Hey Lou, are you sure of that $800K figure? The ARU accounts talk about a figure of $4.3million (from memory). Was the difference between the two a "bail out"?
I also had mentioned that there was a conspiracy to get rid of the force when Foley was appointted coach,, A few members of this forum told me that I wore my tinfoil hat.. I had an insider in NZRU mention it,, My source was right on ,, He always said we would be ambushed .. Look back in the Archieves in 2012 and 2013..
Just another couple of quick things: was the $1.8m write off in addition to the write off of the $13m owed to the ARU by the MRRU in loans? And, do you know where in the ARU's accounts those two "just because" payments of $500K and $250K to Cox were recorded?
I found no mention of any of those three payments in the accounts that were filed with ASIC. More obfuscation and shady dealings? What else has been hidden over the past 12 years or so?.....
4 Corners, we NEED you!!
I've always had that feeling too Chibi. Almost like reading out the wrong envelope on Oscars night!
Allison I do remember that when the ARU took over the Admin of the Force we had an outstanding debt with the WA government for something like $2 million. as a loan when we moved from spewbie to NIB and into the new Rugby HQ,, which was to be paid down over this last broadcast deal,, The ARU had to pay that out???
This is what I have:
from the notes in the ARU annual reports in 2015:
i. Super Rugby grants increased by $1.4m due to increased financial support provided for MRRU
ii. $5m financial assistance to MR. Originally provided as a long term loan, subsequently forgiven under the arrangements of the sale of the entity 30 June 2015. - total $6.4 m GIVEN to Andrew Cox
from the notes in the ARU annual reports in 2016:
Super Rugby funding to Rebels includes $2.6 m of special funding as part of the external sale agreement - GIVEN to Andrew Cox
These payments were over and above the normal ARU player payments and were given - just because he asked for them.
the only reference to extra SR funding to WA is in the ARU annual reports for 2016: SR funding to WA includes $3.7 m relating to commercial operations from 1 Aug 2016 - nothing noted in the 2015 reports
This is a cut and paste from my "unsustainable" article Lou (first post in the "unsustainable" thread):
"And that brings us to 2016. As we already know, the ARU entered into an alliance agreement with the Western Force in August of 2016, under which the ARU bought the Force Super Rugby licence and its intellectual property for $3.7m. It also took on the Western Force players and staff as employees of the ARU. In addition to the $3.7m consideration paid for the Force licence and IP, the 2016 accounts show us that the ARU provided a further $3.6m in grant funding to the Western Force Super Rugby organisation, making a total amount in “grant” funding of $7.3m to the Force in 2016."
See also:
Note xii in Table 1 in that thread
Note 8 to Table 4 in that thread
Note 26 to Table 4 (which says the remuneration & Super for Force players & staff from 1 Aug - 31 Dec 2016 was $4.787mill and was separate from the $3.7mill for the IP and licence and the other $3.6mill for that year's grant.)
Lou, if you have the stamina, my piece in the first post of the "unsustainable" thread plus the tables are what I gleaned from the ARU accounts filed with ASIC for the years 2010 to 2016.
The ARU is so shifty it is hard to make sense of these figures. Suffice to say, that on one hand, the ARU hand over $13 m in forgiven loans to the MR and then continue to pay the new owner $6-7 m because he asked for it and on the other hand , the ARU purchase the WF IP and Licence - no gifts, no loans, no nothing.
They are artful dodgers aren't they?!!
They are certainly not checking in the rear view mirror. Key take outs for me from the ARU response to Andrew Forrest’s accusation are:
“Rugby WA provided several opportunities to put its best business case forward”
• After the Clarke/Day “axe” the Force presentation in Perth we requested the details behind the summarised “scenarios” they modelled that determined why they were leaning towards axing the Force. This was never provided (the infamous “Spreadsheet”)
• They also did not complete the “rugby program” comparison presentation at the meeting preferring to cut to the chase and tell us that the decision was overwhelmingly “Financial” and we “did quite well” on the non-financial metrics.
• We did not put forward any case immediately after that meeting as we were never given the Terms of Reference by which we were being measured. We also felt that as they effectively owned the Club whatever we put forward would be discredited.
• We also believed that we had a robust Alliance Agreement in place and that we were “partners”
• Down the track a little we prepared a range of scenarios for the ARU based on various inputs such as:
o Historical financial and match day data
o Own the Force funding outcomes
o Cost to repurchase the license ($800k)
o Road Safety sponsorship probabilities
o Team success/Bums on seats
o Other sponsorship/ corporates
• This review produced detailed high ,low and probable business outcomes around the buy- back opportunity in the Alliance Agreement and these were presented to the ARU in much finer detail than anything they provided to us.
