The Awful Truth About The ARU's Financial Position

[p.Tah]

Surely if someone is the head of recruitment firm and recruits someone who stuffs up the job the he's been recruited for, the recruitment process needs to be at least questioned?

My memory is a bit hazy on this but if I recall correctly a fair portion of people in Rugby wanted JON to return for his second run, so much so he could essentially write his own pay cheque/bonuses. Sounds like he did (who wouldn't) and when they wanted him out, they had to pay him handsomely.

We can bang on speculating on what went wrong and who is to blame but the truth probably centres on many decisions and inactions by many different people over a long time compounded by a variety of circumstances outside the ARU's control. This all occurred in a governance process that was broken.

I hope the current people at the ARU can put in systems and process within the new governance structure that ensures rugby doesn't get in this situation again.

 

[I like to watch]

I don't think that would concern the schools too much.

And frankly I think the ARU barely put a dollar into that program, the kids have to pay almost every cent themselves.
.

Just had a look in the ARU annual reports,they are listed as a member union and have consistently received $5-600k pa.
Which is more than both the Vic or WA unions.
I bet you the village clubs would prefer to receive that,rather than a levy!

 

[TOCC]

Incidentally, I hope that Pulver is earning that sort of money. If he is not, we probably do not have the right calibre of CEO. Jobs like this need good people. Good people get paid good money.

Andrew Demitriou earned $1.8million in 2012 on the back of $440million in revenue and profit of $6.7million and signing a $1billion broadcast deal..

JON made $2.2 on the back of a $8.2million deficit and closer to $70million in revenue..



Rugby union was not getting value for money, JON was overpaid as a proportion of overall revenue and KPI's..

 

[barbarian]

Just had a look in the ARU annual reports,they are listed as a member union and have consistently received $5-600k pa.
Which is more than both the Vic or WA unions.
I bet you the village clubs would prefer to receive that,rather than a levy!

Fair enough. Still think it would be difficult for the ARU to implement a levy on schools themselves.
,

 

[I like to watch]

In what way?
Logistically?
They report on participation levels at Schools,so they claim they know who plays where.
Or do you think it's unworkable to levy volunteer organisations that do your development work for you?
I'm not really disagreeing with you,just trying to demonstrate what a fucked idea it is to hit up the village clubs.

 

[barbarian]

Yeah, logistically.

The schools could just tell the ARU to get fucked, and really the ARU couldn't do much to stop them. The only thing they could possibly do is refuse to allow players from that school to represent NSW/Oz Schools.

Whereas clubs are beholden to the organising body who runs their relevant comp. Non-compliance would equal expulsion.
.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The figure I hear bandied around for the $ that ARU subsidise for the National Schoolboys Champs at Riverview each year is $100,000.

When my boys were selected for SJRU regionals, they were expected to sell raffle tickets to cover the cost of their jumpers etc. Those champs are run on the smell of an oily rag.

Perhaps ARU need to see how they can reduce costs at Schoolboys champs. Maybe they have already done this and we just don't know about it, or won't know about it until the 2014 Schoolboys tournament rocks around.

 

[Quick Hands]

Rugby union was not getting value for money, JON was overpaid as a proportion of overall revenue and KPI's..

But apparently he was recruited by a former Wallaby who runs a recruiting company, which means it was ok.

 

[Quick Hands]

The school v clubs levy discussion highlights once again how the ARU has essentially lost control of its development structure by outsourcing it to schools.

I understand why the ARU can't levy schools but can levy clubs. I think it's wrong on every level - particularly when the argument that Pulver is running is that people who participate and thus gain enjoyment from the game should pay. (not an argument I agree with, but's that's another matter)

It all reminds me of pre-revolutionary France where the nobility were exempt from paying taxes, but the peasants had to pay taxes, levies and feudal dues to keep the kingdom going.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Such as a former CEO?

Interesting that he has a "non disparagement agreement" in place. Was he expecting to be criticised?

The more I think about it, the more I think that this clause may be a standard clause in CEO's contracts.

How often have CEO's been sacked recently, with not a bad word said between the former employee and former employer?

The interesting thing in this case is that JO'N has had to draw attention to the clause in an interview with a journo.

With my Tin Foil Hat on, he would not draw attention to that clause in his contract unless he actually believed that the "real answer" would be disparaging to the ARU. A clever sausage could interpret that by saying he has to comply with the little known clause, he is sailing very close to actually disparaging the ARU (by omission).

Interesting word, "Disparagement", isn't it?

 

[Quick Hands]

Although the article in question appeared in the Australian Financial Review, and describes it in these terms:

And as it does tension is rising over who is responsible; the former chief executive, John O’Neill, does not take kindly to criticism of his regime – and reveals to AFR Weekend his exit agreement included a rarely used “non-disparagement agreement”.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Although the article in question appeared in the Australian Financial Review, and describes it in these terms:

And as it does tension is rising over who is responsible; the former chief executive, John O’Neill, does not take kindly to criticism of his regime – and reveals to AFR Weekend his exit agreement included a rarely used “non-disparagement agreement”.

