Munster Debts

First topic message reminder :

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/irfu-chief-does-not-believe-munster-can-make-debt-repayments-1.2723985

Clearly Philip Browne didn't read the thread on here in which I was told the debts would be repaid without an issue.

No 7&1/2 wrote:And in the Prem.

No offence, but I am not concerned about what goes on in other leagues, if you want to discuss the English league, then start a thread, I will jump on and give an opinion.

Sin é wrote:The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

So Munster are not in debt then, like I have been saying all along ? Then the league is truly unfair.

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

So Munster are not in debt then, like I have been saying all along ? Then the league is truly unfair.

How is the league unfair?

marty2086 wrote:You say they are spending beyond their means, if that was the case they would go bust. How many clubs get money injected from their owners or unions?

But they are spending beyond their means, they have missed repayments on their loans, but somehow they are carrying on regardless, so you tell me how it works.

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Marty, why are you trying to change the debate for ? We all acknowledge the "help", in fact, it was getting our Irish members to acknowledge it as well. Nobody has any problems with this.

The point still stands though, is it fair for clubs to spend beyond their means without reprisal ? Because that is what is happening here in the Pro12 with regards to Munster.

The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

Sin, the IRFU aren't the owners they are financial backers though

They have a capital interest in the success and continuation of Munster as a business

The IRFU own Munster (and they own the other three Provinces as well). The management and staff are employees of the IRFU. The IRFU control the Provinces.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You say they are spending beyond their means, if that was the case they would go bust. How many clubs get money injected from their owners or unions?

But they are spending beyond their means, they have missed repayments on their loans, but somehow they are carrying on regardless, so you tell me how it works.

This has been explained but as a self proclaimed business owner the basic tenents of business seem beyond you

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Marty, why are you trying to change the debate for ? We all acknowledge the "help", in fact, it was getting our Irish members to acknowledge it as well. Nobody has any problems with this.

The point still stands though, is it fair for clubs to spend beyond their means without reprisal ? Because that is what is happening here in the Pro12 with regards to Munster.

The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

Sin, the IRFU aren't the owners they are financial backers though

They have a capital interest in the success and continuation of Munster as a business

The IRFU own Munster (and they own the other three Provinces as well). The management and staff are employees of the IRFU. The IRFU control the Provinces.

Control is probably the better word but according to the IRFU the branches own the provinces

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:And in the Prem.

No offence, but I am not concerned about what goes on in other leagues, if you want to discuss the English league, then start a thread, I will jump on and give an opinion.

But his point is relevant. You complain the league is unfair, so comparisons with other leagues are necessary.

It's BS to suggest that the Provinces have an unfair advantage, and highly hypocritical from those who brush over the genuine unfair advantage of certain teams within T14 and AP while moaning about 'the Irish'.

marty2086 wrote:So Munster are not in debt then, like I have been saying all along ? Then the league is truly unfair.

Because Munster can operate on the back of the financial gains of the Irish international side. Other sides in the league cannot operate off the financial power of their international set-up.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So Munster are not in debt then, like I have been saying all along ? Then the league is truly unfair.

Because Munster can operate on the back of the financial gains of the Irish international side. Other sides in the league cannot operate off the financial power of their international set-up.

You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

So Munster are not in debt then, like I have been saying all along ? Then the league is truly unfair.

Munster have a 'mortgage' on one of their stadiums! Munster owed more money in 2010 than they do now. Munster sustained losses of about 1.5m over the last 2 years. Plenty of companies have losses, but they generally are allowed time to trade out of them.

Making the KOs of the Champs Cup would make a huge difference in Munster's finances, particularly if they are home games or against clubs that have a decent fan base that they get a proportion of the gate.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:And in the Prem.

No offence, but I am not concerned about what goes on in other leagues, if you want to discuss the English league, then start a thread, I will jump on and give an opinion.

Sorry thought this was about munsters debt? Just giving the comparison that debt does exist in the prem as well when considering whether one league is unfair, or all leagues.

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Marty, why are you trying to change the debate for ? We all acknowledge the "help", in fact, it was getting our Irish members to acknowledge it as well. Nobody has any problems with this.

