NRL faces major turmoil as clubs threaten breakaway league

[bad boy bubby]

latest figures not out, much?

I'm not sure you understand exactly what he's talking about...but to recap everyone.

I know what he's talking about.
His boring agenda against the Sharks, he could've used any team, and there are a lot more in worse positions.

 

[bad boy bubby]

Err because they arent released until end of next year lol. Could have chosen any club, what it shows is that despite larger grants, partly because of out of control non playing expenditure, clubs are losing money.

If sharks don't show at least a break even in next Accounts on the back of a gf win then you wonder when they ever will.

Here are the reports from a month ago. Granted they are forecasted but your bias is grating.

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...n/news-story/6a644e9e54d147a4f070f90b86a0afd0

SYDNEY based NRL clubs will lose a combined total of $34.1 million this season in continued worrying signs for the game.

Alarming figures show all Sydney clubs will operate at a loss for season 2016 where not even the premiership-winning Cronulla Sharks could post a profit.

Five of the nine Sydney franchises sank deeper into the red, headlined by the Eels and Canterbury, as it’s revealed collectively clubs will lose $4.5 million more than last year.

The Daily Telegraph last month reported Parramatta’s record loss of $11 million for the season, an increase of $3 million from the previous year.

While the Bulldogs’ $5.2 million loss will be offset by a $4 million League Club grant, it was $1.7 million more than 2015 and comes amid a massive clean-out of Des Hasler’s coaching staff.


In other figures set to be delivered to members or private owners:

* SOUTH Sydney suffered almost a $4 million downturn in fortunes after posting a healthy $1.4 million profit last year;

* THE Sharks performed the best, posting a loss of just $500,000 this year;

* THE Sydney Roosters will lose $3.2 million;

* ST GEORGE Illawarra lost $2 million which was underwritten by a Leagues Club grant;

* PRIVATELY owned Manly are $1.5 million in the red after being locked in a court dispute over alleged non-payment of a major sponsorship; and

* PENRITH and the Wests Tigers sustained operating losses of $5.4 million and $2.8 million respectively.

The Panthers are actually $1 million better off than 2015 but chief executive and chairman Brian Fletcher said the operating cost of Penrith’s Rugby League Academy, the investment in juniors and determination to be a powerhouse on the field meant the club was prepared to wear the financial burden.

“For us to try and perform at the highest level, we need to spend that sort of money,” Fletcher said. “We are different to other clubs. We have 8500 juniors, junior programs that we have to pay for and run, that aren’t subsidised by the NRL.

“We’ve also got to maintain Penrith Stadium, which costs between $500,000 and $750,000 a year for rent and upkeep.

“We also built the academy to improve the quality of our players — that’s not cheap to run either. We find it very difficult to get figure down but hopefully the new $4 million (funding from the new broadcasting deal), which was promised on top of our funding from 2018 will help break the back of that loss.”

South Sydney lost almost $4m in 2016.
Clubs continue to discuss funding and licences with the NRL, but Fletcher stressed any significant cash cutbacks would jeopardise the Panthers’ chances of succeeding on the field.

“If we have to spend $6 million to be competitive, so be it,” Fletcher said.





After being the sole Sydney club to post a profit last season, Rabbitohs chief executive Blake Solly put this year’s concerning financial result to several factors.

“We have traditionally been break-even or profitable over the last three to four years but we have made some investments into our football program and also into our new community high-performance centre at Heffron Park,” Solly said.

“We are on a slightly different footing to most Sydney clubs in that we don’t have a licenced club. That is why membership is a key to us. It is a huge contributor to our financial wellbeing.

Premiers Cronulla were also the best-performed team financially in 2016, posting a loss of $500,000.
“With 35,000 members, which we hope to get in 2017, we will back at break-even again and if we have an even better season on the field, we will certainly make a profit.”

Brisbane appear the only team to consistently post a profit.

