What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rugby Australia to target top NRL talent

JamesRustle

First Grade
Messages
8,791
RA would be absolutely shitting their vinyl patched undies (they can no longer afford leather patches) with 2 new NRL teams announced and a third likely to be announced within a couple of years.... big growth in salary cap, likely to attract ever better sponsors, strong and popular competition, attraction for young players to make a name and appealing to players with young families who don't want to be on the road for 6 months of the year (preferring to travel leisurely with family).
 
Messages
1,115
RA would be absolutely shitting their vinyl patched undies (they can no longer afford leather patches) with 2 new NRL teams announced and a third likely to be announced within a couple of years.... big growth in salary cap, likely to attract ever better sponsors, strong and popular competition, attraction for young players to make a name and appealing to players with young families who don't want to be on the road for 6 months of the year (preferring to travel leisurely with family).
Yeah every time I hear a union `identity` interviewed these days they never talk about the domestic union or how much you can earn it`s all about " we have other things we can offer" and the nauseatingly pretentious " runway of events". Obviously deeply alarmed.
 
Messages
1,115
Wasn't sure where to put this article, so I've posted it here.

From the comment`s section. Bet there`s more than a few of these. Look out Force.

"Talking of weaving. I went to watch the Storm yesterday (well RA, you took my alternative away). Watch Papenhuzen in the first 15 minutes of that game. Now that is weaving – absolutely unbelievable."
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
40,947
French top 14 players get huge tax incentives too so it’s not a straight comparison

Think they pay tax rate of around ten percent ?

With the next tv deal the nrl will be paying at least 2 million pa on the top end for the top ten players in the game

Maybe 2.5 million for someone like Cleary



Edit according to that article they pay 8 percent vs an average rate of 40 percent plus in Aus
 

Munky

Coach
Messages
13,015
I'm a bit late to the party with the ARU realising financials in late April.

The annual loss has increased from $10m to $35m.

The deficit on the balance sheet has blown out to $50m.

The borrowings from the Oxford St loan shark has increased by $10m to $57m at a low interest rate of approx 10%.

Also worth noting is the $20m cash on hand against the $51m in deferred revenue. Deferred revenue has increased by $35m suggesting they negotiated a big chunk of sponsorship up front and blown the cash.

They have f**k all tangible assets on hand to go with the river of red in the financials.

Interesting times ahead.
 
Messages
1,115
I'm a bit late to the party with the ARU realising financials in late April.

The annual loss has increased from $10m to $35m.

The deficit on the balance sheet has blown out to $50m.

The borrowings from the Oxford St loan shark has increased by $10m to $57m at a low interest rate of approx 10%.

Also worth noting is the $20m cash on hand against the $51m in deferred revenue. Deferred revenue has increased by $35m suggesting they negotiated a big chunk of sponsorship up front and blown the cash.

They have f**k all tangible assets on hand to go with the river of red in the financials.

Interesting times ahead.
Thanks mate, love a bit of bad news for the union, btw, the loss was 36.8m, not nitpicking, just revelling in the fact that every dollar lost is one step closer to insolvency.

The following clear-eyed article is by SMH union reporter Paul Cully:


In the latest Rugby Australia annual report, Rugby Australia chief executive Phil Waugh trumpets the fact they have secured an increase of about 40 per cent in the new broadcast deal with Nine, the publisher of this masthead, making it valued at up to $240 million.

It’s easy to strip about $50 million out of that figure, however. The free advertising component of the deal amounts to about $30 million over five years, reducing the cash amount to $210 million, and subtract a further $25 million if the Wallabies and the Super Rugby sides don’t meet certain performance criteria.

In other words, the $240 million deal “value” is actually $185 million in real terms, with the potential of rising to $210 million if Australian rugby shoots the lights out over the next five-year period.

That is a far different figure to the one presented – far more sobering – but it is actually a far more helpful one for Australian rugby fans trying to make sense of the seemingly contradictory signals that keep emerging.

But the reality is that Lolesio’s exit is a sign that RA is involved in an ongoing struggle to live within its means on the back of a $36.8 million deficit in 2024.

The absorption of the Waratahs and the Brumbies into RA also clouds the longer-term picture. While RA was keen to point out the “one-off costs” involved in bringing them under the RA umbrella, it remains to be seen whether they’ll be a persistent cost burden.

Who makes money in Super Rugby
? The Reds, the Drua (with healthy support from DFAT, NZ Rugby and World Rugby) and whoever hosts the final, which was the Blues last year.

Apart from that, it’s a yearly challenge for the clubs to wash their faces – the Hurricanes have lost $NZ2.1 million ($1.97 million) in the past two years, so it’s possible that the Waratahs and the Brumbies will weigh heavily on RA’s bottom line in the coming years.

It’s hard to see Australian rugby getting off the financial tightrope any time soon.


