Interesting article about wage spend

First topic message reminder :

Really puts in perspective, how tough it is for some Pro14 teams to keep up with others in terms of paying for their squads, and being able to pay for quality overseas players.

While the PRO14 has no official salary caps, the four Irish provinces player cost amount to roughly £7 million, which is on par with the English Premiership’s cap.

Welsh and Scottish teams operate on less again. The SRU have been quoted as stating that Edinburgh Rugby has a player budget of £4.8m, while Glasgow Warriors operates on approximately £5.1 million.

The Welsh regions have a budget in and around the £5 million mark, varying slightly on each region.

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/top14s-massive-salary-cap-now-dwarfs-that-of-the-premiership-confirmed/

The article does nothing very much for the conversation about compensation in the game.

I think we all would genuinely be interested in how much it costs to keep professional squads together. Not that we are ever likely to get an answer, mind you. If, somehow, we were, then the first question to ask is what basis you'd want to make the comparison.

You could, for instance, look at how much it costs to all parties to contract and keep all players with a club, region, province etc. Alternatively, you could look at what players actually pocket. Different tax rates, and cost of living, can have a big impact on what players put in the bank. It's easy to imagine a situation when a player might be given a bigger gross offer than his current contract but it is unattractive, as it nets him less.

Still, that wouldn't necessarily tell us everything about how much it takes to keep a top team together. Players might take less to be part of a top club, to have a chance of winning something. I can't help wondering whether the revolving doors at Leicester in recent seasons mean they have to pay more for players now because they aren't the automatic draw they once were.

TJ: ‘Blues spend is similar to Edinburgh’s’. So what are their spends exactly, if you know that they are similar?!

TJ you say there’s not much difference between all of the sides then you say they range from £4.5m to 6.5m. That just highlights that there is a big difference. And I’m not convinced that £6.5 is the upper limit in our league. But let’s just look at 4.5 and 6.5. That’s a 45% difference between top and bottom. How is that ‘similar’. That extra £2m can get you perhaps 4 very good players who earn around £500k. Or perhaps 8 very decent players at the £250k level. That’s a big difference between top and bottom. So, with respect, I disagree that there is not much difference between salary spends. That’s not to say I’m whingeing about it. The challenge for the teams at the bottom to do more to boost their budgets. But let’s not pretend that the spends are similar.

I think I could summarise what I have learned from the posts so far; nobody really has a clue how wages between the Pro14 and Gallagher Premiership compare.

My question is; who cares?

Exiledinborders wrote:I think I could summarise what I have learned from the posts so far; nobody really has a clue how wages between the Pro14 and Gallagher Premiership compare.

My question is; who cares?  

Some of the posters on here and elsewhere, obvs.

The Oracle - compared to France or England where the top teams spend several times as much its minimal. I can't be bothered looking it up now but were racing and toulon not in the 30 m area and the lowest teams more comparable to the Pro 14 teams? Or England where several terms cheat the salery cap and others cannot get near it?

2 teams cheated the cap. And don't now.

You think?

TJ
I saw the stats for the French teams a few weeks back. Stade spend most on 34m euro. Perpignan on least at 16m euro.

Yup I think tj. But say you're correct who were the several teams though to have breached the cap a few years ago?

Rugby Fan wrote:The article does nothing very much for the conversation about compensation in the game.

I think we all would genuinely be interested in how much it costs to keep professional squads together. Not that we are ever likely to get an answer, mind you. If, somehow, we were, then the first question to ask is what basis you'd want to make the comparison.

You could, for instance, look at how much it costs to all parties to contract and keep all players with a club, region, province etc. Alternatively, you could look at what players actually pocket. Different tax rates, and cost of living, can have a big impact on what players put in the bank. It's easy to imagine a situation when a player might be given a bigger gross offer than his current contract but it is unattractive, as it nets him less.

Still, that wouldn't necessarily tell us everything about how much it takes to keep a top team together. Players might take less to be part of a top club, to have a chance of winning something. I can't help wondering whether the revolving doors at Leicester in recent seasons mean they have to pay more for players now because they aren't  the automatic draw they once were.