Leagues Club grants helped the ease the financial pain of several Sydney clubs. The NRL cannot allow any club to fold given rugby league’s television broadcasters require eight games each week.

“Sustainability is the biggest issue in the game,” said one club chairman. “The game has to have eight games a week. Clubs have to be viable to deliver on our contractual obligations.”

The Eels season was a total disaster. In the letter to members last month, then interim Eels CEO Bevan Paul claimed the club’s losses were “clearly unacceptable and with the leagues club redevelopment scheduled to begin in early 2017 it is critical that Eels costs are constrained within the benchmarks of comparable NRL franchises.”

Originally published as Sydney clubs to lose $34m this season

 

[taipan]

Err because they arent released until end of next year lol. Could have chosen any club, what it shows is that despite larger grants, partly because of out of control non playing expenditure, clubs are losing money.

If sharks don't show at least a break even in next Accounts on the back of a gf win then you wonder when they ever will.

Could have chosen any club LOL.But insert" it doesn't suit my agenda."
And just how many clubs show a break even after a G/F win?

The very reason the NRL wants to clamp down on non playing expenditure.

All corporate boxes have been sold for season 2017 for the Sharks, the main issue is major jersey sponsor spot to fill. The other the Carney legal matter.
Next door residential people moving in to stage 1.

 

[Von Hipper]

I know what he's talking about.
His boring agenda against the Sharks, he could've used any team, and there are a lot more in worse positions.

Right here I should state I am no financial expert. But limiting spending in an area such as football departments is a sure fire way to get the entire league to a more stable position.

Sharks still lost money. Its possible this is entirely legit of him

Could have chosen any club LOL.But insert" it doesn't suit my agenda."
And just how many clubs show a break even after a G/F win?

The very reason the NRL wants to clamp down on non playing expenditure.

All corporate boxes have been sold for season 2017 for the Sharks, the main issue is major jersey sponsor spot to fill. The other the Carney legal matter.
Next door residential people moving in to stage 1.

Imagine how much better a position they may have been in, after 10 years of, say, shaving the equivalent of 300k off their budget without fearing being blown out the water too much; while they were directing it to more productive (profit-wise) means?

People go its so limiting! Derrrrr no, its rationalisation, they get ahead then future football department caps are larger.

I mean look at this mofo flaunt it all up 'Clubs continue to discuss funding and licences with the NRL, but Fletcher stressed any significant cash cutbacks would jeopardise the Panthers’ chances of succeeding on the field.

“If we have to spend $6 million to be competitive, so be it,” Fletcher said.'

LOL!

He don't give a shit, but he will want central funds or the league's club to foot the bill. It will never be tickets or sponsors (they just dont get it....) They talk about robin hooding - this asshole wants to robin hood. All for him.

MEDIOCRE!

In a proper league Penrith would not have those massive overheads - the load would be national and so too the rights to players (maybe the locals would have an edge, sure).

They are not interested in any of those things - they will always keep league mediocre.

Put it this way - no matter HOW MUCH he spends - they may NEVER win....

^^ The whole point of the measures is to move it more toward a case where Penrith doesn't have to stress about that stuff so much (he's doubling down 6m+ lol no fkin way dude....) , and the place where most of, if not - the only place - where competition happens is on the field

 

[taipan]

Right here I should state I am no financial expert. But limiting spending in an area such as football departments is a sure fire way to get the entire league to a more stable position.

Sharks still lost money. Its possible this is entirely legit of him



Imagine how much better a position they may have been in, after 10 years of, say, shaving the equivalent of 300k off their budget without fearing being blown out the water too much; while they were directing it to more productive (profit-wise) means?

People go its so limiting! Derrrrr no, its rationalisation, they get ahead then future football department caps are larger.

I mean look at this mofo flaunt it all up 'Clubs continue to discuss funding and licences with the NRL, but Fletcher stressed any significant cash cutbacks would jeopardise the Panthers’ chances of succeeding on the field.

