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!

annual report 2014

Messages
15,338
Sounds like the DT putting their usual "spin" on matters. This is how the same story was reported by the Sydney Morning Herald today -

Snubbed clubs want seat at table as powerbrokers discuss direction of NRL leadership

Date: May 21, 2015 - 10:00PM
Adrian Proszenko
Chief Rugby League Reporter

Newcastle chairman Brian McGuigan has called for the four snubbed clubs to be included in discussions about rugby league as powerbrokers gathered to discuss the NRL's handling of the game.

As revealed by Fairfax Media, representatives of 12 of the 16 club were invited to a meeting at the offices of accounting firm KPMG in Sydney to view an independent appraisal of the governing body's books.

Some of league's most influential names, including NSWRL chairman George Peponis, Roosters supremo Nick Politis, South Sydney counterpart Nick Pappas and Penrith's executive general manager Phil Gould attended the briefing. For at least a day, powerbrokers put aside their differences to discuss grievances with Rugby League Central.

The NRL's financial reports were just one of the topics discussed. Other issues raised included crowd numbers, stadia strategy and the potential imposition of NRL-appointed independent directors.
"We had a good meeting today, it was fruitful," said Bulldogs CEO Ray Dib. "We are going to work together, all 16 clubs, with the NRL."

The NRL trumpeted a $50 million surplus for the financial year, but the independent audit suggested the figure was overstated by about $30m. Should the clubs band together to challenge the Australian Rugby League Commission about that and other gripes, Thursday will go down as a landmark day. However, four clubs - Wests Tigers, Newcastle, St George Illawarra and Gold Coast - were not invited because of a perception they are beholden to the governing body. It's understood the four omitted are frustrated by the stance, believing they are also truly independent.

McGuigan, the founder of McGuigan Wines, said he was disappointed a quarter of the clubs weren't offered a seat at the table.

"This is the ridiculous part, we should all be one," McGuigan said. "We should be together and harmonious. Anyone who tries to put a splinter in that harmony should answer to themselves 'Why am I doing this? Why am I trying to exclude some other people?'

"We don't always agree on the course of actions you take but you need to talk about issues that are there or might emerge in the future.
"We have a responsibility to do all in our power to see our code expand and be fully functional and effective. A good personal relationship between us all is very desirable. After all, you get a lot more with honey than vinegar."

NRL chief executive Dave Smith said he was unaware of the meeting and defended the financial performance of the code and how it was reported.
"We've got $50m under professional funds management," Smith said. "I'll give you the chitty though, you can see the interest we have earned on the $50m.

"We distributed $28m last year - $20m of that was, from memory, to the clubs. Half of the $8m was to welfare and the other half was to other projects.

"We retained whatever the balance is in the bank account as cash. Those numbers exist.

"The way any business works - we're a serious not-for-profit - is you have your operating costs. Anything you make above your operating costs - let's park tax and other things for a minute - is called a surplus.

"In business it's called profit, here it is called surplus. Because we are a not-for-profit, every single dollar goes back into the game.

"So in two years we generated surpluses after operating costs of $100m. Those have been distributed - $50m to the funds, $28m to the clubs and welfare and the residual is cash in the bank. Fact."

To affect change at ARLC level under the constitution, the clubs would need a 75 per cent consensus, requiring at least 12 to act in unison. McGuigan said that made it all the more important to engage all 16 stakeholders.

"If I had an issue with the commission, of course I would bring it to their attention," McGuigan said.

"I'd say to these people, 'If you've got an issue, talk to us about it. Include us as well because we're playing the same game'."

Smith said he encouraged clubs to meet frequently to discuss ideas and didn't view the gathering as a mutiny "behind my back".

"The game is going through a big change but I don't think it's ever been in better shape, whichever dimension you look at it," Smith said. "It's big and getting bigger. I'm pretty proud to be the person in charge of that. I'm not saying it's perfect, by a long shot, but I can tell you it's big and getting bigger.

"The game is in great shape and if I get feedback to make it even better, I'll take it every day of the week."
 

TiggaPlease

Guest
Messages
891
The clubs should f**k off and do what they're told. Self interested boys clubs who will do anything they can to try keep the game in the dark ages.

We need vision and expansion, not greed and nepotism.

The NRL pays the salary cap in via a grant and the clubs still can't turn a profit, no way I'd be giving them more money.
 

firechild

First Grade
Messages
8,061
The very same clubs need to look in the mirror and realize it's there fault there running in the red all the time. There inability to run as a professional sport club despite decades of history and culture to build a sufficient fan-base. The clubs need to take responsibility for there poor administration, they been bail-out numerous time throughout the years.

That's only part of it though. The NRL is forcing clubs to play in poor timeslots for crowds. If the NRL is pushing a more tv friendly game at the expense of family friendly times to attend, the clubs should be compensated.
 

bottle

Coach
Messages
14,126
The further the likes of Uncle Nick are kept from getting their grubby hands all over the decision making process the better. Already too much vested interest and perception of conflict of interest.
The maintenance of independence is critical to any form of good governance.
 

Diesel

Referee
Messages
23,711
I'd be telling uncle Nick that his Roosters can f**k off and will be replaced by Perth. The same goes to any other club because I'm sure Brisbane 2 & 3, Wellington would take their place
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,709
The very same clubs need to look in the mirror and realize it's there fault there running in the red all the time. There inability to run as a professional sport club despite decades of history and culture to build a sufficient fan-base. The clubs need to take responsibility for there poor administration, they been bail-out numerous time throughout the years.
The clubs would argue the billion + flowing into the game is because of them. Not suits in NRL head office. They would argue with their fair shareof the tv rights they wouldn't be in the red.
The clubs should f**k off and do what they're told. Self interested boys clubs who will do anything they can to try keep the game in the dark ages.