Ben Kay was talking about the challenges of the salary cap on this weeks RugbyPod and the work of Ged Glynn at Leicester. When you look at what is included in the salary cap in the Premiership it

Salary, wage, fee, remuneration etc.
Bonus (match, win, year-end etc.)
National insurance
Loan (not paid back in full before end of SCY loan was made).
Child support / maintenance /school fees
Accommodation or holiday cost
Pension (incl. annuities)
Image Rights payments
Payment in connection with promotional, media or endorsement work
Payment for off-field activities for or on behalf of club
Signing on fee, transfer payment, relocation allowance or payment linked to transfer
Accommodation, holidays, cars, match tickets (other than 4 per match), clothing (other than training kit, official club blazers and other club wear), travel, membership fees, food and drink (other than at matches and training)
Payment in kind a player would not have received were not for his involvement with a Club
Redundancy/Compromise etc.
Agent Fees plus VAT & NI
Any 3rd Party & Connected Party (e.g. sponsor) payment unless demonstrated separate

It highlights the challenge a club has to stay within the salary cap especially when it's not as simple as starting every season with all your contracts and salaries in place and numbers crunched, every game brings with it bonuses, each payment being taxed and then maybe media work and god knows what else.

Those calling for one in the Pro14 really don't have a clue what they are talking about, especially when they talk of level playing fields. Different tax and pension systems mean that teams in different countries would have less actual salary to work with. It wasn't that long ago RoI had tax breaks for sport stars that gave the 3 southern provinces a huge advantage in keeping their top players, these kind of situations would fall outside of a salary cap but would give a club an advantage that one in another country simply doesn't have

Standulstermen wrote:TJ
I saw the stats for the French teams a few weeks back. Stade spend most on 34m euro. Perpignan on least at 16m euro.

NO. NO. NO. NO.

Time and time again this is misunderstood.

The salary cap is 11m Euro in France for goodness sake. Why is it mostly Irish rugby fans who peddle this "French spend 30m Euros on players" nonsense?

It's getting embarrassng now.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup I think tj. But say you're correct who were the several teams though to have breached the cap a few years ago?

Perpingan had several players contracts suspended. I think someone else got relegated for it in the second tier.
How strongly its really policed is debatable, but at theres closer scrutiny than in the Jeff where the various allegations have been delat with entirely behind closed doors and to my memory no sanctions ever imposed (as per the joke of ametuerism before they finaly gave up pretending).

Certainly if the clubs were spending 30 million euro on player wages there would be a lot more collapsing than there currently are.

marty2086 wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:The article does nothing very much for the conversation about compensation in the game.

I think we all would genuinely be interested in how much it costs to keep professional squads together. Not that we are ever likely to get an answer, mind you. If, somehow, we were, then the first question to ask is what basis you'd want to make the comparison.

You could, for instance, look at how much it costs to all parties to contract and keep all players with a club, region, province etc. Alternatively, you could look at what players actually pocket. Different tax rates, and cost of living, can have a big impact on what players put in the bank. It's easy to imagine a situation when a player might be given a bigger gross offer than his current contract but it is unattractive, as it nets him less.

Still, that wouldn't necessarily tell us everything about how much it takes to keep a top team together. Players might take less to be part of a top club, to have a chance of winning something. I can't help wondering whether the revolving doors at Leicester in recent seasons mean they have to pay more for players now because they aren't  the automatic draw they once were.

Ben Kay was talking about the challenges of the salary cap on this weeks RugbyPod and the work of Ged Glynn at Leicester. When you look at what is included in the salary cap in the Premiership it

Salary, wage, fee, remuneration etc.
Bonus (match, win, year-end etc.)
National insurance
Loan (not paid back in full before end of SCY loan was made).
Child support / maintenance /school fees
Accommodation or holiday cost
Pension (incl. annuities)
Image Rights payments
Payment in connection with promotional, media or endorsement work
Payment for off-field activities for or on behalf of club
Signing on fee, transfer payment, relocation allowance or payment linked to transfer
Accommodation, holidays, cars, match tickets (other than 4 per match), clothing (other than training kit, official club blazers and other club wear), travel, membership fees, food and drink (other than at matches and training)
Payment in kind a player would not have received were not for his involvement with a Club
Redundancy/Compromise etc.
Agent Fees plus VAT & NI
Any 3rd Party & Connected Party (e.g. sponsor) payment unless demonstrated separate

It highlights the challenge a club has to stay within the salary cap especially when it's not as simple as starting every season with all your contracts and salaries in place and numbers crunched, every game brings with it bonuses, each payment being taxed and then maybe media work and god knows what else.