Rarely used?
Just more bullshit from JON - he ought to know how "widely" used it really is:

The critiques from ex-Wallaby Glen Ella and one-time Test coach Eddie Jones come as former ARU boss Gary Flowers issued a letter via his lawyer putting O'Neill on notice following a magazine interview last month with the ARU chief.
O'Neill was interviewed as part of a probe into the state of Australian rugby and the hurdles the code faces to claw its way back into a domestic sporting market dominated by the NRL and AFL.
In the letter, sent to ARU chairman Peter McGrath two weeks ago, Flowers claims the ARU has breached a Deed of Release, brokered in April 2007 to ensure its board and delegates would not make "disparaging remarks" about the former ARU boss.http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ate-of-dis-union/story-e6frepm6-1225908117363

And while I am on it I'm going to defend my adult-life-long mate Flowers.
JON was destabilising while with the FFA trying to get his old job back, having left behind a couple of trojan horse within the "organisation".
One needs to be careful accepting anything spun out of the ARU concerning Flowers' contribution to the problems in the game - on one view JON never left the joint.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Bill Pulver talks about getting more out the Broadcast deal.

This needs to be followed up with appointments to the Board of people with experience in negotiating Broadcast deals. Currently I believe there is nil experience in this regard on the Board unlike other major sports.

The two most recent appointments are

Paul McLean - ex Wallaby and property executive

Cameron Clyne - Big Four bank CEO and Sydney Uni Rugby Foundation Chairman

There is a perception with some justification that Board appointments are kept to ex players and those associate with either Sydney Uni or Shore School.

Michael Hawker needs to address this perception and deliver to Bill Pulver some Broadcast experience to help in negotiations.

 

[Quick Hands]

Notice how the FFA is now going gangbusters sans JON?

 

[No.8]

Simple fact is - if the ARU don't start to advertise to the broader community like NRL, AFL, Soccer, Cricket does then in 15-20 years we could see Rugby Union in Australia nearly back to an amateur game.

Moving to foxtel and locking themselves in that small box of marketing and advertising is destroying rugby in Australia.

I reckon if you asked most 10-15 year olds now they prob never would of watched a Union game.

 

[Pfitzy]

Moving to foxtel and locking themselves in that small box of marketing and advertising is destroying rugby in Australia.

Like it did for the BBL?

 

[Quick Hands]

And it's not just matches, it's coverage in general.

In a paper that I read last week, rugby was about 10 or 12 pages in from the back, after league, cricket, AFL, winter Olympics, soccer, racing, motor racing, basketball. I watched Fox news this morning and the Super Rugby matches were the last item of sport covered - English soccer is in front of us in terms of coverage. Free to air won't touch super rugby with a big stick and test rugby barely rates on FTA.

Once winter starts, you won't find Shute Shield results anywhere but a quick flash of the scores on ABC news. Even the Sunday papers give little more than a summary of the results - used to be a double page spread, with a little on schools and subbies as well.

What people who are arguing in favour of these multi-million dollar salaries fail to grasp is that rugby isn't a major sport in the eyes of the community. We're barely above sports like hockey and water polo and we want to pay our executives like they're running the AFL or NRL or BHP - it's crazy.

The Wallabies used to be able to sell out any stadium in the country for an AB test - not any more. In fact for everything other than AB matches we'd be flat out filling the SFS these days. The Waratahs used to draw 30,000 to the SFS regularly - more in Australian derbies and less for SAF teams (still around 25,000 though.) Now they're lucky to get 15,000. And tests and Super rugby are the only matches that draw crowds.

We've got declining participation, declining crowds, declining coverage and we're losing money.

And we've got people on this thread arguing for million dollar salaries while we're putting $200 levies on 6 year olds.

Note: I actually think that Bill Pulver is doing a reasonable job. I don't agree with everything he's done, such as the aforementioned levy, but I think he's got the game's interest at heart and is trying to work his way through multiple, multi-layered problems. He inherited a train wreck after all.

The problem being while rugby is engaged in crisis management, the other codes are moving ahead.

 

[wamberal]

The simple truth is that rugby is up against two, maybe three, very powerful competitors. The NRL and the AFL are both local sports which have grown very strong over the years. The NRL had the artificial advantage of huge, unearned, poker machine revenue for many years. Had they had to rely only on admission money and sponsorship, for all those years, we would be in a better position, no doubt about it.

If the ARU was empowered to change the rules of our game, whenever it wanted to, there is no doubt we would be in a better position.


The NRL and the AFL are not going to lose the huge in-built advantages they have. They will both continue to be games that appeal far more to the Australian audience (of players and supporters and viewers) than ours does.

For those who are old enough to remember, we actually did once have a so-called local dispensation - rugby used to allow kicking out on the full from anywhere on the field. We begged for the right to play our domestic competition under the current rule where kicking out on the full is only allowed from the 22 (formerly the 25 yard line).


Perhaps the time has come for us to seek local SH dispensations again, so that we have a bit better chance of competing in this marketplace.

Very few Australians are interested in scrums, or mauls, (and particularly rolling mauls). Unless the game is speeded up, cleaned up, made simpler, and more accessible, there is only one way it is going to go. Down.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Like it did for the BBL?

BBL was FTA & live on 10.

 

[wamberal]

I hope the sages at the IRB are having a close look at the success of the Auckland Nines.

The future is coming, like it or not. We either anticipate it, and position ourselves to survive and, hopefully, prosper, or we can always go back to being an amateur, community-based, game (as some of our posters think we should apparently).