Eels Salary Cap MK III

[phantom eel]

The club needs to accept the findings of the breach notice and get under the cap in order to recommence playing for competition points. Accepting the findings of the breach notice is an admission of guilt.

I thought they get the chance to respond to the breach notice (rather than accept it)? The act of trying to get our club cap compliance (in the eyes of the NRL) is not an admission of guilt - all that has happened is that the NRL have (recently) added the TPA value of our contracts to our cap expenditure...

Our efforts to shift some dollars into subsequent years to please them by Friday week is not admitting "guilt" imo, and is not the club's "response". It's sensibly putting in place a contingency plan that will allow the team to play on for points, while "guilt" is established elsewhere - firstly by the NRL determination after they receiev our response, and after that in court if named individuals disagrees with their punishments.

Let's stop fighting it now, and have the Club get on with what we have to do - and individuals can fight things later if they so choose.

 

[phantom eel]

The suggestion is that the recorded board meetings are the smoking gun.

If not, and none of this was at board level then fair enough.

The smoking gun phrase was media language. If I recall, the NRL source quoted said that the recordings merely pointed them in the right direction of what to look for amon g the 750,000 emails, texts and documents etc.

Are you suggesting the recorded board meetings aren't relevant and that the board members not threatened with deregistration and replacement with a puppet from HQ were not aware of any of what is being alleged?

Pretty much yes, it would appear that way. Otherwise the NRL would have been looking for 4 directors (a majority) to step aside, or 5, or 6, or all 7... there is a reason they have gone for just these particular 3 directors, and I think it's about evidence not personalities/conspiracies etc.

 

[Chipmunk]

I thought they get the chance to respond to the breach notice (rather than accept it)? The act of trying to get our club cap compliance (in the eyes of the NRL) is not an admission of guilt - all that has happened is that the NRL have (recently) added the TPA value of our contracts to our cap expenditure...

Our efforts to shift some dollars into subsequent years to please them by Friday week is not admitting "guilt" imo, and is not the club's "response". It's sensibly putting in place a contingency plan that will allow the team to play on for points, while "guilt" is established elsewhere - firstly by the NRL determination after they receiev our response, and after that in court if named individuals disagrees with their punishments.

Let's stop fighting it now, and have the Club get on with what we have to do - and individuals can fight things later if they so choose.

They do have the opportunity to respond, but if they choose to not accept the terms of the breach notice then they will not be able to play for points (as well as being cap compliant).

 

[strider]

Does anyone find it interesting that we have been accused of cheating the cap, which may include guaranteeing TPA.

Now if we were guaranteeing TPA or maybe making secret payments, then why has there been some many reports of Eels plays not getting paid TPA's negotiated with them? Surely we would have paid them as per the allegations made against us ?

For a club that has cheated there seems to be a lot of players left out of pocket!

Thats a fair point. Did the companies take the inflated invoice payments and run?

 

[emjaycee]

I thought they get the chance to respond to the breach notice (rather than accept it)? The act of trying to get our club cap compliance (in the eyes of the NRL) is not an admission of guilt - all that has happened is that the NRL have (recently) added the TPA value of our contracts to our cap expenditure...

Our efforts to shift some dollars into subsequent years to please them by Friday week is not admitting "guilt" imo, and is not the club's "response". It's sensibly putting in place a contingency plan that will allow the team to play on for points, while "guilt" is established elsewhere - firstly by the NRL determination after they receiev our response, and after that in court if named individuals disagrees with their punishments.

Let's stop fighting it now, and have the Club get on with what we have to do - and individuals can fight things later if they so choose.

I agree, there is nothing we need to fight NOW. We just need to sit down with the NRL Salary Cap Auditor and let him know how we can be under the cap by next Friday.

This doesn't negate the fact that allegedly some or all of our TPA's are/were incorrectly obtained and that we have breached the cap 5 of the last 6 years and that we have allegedly paid players TPA's directly from the club or that we have paid under the table payments to players or that we have inflated invoices in order to pay players via suppliers - these are allegedly the real reasons we were penalised, fined and the NRL wants the 5 gone.

 

[emjaycee]

The $ values i have seen thrown around in the media for our dodgy TPAs are max $20-30k. I know if they were plentiful they would all add up. But i just dont see how it will all come up to near millions of dollars for every club.I reckon a media TPA might be lucrative. But the average player wont get anywhere near one of them.

We have been a cellar dwelling one man team for many years. Who other than hayne would most companies want to put their money on? The new squad, maybe Semi has a niche market, Foran is a well spoken fella. Who else could attract more than a drop in the ocean of a nrl contract? I love beau scott as a parra player but he's a mad merkin with evil death stares.

Manu is perfect if you have a tattoo shop.

 

[Dibs]

Lol channel 7 are running with a story of a bunch of punters having a class action against the eels because they backed them to win the premiership

 

[emjaycee]

I take it that even the philanthropic TPAs can be somehow tax deductable... and hence good business as well? (Not that I know anything about business tax deductions at all...)

Yep, would still be a 'valid' expense I believe.

 

[phantom eel]

They do have the opportunity to respond, but if they choose to not accept the terms of the breach notice then they will not be able to play for points (as well as being cap compliant).

