Where to for Twiggy Rugby?

[dru]

I wonder what other cost cutting measures the ARU has planned.
Maybe an across the board 10-15% cut?
They won't be able to cut a team until the new agreement, if there is one.
7's rugby must get a fair bit I would think, maybe make them amateur and they can raise their own funds until an Olympic year.
Maybe Clyne can continue doing the CEO's and COO's jobs, that's >1m a year saved.
Cut back the Wallabies Top up's and match day payments again.
I guess the NRC will be going or cut back.
The National Women's Comp is University based so they don't need money.
No more buying out contracts that's for sure.

Actually they explained the cut by advising substantial funds to the grass roots.

Let's see how that plays out for the comfortably sleeping-well Clyne.

 

[Quick Hands]

Actually they explained the cut by advising substantial funds to the grass roots.

Let's see how that plays out for the comfortably sleeping-well Clyne.

I'll bet that very little of it gets to the grass roots.

I suspect that much of the money will go to keeping the NSWRU and the QRU afloat.

Let's see how many junior clubs get a visit from Clyne with a cheque in hand.

Or maybe he'll be sleeping so soundly, he'll be late.

 

[BLR]

Actually they explained the cut by advising substantial funds to the grass roots.

Let's see how that plays out for the comfortably sleeping-well Clyne.

Yet after Twiggy offered $50 million SPECIFICALLY for grassroots it became a case of needing the money for Super Rugby.

That money was NEVER going to grassroots, ever, and I really hope no one truely believed that.

EDIT: NSW & QLD have always had money troubles, ACT has burnt through their cash, although it looks stable they no longer have that safety net while VIC has always been a sink hole. There was no way this was going anywhere but to patch those holes, as has always been the case.

 

[Quick Hands]

God, it's only a game. Not like he's a war criminal. Let's keep things in perspective.
.

I didn't think that moral behaviour and honest, ethical dealings were divorced from sport. Or that one had to reach "war criminal" status to be considered morally bankrupt.

Certainly my experience has been that those that I've dealt with in sport were honest and ethical in their dealings with others and anyone trying to get an unfair advantage was called out.

 

[Quick Hands]

Yet after Twiggy offered $50 million SPECIFICALLY for grassroots it became a case of needing the money for Super Rugby.

That money was NEVER going to grassroots, ever, and I really hope no one truely believed that.

EDIT: NSW & QLD have always had money troubles, ACT has burnt through their cash, although it looks stable they no longer have that safety net while VIC has always been a sink hole. There was no way this was going anywhere but to patch those holes, as has always been the case.

I'd heard previously that the NSWRU had enough money to make it through to this time next year before the creditors came knocking. This little maneouvre will stave that off for a couple of years anyway.

 

[mst]

The ARU grants around $5.7m to each Super Rugby team each year - it's really each team's share of the broadcast rights.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...t/news-story/86d59b6d4a5b7b4663878ea7af458305


The broadcasters have agreed to pay the same until 2020 and the ARU only have to distribute that much to 4 teams not 5.

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

No. The ARU have shown its not really each team's share of the broadcast rights. If it were their money it would flow directly to the franchise's and the ARU would not be taking the $5.7mil; equivalent to the 5th franchises portion. The Franchise's would be making more offsetting the ARU contributions and deriving savings; but its not the reality. Its a different model which is odd considering most of the franchises are running at a loss but the ARU is posting a profit.

All bar one Super Rugby franchise made a profit and if you take the Brumbies as an example even though they made a profit the ACT Government contributed more than $2.1mil in 2016 and the Brumbies carry little overheads.

Its one the issue that Cox raised which showed that the private investment the Kiwi team have to support them can never happen under the current ARU deals. Most likely a contributing factor as to why they cant go down the private investment / equity route.

The devil that in the lack of detail of the ARU spreadsheets and explainer is highlighted where it say that in parts it used no historical or comparative data but acknowledges that the Rebels cost nearly 150% more @$19.3mil comparative to the Force over the same period of 2014-17.

One oddity is the declining "cash" the ARU sheets. If the TV revenue and Government contributions are reasonably fixed / steady then what is the "cash" fluctuation and cost that causes the downward trend?

 

[mst]

I wonder what other cost cutting measures the ARU has planned.
Maybe an across the board 10-15% cut?
They won't be able to cut a team until the new agreement, if there is one.
7's rugby must get a fair bit I would think, maybe make them amateur and they can raise their own funds until an Olympic year.
Maybe Clyne can continue doing the CEO's and COO's jobs, that's >1m a year saved.
Cut back the Wallabies Top up's and match day payments again.
I guess the NRC will be going or cut back.
The National Women's Comp is University based so they don't need money.
No more buying out contracts that's for sure.

Bankrupt unions - keep the SS ARU alive and hope for a rescue?

 

[BLR]

Bankrupt unions - keep the SS ARU alive and hope for a rescue?

Now that I think about it....the big 4 banks (5?) are guaranteed by the government so to be honest they can lose whatever the hell they want and get it covered for them. Having bankers with that attitude on the ARU board would breed no real idea on how to create money from a bad situation without handouts. We should put the bloke who runs ING Direct in charge, they know what's up.