• Following this and in response to letters from the ARU terminating our Alliance (pre Arbitration) and at their request, we presented an update of how we saw the Financial stability of the Force post 2017 in a buy back outcome .This was thrown back in our face on the basis that:
o We have not fully funded the Own the Force campaign (Notwithstanding that the impediment to this was the ARU themselves)
o The Government had not signed the Road Safety sponsorship extension (true but et Government had given strong enough indications and we had/have a backup plan)
o The Government was putting conditions on the $4mm Bledisloe advance that they were not prepared to accept.(What they wanted was an option on future unallocated Internationals).
o Andrew Forrest’s Own the Force underwriting had no guarantees and basically they did not rate him or his promise.
• Showing extreme patience we answered each of their criticisms in detail and still they batted us out of the park stating that the “Offer was not in a Form that could be accepted”
• All of the above plus a multitude of calls and emails in the “Good Faith” demanded under the terms of the Alliance agreement happened BEFORE the Arbitrator handed his pro ARU decision down . Each letter asked them to engage with us/Andrew and work out a win /win solution. Clearly we tried but they were just not prepared to engage. Minds were made up.
• Of course the big question is , over the course of this debacle were the Rebels at any time asked to put forward THEIR Business Case and I’d suggest that answer is no because they were never really at risk and Clarke had told them they were safe (remember that was in the press too and Cox was quoted).
“Once the VRU bought back the Rebels license Clyne said the ARU’s Hands were tied”
You all know that the “bait and switch” of Cox selling the Company. Transferring the License happened after the ARU reacted to press rumours and stated categorically that “the license could not be transferred without the ARU’s written approval”. When it actually happened a few days later for the princely price of $1 there was again a public statement by the ARU that this was not legal and that they would be immediately and urgently looking into it. At that point Andrew called Clyne and suggested to him that this was his opportunity to revoke the Rebels license and get the 4 team outcome that the ARU so desperately wanted. For a brief moment we thought we were safe and had won . So what happened after that:
• It seems that they pretended to look into it but like all these events this was swept under the carpet and never mentioned again.
• The next step was the so called Vic Government support to the tune of $20mm which is based arounf revenue from International fixtures and which still remains in the shadows and no one seems to be really owning up to the question of who is actually paying and how much:
o If it’s the Vic Government are they effectively paying a higher price than $5mm for a Bledisloe (the figure WA is paying) and if so are they paying the incremental cost to the VRU or the ARU?
o Who is paying the VRU? If it is the Government then one would think that this is rather unprecedented and the other codes in Melbourne might be asking for their share.
o My theory is that the Vic Government is paying the standard $5mm to the ARU and the ARU is paying the 20% to the Rebels which is effectively reducing the amount that they can distribute to Grass Roots and/or the other States and once again Melbourne is getting a handout no one else is getting. I could be wrong but it could certainly be “managed” in the ARU financials that way.
o I stand by my theory that for the Rebels to survive the Force must die. They need our Coach our players and more backdoor funds from the ARU . If the Rebels fail financially again the ARU are alone in the crosshairs.
Pulver and Clyne saying “Sadly Andrew came too late”
Andrew is answering this himself but I would imagine it is not at all too late from a practical and planning purpose. Sanzaar will no doubt have a number of Super 15 Draw models including:
• Force are out
• Force are in Sunwolves are out
• No one is out 16 team tournament
No one has booked a flight and no city has revoked its stadium deal. I think we all know that there is NO Contractual agreement between SANZAAR and the ARU to cut an Australian Team and other than a massive loss of face (which they will get anyway if we win the appeal) there really isn’t that much at stake for the ARU.
It’s very clear that this man is a poor liar and has morphed into one of a Pathological stature. He has not even been clever enough to check his tracks, even the fresh one. That’s what liars do they only have their own form of truth.
Cheers John
Remember that this all started last year with our Board going to the ARU to ask for a loan. Something every other Franchise had done at least once and in most cases for a higher amount. They came back to us with a "better" idea which was the Alliance. We liked it because it fixed our short liquidity issues and gave us a buy back option (which we started work on immediately) but most importantly it fixed a long term problem of talent equalisation and got them in our tent. Ironically we may not have gotten Billy or even our 2 home grown boys Curtis and Chance without the ARU finally giving us a "hand".
This "Alliance" model was a model the ARU wanted to achieve for all franchises and we were to be the test pilot. Clearly despite rigorous legal work by our team on the agreement a word or 2 allowed them to pounce when they needed to. I will never believe it was a set up from the start but todays revelations would tell you that the ARU certainly put the document to the test when they decided to look at the options to cut a team. Clearly the complete background ,the intent or the marvellous fanfare with which Pulver announced the deal was trampled into the NSW mud when their vision for " making Rugby accessible to all Australians" narrowed by a few thousand kilometres.
John, I thought the Agreement was drawn up by our lawyers, not theirs? In which case, how did they outsmart us with those one or two key words?
Could those key words be construed as them deliberately acting in bad faith?
Does this mean our appeal is dead in the water?