What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

ARLC Commission Changes

Nice Beaver

Nice Beaver

First Grade
Messages
5,920
Grant and Greenberg are as ineffectual and useless as each other.

Both are a poor man's politician doing nothing but provide lip service and spewing out what they think people want to hear.

Both should piss off and leave rugby league alone.
 
El Diablo

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Hello said:
Purely for the sake of context, could you tell us who you do want/did like having in the CEO and Chairman jobs??

You seem to bitch about everyone, im just wondering if there is any sense of positivity behind it....
Click to expand...
i just bitch about these two epic failures
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,521
LeagueXIII said:
Here is Grant talking on 2sm no media agenda here straight from his mouth:

http://2smsupernetwork.com/nrl-john-grant-defends-his-position-as-chairman-of-arlc/
Click to expand...

He should be defending the position and decisions of the nrl, not his own self interest.

There is no getting away from the fact they offered the clubs a deal last year before knowing if they can afford it or what the budget would look like from next year. Then realised they could t afford it and tried to back out if it. That is just incompetent and undeafendable
 
S

Stormwarrior82

Juniors
Messages
1,036
Perth Red said:
He should be defending the position and decisions of the nrl, not his own self interest.

There is no getting away from the fact they offered the clubs a deal last year before knowing if they can afford it or what the budget would look like from next year. Then realised they could t afford it and tried to back out if it. That is just incompetent and undeafendable
Click to expand...

Did you listen to it? How has he not defended the Nrls/Arlc position??

He explains why the MOU was taken off the table. They offered a deal to the clubs that they could afford. Then they hired a media chick who said it will cost a lot more to take over from Telstra and start the Nrls own digital presence. As well as got stats back about declining player numbers. Would you prefer they do nothing instead?? Hence they took the MOU off the table and tried to negotiate again with the new info. How can you blame them solely for that? Not incompetent at all. With the new information inhand they made a good decision.

I guess over the next 5/6 years when digital presence increases and the grassroots footy improves you can all thank the nrl/Arlc for there amazing foresight. Because the clubs/players sure didn't make it easy.
 
Hello, I'm The Doctor

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Stormwarrior82 said:
Did you listen to it? How has he not defended the Nrls/Arlc position??

He explains why the MOU was taken off the table. They offered a deal to the clubs that they could afford. Then they hired a media chick who said it will cost a lot more to take over from Telstra and start the Nrls own digital presence. As well as got stats back about declining player numbers. Would you prefer they do nothing instead?? Hence they took the MOU off the table and tried to negotiate again with the new info. How can you blame them solely for that? Not incompetent at all. With the new information inhand they made a good decision.

I guess over the next 5/6 years when digital presence increases and the grassroots footy improves you can all thank the nrl/Arlc for there amazing foresight. Because the clubs/players sure didn't make it easy.
Click to expand...

I like to imagine taht this is Johnny typing away madly to get himself a bit of sympathy...
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,521
I respect storms opinion and at least he can debate without insult, which is rare on here!

They should never have offered a deal without knowing what the next 5 years looks like, or having offered it accepted they have stuffed up and found savings elsewhere. Offering the clubs something then pulling it and trying to blame the need for grassroots funding to make themselves look like the good guys was always going to end in a major spat. The nrl's revenue will have gone from $180mill to $500mill plus in space of 6 years, how the frick can they not afford what needs to be done?

And again I ask what is $100mill digital actually going to deliver? Digital streaming paytv does not cost a fraction of that, websites dont cost a fraction of that, what is the expected ROI of that much money?

Whilst I think clubs are generally very poorly run they should be getting a fixed % of revenue as the main earners and I don't think 40% is unreasonable.
 
S

Stormwarrior82

Juniors
Messages
1,036
BuffaloRules said:
He has supported him every step of the way since he joined up here and has little interest in any other NRL topic other than defending Grant, so doubt he will say he needs to go now...

All the points you have raised about his performance and shortcomings over the past 18 months will no doubt be deflectied once again back onto the clubs and the media, and "why should he have to explain where all the money goes to anyone"..,
Click to expand...

You clearly can't read much. I do post in other threads.

Your right I don't think he does need to go. What is funny is the fact Grant wasn't even in the room or privy to the conversation at the Ceos meeting about nrl spendature but the media has still tried to get rid of him. But let's put it down to Grants fault anyway.

I don't see the need to explain where every single $ is spent. And I find it extremely funny that the $53 mil loss the club had this year and they are still wanting financials?

I would expect that some financials should be kept quiet, due to the chance other codes could use it to there advantage. Knowing where exaclty a code spends their money mighten actually be such a good thing.

Do you think Samsung and apple discuss there spendature?
 
