Roar Guru
Joined November 2016
4.5k
Views
2
Published
5.6k
Comments
Location: Western Australia ----------------------- Rugby team: Western Force ----------------------- AFL team: Dockers
Published
Comments
There has been a lot of talk in the past week about what Fremantle should and should not be doing vis a vis trades…
I was lucky enough to attend the inaugural game of World Series Rugby last night between the new Western Force and Fiji A (Warriors).…
Don’t get us wrong mate. We all love the Tah’s. 😂
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
I think expecting the governing body to have a full picture of the finances of each franchise is a fair point. You would expect audited annual accounts with a going concern statement to be a minimum standard. Whether it was a condition I don’t know, but I do know that directors doing the wrong thing don’t always ‘fess up when having accounts and reports prepared
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
You’d like to think that RA was across the financial performance of all franchises imo. However if Rebels were trading while insolvent and doing improper transactions as found in the Administrators report , then I can understand why RA wasn’t been kept fully informed .
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
James, I think quite a few of us received the same treatment. It was obvious that the Rebels directors were in trouble as as soon as the log of claims was made public but not everyone was prepared to see or admit it. In Geoffs defence he isn’t the first fan to allow his love of the club to blind him to the reality of the situation.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
There’s nothing to suggest RA were shadow directors at all. Just a big slur by Rebels directors to misdirect blame for their incompetence.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
I don’t think the TAH’s and Rebels are comparable tbh. The Tahs have proper accounts and good governance and by the look of it they pay their taxes and bills as they are due. They have said publicly that they were struggling but there is nothing to show they were insolvent last year let alone for the last 5 years. Totally opposite to the Rebels who have hidden their real financial position for the last 5 years.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
It was RA that demanded Rebels have a full independent review of their financial situation in early 2023. Reasonable to think they did this after becoming aware of the situation – not before.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
The fact the RA says they provided cash to the Rebels which was supposed to go to the ATO but the Rebels spent it on other things is a huge statement. If there was an agreement signed on this (likely I think) then the Rebels directors have nowhere to hide.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
RA should make a decision that is in the best short and long term interest of Australian rugby. Not the interest of Rebels directors who allowed the club to trade whilst insolvent for 4.5 years.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Force weren’t insolvent when they were cut. Their total debt was $2m owed to the state government for the stadium upgrade and they had received a promise of backing from Twiggy and they were paying all their bills as they fell due. The financial excuse was a myth as ARU made up their pea sized brains before they reviewed finances.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Really? Then why did they become insolvent in 2018?
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Except they were trading insolvent BEFORE the pandemic started.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Well they were trading insolvent before the pandemic so that is wrong. The best you could say is that without a pandemic they are less unsustainable.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Yep, and those of us that questioned it were told “It’s ok, nothing to see here.”
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
I think we all do but it should be paid by the Rebels directors not RA.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
They often do. I believe they prefer to allow companies to try to trade out of difficulty rather than be the one to push them over the edge. Clearly it doesn’t always work out.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
RA needs to hold the licence. It’s the only thing potentially worth anything. Why would they sell it to a group that include the people that have been found to have traded while insolvent and have been implicated in potential improper dealings while directors?
Hold the licence and lease the rights to operate under it to the new consortium for two years. Then also put conditions such as the funding for Rebels is to be fully underwritten with personal guarantees from the proposers and none of the Rebels directors can be involved and finally that all annual accounts are audited and provided to RA.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Couldn’t RA hold the licence and Rebels still operate? Just like NSW and (dare I say it) the Force in 2017.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
If the directors are guilty of trading while insolvent, and also guilty of making improper payments while insolvent that would be grounds for being barred from acting as a director for up to 10 yrs. Or worse potentially. If the same directors are part of the “rescue” package, then RA would not want to engage with them. I think those directors have no option but to drop out of the bid. That would be the honourable and proper thing to do if they genuinely want the bid to succeed. Based on the report, they are now officially a boat anchor on saving the Rebels.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
It does. The difference here I feel is that allowing the Administrators to do their job isn’t a bad thing. It’s what happens next that we should watch closely
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
I am sure their will be some people that grasp at straws here but the report is pretty damning of the Rebels directors and even if the DOCA is approved and RA support the plan, that doesn’t mean the directors won’t be prosecuted.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
True mate, but I’m not sure that RA was wrong here. I think they have let the Administrator work their way through the facts without any pressure from the Directors saying “we are in discussions with RA so you need to change your report”. Now the report is out and the facts are on the table, I think RA is likely to be more open to a discussion. The issue for the Rebels directors and the Proposers is that now they aren’t operating from a position of any strength.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Yes, there is a degree of self preservation here by Directors and their public statement is really just bluff and bluster. The directors will be prosecuted for a failure to perform their fiduciary duties unless RA help out and no amount of claiming is was “someone else’s fault” changes the “trading while insolvent and improper transfer of funds” issues. They are both prosecutable.
Having said that, RA needs to help find a path forward here.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Well that is just a staggering finding wrt the directors behaviour. Trading while insolvent for 3 years and also improper related party transactions with directors is about as bad as it gets. Not to mention the fact that admin and player costs/salaries appear to have boomed while revenue (outside the RA issue) went down. Now we see the real truth behind the B*S. I agree with comments above that the tax office wouldn’t be pleased to be asked to take a haircut in those circumstances.
However, it is clear that a legal bunfight isn’t in anyones interest even if the directors do deserve a big slapping.
Personally if I was RA I would support the Administrators recommendation and the DOCA, but keep hold of the license itself while requiring directors guarantees, access to all financial docs every quarter and a host of other very tight controls in relation to the financial performance of the new costs to be incurred by the new franchise over the next 2 years that they have asked for. Review it after that. I think that deals with Herberts points about not throwing RA’s money at it and still supports rugby.
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival
Ok. A couple of years ago the TAHs publicly stated that they had financial issues and they were only spending 90% of their salary cap. They lost most games but sucked it up. At the same time the Rebels traded while insolvent, kept it secret , and spent all of their salary cap and made a huge loss. Which franchise do you think is the fiscally responsible one trying to do it right by their members and supporters?
UPDATE: RA say they were blindsided over Rebels' finances, reject private consortium claim as administrator backs club's survival