Terms of Reference for a Senate Inquiry into the Future of Rugby Union in Australia

[valzc]

I certainly hope the lawyers are digging away at the accounts. I wonder what would happen if you type Cameron Clyne, Pulver or Clarke into ASICs website, all their hidden shelf companies & trust accounts would pop up? It's certainly sounding like fraud/embezzlement to me. Which makes me think what's happened to McGowans legal threat, last I heard they were checking back on the contracts with WA Gov & ARU? Are they now working with the Senate to dig out all the dirty laundry?

[Perth Girl]

Here's another one : with absolutely nothing to back it up : Cox completed the infamous Put Option and now the VRU own the Rebels - where is the working capital coming from ? In other words, on completion, 4 August, the Balance sheet was "clean", but no subscriptions or sponsorships or match day revenues are coming in, so who is funding the show? Also, as Pulver said this week, a trigger to take back the Rebels licence would have been insolvency - so at what point will the generous Victorian benefactors pull the plug and let the Rebels sink or swim? At the moment, the infamous Victorian Government partnership that Pulver referred to but refused to detail (due to confidentiality) has not been signed - it continues to sit in limbo - not so iron clad after all compared with the WA Gov commitment to the Force.

Yes I heard, not at the inquiry, that the Vic gov.agreement has not been signed but didn't the ARU base their decision partly on that agreement?

[Sheikh]

The money...meant for AUSTRALIAN rugby...went to pay off Cox's debts in New Zealand, and into his and Clarke's pockets.

There...I said it. Sue me you cretinous duplicitous thieving wankers, you will have to prove it didn't

Unfortunately, SB, that's not how libel works. You made the allegation; you have to prove it if they take you to court.

[Perth Girl]

The 100 page report by Colin Smith on the expansion of Super Rugby and how it would cripple the ARUs finances should make for interesting reading. It would certainly back up Clynes quote around the ARU knowing the expansion was unsustainable. While it will bring our beloved Force back, it is heartening to hear and see some of the skeletons exiting the closets.
Not really sure what to make of Greg Harris's comments, one article he is supporting the cull, next one he is criticising it. As a former Force CEO and RUPA CEO, surely he realises the devastation to the players and their families, he is connected to both of the victims here.
The size of the Rebels continuous losses has piqued my interest in a different way today. How did the losses not only continue but stay consistently above $4 million when each of the other franchises always were within a few hundred thousand of being in profit or loss? How can 1 out of 5 similar businesses, same product, same market etc be so out of sync with the financial performance of the 4 comparitive businesses?
It was interesting to also hear Pulver avoid the question of what is Australias share of SANZAAR revenue. The tv deal of $285 million over 5 years was widely trumpeted at the time of signing but the details of the ARUs income share from SANZAAR are "confidential". The tv deal was trumpeted as bringing in $30 million a year in increased revenue. Surely a $30 million increase in income per year would be sufficient to add to existing financing structures in relation to Super Rugby grants to shore up the position of 4 franchises that are only just missing profitability by a few hundred thousands dollars each year? Even if Super Rugby grants went up by $1 million per franchise per year, that still leaves a $25 million per annum surplus from this increase in revenue. How has Melbournes board gotten their financial health so horribly wrong? 4 out 5 of the comparable businesses operate within similar performance indicators and measures delivering the same product. How does one out of the 5 get it so wrong? It is not a one year abberation either, it is consistently performing negatively. Why?
Even if the tv deal includes Wallabies coverage, then grants to the Wallabies would naturally rise. We still have $25 million spare after increasing Super Rugby grants, Wallabies receive an extra $5 million from the increased revenue that still leaves a $20 million surplus from last year unaccounted for and following the same method would result in that $20 million surplus doubling to $40 million by the end of 2017. Yet looking through the analysis of ARU accounts, this anticipated revenue increase is impossible to determine where it went. Then to hear the CEO say he did not know specifically where 55% of their income is spent is confusing.
Hopefully the answers to this and other questions finally get answered.

Regarding the ARU share of the deal all he would say was the NZ, SA and ARU got the same amount and the Argies a bit less

[sittingbison]

Unfortunately, SB, that's not how libel works. You made the allegation; you have to prove it if they take you to court.

Account was temporarily hacked by TWAS, paying me back for determining his status of paid ARU shill.