Why would we not accept the terms, and not want to play for points? I believe we can accept the terms of the notice (in order to respond) without admitting any guilt. The final penalty is determined when the NRL considers our response - surely getting us cap compliant in the NRL's (new) view is seperate to "admitting guilt" over the TPA and other arrangements in question.

 

[Sphagnum]

Lol channel 7 are running with a story of a bunch of punters having a class action against the eels because they backed them to win the premiership

The sponsors need to get their plug into this whole debacle as well.

 

[phantom eel]

I agree, there is nothing we need to fight NOW. We just need to sit down with the NRL Salary Cap Auditor and let him know how we can be under the cap by next Friday.

This doesn't negate the fact that allegedly some or all of our TPA's are/were incorrectly obtained and that we have breached the cap 5 of the last 6 years and that we have allegedly paid players TPA's directly from the club or that we have paid under the table payments to players or that we have inflated invoices in order to pay players via suppliers - these are allegedly the real reasons we were penalised, fined and the NRL wants the 5 gone.

Summed up perfectly :thumn.

 

[Chipmunk]

Why would we not accept the terms, and not want to play for points? I believe we can accept the terms of the notice (in order to respond) without admitting any guilt. The final penalty is determined when the NRL considers our response - surely getting us cap compliant in the NRL's (new) view is seperate to "admitting guilt" over the TPA and other arrangements in question.

The NRL has subsequently said that the club needs to accept the terms of the breach notice, which is docked 12 points, pay the fine and 5 board go, before the club will be permitted to play for points. They also have to be under the cap, but the NRL will make that happen if we admit guilt and accept the breach notice.

What grounds would the club have challenge anything if we agree to the terms of the breach notice. They would be saying that we accept everything is true and correct.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

I agree, there is nothing we need to fight NOW. We just need to sit down with the NRL Salary Cap Auditor and let him know how we can be under the cap by next Friday.

This doesn't negate the fact that allegedly some or all of our TPA's are/were incorrectly obtained and that we have breached the cap 5 of the last 6 years and that we have allegedly paid players TPA's directly from the club or that we have paid under the table payments to players or that we have inflated invoices in order to pay players via suppliers - these are allegedly the real reasons we were penalised, fined and the NRL wants the 5 gone.

But you don't think that, in determining what we've got to do to get under the cap, we need to know how far over the cap we actually are? As opposed to how far over the cap we have been accused of being?

 

[The EELiminator]

Lol channel 7 are running with a story of a bunch of punters having a class action against the eels because they backed them to win the premiership

what? you mean to say when i put a bet on there's a chance i could lose? :crazy::crazy:
wouldn't it be a laugh if the class action gets settled out of court and they get a reduced payout on their bets then the eels win the premiership :lol:

 

[I bleed blue & gold]

So would an extraordinary meeting be a good idea? Is anyone going to organize one? How would one organize one?

 

[ash411]

The way I see it, TPA have two potential advantages for a company.

1) It's a marketing expense, Which helps you come tax time, the more you spend building your business the less tax you pay.

2) If you have a service model business with clients for example, you could have a client day at your company where they can come by, have a drink & a feed, and meet a fair dinkum NRL player. Clients lap that stuff up, it makes them really happy and goes a long way towards keeping that client, and possibly expanding what they buy from you. Depending on what business you're in, that could be worth a lot of money. Think of it this way, lets say you charge $10K for X service, You have a client that happens to be a mad parra fan, he already takes X service, but you see an opportunity to sell him Y service as well, for $50K. You have a TPA agreement with Normy for $25K, you get him to come out to your office or wherever to meet your client (and some others as well), of course the client is gonna show, he wants to meet Normy. While you have him there, you sell him on Y service, and he's so chuffed to meet Normy that it helps get the sale over the line. You've now increased your revenue from that client by $50K.

That's the advantage that TPAs have for businesses. There's also a philanthropic element as well, as MJC mentioned, they're more than likely fans of the team that want to help out.

 

[hineyrulz]

Why was one board member saved from the axe? Do they have any links to the previous administration?

Gerrard is great mates with Grant, make that of you will......

 

[forward pass]

Initially when the Fab Five went to the Supreme court, I was furious and thought they were being selfish arseholes.

But - there is something that keeps bugging me. How could the NRL present the board with a complex and detailed 60 page (apparently) breach notice - along with a difficult task of complying with the cap within 10 days - but then disqualify 5 of our most senior officials at the same time. Who is left to analyse, digest, investigate and respond to all the allegations?

The NRL should have informed them that they have 28 days or so at which time they will be forced to stand down. Just my thoughts.

 

[emjaycee]

But you don't think that, in determining what we've got to do to get under the cap, we need to know how far over the cap we actually are? As opposed to how far over the cap we have been accused of being?

Yep and we have been given a preliminary breach notice that outlines that and the time to respond to that (9 days).

 

[akers]

Initially when the Fab Five went to the Supreme court, I was furious and thought they were being selfish arseholes.

But - there is something that keeps bugging me. How could the NRL present the board with a complex and detailed 60 page (apparently) breach notice - along with a difficult task of complying with the cap within 10 days - but then disqualify 5 of our most senior officials at the same time. Who is left to analyse, digest, investigate and respond to all the allegations?

The NRL should have informed them that they have 28 days or so at which time they will be forced to stand down. Just my thoughts.

Spot on..