The point still stands though, is it fair for clubs to spend beyond their means without reprisal ? Because that is what is happening here in the Pro12 with regards to Munster.

The owner of Munster didn't spend beyond its means. It made a 'profit' of 5 or 6m and has reserves of 60m+.

Sin, the IRFU aren't the owners they are financial backers though

They have a capital interest in the success and continuation of Munster as a business

The IRFU own Munster (and they own the other three Provinces as well). The management and staff are employees of the IRFU. The IRFU control the Provinces.

Control is probably the better word but according to the IRFU the branches own the provinces

Actually, I think Ulster maybe different to the other 3 as it is based in the UK. To be in receipt of UK Gov funding, they would need to be registered as a UK company (and have audited accounts*). The other 3 Provinces' Financial Reporting are included in the IRFU's Annual Report and they only give unaudited accounts to AGMs in the Provinces.

*I was involved in a island of Ireland sporting organisation based in ROI and any funding we received from NI was a pittance. When a major project was undertaken that was inline for Gov. funding in NI, a limited company had to be set up in NI to be able to receive the funds.

This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

marty2086 wrote:This has been explained but as a self proclaimed business owner the basic tenents of business seem beyond you

Why is it beyond you to debate in a mature manner. You do not have to resort to this nonsense every time you cannot provide a proper answer.

You and Sin are saying to different things. It's either one or the other.

LordDowlais wrote:Marty, why are you trying to change the debate for ? We all acknowledge the "help", in fact, it was getting our Irish members to acknowledge it as well. Nobody has any problems with this.

The point still stands though, is it fair for clubs to spend beyond their means without reprisal ? Because that is what is happening here in the Pro12 with regards to Munster.

How do you know there is no reprisal? You don't know anything about the setup of Munster or its finances. You don't know what changes or restrictions have been imposed.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:This has been explained but as a self proclaimed business owner the basic tenents of business seem beyond you

Why is it beyond you to debate in a mature manner. You do not have to resort to this nonsense every time you cannot provide a proper answer.

You and Sin are saying to different things. It's either one or the other.

Excuse me?

I have pointed out a number of times that just because they have failed to meet one payment does not mean they will be wound up, it basic business.

Im pointing out that you claim to be a business owner but don't know some of the basics of dealing with debt

How exactly are we saying different things?

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

Its a rubbish hypothetical because each instance is different.

If Ospreys owners had lent them the money and they didn't repay it would they strip them clean and make it harder for them to generate income?

In Munster case its in the IRFUs best interests to have them strong

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

What are you talking about?

marty2086 wrote:Im pointing out that you claim to be a business owner but don't know some of the basics of dealing with debt

I know ALL aspects of dealing with debt. That is why I am at a bemusement with Munster's situation.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Im pointing out that you claim to be a business owner but don't know some of the basics of dealing with debt

I know ALL aspects of dealing with debt. That is why I am at a bemusement with Munster's situation.

Obviously not when you don't know how administration and debt collecting works

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

You mean if Ospreys owed €9m on a €40m stadium that they co-owned with the WRU

And if they had to cut their senior squad from 51 to 41, employed different coaches and reduced their spending on players, and could show how they could repay the amount over a longer period of time with a substantial amount of the debt repaid within the next 3-4 years.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Im pointing out that you claim to be a business owner but don't know some of the basics of dealing with debt

I know ALL aspects of dealing with debt. That is why I am at a bemusement with Munster's situation.

Obviously not when you don't know how administration and debt collecting works

Nail on head.

marty2086 wrote:Obviously not when you don't know how administration and debt collecting works

Marty, stop trying to be clever, you are turning this into an argument for fear of losing the internet. It's OK I am not looking for one upmanship.

Look, does the debt belong to Munster or the IRFU ?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Obviously not when you don't know how administration and debt collecting works

Marty, stop trying to be clever, you are turning this into an argument for fear of losing the internet. It's OK I am not looking for one upmanship.

Look, does the debt belong to Munster or the IRFU ?

And my point is proven

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

edit: Leinster is similar to Munster.

