• 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.

Rebels 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
Highlander35

Highlander35

Andrew Slack (58)
1. With both Colby and Fugs around, we've got 3 quality opensides. McMahon at 6 lets both of them stay in the 23 without losing much in the backrow, especially with Higgers being a great Jumper.

2. Too few locks. Neville's obviously not rated, Samo is old and not here yet, Cummins is in his first year. Leaves Jones, Timani and Jeffries (who's only in his 2nd year as well).
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Geoff Shaw (53)
Staff member
Guess who's here?

Radike.JPG
 
Inside Shoulder

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
The Australian Rugby Union may strike a deal to find new owners for Super Rugby franchise Melbourne Rebels this year, in a move that will save the governing body $2 million to $3 million
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Geoff Shaw (53)
Staff member
But we just had private owners, then they gifted it to the ARU. Still, I am happy with the idea of private ownership if it means top-quality stays in melbourne.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
oztimmay said:
But we just had private owners, then they gifted it to the ARU. Still, I am happy with the idea of private ownership if it means top-quality stays in melbourne.
Click to expand...

Gifted it to the ARU? That's a funny way of looking at it...
The previous owner offloaded a team to the ARU with ongoing financial liabilities running into the $millions..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
oztimmay

oztimmay

Geoff Shaw (53)
Staff member
TOCC said:
Gifted it to the ARU? That's a funny way of looking at it.
The precious owner offloaded a team to the ARU with ongoing financial liabilities running into the $millions..

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


I'm referring more to the process, not the financial outcome of the transaction. The licences owned by the founding bard members (mostly with Harold Mitchell) were given at no cost (what I term gifted) to the VRU, which was then transferred over to the ARU (they effectively own them anyway).

The financial state is another problem all together. The potential to have a private investment would be good for a number of reasons; keeps the Rebels solvent, takes financial pressure off a cash strapped ARU and (most importantly) keeps the gave I love in Melbourne.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Andrew Slack (58)
oztimmay said:
I'm referring more to the process, not the financial outcome of the transaction. The licences owned by the founding bard members (mostly with Harold Mitchell) were given at no cost (what I term gifted) to the VRU, which was then transferred over to the ARU (they effectively own them anyway).

The financial state is another problem all together. The potential to have a private investment would be good for a number of reasons; keeps the Rebels solvent, takes financial pressure off a cash strapped ARU and (most importantly) keeps the gave I love in Melbourne.
Click to expand...
I still can't work out why anyone would want to invest their own money in the rebels given that they reportedly lose $2-3 million a year
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Strewthcobber said:
I still can't work out why anyone would want to invest their own money in the rebels given that they reportedly lose $2-3 million a year
Click to expand...

I think you'd find more professional sporting teams around the world lose money than make money.

It's a lifestyle asset for someone who is very wealthy and also wants to contribute to rugby union in Australia.

Look at all the very wealthy people who own lots of racehorses. They might get the occassional huge win but rest assured they're out of pocket millions of dollars a year on their stables. If I was in that position I'd much prefer to own a rugby team.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Andrew Slack (58)
That's kind of my point. If the best we can do is a short term option led by someone with no interest in rugby then why bother in the first place?
 
T

TOCC

Guest
oztimmay said:
I'm referring more to the process, not the financial outcome of the transaction. The licences owned by the founding bard members (mostly with Harold Mitchell) were given at no cost (what I term gifted) to the VRU, which was then transferred over to the ARU (they effectively own them anyway).

The financial state is another problem all together. The potential to have a private investment would be good for a number of reasons; keeps the Rebels solvent, takes financial pressure off a cash strapped ARU and (most importantly) keeps the gave I love in Melbourne.
Click to expand...

I disagree that the financial state is a another problem altogether, the board is directly responsible for the financial performance of the organisation... Harold established an organisation which posted regular losses and then off-loaded it to the ARU... He handed and organisation which was effectively insolvent back to the ARU, the ARU had no choice but to bail the Rebels out and accept ownership.


I agree private ownership is a positive, but maybe the finer details need to be tightened so another Harold doesn't occur..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
B

Brett McCurdy

Frank Row (1)
Crowd-funding !!
What if we reach the magic number of 10,000 members this year.
IF those members were to pay $500 = $5M.
Then we the members own the club and are entitled to appoint administrators to manage on our behalf........
I know it's an unrealistic dream, but I don't want to lose the team and opportunity for rugby in Melbourne.
Just a thought without any detailed thinking behind it.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Rebels won't leave Melbourne, the reason the other two counties agreed to allow the Rebels in because it represents a 4 million population catchment area and is one of the major economic centres of the Oceana region.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top