Cully fails to mention the $8m that Oz union won`t be getting off the Kiwis` due to the reduction in the latter`s broadcast deal and on-going losses. Tightrope indeed.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
7,159
Thanks mate, love a bit of bad news for the union, btw, the loss was 36.8m, not nitpicking, just revelling in the fact that every dollar lost is one step closer to insolvency.

The following clear-eyed article is by SMH union reporter Paul Cully:


In the latest Rugby Australia annual report, Rugby Australia chief executive Phil Waugh trumpets the fact they have secured an increase of about 40 per cent in the new broadcast deal with Nine, the publisher of this masthead, making it valued at up to $240 million.

It’s easy to strip about $50 million out of that figure, however. The free advertising component of the deal amounts to about $30 million over five years, reducing the cash amount to $210 million, and subtract a further $25 million if the Wallabies and the Super Rugby sides don’t meet certain performance criteria.

In other words, the $240 million deal “value” is actually $185 million in real terms, with the potential of rising to $210 million if Australian rugby shoots the lights out over the next five-year period.

That is a far different figure to the one presented – far more sobering – but it is actually a far more helpful one for Australian rugby fans trying to make sense of the seemingly contradictory signals that keep emerging.

But the reality is that Lolesio’s exit is a sign that RA is involved in an ongoing struggle to live within its means on the back of a $36.8 million deficit in 2024.

The absorption of the Waratahs and the Brumbies into RA also clouds the longer-term picture. While RA was keen to point out the “one-off costs” involved in bringing them under the RA umbrella, it remains to be seen whether they’ll be a persistent cost burden.

Who makes money in Super Rugby
? The Reds, the Drua (with healthy support from DFAT, NZ Rugby and World Rugby) and whoever hosts the final, which was the Blues last year.

Apart from that, it’s a yearly challenge for the clubs to wash their faces – the Hurricanes have lost $NZ2.1 million ($1.97 million) in the past two years, so it’s possible that the Waratahs and the Brumbies will weigh heavily on RA’s bottom line in the coming years.

It’s hard to see Australian rugby getting off the financial tightrope any time soon.


Cully fails to mention the $8m that Oz union won`t be getting off the Kiwis` due to the reduction in the latter`s broadcast deal and on-going losses. Tightrope indeed.
Cheers! This made my day
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
40,947
Thanks mate, love a bit of bad news for the union, btw, the loss was 36.8m, not nitpicking, just revelling in the fact that every dollar lost is one step closer to insolvency.

The following clear-eyed article is by SMH union reporter Paul Cully:


In the latest Rugby Australia annual report, Rugby Australia chief executive Phil Waugh trumpets the fact they have secured an increase of about 40 per cent in the new broadcast deal with Nine, the publisher of this masthead, making it valued at up to $240 million.

It’s easy to strip about $50 million out of that figure, however. The free advertising component of the deal amounts to about $30 million over five years, reducing the cash amount to $210 million, and subtract a further $25 million if the Wallabies and the Super Rugby sides don’t meet certain performance criteria.

In other words, the $240 million deal “value” is actually $185 million in real terms, with the potential of rising to $210 million if Australian rugby shoots the lights out over the next five-year period.

That is a far different figure to the one presented – far more sobering – but it is actually a far more helpful one for Australian rugby fans trying to make sense of the seemingly contradictory signals that keep emerging.

But the reality is that Lolesio’s exit is a sign that RA is involved in an ongoing struggle to live within its means on the back of a $36.8 million deficit in 2024.

The absorption of the Waratahs and the Brumbies into RA also clouds the longer-term picture. While RA was keen to point out the “one-off costs” involved in bringing them under the RA umbrella, it remains to be seen whether they’ll be a persistent cost burden.

Who makes money in Super Rugby
? The Reds, the Drua (with healthy support from DFAT, NZ Rugby and World Rugby) and whoever hosts the final, which was the Blues last year.

Apart from that, it’s a yearly challenge for the clubs to wash their faces – the Hurricanes have lost $NZ2.1 million ($1.97 million) in the past two years, so it’s possible that the Waratahs and the Brumbies will weigh heavily on RA’s bottom line in the coming years.

It’s hard to see Australian rugby getting off the financial tightrope any time soon.


Cully fails to mention the $8m that Oz union won`t be getting off the Kiwis` due to the reduction in the latter`s broadcast deal and on-going losses. Tightrope indeed.
Brumbies don’t lose much money they are a break even operation

The Waratahs could be a huge burden

They would average around 8000 paying tickets a game at best

Doubt they are financially viable on that amount of paying fans
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
40,947

450k a year is a dead set bargain

Think he goes better at centre getting earlier ball but he’s going to be a star

The other wallabies guy at the titans come back from injury soon and the titans are light on halves
 

Latest posts

Top