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

1) The Ospreys are a private business and, if they were a successful business, they would be able to cover the debt eventually. Or, like Sarries, continue trading while mounting up bad debt.

2) The organisation Ospreys owe money to is their owners, like Sarries, and so wouldn't have an issue with changing the repayment scheme.

Questions for you; how many Regions are in debt? What is that debt? Who are they in debt to?

Thanks

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

Thank you very much Sin.

This is all I was after. Certain member on here need to grow up and get a life.


So the debt is the IRFU's. They own Munster. Thus the league is unfair because some teams can ride the wave of the international teams endeavours, and other cannot.

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

edit: Leinster is similar to Munster.

Directorship does not necessarily equate to ownership.

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

Thank you very much Sin.

This is all I was after. Certain member on here need to grow up and get a life.


So the debt is the IRFU's. They own Munster. Thus the league is unfair because some teams can ride the wave of the international teams endeavours, and other cannot.

Errmm no

Its at the behest of any owner to put in and deal with what they see fit, the owners of any teams can put in money

The IRFU put money into all the provinces, the Scottish teams are owned by the SRU

So I fail to see how you get the unfair comment, bitterness maybe?

Apologies Sin this is the quote I was going by

“The issue is, what are they going to get in return,” Browne shrugs. “The shareholders in each branch are the clubs, that’s the way it is. In France, someone comes in and buys the club — as in the players, the brand, the physical facilities, the whole shooting match. Gloucester, for instance, has just been sold by the Walkinshaws for around £12m, and a new owner, Martin St Quinton, has bought the controlling shares.

“Now compare that to Munster: Thomond Park is owned by the clubs and by the branch. You can’t sell that. The players are owned and controlled by the IRFU, the revenue streams aren’t sufficient to cover the costs of running the professional game — so whoever is going to invest in professional rugby in Ireland is essentially writing cheques for €1m and continue doing that until they get bored.

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

Thank you very much Sin.

This is all I was after. Certain member on here need to grow up and get a life.


So the debt is the IRFU's. They own Munster. Thus the league is unfair because some teams can ride the wave of the international teams endeavours, and other cannot.

Your logic is flawed.  To whom is the IRFU indebted?  

If what you are trying to claim is that Munster and IRFU are one and the same then there is no debt since the IRFU used its own funds along with Govt support to build the stadium. Thus by your logic, Munster is not in debt at all, and has no advantage.

He seems to be twisting himself in knots to say Munster and the IRFU are bad

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

edit: Leinster is similar to Munster.

Directorship does not necessarily equate to ownership.  

I know, but you would expect to see some representation of the ownership on the board of directors. The Reg. office is also IRFU, Lansdowne Rd (and not some accountants/solitors). Accounts are not being filed either for Munster or Leinster which you would expect if they were an independent body.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

edit: Leinster is similar to Munster.

Directorship does not necessarily equate to ownership.  

I know, but you would expect to see some representation of the ownership on the board of directors. The Reg. office is also IRFU, Lansdowne Rd (and not some accountants/solitors). Accounts are not being filed either for Munster or Leinster which you would expect if they were an independent body.

Sure we always knew Leinster and the IRFU were the same thing

Munchkin wrote:

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

1) The Ospreys are a private business and, if they were a successful business, they would be able to cover the debt eventually. Or, like Sarries, continue trading while mounting up bad debt.

2) The organisation Ospreys owe money to is their owners, like Sarries, and so wouldn't have an issue with changing the repayment scheme.

Questions for you; how many Regions are in debt? What is that debt? Who are they in debt to?

Thanks

You haven't answered the questions at all. The Ospreys would borrow that level of money from banks not their owners. So have a rethink.

As for your question, have a look on Companies House or look at their accounts if you're after that info.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You mean except all the teams?

You really don't know that all unions provide funds to all their teams?

Well who is correct you or Sin ?

I am! Just checked who owns what.

Registered address of Munster is IRFU, Lansdowne Rd.
Directors are: Philip Brown and Conor O'Brien (who I think is the IRFU's accountant). No locals.

Ulster is different: Its reg. address is Kinspan and its directors are local. Philip Browne is not a director.

edit: Leinster is similar to Munster.

