this GW comparison is no insult by the way. That guy was a thinker. Everything got relegated to the cave - which I think is a damn good sign. He should make his way back.
haha it sounds like E/D is a secret admirer of many people. Must have had a rough life. Probably grew up in south sydney and had a very close affinity to needles and pills. Or he works at the daily tele, I dont know which is worse.
Make sure you chew it off.
I did laugh, I mean its not mindless bullying if its funny, right!? Right?? Pffft, hahaha. How does it make you feel though? Like a big man?
Oh. I bet..... Its easy to tell which ones of you are unhappy with your lives, feel like pussy's or have no balls.
Current situation (based on 2015 annual report)
NRL revenue. $334mill Grant allocation to 16 clubs $162mill = 48% of revenue
Potential 2018 situation (would based on a revenue of $500mill, Salary cap of $10mill, grant of $13mill)
NRL revenue. $500mill Grant allocation to 16 clubs $208mill = 42% of revenue
Even with extra bail out money if still needed and two expansion clubs the % of revenue needed would still be less than the current 48%
Seems the NRL clubs may have a point. If the NRL brings in a 5 year staged growth plan starting at say $8mill cap and $10.4mill grant going up $500k a year then it will still be no more than current % of revenue over the tv deal.
You might be right - either way you cut it, by the end they can still hand out the same amount.
I dont think its just about the revenue. I think this issue is a catch-all tied up with the licences. Whats the bet it can be done somehow without too much change to how it is now (with new licenses). I doubt the NRL (in fact we established that, didn't we all) turned up and just abruptly pulled stuff off the table.
I like juniors and data, I like clubs, its all great, the players, just so as long as they are all moving forward they can spend as much as they like, I wouldn't mind at all, and of course progressing toward expansion.
I hope though the % decreases on what the end is, to start with, and they can scale it up over time with a healthy buffer (in effective terms). I dont buy into the whole notion clubs need 3M extra on a 10M cap just this 5 year period (but if like in your example they have a wider gap to start with that may provide the same effect). They don't seem to be doing anything to prove the case where they could use the extra money (that it won't automatically be wasted on inefficiencies because the biz is not developed enough yet, tempting to use it elsewhere), and nothing has appeared in a thorough media to suggest otherwise. Its just he said/she said.
I think we will see a lot of cost cutting measures in the next few years. I would be thinking twice about any cuts, anywhere, because spending less is often doing less. So I tackled the issue from the other direction.
I look at the funding model and think its good, it sounds like enough - but I also think they are all in a debt time bomb. Costs just always seem to go north.
