The Pulverisation of Australian Rugby

[Quick Hands]

They would need to have lower overheads,their turnover is only $117M compared to ARU $145M.
Yet spend $10M more on game development than the ARU.
Surprisingly the ARU spends $10M more than the Kiwis on corporate.
It puzzles me that they are so much better run for 1/2 the cost in admin..

I'm not puzzled

 

[Train Without a Station]

They would need to have lower overheads,their turnover is only $117M compared to ARU $145M.
Yet spend $10M more on game development than the ARU.
Surprisingly the ARU spends $10M more than the Kiwis on corporate.
It puzzles me that they are so much better run for 1/2 the cost in admin..

So you think it's not possible that corporate expenses are significantly higher in Australia? Would rent come under that?

I'm not saying that the ARU are as well managed as the NZRU, but we need to consider different market (lack of competition for NZ) and locations (Sydney has one of the highest costs of living in Australasia doesn't it?) that certainly impact on the ARU's bottom line and sees them probably get significantly less bang for their buck than the NZRU. It's not unreasonable to expect that rental costs alone would be double.

 

[Muglair]

Nice try Strewthcobber but I desist from looking at ARU reports.

I would really want to see:

• Definition of major issues, either internally identified or externally by such reports as Arbib
• Analysis of why such issues or irrelevant or why they are
• Setting of clearly defined and measurable objectives, milestones and final deadlines for achievements
• Annual commentary of progress against said objectives

I would not want to see:

• Loosely defined strategies and objectives
• Annual obfuscation about achievements, redefinition of objectives and floating of deadline dates for completion

The only reason I desist from further research into ARU archival materials is a persistent suspicion I will be disappointed.

I promise that if you give your personal guarantee that I will find what I seek then I will research all ARU available documents before I comment further. Even though I will be frustrated at their apparent inability to communicate their achievements to this audience.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Well if you don't look at the reports how will you see anything?

It's massively unreasonable to sit there and complain about lack of transparency when you have made zero effort to look at the information that is readily available.

 

[Muglair]

Shit guys, stop posting while I write. I deleted the whole paragraph on the lower level of scrutiny successful organisations receive.

NZ is a different world. Get over it. We are not comparable on so many different levels it renders high level analysis meaningless. All Blacks are gods, the game is everything, nothing here is the same.

 

[Muglair]

So TWAS you are prepared to give that guarantee? I do this for a living, post #606 and no contributor really has anything concrete to say about the achievements of the current administration?

Have you read these reports?

 

[Quick Hands]

(Sydney has one of the highest costs of living in Australasia doesn't it?) that certainly impact on the ARU's bottom line and sees them probably get significantly less bang for their buck than the NZRU. /quote]

Which might make things more diffcult for the Sydney clubs as well? Cost of doing business higher for them than say clubs in Perth? Or does the Sydney thing only apply to the ARU and not Sydney clubs?

 

[Train Without a Station]

Well considering they generally don't have rent and corporate expenses I'm not sure how much they are actually affected. The Waratahs would be though I'm sure.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Muglair I'm not guaranteeing shit. But if you want to criticise their lack of transparency maybe read their fucking reports to see of they are being transparent or not rather than just say they aren't with no evidence to suggest it.

 

[I like to watch]

So you think it's not possible that corporate expenses are significantly higher in Australia? Would rent come under that?

I'm not saying that the ARU are as well managed as the NZRU, but we need to consider different market (lack of competition for NZ) and locations (Sydney has one of the highest costs of living in Australasia doesn't it?) that certainly impact on the ARU's bottom line and sees them probably get significantly less bang for their buck than the NZRU. It's not unreasonable to expect that rental costs alone would be double.

It's not double.
Commercial space in Wellington is about 75% of the equivalent space in North Sydney.
Wages also about 75%.
Your point about lack of competition is interesting.
As you point out NZ operate in almost a monopoly,yet they feel the need to spend $10M more than the ARU on game development.
Logic would suggest it should be the opposite.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Logic would also suggest you need money to spend it unless you want to be insolvent.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Nice try Strewthcobber but I desist from looking at ARU reports.