Directorship does not necessarily equate to ownership.  

I know, but you would expect to see some representation of the ownership on the board of directors. The Reg. office is also IRFU, Lansdowne Rd (and not some accountants/solitors). Accounts are not being filed either for Munster or Leinster which you would expect if they were an independent body.

Not necessarily. Depends on the corporate structure of how the branches were set up. I sit on a board of a company with seven directors. None of us are owners of the company. It has separate members who own it.

The IRFU may well have some ownership of the Branch - I don't know.

marty/pot hale, honestly, what is the matter with the two of you ? Can you not debate with sinking to these childish levels ?

I am not trying to portray anyone as the devil here, what I am asking is, as I have done all through this thread, is that is there any debt at all ? If Munster are owned by the IRFU and it's the IRFU's money, then there is no debt. There is no if or buts about it. Unless the money was borrowed from an entirely different organisation then if you believe marty, then it is Munsters debt, but if you believe Sin é, then it's the IRFU's debt. It's as simple as that.

Now the issue I have, if it's all the IRFU's money, then it makes the league unfair, as it would if it was the Scottish sides and the SRU's money. This would supply us with concrete evidence that the league is unfair, as who are the privately owned clubs competing against ? Other clubs ? or other countries ?

Who is being childish? You are the one who can't grasp it all

So what do you suggest owners do? Sit back and let businesses do their thing and never put money into them?

You do realise that every owner of every team in the league has done it at some point in some form or other?

Dai Llewod wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

1) The Ospreys are a private business and, if they were a successful business, they would be able to cover the debt eventually. Or, like Sarries, continue trading while mounting up bad debt.

2) The organisation Ospreys owe money to is their owners, like Sarries, and so wouldn't have an issue with changing the repayment scheme.

Questions for you; how many Regions are in debt? What is that debt? Who are they in debt to?

Thanks

You haven't answered the questions at all. The Ospreys would borrow that level of money from banks not their owners. So have a rethink.

As for your question, have a look on Companies House or look at their accounts if you're after that info.

Your hypothesis is not comparable. State what the 9m is for, what guarantees are in place, the interest terms on the loan, what assets are involved, the period of repayment, the current value of the asset. Then state what changes have been made to operating finances, what changes have been made to player salary bill, the income that the club expects to receive over the next five years, etc.

Dai Llewod wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

1) The Ospreys are a private business and, if they were a successful business, they would be able to cover the debt eventually. Or, like Sarries, continue trading while mounting up bad debt.

2) The organisation Ospreys owe money to is their owners, like Sarries, and so wouldn't have an issue with changing the repayment scheme.

Questions for you; how many Regions are in debt? What is that debt? Who are they in debt to?

Thanks

You haven't answered the questions at all. The Ospreys would borrow that level of money from banks not their owners. So have a rethink.

As for your question, have a look on Companies House or look at their accounts if you're after that info.

I answered your questions quite clearly. Comprehension?

So you must have proof that it is the Banks that the Ospreys borrow money from? Good, you can show me the accounts, or at least an editorial.

I'm not checking Company House (something Chunky would always refer to in order to squirm out of an argument...). You know the Regions have debt, you know that Cardiff, in particular, owe the Pie man millions, and you know that Ospreys had to borrow from WRU when the Euro money stalled.

So, Dai, or whoever you are, do a bit of digging.

marty2086 wrote:

Who is being childish? You are the one who can't grasp it all

So what do you suggest owners do? Sit back and let businesses do their thing and never put money into them?

You do realise that every owner of every team in the league has done it at some point in some form or other?

Oh I can grasp it quite easily.

It is you and Pot Hale who are not grasping it.

Look, I understand every club needs to have money put into it, but the whole ethos of it is not fair. Privately owned clubs can only put in money that they can afford. Union owned clubs can have money from the cash cow that is international rugby. After knowing what members are like on this forum, I will take Sin e 's word on how things work, and in Ireland the IRFU own the teams, except Ulster, which seems very sketchy to say the least. Anyway, we have private clubs competing against whole unions, this is massively unfair, and Dai Llewod is correct when he points this out.

