http://www.aru.com.au/portals/1/SUPPORTING-DOCUMENTATION-THE-FUTURE-OF-SUPER-RUGBY.pdf
Printable View
http://www.aru.com.au/portals/1/SUPPORTING-DOCUMENTATION-THE-FUTURE-OF-SUPER-RUGBY.pdf
It's all bullshit because no other team could be legally cut.
OK, so I gave up reading in disgust, I'm not sure how far through I was.
They're basing the decision on a bunch of factors, creatively twisted to cover up the truth.
1 they stated that both teams were assumed to be self sustaining into the future, yet there would still be a hole in ARU finances.
Why don't they plug the leak rather than killing a team that will sustain itself?
They assume the rebels will be self sustaining into the future, despite not disclosing any details which makes that statement anything other than fantasy.
2 they generously include the Vic Govts funding towards the rebels, with no contract but ignore any commitment by the WA government.
3 despite there being a 3 year contract with Road Safety (that contains a release clause) this funding is seen as not guaranteed.
So guarantees only apply to contracts that aren't written? Or is that purely to support your buLlshit "argument"
4 the kicker for me, they're plugging a "best case" 13 million dollar hole (worst case 25 MILLION) with 18 million realised over the remainder of the contract yet will still be able to give that money to grass roots?
What happened to the record broadcast revenue?
50 million is double 2 million, how does that add up?
I'm no financial genius, but I can smell bullshit when I'm served it in a sandwich
"Retaining the Melbourne Rebels provides a clear financial benefit for the ARU"
soon followed by
"ARU is unable to disclose the value of this agreement, as all Government contracts are signed in commercial confidence."
Hmmm.... :confused:
i'm angry now, but if ever these guys get on tv in the future and then retrospectively say oh I regret axing the Force I'd go berko!!! It is clearly discrimination against a state with a geographical disadvantage.
I'm also concerned about the double answers to this:
"ARU’s ongoing commitment to Rugby in Western Australia
ARU is committed to providing a clear pathway for aspiring young Rugby players to reach the highest levels of the sport and represent Australia’s men’s and women’s representative teams.
This includes a commitment to continue its support for Perth Spirit remaining in the NRC competition."
along with this (admittedly from earlier in life):
"“In the course of renegotiation about what would happen should we lose the arbitration, the NRC Spirit team was in the Alliance as well and we asked them about that,” said Edwards. “They basically said this will be their last season, the one that’s about to start."
(http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spor...b20cdc21dcde1b)
It's such a crock of shit BnB that it's not worth wasting your time trying to understand the double speak. It's all a pack of lies, no more and no less.
The silver lining in all of this for me is that we no longer have to so much as pass the time of day with the lying, thieving, corrupt and conniving septic tank dwellers at the non-Australian Rugby Union.
It looks like they're including drawdowns on the subsidies/returns to the Rebels from the $8M Bledisloe game plus the Lions tour as "Victorian Government commitment" income for the Rebels too.
Well according to the bits and pieces that were came out while the ARU were negotiating with Cox for the licence they were only at the Heads of Agreement stage. Whether the Vic government actually went on to sign contracts after the licence as sold for a dollar is the pertinent point. That is not subject to commercial confidence - only the details. And it is the most relevant point to the ARU claim that the Vics had a stronger model as at the 11th of August when they claim the decision was made. But they will still claim confidentiality until enough water has passed the bridge.
It would interesting to know if the ARU has actually factored in what the WA Govt would have tabled in for these Bledisloe games to be held in Perth , same for Brisbane and Sydney that the Victorian government has promised if the Rebels were kept. The rationale for their calculations would be severely incorrect if they did not factor that in. My money is on them not having factored that in.
Also Melbourne loves to be the World Capital of sport and I am fairly sure that they would not have turned their back on the Bledisloe games if the Rebels were cut......
It's all bullshit. Pretending that the Rebels, who have already been responsible for around $28m of debt (not the usual payments), could be considered financially viable is preposterous