Those calling for one in the Pro14 really don't have a clue what they are talking about, especially when they talk of level playing fields. Different tax and pension systems mean that teams in different countries would have less actual salary to work with. It wasn't that long ago RoI had tax breaks for sport stars that gave the 3 southern provinces a huge advantage in keeping their top players, these kind of situations would fall outside of a salary cap but would give a club an advantage that one in another country simply doesn't have

As an aside, the Sportsperson Tax Relief Act was brought in mainly for jockeys after strong lobbying from racing industry to Charlie McCreevy in 1998. The Act was passed in 2002 with McCreevy acknowledging a lot of rugby players would miss out as they were playing in UK.   The Act is still law for any players who pay tax to Irish Revenue and PAYE tax credits are allocated and PAYE tax recalculated at the end of the player’s career based on best ten from a max of 14 year’s tax paid.  PRSI and USC are not rebated nor is any tax paid on earnings for sponsorships, appearance fees, image rights, etc

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:TJ
I saw the stats for the French teams a few weeks back. Stade spend most on 34m euro. Perpignan on least at 16m euro.

NO. NO. NO. NO.

Time and time again this is misunderstood.

The salary cap is 11m Euro in France for goodness sake. Why is it mostly Irish rugby fans who peddle this "French spend 30m Euros on players" nonsense?

It's getting embarrassng now.

11M Euro.  A nice packet all the same huh?  

So go ahead, explain what happens to the other 24M or so.  Is it spent in a year and how is it spent?

Now the Irish bit.  The Irish respond mostly with nonsense because they, with all their unbalanced success levels in Europe against the odds, are the Nation most attacked by the rest of our European pals for the system we use that brings it about (attacked with nonsense, in other words )  
We get it in the neck during Pro14 seasons (crooked refs and over-done player rotation), and we got it in the neck during the BIG drawma episode when the European element of Rugby was being renegotiated/hijacked.

Anyway.... let's all agree that 11M is a bigger number than 5M or indeed 7M.  We'll all agree on the maths of that, yes?

BTW...are bonuses for performance and/or League position done inside the CAP or outside it?  And if paid outside and exclusive from an official cap, are those bonuses policed?  That is to say: is there an agreed list of what team bonuses can be given for and is there a policing unit to ensure no team abuses bonuses to shore up salaries?

Pot Hale wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:The article does nothing very much for the conversation about compensation in the game.

I think we all would genuinely be interested in how much it costs to keep professional squads together. Not that we are ever likely to get an answer, mind you. If, somehow, we were, then the first question to ask is what basis you'd want to make the comparison.

You could, for instance, look at how much it costs to all parties to contract and keep all players with a club, region, province etc. Alternatively, you could look at what players actually pocket. Different tax rates, and cost of living, can have a big impact on what players put in the bank. It's easy to imagine a situation when a player might be given a bigger gross offer than his current contract but it is unattractive, as it nets him less.

Still, that wouldn't necessarily tell us everything about how much it takes to keep a top team together. Players might take less to be part of a top club, to have a chance of winning something. I can't help wondering whether the revolving doors at Leicester in recent seasons mean they have to pay more for players now because they aren't  the automatic draw they once were.