We need vision and expansion, not greed and nepotism.

The NRL pays the salary cap in via a grant and the clubs still can't turn a profit, no way I'd be giving them more money.

NRL clubs get a MUCH smaller slice of tv money than NFL or EPL clubs get. Something like a third of the tv deal. In many leagues around the world the clubs get well over half. And that's leagues where the clubs don't have to worry about junior development.

Another solution would be to not increase the payment to clubs but take development of their hands. The cost savings would be huge.
 

Brutus

Referee
Messages
26,348
Kick these f**khole clubs out and put Valleys, Wynnum, Redcliffe, Wests Panthers, Norths Brisbane, South Magpies, Easts Tigers, Ipswich Jets and the fish eaters in.
 

Diesel

Referee
Messages
23,711
I'm sure each club would get more if they were developing their own players instead of poaching others but they're not interested in doing so. Typical shortsitedness by some clubs.
10 clubs attended, the 4 owned/stakeholder owned by NRL didn't attend, who were the other two clubs?
 

Craig Johnston

First Grade
Messages
5,396
The clubs should f**k off and do what they're told. Self interested boys clubs who will do anything they can to try keep the game in the dark ages.

We need vision and expansion, not greed and nepotism.

The NRL pays the salary cap in via a grant and the clubs still can't turn a profit, no way I'd be giving them more money.

the arlc commisioners and subsequently dave smith's position is controlled by the clubs.....they get 16 votes (albeit 12 right now) of the 18 total, so if the clubs don't like being told to do what they're told, they have the power to tell dave smith to f**k off.

structure.png
 

Craig Johnston

First Grade
Messages
5,396
I'm sure each club would get more if they were developing their own players instead of poaching others but they're not interested in doing so. Typical shortsitedness by some clubs.
10 clubs attended, the 4 owned/stakeholder owned by NRL didn't attend, who were the other two clubs?

hopefully broncos and storm
 

betcats

Referee
Messages
23,956
- suspect reporting to improve figures
- very little ratings or crowd growth
-Continually changing stadium strategy
- The integrity commission is a joke
-MRC is a joke
- Scheduling and draw is a joke
- Pissy rule changes at stupid times
- Massively expanded spending and operations for very little growth


But hey its all the clubs!

Lets not forget the cash Smithy is spending he had f**k all to do with getting but hey lets all get a payrise anyway!

From what I can see as a fan the game is two or three years into a massive cash injection and not much is improving.
 
Last edited:

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,545
Hasn't this same article been written about 5 times now in the last 6 months?

Its like they just cut and paste it when they have no news content.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,374
I'm sure each club would get more if they were developing their own players instead of poaching others but they're not interested in doing so.

Would they?

As all clubs can only spend the salary cap which is funded by the NRL, I don't see how this is the case.

It would be cheaper to poach established players than take the chance spending money developing your own.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,374
From what I can see as a fan the game is two or three years into a massive cash injection and not much is improving.

Well, the players are getting paid more....Salary Cap is up from $4.4 Million in 2012 to $6.55 Mil now and $7 Mil by 2017.

Needs to be another big bump in 2018 and steady growth through 2022 though with the revenue looking to go through $500 Million a year...
 

betcats

Referee
Messages
23,956
Well, the players are getting paid more....Salary Cap is up from $4.4 Million in 2012 to $6.55 Mil now and $7 Mil by 2017.

Needs to be another big bump in 2018 and steady growth through 2022 though with the revenue looking to go through $500 Million a year...


500 million revenue sounds great but its 7 years away and currently there is some scepticism about the figure the NRL is putting out for last year, so I will wait and see for that, this admin is very fluffly with their figures they like to talk them up from what I have seen. What are the next TV rights looking to go for? It wont be another 100% increase surely.

The salary cap bump was very good but it comes off the back of a TV deal that was earned by the previous administration, SMith didn't have anything to do with it, was he even employed by us when it was negotiated??
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,456
500 million revenue sounds great but its 7 years away and currently there is some scepticism about the figure the NRL is putting out for last year, so I will wait and see for that, this admin is very fluffly with their figures they like to talk them up from what I have seen. What are the next TV rights looking to go for? It wont be another 100% increase surely.

The salary cap bump was very good but it comes off the back of a TV deal that was earned by the previous administration, SMith didn't have anything to do with it, was he even employed by us when it was negotiated??
Go read the AFL AR where they claim a operating surplus of hundreds of millions before even accounting for club cap grant distributions. Both are NPO, it's a standard accounting treatment.

it was negotiated largely by the ARLC & an investment bank.

Of course Smith wasn't employed by the NRL at the time, that's why he had nothing to do with it!
 

betcats

Referee
Messages
23,956
Go read the AFL AR where they claim a operating surplus of hundreds of millions before even accounting for club cap grant distributions. Both are NPO, it's a standard accounting treatment.

it was negotiated largely by the ARLC & an investment bank.

Of course Smith wasn't employed by the NRL at the time, that's why he had nothing to do with it!

Exactly so trumpeting the increased salary cap and club grant as an achievement for Smith is silly, it was always going to happen and with money that was earned due to the results of the previous admin.

And its not just the financial figures, what they did with the crowds was sketchy aswell.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Latest posts

Top