RugbyRebels

If I were Brentford, I’d be chatting to my lawyers to see if I could get out for free if LI go into admin.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 7:09 pm If I were Brentford, I’d be chatting to my lawyers to see if I could get out for free if LI go into admin.

A cynic would suggest that it's probably cheaper to pay a journalist at the Times to continually report on the fragility of Irish's finances to see if that would tip them over the edge, than to pay the release clause.

Puja

Did they also pay the US consortium to not pay the staff?

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 7:15 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 7:09 pm If I were Brentford, I’d be chatting to my lawyers to see if I could get out for free if LI go into admin.

A cynic would suggest that it's probably cheaper to pay a journalist at the Times to continually report on the fragility of Irish's finances to see if that would tip them over the edge, than to pay the release clause.

Puja

I'd like to think we're better than that.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:02 pm Did they also pay the US consortium to not pay the staff?

I don't really know what's going on with that consortium - as far as I'm aware, they don't own Irish yet? So why are Irish reliant on them paying the wage bill? Surely the consortium are a little nervous about forking out cash for the running of an asset which they don't yet own?

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:07 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:02 pm Did they also pay the US consortium to not pay the staff?

I don't really know what's going on with that consortium - as far as I'm aware, they don't own Irish yet? So why are Irish reliant on them paying the wage bill? Surely the consortium are a little nervous about forking out cash for the running of an asset which they don't yet own?

Puja

They must be nervous which is, I assume, why they paid wages for March but not April, albeit they may have by now.
The point was more that the The Times are reporting a fact, ie failure to pay wages, rather than being paid to regurgitate old news as you alleged.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:24 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:07 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 8:02 pm Did they also pay the US consortium to not pay the staff?

I don't really know what's going on with that consortium - as far as I'm aware, they don't own Irish yet? So why are Irish reliant on them paying the wage bill? Surely the consortium are a little nervous about forking out cash for the running of an asset which they don't yet own?

Puja

They must be nervous which is, I assume, why they paid wages for March but not April, albeit they may have by now.
The point was more that the The Times are reporting a fact, ie failure to pay wages, rather than being paid to regurgitate old news as you alleged.

Fair point - didn't mean to seem that I was implying that it was made up out of whole cloth. Poor turn of phrase by me. Was more noting that The Times appear to have been the source of several "Irish could be on the brink" stories and that they were first to break the news for both months where the pay was late. But could just as easily be that the journo has a contact inside Irish themselves.

Puja

More bribes.

In depressing news, Atlas have completed their takeover of Worcester Sixways Rugby: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... ugby-union

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:03 pm In depressing news, Atlas have completed their takeover of Worcester Sixways Rugby: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... ugby-union

Puja

Sweep stake on how many days until Wasps are installed as new tenants?

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:56 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:03 pm In depressing news, Atlas have completed their takeover of Worcester Sixways Rugby: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... ugby-union

Puja

Sweep stake on how many days until Wasps are installed as new tenants?

Who picked one day?

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:52 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:56 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:03 pm In depressing news, Atlas have completed their takeover of Worcester Sixways Rugby: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... ugby-union

Puja

Sweep stake on how many days until Wasps are installed as new tenants?

Who picked one day?

It was inevitable but I thought they'd have made a short show of not moving in straight away.

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:57 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:52 am

FKAS wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:56 pm

Sweep stake on how many days until Wasps are installed as new tenants?

Who picked one day?

It was inevitable but I thought they'd have made a short show of not moving in straight away.

Not sure why, in the current dire environment, this is depressing - any fresh support for rugby has to be welcomed.

Courtney weighing in (though not really saying much that we haven't already worked out):

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/premie ... in-england

Might be more than a temporary home for Wasps. Edit - it's Christopher John Holland not John Holland as the guy says here. Not managed to verify much.

Looks like it's Loxwood providing Atlas with loan facilities and the whole Sixways site being used as collateral.

Shame he didn't just do that a few days ago instead of being a dick and putting pressure on those staff he has that require salary in order to pay their mortgage/rent.

I think the wage bill is circa £350k a month and he’s been covering that for a good chunk of the season. I think he’s also written off seven figures of debt to ease the sale of the club. I’m not sure he’s the one to get angry with.

So... we shouldn't be angry with the employer for not paying employees... So who should we be angry with?

He could’ve not paid his employees months ago… Given the US consortium paid the wages for March I’m guessing he thought they’d pay April, too, and has stepped in when they haven’t.
Do we have to be angry with anyone but if we do I’m guessing it’s the US consortium.

I'm not angry with the guy, I just don't get why if he's willing to pay now a few days late why he could just pay the people on time. He's always come across as a decent owner but this was a shite game to play to try and force the other party into completing the sale quickly.

As an aside it could also have cost the club more as employees can legitimately claim back any fees incurred because of the late payment of their salary. Not that would help their credit scores recover or stop the short term stress incurred.

FKAS wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 10:08 pm I'm not angry with the guy, I just don't get why if he's willing to pay now a few days late why he could just pay the people on time. He's always come across as a decent owner but this was a shite game to play to try and force the other party into completing the sale quickly.

As an aside it could also have cost the club more as employees can legitimately claim back any fees incurred because of the late payment of their salary. Not that would help their credit scores recover or stop the short term stress incurred.

As I said, I’m guessing because he thought the US consortium were coughing up as they had the previous month.

So we shouldn't be angry with the employer for not paying their employees, we should be angry with someone who isn't the employer for not paying people who aren't their employees?

Surely, whilst he owns the club, he remains the owner of the club; and it's his responsibility to pay his employees, not someone else's.


Equally, if I'm selling my house, it's my job to pay my mortgage, not the buyer's. I'm pretty sure that if I didn't, then the bank would be coming after me, not them.

I'd always be reticent to stick the boot into Crossan. In a loss making environment, where broadly speaking no one makes money from club rugby he's essentially a fan who's sunk what for him must be an incredibly uncomfortable amount of money into the club. He's wealthy by normal standards, but isn't in the same league as some of the owners in the league. The club would have gone to the wall a decade ago if it wasn't for him.

He's clearly been trying pretty hard to offload the club in recent years, when the easy thing financially would have been to just pull the plug. It's hard to know what's going on behind the scenes, but this takeover has by all accounts been going on since the back end of last year and we're probably well past the point at which he would have budgeted for it completing. Payroll was met last month by the buyers and I'm guessing there was an agreement that this would happen this month too if the deal hadn't completed.

So yes, looking at it simply, it his his responsibility and he could have stepped in as soon as it was late (albeit then he still has to dig out c.£500k). Ultimately though the buyers now need to make this happen this month. Otherwise the outlook is pretty rocky.