skeepe and Drake
did you guys read the articles for Gasnier from May and June 2010?
There appears NO analysis reviews Audit of the third party values and none were even identified. The May excerpt where $1.4m is announced by Doust as the value being worked , clearly includes third party deals , yet Gasnier has not even signed and Doust is working them NOT Gasnier.
This is exactly what souths did , yet Souths deal has been scrutinised in detail.
What is the detail on the Gasnier third party and why were they approved and Souths Inglis deal not? thank you for proving the Souths fan point about the inconsistent treatment given to Souths deal versus Saints deal.
cut from Phil Rothfield Sports Editor-at-large
<LI class="source ">From:
The Daily Telegraph <LI class="date-and-time last">May 11, 2010 12:00AM
The Dragons desperately want him but can only pay a small amount this season then kick in with serious dollars for 2011 and 2012. Over three seasons he could still earn around the $1.4 million mark with third-party sponsorship support.
Future salary cap changes to benefit Dragons, Gasnier
Chris Barrett, Glenn --- late June 2010
NRL chief executive David Gallop said he was comfortable Mark Gasnier had been placed under the Dragons' salary cap ''at a reasonable figure'' for 2010, after insisting the club review their initial intention to sign the former Test centre for only $50,000 for the rest of the season.
Gallop and Dragons chief executive Peter Doust both declined to comment on exactly what portion of Gasnier's heavily back-ended four-and-a-half year contract was listed under the $4.1 million cap for this year after he officially rejoined the club yesterday. But the
Herald understands the figure is approximately $120,000.
Lengthy negotiations between Doust and the NRL were required to get the Gasnier deal over the line and it has been accompanied with scepticism in some quarters about just how a player of such quality could be allowed to be the recipient of such a low fee within the salary cap.
Advertisement: Story continues below
However, Gallop said yesterday the Dragons had been convinced to increase their initial $50,000 half-season valuation significantly.
''We had a bit of argy-bargy about the initial figure that they were looking to put him in at for the remainder of 2010,'' Gallop said.
''They've now got him in the cap at a reasonable figure. We also accepted that it is a fairly unusual situation and clearly to have him back in the game is good as well.''
Doust said the Gasnier contract, which keeps him at the club until the end of 2014, had been struck with an eye to future changes to the salary cap, which include a $100,000 rise in the cap itself, the relaxing of rules regulating third-party payments and a doubling of the $150,000 allowance for marquee players. ''They aren't actually [ratified] in the regulations. But we can be optimistic in 2012, '13 and '14 that … it will all work come that time,'' Doust said.
''I think we can expect an increase in the playing salary cap, we can also expect increases in allowances for arrangements outside the cap - existing sponsors and third-party sponsors - and there's likely to be an increase in long-term player allowances. Everything that has happened in the cap sense has worked in our favour. We're in a time of changing circumstances with the salary cap. That has obviously had an impact in what we could achieve in the latter years.''
Doust would not elaborate on the total value of Gasnier's deal but said the $1.9m figure reported yesterday was incorrect. He agreed that it had been a ''complicated negotiation process''.
The response from rival NRL clubs yesterday was to urge consistency from the league given the unusual nature of the back-ended deal.
''Rules for one, rules for all,'' Penrith chief executive Mick Leary said. ''If they give the OK on that … if we get into that situation, or any other club, they should be allowed the same principles.''
