• 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.

Australian Rugby / RA

I like to watch

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
Braveheart81 said:
How much can the corporate costs be cut before they start having a negative impact on the game? Certainly those corporate costs and headcount have been trimmed a lot in recent years (coming from a very bloated beginning). At some point of efficiency your corporate costs are largely overheads that shouldn't really vary that much from year to year.

If the revenue goes up we shouldn't see the corporate costs go up in lock step but should see grassroots spending go up substantially because there is free cash flow available.

You can't realistically make a decision that your overheads are going to be constrained to being a fixed percentage of revenue. You obviously have to live within your means but at some point shrinking that also shrinks you ability to generate the revenue.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that no improvements had been made in corporate expense,and wasn't suggesting that corporate costs should be pegged to a fixed percentage of income.Nor did I suggest that corporate costs should be reduced to levels where the ARU can't function.
My point was the ARU spends a higher percentage of income on corporate, and a lower percentage on grassroots than their competitors.

The biggest problem I have with the ARU is they consider grassroots to be an expense.
Whilst smart administrators consider it an investment.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Andrew Slack (58)
Braveheart81 said:
I think our overheads are always going to be higher because cost of living and salaries are higher here.

I'm not entirely sure about player salaries. I think they may be a bit higher here as well on average.

I don't think our top players get paid more than NZ's now.
Click to expand...
Not so much the players salaries - they are essentially fixed, covered by the CBA and can be budgeted for.

It's the other costs around keeping the pro game going which would be interesting to compare - theoretically if the ARU didn't have to bail out the Rebs, or employ the force atm then there would be more money available for the community side of things.

Which is essentially Clynes argument.

Would be interesting to see if that stacks up when compared with NZ

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
 
B

Buggins

Frank Row (1)
Watching Fox Kick and Chase - says John Eales most successful Wallaby Captain with a 70 something percentage - would have though Ben Mowen's 5 out of 6 was better than that! I know he only played a few tests as captain but he was very successful.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Buggins said:
Watching Fox Kick and Chase - says John Eales most successful Wallaby Captain with a 70 something percentage - would have though Ben Mowen's 5 out of 6 was better than that! I know he only played a few tests as captain but he was very successful.
Click to expand...


I guess they have a minimum number of games for it to be considered relevant.

Dean Mumm is 1 from 1.
 
lou75

lou75

Ron Walden (29)
Strewthcobber said:
Not so much the players salaries - they are essentially fixed, covered by the CBA and can be budgeted for.

It's the other costs around keeping the pro game going which would be interesting to compare - theoretically if the ARU didn't have to bail out the Rebs, or employ the force atm then there would be more money available for the community side of things.

Which is essentially Clynes argument.

Would be interesting to see if that stacks up when compared with NZ

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I keep reading about Clyne complaining about having to bail out the Rebels but this was the ARU's choice all along - to sell to Cox with the extra payments of circa $6 m to him - they had previously turned down an offer from another party who had promised to cauterise the money flow from the ARU but for some reason, Pulver turned that offer down. He has never explained why he did this - instead, he and Clarke pushed the sale through to Clarke's old mate Cox, who the ARU continued to pay money to despite the sale. It doesn't seem logical to me, but I'm just a simple fan - Clyne, if he could explain why the deal to sell to Cox included extra $6m payments instead of selling to (and I do have the details but will not release at this stage) for no extra payments, otherwise, Clyne should STFU about the payments to the Rebels.
If you want to go further back in time, the ARU paid a lot of money to the Rebels while Clarke was the CEO of the Rebels, Clarke at that time acted as if he had an open cheque book, because his old mate Pulver was writing the cheques - e.g.: Clarke took the entire admin team up the Brisvagas to watch a Reds v Rebels match - why would you pay to take the admin team interstate? Crazy right? But lets not examine what actually happened and who was responsible, lets just blanket it all down to those evil rebels who sapped the ARU of their precious money. And on that note, I'm gonna have another wine.
Dare I say it - the ARU engineered most of the problems with the payments to the Rebels and now Clyne is blaming the Rebels as if they are responsible for those problems. Pour me another wine.
 
RugbyReg

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
Buggins said:
Watching Fox Kick and Chase - says John Eales most successful Wallaby Captain with a 70 something percentage - would have though Ben Mowen's 5 out of 6 was better than that! I know he only played a few tests as captain but he was very successful.
Click to expand...


Watty Friend's 3 tests for 3 wins was pretty damn good. Particularly as it was in the early 20th century when wins were rare.

Chris McKivat, James Slipper, Darby Loudan, Jimmy Clarke, Larry Dwyer, Paul McLean, Rob Loudon (brother of Darby), Rod McAll, Tim Horan, WArd Prentice, Chris Whitaker, Jason Little and Dean Mumm all had a win in their only test as skipper.

