to recover money from Rugby Australia would be the Rebels taking RA to court and trying to prove some liability for those outstanding amounts. Obviously the Rebels have a prominent KC on their board but they still have to fund the litigation.

I am backing him to know more about it than me. I was just stating what his argument was.

I am not going to debate you on it as it would be a waste of time as I don’t have the required knowledge to do so

 

[Members Section]

I would be very surprised if they are not paid separately with the Rebels paying one salary and dealing with the withholding and reporting obligations and Rugby Australia doing the same with the Wallabies component.



I just can't see it working like this in reality though. The ATO will chase the Rebels directors with director penalty notices well before they go elsewhere. This is a simple thing for the ATO. The Melbourne Rebels owe them money and haven't paid it and the directors become personally liable for those unpaid debts on a joint and several basis. The process is pretty punitive. The ATO gives notice that they intend to apply director penalties and then if the debts remain unpaid after that notice period the debts get piled on the personal accounts of those directors with the ATO. Interest then starts accruing on a personal basis on that debt.

Any attempt to recover money from Rugby Australia would be the Rebels taking RA to court and trying to prove some liability for those outstanding amounts. Obviously the Rebels have a prominent KC on their board but they still have to fund the litigation.

Yes but if does it pro bono just to rock the boat it would be the worst case for everyone, unless RA find someone to do the same

 

[Braveheart81]

I am backing him to know more about it than me.

From a legal perspective he quite possibly has a case.

Where I'm skeptical of it is that the ATO are the party owed the money and they have a path of very little resistance trying to make the directors liable for the debt. Some of those Rebels directors presumably have fairly deep pockets (and in my experience the ATO will chase them in the order of whose pockets they believe are deepest).

 

[PhilClinton]

Has this been posted anywhere yet? Sounds bad.

Leaked document alleges Rebels-Moana merger

Australian rugby appears to be on the verge of another civil war just two weeks out from the start of Super Rugby Pacific season, as the financial crisis at Melbourne Rebels took another extraordinary turn on Thursday.

www.espn.com.au

 

[Slim 293]

Yeah, last page...

It seems the governing bodies learned nothing from the pre-Covid years.