0
Yeah. My big question, after reading the fin review article this morning and returning to find comment on my post and remind me of that issue.
Which agency looks at gross financial mismanagement in cases like the ARU. Listed companies have a watchdog as do incorporated bodies, who do we call to protect the little people here.
If these f@#kers were in charge of a company with shareholders they would be running away from pitchforks right now, not necessarily over cutting 20% of their workforce, but over driving a company into bankruptcy after securing its biggest payday in history.
C'mon the
ASIC for governance irregularities, ACCC for consumer fraud
Thanks Steve,
I had a look at ACCC so see whether I could request an investigation, apparently I can't, however this was very interesting given the ruling in the Sydney courts.
https://www.accc.gov.au/business/bus...contract-terms
ypes of terms that may be unfair
The law sets out examples of terms that may be unfair, including:
terms that enable one party (but not another) to avoid or limit their obligations under the contract
terms that enable one party (but not another) to terminate the contract
terms that penalise one party (but not another) for breaching or terminating the contract
terms that enable one party (but not another) to vary the terms of the contract.
Ultimately, only a court or tribunal (not the ACCC) can decide that a term is unfair.
I wonder if the error of law could be applied that the term about renegotiation of the broadcast deal could be identified as an unfair term in the context that it now sits.
I assume that will bring the whole agreement into question and probably won't win us the right to enter the competition again, but it would probably allow us to go for damages. Since they're sailing so close to the breeze regarding insolvency, I'd love to see RugbyWA go for the 18 Million and use that to twist the ARUs arm into supporting the Indo-Pacific League properly.
C'mon the
Perhaps that is another reason why the Western Force has been the only intended victim all along.
The EARU has sunk so much frigging money into the Rebels that they think that they have to hang on and try to get some kind of return on the money which they have spent down there.
I wonder how that money has been booked in the formal ARU accounts?
Last edited by FingerTips; 11-09-17 at 11:49.
The would be an example of the sunk cost fallacy - http://www.lifehack.org/articles/com...ct-stupid.html
Absolutely.
Any half-decent business person knows that once money has been spent, it is gone. If there is no good to be gained from spending more money on something, then you walk away and don't spend any more - it would be simply good money after bad.
However, we do need to remember that with the EARU we are dealing with bankers and their ilk, and not with people who actually understand business.
Have you read http://asic.gov.au/about-asic/contac...w-to-complain/ ?
The first public hearing is in Perth on 20th September, is anyone going. Submissions are open until 12th October
As would purchasing tickets to a sporting event that, when the time comes, you know attending will just make you FEEL hurt, angry and powerless........not to mention giving some justification to the bastards who made you feel that way.
- JUST SAYIN'.THE SUNK COST FALLACY
Or, let’s say you buy tickets to a concert. On the day of the event, you catch a cold. Even though you are sick, you decide to go to the concert because otherwise “you would have wasted your money”.
Boom! You just fell for the sunk cost fallacy.
Sure, you spent the money already. But you can’t get it back. If you aren’t going to have a good time at the concert, you only make your life worse by going.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Yeah I did, I stumbled over
My complaint is about:
<ul>
<li>Supply of goods and services</li>
<li>Employment: wages and conditions</li>
<li>Business names</li>
<li>Scams</li>
<li>Superannuation and insurance</li>
<li>Money I have borrowed (credit cards, loans, mortgages)</li>
<li>Money I have invested (financial services and advice)</li>
<li>Insolvency practitioners (liquidators, administrators and receivers)</li>
<li>Shares and market misconduct (insider trading etc.)</li>
<li>Running of companies</li>
</ul>
I mean, maybe the last one, but it's not really a strong link with my personal case. and I'd have very little actual information to add.
I can see areas on that list that Rugby WA could have a go at, I can see places where the Players and Staff could have a crack, I could see where somebody with Twiggy's nouse might make an impact, possibly even Alison would have sufficient actual knowledge to have a go, just not me.
C'mon the
Might be useful to sit around a whiteboard (at a suitable pub of course) and outline the key points to be made. Happy to participate and help draft up a TWF submission if others are also interested.
Not sure if others have already started this process, but if so please let me know.
PS I've appeared before a few Senate Inquiries (and written supporting submissions) as part of my job - it's not that scary so I'm happy to provide background on what it's like and there are probably other TWFers who have done likewise.
Last edited by Macattack; 11-09-17 at 14:11.
Pint o' Guinness at JBs
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor