Parramatta Eels could be out of pocket more than $500,000 from court case

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

A member got up and asked the question about why was the payout for employees high, from $700k in 2012 to $2.1mil in 2013.

The CEO said that both Ken Edwards and Ricky took up most of that.

These were later in the year and Ricky's was around Oct.

That makes perfect sense....a lot more than the par. in the Chairman's report. Cheers.

 

[born an eel]

Salary cap from 2012 to 2013 went up by $700,000

NRL Grant was an extra $2.7mil from the previous year.

That's $2mil extra into our bank account.

The member was never suspended, the entire board seeked an apology and that wasn't too be.

so that is why Sharp was questioning the additional "massive and unrealistic budget approvals within the football club spend in early 2012/13 financial year". From this wording you can surmise that when the new board was voted in they sort to bring the football club into a more realistic spend.

 

[born an eel]

How anybody could support a bloke who made his money through ripping off innocent people is beyond me.

you do realise that the leagues club is supported by people playing the pokies? :lol:

 

[Jodeci]

so that is why Sharp was questioning the additional "massive and unrealistic budget approvals within the football club spend in early 2012/13 financial year". From this wording you can surmise that when the new board was voted in they sort to bring the football club into a more realistic spend.

Ken Edwards changed the entire structure of the Footy Office.

Installing 4 General Managers and more staff to keep up with demands.

GM of Strategy
GM of Comms
GM of Marketing
GM of Memberships

A few of those people have left, but they have been replaced.

I personally dont think there will be much of a reduction in operating costs in the next Leagues Club balance sheet.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Should read" very complimentary"

I prefer 'cheeky complimentary'.

 

[Jodeci]

So Ricky had a get out clause AND he was entitled to a payout ? :crazy:

Who the f**k would be dumb enough to agree to that ?

Gronk

He payout was very minimal.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Of course.

 

[Gronk]

Gronk

He payout was very minimal.

He resigned. He deserves no payout. Spags was an imbecile for agreeing to it. Smacks of desperation. I bet if the dude from Macquarie Bank was on board, commercial deals would be dealt with in a new light.

So who got all the cash ?

Originally Posted by Jodeci
A member got up and asked the question about why was the payout for employees high, from $700k in 2012 to $2.1mil in 2013.

 

[Wizard Sleeve]

I have no doubt Roy would have taken action against the article that made him look dodgy if he thought it was incorrect.

:lol:

 

[Wizard Sleeve]

Gronk

He payout was very minimal.

Didn't the CEO say Edwards and Ricky took most of the difference ? Clarify minimal . 100K?, 200K ?

Either way who'd say to someone here's a get out clause and if you choose to exercise it we'll give you a pay out :lol: .

 

[Poupou Escobar]

He resigned. He deserves no payout. Spags was an imbecile for agreeing to it. Smacks of desperation.

Because we weren't desperate?

 

[Gronk]

Because we weren't desperate?

You're the only desperate around here merkin.

 

[Bigfella]

Every time I have resigned the payout has been VERY minimal

Not sure any of them have ever featured in the company financials

 

[emjaycee]

Yeh I know. I agree. But Sharp's Chairman's report (p.11) explicitly stated that departures he was referring to were in the first half of the 2012/13 financial year. Makes no sense to me.

I know the FC's financial year runs October - September, and I think the LC's could be the same.

Looks like the issue is that the Footy Club in 12/13 FY (because it has a split financial year) ran up some expenses that hit the LC in FY 13. Seems as if LC is calendar year aligned hence the confusion.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Looks like the issue is that the Footy Club in 12/13 FY (because it has a split financial year) ran up some expenses that hit the LC in FY 13. Seems as if LC is calendar year aligned hence the confusion.

Ta. Well it explains what appears to have happened. Because the subsidiary's fin year ends 3 months or less from the LC's they can use the subsidiary's balance date when they consolidate the accounts (it's a situation open to some abuse, but not uncommon and not suggesting that is happening here).* That being the case, there should have been disclosure in the LC's 2012 Annual Report of the significant events that occured in the intervening time (i.e. between October 1 and December 31 2012). There may well have been such disclosures I guess.

* in fact, if the amount was as large as has been suggested, an adjustment should have been made in the 2012 accounts.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Barry, are you an accountant or a business lawyer? And how much overlap is there between the two?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Barry, are you an accountant or a business lawyer? And how much overlap is there between the two?

Well, I'm a professionally qualified accountant, but I don't work as one (and haven't for some time). Frig that for a joke.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yeah I'm a fully qualified bricklayer (trade certificate III yo!) but haven't done that for a very long time.

Looks like we have a lot in common.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Yeah I'm a fully qualified bricklayer (trade certificate III yo!) but haven't done that for a very long time.

Looks like we have a lot in common.

I'm a fully qualified Cable Layer (Cert 4).

 

[Jake the snake]

I'm a fully qualified Cable Layer (Cert 4).

You're a fully qualified merkin!! ;-)