I would really want to see:

• Definition of major issues, either internally identified or externally by such reports as Arbib
• Analysis of why such issues or irrelevant or why they are
• Setting of clearly defined and measurable objectives, milestones and final deadlines for achievements
• Annual commentary of progress against said objectives

I would not want to see:

• Loosely defined strategies and objectives
• Annual obfuscation about achievements, redefinition of objectives and floating of deadline dates for completion

The only reason I desist from further research into ARU archival materials is a persistent suspicion I will be disappointed.

I promise that if you give your personal guarantee that I will find what I seek then I will research all ARU available documents before I comment further. Even though I will be frustrated at their apparent inability to communicate their achievements to this audience.

I'm not sure what you want me to say? You'll be disappointed. Don't read it? There's much more of your latter points than the former, but I think it's still worth reading, especially the financial part. The dollars really do tell their own story.

I'm no more than an rank amateur at reading annual reports but I found it very worthwhile and gave me a much better understanding of where Pulver is coming from.

It's a shame because it would have been nice to have a professional's informed opinion.

 

[Muglair]

OK TWAS I take your aggressive tone as an absolute guarantee of your own credibility on the subject.

I am betting you have not looked at it either and you will be held accountable.

 

[I like to watch]

h

Logic would also suggest you need money to spend it unless you want to be insolvent.

They have the money,we have just been discussing why are corporate overheads over $10M more expensive in a poorly managed business,than in a successful business.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Below links for reports.

Just remember the golden rule of consulting.

There's no money to be made in solving the problem.

My personal favourite is Recommendation 13

http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Summary.pdf

http://myrugby.rugby.com.au/myrugby/images/docs/Gov/Details.pdf

 

[Muglair]

Thanks Kenny.

Looking at this stuff as you write. When I Google Premier Task Force etc I mainly get GAGR references. I loved in 2012 the references to the ARU going broke.

Spoiler alert on my review, lots of governance stuff. I hope the end result is not a lot a lot of fluff on the process we are going to use to achieve things ....

 

[Muglair]

Oh dear. Saved both the Arbib Report and the ARU response as I continued searching for real data. KP has prompted me to read the ARU recommendations arising from the Arbib Report. Is someone going to explain to me why I should read all 45 pages of the Arbib Report?

I read the opening 10 pages, suitably positioned to obtain further work from the ARU.

 

[Kenny Powers]

The maths is amazing

A National Participation Fee ranging from $11 to $33 being levied by the ARU, let's round it to an average $20

Page 7of the ARU annual Report 615,809 participants.

That's $12,316,180 all for the grassroots, better than NZ.

Anyone believe the numbers?

 

[I like to watch]

Um,no it's not better than NZ.
The ARU intends on increasing their taxing of grassroots,not contributing to the grassroots.
And we all know the ARU participation figure is not even a good lie.

As an aside NZRU are not on their own.
The poms spend £45M on their pros & £30M on grassroots, from total revenues of around £150M.
The Irish €32M on their pros & €10M on grassroots, from total revenues of €70M.
I could go on,but most will probably see a trend.

 

[TOCC]

They would need to have lower overheads,their turnover is only $117M compared to ARU $145M.
Yet spend $10M more on game development than the ARU.
Surprisingly the ARU spends $10M more than the Kiwis on corporate.
It puzzles me that they are so much better run for 1/2 the cost in admin..

ARU's annual revenue is $145million?

You are quoting a British&Irish Lions tour which caused a significant jump in revenue..

By comparison, in 2012 the ARUs income was $96million and NZRUs income was $106million (in respective currency).

To further highlight the fluctuating nature of income in a RWC year, ARU income was $75million in 2011 and NZRU was $103millon.