“If we have to spend $6 million to be competitive, so be it,” Fletcher said.'

LOL!

He don't give a shit, but he will want central funds to foot the bill. They talk about robin hooding - this asshole wants to robin hood. All for him.

Perhaps if they hadn't had a guy by the name of Danks offering his services for a few weeks, and a dope by the name of Carney the results of which lost them sponsorship, cost them legals, helped achieve a wooden spoon,
then they may well have been in better financial situation 2015 and 2016..
$500,000 loss in the scheme of things is not the end of the world,compared to other clubs with far bigger Leagues club grants.

And the G/F win ,plus record merchandise sales still ongoing, close to all corporate boxes sold ,and an expected record number of members for 2017, Think they will have a reasonable year finances wise.Of course the Carney legal matter still pending.

If there is waste in football management, it needs to be curtailed.

You can put millions into non football mgt, and still end up like the Broncos,Bulldogs and Roosters.
It's the cattle on the field first.

 

[siv]

Why not use 2016 financials?
Last i read every Sydney team lost money but the one that lost the least was the Sharks, plus they won the premiership, have you forgotten already? or does that bit of info not suit the crap you spew ?

Look at financials AFTER LC grants

Not before

 

[siv]

If you limit spending under FC admin

How do address issues where club already have X item

But a club without X now cannot go and get X

It will depend on what is deemed FC admin costs

I expect non FC admin spending will just increase

You cant stop Panthers LC adding a pool or new gym equipment to their CoE

 

[Perth Red]

will Perth be in the red or black?

With our state govt, very much in the red at the moment!

 

[Perth Red]

Could have chosen any club LOL.But insert" it doesn't suit my agenda."
And just how many clubs show a break even after a G/F win?

The very reason the NRL wants to clamp down on non playing expenditure.

All corporate boxes have been sold for season 2017 for the Sharks, the main issue is major jersey sponsor spot to fill. The other the Carney legal matter.
Next door residential people moving in to stage 1.

Very few clubs post their financials so there are onAly a few that you can get a true picture of. Sharks are some of the easiest to read as the others tend to bury them in the leagues clubs figures so hard to differentiate between LC and FC financial performance.

Manly posted a small profit on the back of of seasons of losses their premiership winning year.

As I qualified all clubs are in spending strife despite massive grant increases. When you read comments like the Penrith one you have to see why the NRL needs to bring control in on it, not just throw another massive grant increase at the problem.

 

[Perth Red]

Perhaps if they hadn't had a guy by the name of Danks offering his services for a few weeks, and a dope by the name of Carney the results of which lost them sponsorship, cost them legals, helped achieve a wooden spoon,
then they may well have been in better financial situation 2015 and 2016..
$500,000 loss in the scheme of things is not the end of the world,compared to other clubs with far bigger Leagues club grants.

And the G/F win ,plus record merchandise sales still ongoing, close to all corporate boxes sold ,and an expected record number of members for 2017, Think they will have a reasonable year finances wise.Of course the Carney legal matter still pending.

If there is waste in football management, it needs to be curtailed.

You can put millions into non football mgt, and still end up like the Broncos,Bulldogs and Roosters.
It's the cattle on the field first.

My comments were in relation to the $6.5mill sharks FC spending, not the rest Of the expenditure. It's not so much waste as excess for fear of falling behind others. This fear is driving all the clubs to have greater expenditure than income and heir answer is to ask the NRL for more, and as the Panthers guy said we'll just spend it to keep up. Problem is everyone else is doing the same and the arms race continues, as do the losses every year.

 

[T-Boon]

If you limit spending under FC admin

How do address issues where club already have X item

But a club without X now cannot go and get X

As I understand it, it is ongoing costs that a football department cap applies to. If someone already has a "centre of excellence" you can't punish them for it. They just have to run it year to year for the same amount that other clubs run their "centre of competence".
If someone already has Bellamy he just comes under the Football department cap etc, etc.

