Search results

Jamie Pandaram in the Aus today says the exclusive dealing period on the rights post 2025 ends 31/12 this year. News is running the line across its papers today that the Rebels law suit severely impacts the negotiations as it both impacts the viability of RA and means there in uncertainty on...

That was my point.

The reality is that if RA went under very little would change down here from where we are today.

They are the biggest funder of Australian business - by all reports at SME level moreso than the big four banks.

Unsurprisingly the Rebels were right on board with centralisation. It was RA who backed off.

But they would have given it to the Force - again it’s a strange position.

You’re not trading insolvent if you have a reasonable belief you can pay your debts - like your directors funding the club, which is what happened for quite some time.

Whilst that is unlikely, what if they became aware during Covid and made promises to protect their tv deal during the pandemic based off their confidence around a PE deal. There are scenarios where codependence could have lead to a situation that became inconvenient to RA.

Motion 1 will be security of costs.

That’s from a long time agree we prevented from recruiting from the existing franchises. It was a botch by RA - they should have learnt from well run organisations on how to do it.

Not if baseless, just if they lose. Also costs don’t cover real costs in most cases.

I’ve had plenty of cases where we paid even though we were right (builder, not lawyer). The cost of legals and organisational headspace outweighed a quick settlement.

The main thing I see here is that it is likely that some litigation funder (as per the DOCA) has seen that there is enough merit in the case to back it.

That does ignore the fact that at the time of the insolvency RA took back the IP and player contracts for the Rebels. Complete control for season 2025, no attached debt, still shut down.

I love the hubris of fans from franchises who haven’t published an annual report since 2022 (which clearly showed they were on their arse), but delight in being able to point to the scale of the rebels insolvency because it hid their own smaller financial failure.

I’m assuming this is not the case for the centralised Super Rugby franchises to which the women’s teams are attached, and the constitution line is laughable for the same reason.

Doesn’t really fit with Waugh’s statement when he canned the Rebels: “We have a plan that will ensure Rugby has a strong future in Victoria – the infrastructure and the systems remain unchanged despite the change to the professional game in 2025, and we will continue to look for opportunities...

It probably speaks to how broke they are that they have decided to abandon Victoria completely. Given the reports of a fixed RWC hosting fee I assume the vic government relationship is of no importance to near term revenue.

How much will RA get from each?

He was under a professional sports contract - when you're in that spot your club decides what you can play. He clearly wasn't ready for that so they moved him on.