From there it was:

Ben Mowen 83.33% (5 from 6)
Steve Williams 80% (4 from 5)
Simon Poidevin 75% (3 from 4)
John Eales 74.55% (41 from 55)
Andrew Slack 73.68% (14 from 19)
Michael Lynagh 73.33% (11 from 15)
Tom Lawton Snr 71.43% (5 from 7)
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
RugbyReg said:
Watty Friend's 3 tests for 3 wins was pretty damn good. Particularly as it was in the early 20th century when wins were rare.

Chris McKivat, James Slipper, Darby Loudan, Jimmy Clarke, Larry Dwyer, Paul McLean, Rob Loudon (brother of Darby), Rod McAll, Tim Horan, WArd Prentice, Chris Whitaker, Jason Little and Dean Mumm all had a win in their only test as skipper.

From there it was:

Ben Mowen 83.33% (5 from 6)
Steve Williams 80% (4 from 5)
Simon Poidevin 75% (3 from 4)
John Eales 74.55% (41 from 55)
Andrew Slack 73.68% (14 from 19)
Michael Lynagh 73.33% (11 from 15)
Tom Lawton Snr 71.43% (5 from 7)
Click to expand...

Whits captained a test? Was that from the bench?
 
Jimmy_Crouch

Jimmy_Crouch

Ken Catchpole (46)
Braveheart81 said:
I guess they have a minimum number of games for it to be considered relevant.

Dean Mumm is 1 from 1.
Click to expand...


Dont forget Jason Little (v USA 99 RWC), Chris Whitaker (v Namibia 03 RWC) and James Slipper (v USA 2015) all 1 from 1. I am sure there are more but they are before my time
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
lou75 said:
I keep reading about Clyne complaining about having to bail out the Rebels but this was the ARU's choice all along - to sell to Cox with the extra payments of circa $6 m to him - they had previously turned down an offer from another party who had promised to cauterise the money flow from the ARU but for some reason, Pulver turned that offer down. He has never explained why he did this - instead, he and Clarke pushed the sale through to Clarke's old mate Cox, who the ARU continued to pay money to despite the sale. It doesn't seem logical to me, but I'm just a simple fan - Clyne, if he could explain why the deal to sell to Cox included extra $6m payments instead of selling to (and I do have the details but will not release at this stage) for no extra payments, otherwise, Clyne should STFU about the payments to the Rebels.
If you want to go further back in time, the ARU paid a lot of money to the Rebels while Clarke was the CEO of the Rebels, Clarke at that time acted as if he had an open cheque book, because his old mate Pulver was writing the cheques - e.g.: Clarke took the entire admin team up the Brisvagas to watch a Reds v Rebels match - why would you pay to take the admin team interstate? Crazy right? But lets not examine what actually happened and who was responsible, lets just blanket it all down to those evil rebels who sapped the ARU of their precious money. And on that note, I'm gonna have another wine.
Dare I say it - the ARU engineered most of the problems with the payments to the Rebels and now Clyne is blaming the Rebels as if they are responsible for those problems. Pour me another wine.
Click to expand...

Clyne used to run one of the big 4 banks, so he's used to blaming the customer and then using corporate clout to silence or drown out bad news.
 
James Pettifer

James Pettifer

Jim Clark (26)
Strewthcobber said:
Not so much the players salaries - they are essentially fixed, covered by the CBA and can be budgeted for.

It's the other costs around keeping the pro game going which would be interesting to compare - theoretically if the ARU didn't have to bail out the Rebs, or employ the force atm then there would be more money available for the community side of things.

Which is essentially Clynes argument.

Would be interesting to see if that stacks up when compared with NZ

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Except that argument is #*$&ed.

As I posted in the other thread it is

Kinda like if my kid spends all their money . and so I give them a $100k. Then next year they do the same and I give them another $100k. And the year after and the year after and the year after. At what point do you say, hey hang on, I'm looking at your budget and making sure that this doesn't happen again - for me, it would be significantly less than $28 million on 5 kids particularly that bloody youngest who has cost me $11 million.
Click to expand...



To continue giving out money on a year by year basis to whatever franchise needs it without putting in place financial controls is absolutely ludicrous.
 
lou75

lou75

Ron Walden (29)
Quick Hands said:
Clyne used to run one of the big 4 banks, so he's used to blaming the customer and then using corporate clout to silence or drown out bad news.
Click to expand...

Yes, and JON did too and Alan Jones called him a failed banked and got sued, so I'm not gonna go there, but Clyne is certainly an ex-Banker and he is used to blaming customers to shareholders and blaming the government to customers and so on and he is very good at saying nothing of any substance. I could quote the movement in share price during his reign but ICBF
 
lou75

lou75

Ron Walden (29)
James Pettifer said:
Except that argument is #*$&ed.

As I posted in the other thread it is





To continue giving out money on a year by year basis to whatever franchise needs it without putting in place financial controls is absolutely ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, and then to blame the kid for taking the money , please ...
 
T

TOCC

Guest
I feel this sums up the ARU quite well, looks like it hasn't been moved in years.. found rusting away in Moore Park carpark.. symbol of grass roots rugby investment
35593076743_e6811a7b82_c.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top