 

[Perth Red]

And it will need to be a staged reduction to deal with employment contracts etc.

 

[Perth Red]

Here are the reports from a month ago. Granted they are forecasted but your bias is grating.

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...n/news-story/6a644e9e54d147a4f070f90b86a0afd0

SYDNEY based NRL clubs will lose a combined total of $34.1 million this season in continued worrying signs for the game.

Alarming figures show all Sydney clubs will operate at a loss for season 2016 where not even the premiership-winning Cronulla Sharks could post a profit.

Five of the nine Sydney franchises sank deeper into the red, headlined by the Eels and Canterbury, as it’s revealed collectively clubs will lose $4.5 million more than last year.

The Daily Telegraph last month reported Parramatta’s record loss of $11 million for the season, an increase of $3 million from the previous year.

While the Bulldogs’ $5.2 million loss will be offset by a $4 million League Club grant, it was $1.7 million more than 2015 and comes amid a massive clean-out of Des Hasler’s coaching staff.


In other figures set to be delivered to members or private owners:

* SOUTH Sydney suffered almost a $4 million downturn in fortunes after posting a healthy $1.4 million profit last year;

* THE Sharks performed the best, posting a loss of just $500,000 this year;

* THE Sydney Roosters will lose $3.2 million;

* ST GEORGE Illawarra lost $2 million which was underwritten by a Leagues Club grant;

* PRIVATELY owned Manly are $1.5 million in the red after being locked in a court dispute over alleged non-payment of a major sponsorship; and

* PENRITH and the Wests Tigers sustained operating losses of $5.4 million and $2.8 million respectively.

The Panthers are actually $1 million better off than 2015 but chief executive and chairman Brian Fletcher said the operating cost of Penrith’s Rugby League Academy, the investment in juniors and determination to be a powerhouse on the field meant the club was prepared to wear the financial burden.

“For us to try and perform at the highest level, we need to spend that sort of money,” Fletcher said. “We are different to other clubs. We have 8500 juniors, junior programs that we have to pay for and run, that aren’t subsidised by the NRL.

“We’ve also got to maintain Penrith Stadium, which costs between $500,000 and $750,000 a year for rent and upkeep.

“We also built the academy to improve the quality of our players — that’s not cheap to run either. We find it very difficult to get figure down but hopefully the new $4 million (funding from the new broadcasting deal), which was promised on top of our funding from 2018 will help break the back of that loss.”

South Sydney lost almost $4m in 2016.
Clubs continue to discuss funding and licences with the NRL, but Fletcher stressed any significant cash cutbacks would jeopardise the Panthers’ chances of succeeding on the field.

“If we have to spend $6 million to be competitive, so be it,” Fletcher said.





After being the sole Sydney club to post a profit last season, Rabbitohs chief executive Blake Solly put this year’s concerning financial result to several factors.

“We have traditionally been break-even or profitable over the last three to four years but we have made some investments into our football program and also into our new community high-performance centre at Heffron Park,” Solly said.

“We are on a slightly different footing to most Sydney clubs in that we don’t have a licenced club. That is why membership is a key to us. It is a huge contributor to our financial wellbeing.

Premiers Cronulla were also the best-performed team financially in 2016, posting a loss of $500,000.
“With 35,000 members, which we hope to get in 2017, we will back at break-even again and if we have an even better season on the field, we will certainly make a profit.”

Brisbane appear the only team to consistently post a profit.

Leagues Club grants helped the ease the financial pain of several Sydney clubs. The NRL cannot allow any club to fold given rugby league’s television broadcasters require eight games each week.

“Sustainability is the biggest issue in the game,” said one club chairman. “The game has to have eight games a week. Clubs have to be viable to deliver on our contractual obligations.”

The Eels season was a total disaster. In the letter to members last month, then interim Eels CEO Bevan Paul claimed the club’s losses were “clearly unacceptable and with the leagues club redevelopment scheduled to begin in early 2017 it is critical that Eels costs are constrained within the benchmarks of comparable NRL franchises.”