 

[wamberal]

Now that I think about it..the big 4 banks (5?) are guaranteed by the government so to be honest they can lose whatever the hell they want and get it covered for them. Having bankers with that attitude on the ARU board would breed no real idea on how to create money from a bad situation without handouts. We should put the bloke who runs ING Direct in charge, they know what's up.

Bullsh*t. The banks are not "covered". Depositors are, up to a fairly small amount, in the event of a bank failure.


Banks are an absolutely crucial component of the economic system. People who are responsible for running banks are actually under huge pressure to perform in a very competitive environment. That is why bank CEOs get paid so much.


I worked for an international bank for a couple of years, in Asia, and I can tell you that life was very tough. The pay was good, but the challenges were huge.


There is a saying that I rather like. "The ignorant man despises that which he does not understand". Just saying.

 

[TOCC]

Bullsh*t. The banks are not "covered". Depositors are, up to a fairly small amount, in the event of a bank failure.


Banks are an absolutely crucial component of the economic system. People who are responsible for running banks are actually under huge pressure to perform in a very competitive environment. That is why bank CEOs get paid so much.


I worked for an international bank for a couple of years, in Asia, and I can tell you that life was very tough. The pay was good, but the challenges were huge.


There is a saying that I rather like. "The ignorant man despises that which he does not understand". Just saying.

Doesn't make them good sports administrators, and I find it a little ironic that you insinuate others are ignorant, given you persist in refusing to acknowledge the failures of the ARU board.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Best bet for the ARU would probably be to reduce all grants to the franchises, but especially to the Rebels if they have already been compensated for any of the remaining years through the front loaded agreement previously in place, and not provide any supplementary funding if any of them goes bad. Let the chips fall where they will, and if a franchise goes broke in the meantime, allow them to pass in their license and shut up shop.

 

[stoff]

Best bet for the ARU would probably be to reduce all grants to the franchises, but especially to the Rebels if they have already been compensated for any of the remaining years through the front loaded agreement previously in place, and not provide any supplementary funding if any of them goes bad. Let the chips fall where they will, and if a franchise goes broke in the meantime, allow them to pass in their license and shut up shop.

I don't think they have the option to let a franchise go under without replacing it due to the broadcast deals, and depending upon when it happens most likely with a team in the same city due to fixturing and travel arrangements. At that point they probably have to find the most economical option which is another bailout. If the state unions play hardball, I don't think any of them will lose their licences as they know the ARU can't afford to let them go under. The key now is to require bailout early in the season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[James Pettifer]

I don't think they have the option to let a franchise go under without replacing it due to the broadcast deals, and depending upon when it happens most likely with a team in the same city due to fixturing and travel arrangements. At that point they probably have to find the most economical option which is another bailout. If the state unions play hardball, I don't think any of them will lose their licences as they know the ARU can't afford to let them go under. The key now is to require bailout early in the season.

Surely the key now is for the ARU to have some oversight of the expenses and profitability of the franchises. And if they need to put money in then that oversight should shift to at least partial control.

 

[mst]

Best bet for the ARU would probably be to reduce all grants to the franchises, but especially to the Rebels if they have already been compensated for any of the remaining years through the front loaded agreement previously in place, and not provide any supplementary funding if any of them goes bad. Let the chips fall where they will, and if a franchise goes broke in the meantime, allow them to pass in their license and shut up shop.

The irony of your comment BR is that it has the perfect scenario that would have given the ARU a perfect way of getting of cutting a franchise and renegotiate the TV deal without being an outright villian. Both the Force and the Rebels and arguably any of the other franchises are close to bust and if would have been a motivator for rugby in that it would rally the support.

I still don't get why the ARU didn't play the "broke" card and claimed they could not provide 5 teams when the SANZAAR plan first came up.

 

[TOCC]

I still don't get why the ARU didn't play the "broke" card and claimed they could not provide 5 teams when the SANZAAR plan first came up.

Because the ARU are SANZAAR, any idea that SANZAAR put forward first came from, or was done in consultation with the ARU

 

[Boof1050]

Any way back to twiggy ball.

 

[mst]

Because the ARU are SANZAAR, any idea that SANZAAR put forward first came from, or was done in consultation with the ARU

I am so glad the ARU know what the "A" stands for.

 

[mst]

Any way back to twiggy ball.

So is the key is Wallabies selection or not? Could he contract the 60 cappers as they are already eligible?

 

[mst]

Very interesting and positive.

ARU chairman Cameron Clyne said the national body was committed to working with Forrest on the IPRC.

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/09/15/aru-forrest-working-group

 

[Tomikin]

Yet after Twiggy offered $50 million SPECIFICALLY for grassroots it became a case of needing the money for Super Rugby.

That money was NEVER going to grassroots, ever, and I really hope no one truely believed that.

EDIT: NSW & QLD have always had money troubles, ACT has burnt through their cash, although it looks stable they no longer have that safety net while VIC has always been a sink hole. There was no way this was going anywhere but to patch those holes, as has always been the case.

You mean Act that hasn't asked for money and made money this year after shit deals.. It's a bit rich to call it a safe net.. How bout good business.. Aquis picked Brumby land

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk