• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

ARU fee structure change for 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jaghond

Ted Fahey (11)
An interesting , and well written (IMHO) article !

I wonder if anyone's listening / reading from atop the ivory tower at St Leonards ........

Surely it's time for a bit of common sense to prevail.
 

Brendan Hume

Charlie Fox (21)

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
That is a crock of shit.
That's like the mad monk saying the budget is in a mess,and the only option is to have a Medicare co payment.
Community rugby is not the only avenue to trim costs.
And it's not just the costs,it's the way they are insisting rego fees are to be paid from now on.
BTW,,I am not aware of any Directors who have been sued for insolvent trading either.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
That is a crock of shit.
That's like the mad monk saying the budget is in a mess,and the only option is to have a Medicare co payment.
Community rugby is not the only avenue to trim costs.
And it's not just the costs,it's the way they are insisting rego fees are to be paid from now on.
BTW,,I am not aware of any Directors who have been sued for insolvent trading either.
I don't think they are a good idea either.

All I'm saying is that I can understand why the board is acting the way they are. They have to trim tens of millions of dollars out of the budget or could be personally liable. They also want to be employable on other boards at the end of it.

Most of them (excluding Hawker) haven't even been around long enough to blame for getting into the problem

They have to have different thinking to a consultant like Arbib.
 

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
I don't think they are a good idea either.

All I'm saying is that I can understand why the board is acting the way they are. They have to trim tens of millions of dollars out of the budget or could be personally liable. They also want to be employable on other boards at the end of it.

Most of them (excluding Hawker) haven't even been around long enough to blame for getting into the problem

They have to have different thinking to a consultant like Arbib.
The point is,it appears the only area they have targeted is the grassroots,which is a neglible part of their expenses.but it is a major part of their customer base.

It does not help things at all if by reducing your expenses by $3M,you lose $2-3M in income because you have pissed off your customer base.

I call bullshit on the personally liable bit as well.
Directors being sued for insolvent trading is as rare as rocking horse shit.
 

Brendan Hume

Charlie Fox (21)
All I'm saying is that I can understand why the board is acting the way they are. They have to trim tens of millions of dollars out of the budget or could be personally liable. They also want to be employable on other boards at the end of it.

The fees will only raise $5M though.
It needs to be very clear to people that this is not about bailing out the ARU - the money is being raised entirely from the community game, for the community game.

The problem we have, is that there is no transparency about what the community game actually means to the ARU or the States, there is no budget, planning, outcomes or accountability for the expenditure.

There has been no flagged review into the efficiencies of the current community rugby plan - it assumes that the existing model is good, and that if the professional game can't pay for it, then the community game must. And yet, many within community rugby believe the current model doesn't work - the only reason there hasn't been more push for change is because the people spending the money were also the people making the money - if the ARU and states choose to piss away their revenue, who am I to argue?

It treats rugby clubs as tax collectors, without any explanation of what those taxes will be used for. The plan has been developed outside the community rugby space and imposed on the people who actually run community rugby.

And on your note about the Directors looking to future employment prospects - it would shock me if that were behind any of the motivation for the actions of the board, and if it were, those members need to stand down from their positions. The stipend for the directors is measly, so its not like they need the money. If their worried about being tarnished by the ARU, they should leave.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
They have to have different thinking to a consultant like Arbib.

You've missed the point: Arbib's statements recognised and described the relationship. He also seems to have understood that since the relationship was symbiotic the unwashed needed to be consulted.
That has nothing to do with whether the Directors fear trading while insolvent: it is only about how you communicate and consult thereby managing the relationship.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
You've missed the point: Arbib's statements recognised and described the relationship. He also seems to have understood that since the relationship was symbiotic the unwashed needed to be consulted.
That has nothing to do with whether the Directors fear trading while insolvent: it is only about how you communicate and consult thereby managing the relationship.

I don't think the ARU Directors like the idea of consulting lesser mortals. I doubt many of them would even know what to say to one of us ordinary folk.

Like the Gods on Mount Olympus they expect unwavering loyalty no matter what they do and they brook no questioning. Michael Hawker chairs a recent ARU meeting with Bill Pulver on his right hand side.:)

670px--1,1201,0,500-Framestore_49.jpg
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Can someone update me on where this currently stands in NSW?

Are we still on individual insurance or have we officially moved back to the team model that existed prior to this year?
 

TSR

Mark Ella (57)
Can someone update me on where this currently stands in NSW?

Are we still on individual insurance or have we officially moved back to the team model that existed prior to this year?
As in understand it, the NSWRU is adamant that it will be team based while the ARU sent a letter to the QRU (and presumably others) stating emphatically that everyone was paying the individual NIL.

So either it's still a pissing comp, someone is lying or I've fallen behind.
 

Chris McCracken

Jim Clark (26)
Can someone update me on where this currently stands in NSW?

Are we still on individual insurance or have we officially moved back to the team model that existed prior to this year?

There has been no formal announcement. NSW are saying they haven't accepted the individual insurance, but haven't made a statement about it yet. Andrew Larratt's message posted earlier threw a spanner in the works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top