S

Stormwarrior82

Juniors
Messages
1,036
Perth Red said:
I respect storms opinion and at least he can debate without insult, which is rare on here!

They should never have offered a deal without knowing what the next 5 years looks like, or having offered it accepted they have stuffed up and found savings elsewhere. Offering the clubs something then pulling it and trying to blame the need for grassroots funding to make themselves look like the good guys was always going to end in a major spat. The nrl's revenue will have gone from $180mill to $500mill plus in space of 6 years, how the frick can they not afford what needs to be done?

And again I ask what is $100mill digital actually going to deliver? Digital streaming paytv does not cost a fraction of that, websites dont cost a fraction of that, what is the expected ROI of that much money?

Whilst I think clubs are generally very poorly run they should be getting a fixed % of revenue as the main earners and I don't think 40% is unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Ok I can understand your stance that they shouldn't of gone to the negotiating table with the clubs in dec 15. And in hindsight I'm sure they agree with you. They probably knew that they would get blasted for it but I would prefer they did what they did though. It's a deal that lasts for 5 yrs, get it wrong and our grassroots would be horrendous and our online presence would be no where near what it should. And who would you be blaming? The Nrl/Arlc.

Not sure where your $100 mil media amount came from? I thought it was around $50 mil for upfront costs and the rest to maintain? I am probably wrong.

I'm not sold yet on the idea of % based fixed revenue. I can see how players would feel included but cricket Aus have been there and want to change it.
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,521
Spending on grassroots has gone up,by $15mill a year in last few years, they now are saying it needs another $20mill on top of this. What's it going on? What's the plan? Reality is most of that extra $15mill has gone to nsw and qland cup clubs, I suspect the "needed" $20mill more a year will also go to further develop the second tier competition, not to actual struggling grass roots clubs.

Maybe if the nrl was a bit more communicative on what these strategies are and where the money will be spent they may get more support for them?
 
S

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,776
They need more because they have abandoned RG and U20s at national level

Now clubs that have no cash or TV exposure have been asked to foot a $2 mil bill per year
 
J

Jatz Crackers

Bench
Messages
3,070
Perth Red said:
Spending on grassroots has gone up,by $15mill a year in last few years, they now are saying it needs another $20mill on top of this. What's it going on? What's the plan? Reality is most of that extra $15mill has gone to nsw and qland cup clubs, I suspect the "needed" $20mill more a year will also go to further develop the second tier competition, not to actual struggling grass roots clubs.

Maybe if the nrl was a bit more communicative on what these strategies are and where the money will be spent they may get more support for them?
Click to expand...

Well that would be nice, but what your talking about there is the business plan and the financial accounts.

I think there are plenty here who would have an expectation of seeing the business plan with detailed financials become available for public consumption, so they could watch that plan be followed to the letter and so they could comment/critique on it publicly.

But we all know that can't,won't,shouldn't happen
 
taipan

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
Perth Red said:
I respect storms opinion and at least he can debate without insult, which is rare on here!

They should never have offered a deal without knowing what the next 5 years looks like, or having offered it accepted they have stuffed up and found savings elsewhere. Offering the clubs something then pulling it and trying to blame the need for grassroots funding to make themselves look like the good guys was always going to end in a major spat. The nrl's revenue will have gone from $180mill to $500mill plus in space of 6 years, how the frick can they not afford what needs to be done?

And again I ask what is $100mill digital actually going to deliver? Digital streaming paytv does not cost a fraction of that, websites dont cost a fraction of that, what is the expected ROI of that much money?

Whilst I think clubs are generally very poorly run they should be getting a fixed % of revenue as the main earners and I don't think 40% is unreasonable.
Click to expand...


I suggest you read Roy Master's comments yesterday on SMH.com.au on the $150m for the digital rights strategy.He calls it a smart investment, because ch10 is up the famous creek without a paddle,ch9 is losing money and wants to back off paying big money fro cricket rights, and ch7 is also not in a good position.Advertising money is down, sport's Tv ratings are down.We and a small but competitive market.
If people think TV stations are going to throw money around next time, they are kidding themselves.So the $500m pa could well drop with no back up alternative.
IOW I suggest the ARLC have a fair idea what the next 10 years will look like, and it will be a far different landscape.Hence the need for better stadiums and digital strategy.whilst I think the NRL at times lose the plot, on this I think they are thinking ahead.

40% of revenue to clubs, meaning they be getting max $208m 16x$13m,But that 40% should not be at the expense of juniors ,regionals,player welfare, female comps, admin/DOs.If the revenue drops dramatically that should mean ditto for the clubs.uncle Nick will not be pleased.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top