Ben Kay was talking about the challenges of the salary cap on this weeks RugbyPod and the work of Ged Glynn at Leicester. When you look at what is included in the salary cap in the Premiership it

Salary, wage, fee, remuneration etc.
Bonus (match, win, year-end etc.)
National insurance
Loan (not paid back in full before end of SCY loan was made).
Child support / maintenance /school fees
Accommodation or holiday cost
Pension (incl. annuities)
Image Rights payments
Payment in connection with promotional, media or endorsement work
Payment for off-field activities for or on behalf of club
Signing on fee, transfer payment, relocation allowance or payment linked to transfer
Accommodation, holidays, cars, match tickets (other than 4 per match), clothing (other than training kit, official club blazers and other club wear), travel, membership fees, food and drink (other than at matches and training)
Payment in kind a player would not have received were not for his involvement with a Club
Redundancy/Compromise etc.
Agent Fees plus VAT & NI
Any 3rd Party & Connected Party (e.g. sponsor) payment unless demonstrated separate

It highlights the challenge a club has to stay within the salary cap especially when it's not as simple as starting every season with all your contracts and salaries in place and numbers crunched, every game brings with it bonuses, each payment being taxed and then maybe media work and god knows what else.

Those calling for one in the Pro14 really don't have a clue what they are talking about, especially when they talk of level playing fields. Different tax and pension systems mean that teams in different countries would have less actual salary to work with. It wasn't that long ago RoI had tax breaks for sport stars that gave the 3 southern provinces a huge advantage in keeping their top players, these kind of situations would fall outside of a salary cap but would give a club an advantage that one in another country simply doesn't have

As an aside, the Sportsperson Tax Relief Act was brought in mainly for jockeys after strong lobbying from racing industry to Charlie McCreevy in 1998. The Act was passed in 2002 with McCreevy acknowledging a lot of rugby players would miss out as they were playing in UK.   The Act is still law for any players who pay tax to Irish Revenue and PAYE tax credits are allocated and PAYE tax recalculated at the end of the player’s career based on best ten from a max of 14 year’s tax paid.  PRSI and USC are not rebated nor is any tax paid on earnings for sponsorships, appearance fees, image rights, etc

Was it not amended a number of years ago to extend to earnings within the EEA? So anyone whose biggest earning years were in France or England for example would get the benefits from that?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:TJ
I saw the stats for the French teams a few weeks back. Stade spend most on 34m euro. Perpignan on least at 16m euro.

NO. NO. NO. NO.

Time and time again this is misunderstood.

The salary cap is 11m Euro in France for goodness sake. Why is it mostly Irish rugby fans who peddle this "French spend 30m Euros on players" nonsense?

It's getting embarrassng now.

Was it not TJ who brought in that? And you left out youth players are exempt from the cap, that wage spend cant exceed 50% of turnover, so a small club is handcuffed while the bigger clubs can hit the ceiling

SecretFly wrote:

So go ahead, explain what happens to the other 24M or so.  Is it spent in a year and how is it spent?

From the budget, the only guaranteed income is the tv money / club sponsors and the council money. Everything else can waver slightly. The breakdown of Toulon's team budget is as follows:

Ticket income: 10 million
Private sponsors: 11.2 million
Bar and food sales: 4.8 million
Government grants: 2.9 million
TV rights: 3 million
Equipment supplier: 1 million
International release allowances: 180,000
Insurance: 800 000
Other competition income / prize money depending on European performance: 300,000 - 1 million

That is their "30 million" right there ^. That's what the figure represents. NOT SALARY SPEND. Now of that, approximately 9 million to 10 million will go on wages at the top clubs.

The rest of it is pumped into the ground staff, the equipment, the bar staff, the team management, running the hotel next to the ground, the upkeep of the shop, the upkeep of the stadium, travel costs, etc

If you want to argue that these figures don't add up then go ahead. vAs Molurad Boudjellal has gone on record to say "The boss of the DNACG moved in person to Toulon for two days and he had nothing negative to say about our financial management."

At the end of it all - Toulon make a profit of about 1.5m Euros these days I believe.

Good day to you.

How come.you want to include the additional money sexton gets but want to ignore the french?

No 7&1/2 wrote:How come.you want to include the additional money sexton gets but want to ignore the french?

What am I ignoring?

Maybe I've just misunderstood you with the French are you wanting.to include all the additional add ons the players get from outside the club's or just the basic wage from the club?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Maybe I've just misunderstood you with the French are you wanting.to include all the additional add ons the players get from outside the club's or just the basic wage from the club?