Originally published as Sydney clubs to lose $34m this season

Where we these figures "submitted"? If to the NRL then who at the NRL would leak such commercially sensitive information info to the media?

Also if a LC grant is part of revenue then the FC isnt running at the loss reported, the game needs to decide if LC funding is a source of revenue or not if it is going to be legit about how profitable or unsustainable clubs are.

 

[alien]

I'd love to see a new Super League.

One Sydney team.

We'd f**k yers all. Cherry pick the best players and groom the finest juniors. 80,000 home crowd. TV and media and corporates galore. Dripping in money.

Brisbane, Auckland, Melbourne, Perth, Canberra, Adelaide, Townsville, Wollongong, Newcastle, Gold Coast, Rockhampton, Christchurch, Wellington, Central Coast...you could all lick our arseholes each and every year.


I introduce you to Sydney Wall (aka PGC). [NOTE: I chose 69 as a symbolic 'coming together' of RL in Sydney] [The Wall - because no one is getting in].

View attachment 10792 View attachment 10793

 

[Perth Red]

Wrong thread

 

[taipan]

Very few clubs post their financials so there are onAly a few that you can get a true picture of. Sharks are some of the easiest to read as the others tend to bury them in the leagues clubs figures so hard to differentiate between LC and FC financial performance.

Manly posted a small profit on the back of of seasons of losses their premiership winning year.

As I qualified all clubs are in spending strife despite massive grant increases. When you read comments like the Penrith one you have to see why the NRL needs to bring control in on it, not just throw another massive grant increase at the problem.

2015 is not 2016.

 

[taipan]

My comments were in relation to the $6.5mill sharks FC spending, not the rest Of the expenditure. It's not so much waste as excess for fear of falling behind others. This fear is driving all the clubs to have greater expenditure than income and heir answer is to ask the NRL for more, and as the Panthers guy said we'll just spend it to keep up. Problem is everyone else is doing the same and the arms race continues, as do the losses every year.

My remarks cover all aspects, including FC spending.

 

[taipan]

If you limit spending under FC admin

How do address issues where club already have X item

But a club without X now cannot go and get X

It will depend on what is deemed FC admin costs

I expect non FC admin spending will just increase

You cant stop Panthers LC adding a pool or new gym equipment to their CoE

The fumble ball mob are looking at the problem of overexpenditure, they see it as an issue not just the NRL.

 

[Perth Red]

2015 is not 2016.

They haven't released results to October 31st 2016 yet.

Sharks financial performances

2012 $1mill loss
2013 $1.6 mill loss
2014 $? (Cantvread the report)
2015 $1.5mill loss
2016 $0.5mill loss (allegedly)

As i said clubs need saving from themselves.

 

[Von Hipper]

Perhaps if they hadn't had a guy by the name of Danks offering his services for a few weeks, and a dope by the name of Carney the results of which lost them sponsorship, cost them legals, helped achieve a wooden spoon,
then they may well have been in better financial situation 2015 and 2016..
$500,000 loss in the scheme of things is not the end of the world,compared to other clubs with far bigger Leagues club grants.

And the G/F win ,plus record merchandise sales still ongoing, close to all corporate boxes sold ,and an expected record number of members for 2017, Think they will have a reasonable year finances wise.Of course the Carney legal matter still pending.

If there is waste in football management, it needs to be curtailed.

You can put millions into non football mgt, and still end up like the Broncos,Bulldogs and Roosters.
It's the cattle on the field first.

Irrelevant about Sharks.

It's not the Sharks but all clubs, all the time.
Who cares if they post a profit 1 year out of ten. Irrelevant. The other 9, the next 9. To use the Sharks to prove all 16 clubs, or go close to it, is not correct.

Anyway when all you've got left is to inject people that's a case FOR caps haha.

Not many clubs are lucky enough to have a development either.