Dai Llewod wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Dai Llewod wrote:This is a very simple hypothetical question that should clear this up once and for all if answered competently:

-If say, The Ospreys owed the equivalent of €9m,
1) would they be able to continue trading normally, having the same calibre squad, employ the same coaches, medics, backroom staff etc and
2) would they be allowed by the organisation that they owed money to - to effectively change their repayment scheme to the same level that Munster have done?

Thanks

1) The Ospreys are a private business and, if they were a successful business, they would be able to cover the debt eventually. Or, like Sarries, continue trading while mounting up bad debt.

2) The organisation Ospreys owe money to is their owners, like Sarries, and so wouldn't have an issue with changing the repayment scheme.

Questions for you; how many Regions are in debt? What is that debt? Who are they in debt to?

Thanks

You haven't answered the questions at all. The Ospreys would borrow that level of money from banks not their owners. So have a rethink.

As for your question, have a look on Companies House or look at their accounts if you're after that info.

How do you know who Ospreys would borrow from?

If they had a choice between their owners and banks why wouldn't they get it from their owners?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Who is being childish? You are the one who can't grasp it all

So what do you suggest owners do? Sit back and let businesses do their thing and never put money into them?

You do realise that every owner of every team in the league has done it at some point in some form or other?

Oh I can grasp it quite easily.

It is you and Pot Hale who are not grasping it.

Look, I understand every club needs to have money put into it, but the whole ethos of it is not fair. Privately owned clubs can only put in money that they can afford. Union owned clubs can have money from the cash cow that is international rugby. After knowing what members are like on this forum, I will take Sin e 's word on how things work, and in Ireland the IRFU own the teams, except Ulster, which seems very sketchy to say the least. Anyway, we have private clubs competing against whole unions, this is massively unfair, and Dai Llewod is correct when he points this out.

No you really don't get it

Owners can put in as much capital as they have. See Mourad as a prime example

Your problem is you think the IRFU have deeper pockets

You see private owners as some corner shop owner who has a few grand in savings rather than multi millionaires

marty2086 wrote:If they had a choice between their owners and banks why wouldn't they get it from their owners?

If their owners could afford it. But even then, the owners cannot compete with a whole country.

LordDowlais wrote:marty/pot hale, honestly, what is the matter with the two of  you ? Can you not debate with sinking to these childish levels ?

I am not trying to portray anyone as the devil here, what I am asking is, as I have done all through this thread, is that is there any debt at all ? If Munster are owned by the IRFU and it's the IRFU's money, then there is no debt. There is no if or buts about it. Unless the money was borrowed from an entirely different organisation then if you believe marty, then it is Munsters debt, but if you believe Sin é, then it's the IRFU's debt. It's as simple as that.

Now the issue I have, if it's all the IRFU's money, then it makes the league unfair, as it would if it was the Scottish sides and the SRU's money. This would supply us with concrete evidence that the league is unfair, as who are the privately owned clubs competing against ? Other clubs ? or other countries ?

What childish levels are you referring to?

The privately owned clubs receive money/support from the WRU. So do the other clubs in the league from their unions.

Scarlets: Bank Overdraft and longterm loans for 2015: £12,654,426.
Ospreys: Bank Overdraft and longterm loans for 2015: £5,247,340.
Blues: Bank Overdraft and longterm loans for 2015: £1,542,497
Dragons: Bank Overdraft and longterm loans for 2015: £1,448,992

Pot Hale wrote:The privately owned clubs receive money/support from the WRU. So do the other clubs in the league from their unions.

Not in Wales they don't. The WRU pay 60% towards the players they use for team Wales, then that's it.

The childish bit is when marty resorts to comments like these and you agree with him:-

"He seems to be twisting himself in knots to say Munster and the IRFU are bad"

LordDowlais wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:The privately owned clubs receive money/support from the WRU. So do the other clubs in the league from their unions.

Not in Wales they don't. The WRU pay 60% towards the players they use for team Wales, then that's it.

The childish bit is when marty resorts to comments like these and you agree with him:-

"He seems to be twisting himself in knots to say Munster and the IRFU are bad"

I didn't agree with that comment at all, I made no comment on that post. Check your facts, LD.