Melbourne Rebels 2024

[Highlander35]

Will encourage everyone to get out and watch the local clubs tomorrow first and foremost:

But Wests vs Bond looks to be a good one to watch on the Bye week:

Eloff, Dobbins, Maiava, Mason, Lebron Naea and the Vaihu brothers named in the Doggies squad: while Lukas Ripley is playing for Bond.

 

[Pone's Mullet]

Going to be an interesting few days - "The April 29 AGM falls just days after the Melbourne Rebels’ voluntary administration lapses this week, with a report into their future to be presented on Friday. It’s believed the report will advise that the Rebels should continue to run as a Super Rugby franchise in 2025."

'Easy to throw stones': RA chairman hits back at mudslingers after calls for AGM board cleanout

As calls grow for the entire Rugby Australia board to be overthrown, new chairman Daniel Herbert described the agitators behind the movement as hypocrites…

www.theroar.com.au

 

[KevinO]

Yeah, been waiting for updates on what our future holds, the whole making the process quick has not been the truth.

 

[Pone's Mullet]

Yeah, been waiting for updates on what our future holds, the whole making the process quick has not been the truth.

You're right @KevinO - Soooo unlike RA (*note sarcastic tone)

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

Yeah, been waiting for updates on what our future holds, the whole making the process quick has not been the truth.

Due to the Rebels not RA

 

[Derpus]

Yeah those Rebels administrators were notoriously efficient.

 

[Wilson]

Salakaia-Loto out for around 6 weeks:

Super Rugby teams round 10: Marky Mark replaces Pietsch, Rebels' LSL blow, Flook boost for Reds, Alaalatoa to start

After a few weeks of byes Super Rugby is back to all hands on deck in round 10 with some huge clashes on the…

www.theroar.com.au

The Rebels will welcome regular captain Rob Leota back via the bench, but his return is offset by the foot injury to Lukhan Salakaia-Loto.

The returning Wallabies lock suffered a foot injury during their win over the Highlanders and is expected to miss up around six weeks.

 

[Highlander35]

Big big big loss, probably the worst of the non-halves positions.

Paper thin forward depth outside the front row at the moment. Maiava the only contracted player outside the 23. Not that he's not up to it if required, but a second injury would means paying money we don't have to get Herbert down here, promoting a second clubbie or playing Pone, Dobbins or a Ripley in the 20 jersey.

 

[oztimmay]

From another Rebels group.

Administrator report has dropped - they recommend implementing the deed of company arrangement, i.e. keep Rebels.

One page from the report

No, I have not read it, nor do I have access to it. It's relayed from a trusted source with the acumen to interpret it.

Over to you, Herbee and Phillie.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Looks pretty promisiing.

Is the Investor Group the Tarneit consortium?

And it sounds like there is a pretty big caveat there - if the "Proponents are unable to satsify the obligation......".

Before this happens, the debt has to be resolved? (I guess by Tarneit?)

 

[Rebel man]

You never know with the scum that run the game here

 

[RugbyReg]

So it’s the initial funding AND a commitment to additional funding to cover running costs for two years??

That’s a lot of cash considering how much the Rebels have burnt through each year.

Over to you investooooors.

 

[stoff]

The administrators report and DOCA is published here: https://insolvency.pwc.com.au/singl...ion-pty-ltd-administrators-appointed/casePage

The DOCA is a two part offer (initial 15c on the dollar and employee entitlements covered), with the second phase (an extra 15c on the dollar and funding the rebels to continue for two years) conditional on RA granting MRRU a right to participate in Super Rugby, and the ATO cancelling the director penalty notices. The director creditors don’t get anything, and it enables MRRU to seek litigation funding to sue RA. It’s backed by Leigh Clifford, the current directors, and ‘other high net worth individuals’.

 

[oztimmay]

EXCLUSIVE: Administrator urges private consortium be allowed to save Rebels, amidst claims RA won't engage

The Melbourne Rebels may have traded while insolvent for more than five years, giving rise to potential breach of director duty claims for the…

www.theroar.com.au

 

[Crashy]

very happy its headed this way though suing RA is not going to help the game in this country.
Pay your fucking bills and we wouldnt be in this mess.
Guess its up to the Rugby fans in this country to get behind this club as their second team and FFS Melbournians, get out an support a team one of the 2 codes in your city that has any international relevance.

 

[RugbyReg]

Think of all the Burn City memorabilia they have to get rid off when they move out of Melbourne

 

[RugbyReg]

gee its a pretty damning read against the Rebels. Likely trading involvement since 2018. Just dire financial management.

I was chatting to a former QRU Board Member last night who started in the position when the Reds were in a similar situation back in 2016. He proposed a ludicrous approach, seemingly rare in rugby in Australia, of spending less than you earn. They cut staff big time and it was obviously a big reason they signed Brad Thorn as head coach rather than a more experienced coach. Living within their means and all that.

 

[RugbyReg]

I think this is the bit the Rebels are leaning in to heavily - player payments

All players that were contracted to play for the Melbourne Rebels were subject to a tripartite contract between the player, the Company and RA. These contracts were also subject to the terms of the Professional Rugby Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA VI) 2023 to 2026. Pursuant to terms of the player contracts and CBA VI, the Melbourne Rebels players were initially employed by MRRU. However, RA held the ability to become the sole employer of the players by serving on them a written notice. RA issued such a notice to the players on or about 1 February 2024 advising it had become their employer effective 1 February 2024. The letter also advised it had commenced payment of salary and superannuation from 1 January 2024.

Notwithstanding the above, the terms of the CBA VI appear to suggest that RA may assume liability for amounts due to players of a team who loses its right or is suspended from fielding a team in the SRPC provided that the relevant players will accept all reasonable directions from RA in respect of future employment (see discussion at Section 4.1.1). Further, under CBA VI, RA would be solely responsible for funding the Company with the associated expenses (i.e., match payments) of any Melbourne Rebels players who were selected to represent the Australian national team (i.e., match payments) whilst they were on national duty.

It is the position of the Directors that RA had an obligation under the JVA to step in and ensure that five RA teams were fielded and, as a result, had an obligation to assume certain employee entitlements.

As can be seen from the above, the contractual arrangements of the Melbourne Rebels players were complicated, and the Directors and RA have different positions on who was considered to be the “true employer” of the players.

 

[LeCheese]

I think this is the bit the Rebels are leaning in to heavily - player payments

So MRRU's position is that RA should've been paying player wages as MRRU were unable to do so, yet were obliged to field a team? RA's position is that they were only to cover Wallabies-related payments, however assumed responsibility for all player payments from 1Jan 24?

Messy.

 

[RugbyReg]

where are you @Braveheart81 ??? need your analytical eye on this.

Key findings:

Key Comments

Whilst my investigations are ongoing, my initial findings are summarised below:
 The Company’s failure would appear to be the result of:
- A history of trading losses, exacerbated since 2020 by the negative impact on revenue from the COVID-19 pandemic and reduced funding from RA since that time;
- Insufficient revenue being generated from sources other than RA, such as membership, sponsorship and game day revenue;
- An increasing expense base, including rising wage costs;
- Lack of readily available alternative funding sources to meet the material net asset shortfall and trading losses; and
- Failure to manage its statutory and lease liabilities.

 The Company appears to have maintained adequate books and records.

 The Directors have raised several issues, including what it believes to be potential claims against RA. My investigations into these matters are ongoing. These are complex issues, and I am not yet able to opine on the merits or otherwise of these claims.

 My preliminary view is that the Company may have been insolvent from at least 31 December 2018.