All good and above board now

[Alison]

I noticed this morning as I was going over everything so I can do my submission to the inquiry that in 2015 the ARU received a grant from WorldRugby of a shade under $18 million. That compares to just under $700K in each of 2014 and 2016.

I wonder if that was a reward for including Argentina in the SANZAAR joint venture (SuperRugby and Rugby Championship) and Japan in SuperRugby?

Kind of interesting huh?!

[lou]

I think that was because it was a world cup year and every four years I think they get an extra boost as they have fewer home tests in a world cup year.

[sittingbison]

Yup, 2019 is when the financial screw is going to be twisted

[Alison]

Kala - Puller was talking out of his backside when he said he couldn't say how much they were getting from the broadcast agreement.

It says very, very clearly on page 7 of the ARU's "Reduced Disclosure Financial Report 31 December 2016" lodged with ASIC on 2 May 2017 that the ARU received revenue of $61,387,000 from "Broadcasting". This compared to a figure of $18,102,000 for the previous year. The Directors' report that accompanied the financial report lodged with ASIC was signed by both Puller and Clyne.

Moreover, in 2015 Puller scored an extra $230K in "incentive payments" over and above his salary of $766K. You can't tell me that it's just coincidence that he got a massive bonus in the very year that an extremely lucrative TV broadcast deal was agreed!!

So, he is either an incredibly incompetent CEO or he is lying to Parliament - which is a very significant offence indeed.

Like the Senator said, last week's hearing asked more questions than it answered, and by god I'm going to give that inquiry all the answers it needs to recommend some very serious sanctions on the ARU board.

[Bakkies]

I certainly hope the lawyers are digging away at the accounts. I wonder what would happen if you type Cameron Clyne, Pulver or Clarke into ASICs website, all their hidden shelf companies & trust accounts would pop up? It's certainly sounding like fraud/embezzlement to me. Which makes me think what's happened to McGowans legal threat, last I heard they were checking back on the contracts with WA Gov & ARU? Are they now working with the Senate to dig out all the dirty laundry?

It was said on Wednesday that the WA Government will be appearing before the Senate with those documents.

[travelling_gerry]

I noticed this morning as I was going over everything so I can do my submission to the inquiry that in 2015 the ARU received a grant from WorldRugby of a shade under $18 million. That compares to just under $700K in each of 2014 and 2016.

I wonder if that was a reward for including Argentina in the SANZAAR joint venture (SuperRugby and Rugby Championship) and Japan in SuperRugby?

Kind of interesting huh?!

I think thats the dividend of Rwc year for less tests.

[Ham105]

All these things need to be brought out into the open!

One question that should be put to the ARU at the enquiry is whether they will return the Force IP to RugbyWA.

It doesn't matter if they vacilate and decline to answer. Getting them to put a response on the record (either way) can fuel the WA cause.

Another question for the Future of Australian Rugby Inquiry:

Does the ARU support RugbyWA retaining their vote (as used at the Annual General Meetings, etc.) for having a professional rugby team (i.e. The Force). The team will play in the IPRC rather than SR.

If this is not forthcoming, don't worry, just add it to the pyre.

Keep growing in WA and watch the Rebels and others skate around insolvency. Our time will come to square the ledger.

[wallabydarnd]

there are so many questions being raised in all the above

how on earth will there be time to raise them if it is just one more day with senate inquiry ,particularly if the ERU befuddle and fudge in their answers
can inquiry go on longer ?? might need to have a senate standing committee!!

[blueandblack]

The enquiry has to report in November. If enough of these questions are sent in and they can't answer them all (and they are questions worth asking or exploring), maybe one recommendation will or can be further, deeper investigation by a relevant authority.

[Perth Girl]

there are so many questions being raised in all the above

how on earth will there be time to raise them if it is just one more day with senate inquiry ,particularly if the ERU befuddle and fudge in their answers
can inquiry go on longer ?? might need to have a senate standing committee!!

The senate inquiry will have staff that will look at the paperwork between now and the reporting date in November how ever there will be alot of paperwork especially since the ARU have been asked to supply details of all 13(yes 13!) reviews the ARU have conducted since 2008. Willy was unable to say what recommendations came out of these reviews or whether any had been implemented!