I include what the DCNAG include. "French addons" aren't salary spend. Because it's not a fixed payment. It's a business initiative. If nobody buys a branded shirt from the club shop, then the player doesn't get paid a single extra penny. That's not a salary spend. That's why it doesn't get included in official audit figures.

Sexton's extra $$$ is a guaranteed top up. - a sweetener included into his yearly salary figure paid by a wealthy individual.

Its disingenuous then. You know players are getting paid more but choose to turn a blind eye. Again it's aimed primarily at the Irish for whatever reason.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Maybe I've just misunderstood you with the French are you wanting.to include all the additional add ons the players get from outside the club's or just the basic wage from the club?

I include what the DCNAG include. "French addons" aren't salary spend. Because it's not a fixed payment. It's a business initiative. If nobody buys a branded shirt from the club shop, then the player doesn't get paid a single extra penny. That's not a salary spend. That's why it doesn't get included in official audit figures.

Sexton's extra $$$ is a guaranteed top up. - a sweetener included into his yearly salary figure paid by a wealthy individual.

Except it's not as you've already been told, it's quite ironic that you say Irish posters on here try to make claims about the French spending then you come off with this stuff

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

marty2086 wrote:

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

Ah right. The Irish Times must have got it wrong then

Topping-up sponsorship is the IRFU’s main weapon. This is not just Denis O’Brien, in Sexton’s case, and Bank of Ireland, for Heaslip; there are plenty of quiet Irish millionaires who love their rugby......the cost of having to bring Sexton home is over €700,000 (shared on the Leinster and IRFU payroll) and that’s before the O’Brien sweetener.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irfu-strategy-may-backfire-when-schmidt-bids-farewell-1.3279067

Is a Cap designated to only infer the Basic Official Salary of the combined squad of players?

Do players get bonuses?  (From Club budgets - not linked to branded tee-shirt buying)

If bonuses are given, what are they given for?

If bonuses are given, who polices what they are given for? (ie. one club might decide to give bonuses for games won, for away games won, for training hard enough to reach stated training markers, for being nice to tea ladies)

Do bonuses have to be declared?

Can players have guaranteed bonuses written into contracts that do not form part of their declared official Salary?

Are any free homes, holidays, vehicles included in Cap and declared under Cap controls?


We are trying to understand exactly What Players may get paid, on an annual basis (not linked to branded tee-shirt buying) that might possibly be above and beyond any controlling Cap.

We are trying to determine if the Offical Cap is just a smokescreen to hide annual top ups for players that if declared would exceed said Cap.

We are trying to look at truth - what players get paid in real terms on a yearly basis V declared and published caps.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Its disingenuous then. You know players are getting paid more but choose to turn a blind eye. Again it's aimed primarily at the Irish for whatever reason.

Again, I can't stop you thinking that something is disingenuous if that's your perrogative. I'm just reporting it exactly as the official financial audit organisation in French rugby reports it.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

Ah right. The Irish Times must have got it wrong then

Topping-up sponsorship is the IRFU’s main weapon. This is not just Denis O’Brien, in Sexton’s case, and Bank of Ireland, for Heaslip; there are plenty of quiet Irish millionaires who love their rugby......the cost of having to bring Sexton home is over €700,000 (shared on the Leinster and IRFU payroll) and that’s before the O’Brien sweetener.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irfu-strategy-may-backfire-when-schmidt-bids-farewell-1.3279067

Guess who owns Topaz?

I like how you somehow missed all the articles from the Irish Times that state it too

The Irish Times has learned that the Irish and Lions outhalf has been signed up as an ambassador for Topaz, the O’Brien- owned Irish petroleum retail chain.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/sexton-to-earn-up-to-800-000-on-return-to-leinster-1.1955334

But if you want to have a discussion rugby fan on what players are paid you're choosing to ignore a percentage for what reason? It's why wage caps are so murky. Here's 500 quid a week. Oh and have this free house completely unconnected to your wage.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Maybe I've just misunderstood you with the French are you wanting.to include all the additional add ons the players get from outside the club's or just the basic wage from the club?

I include what the DCNAG include. "French addons" aren't salary spend. Because it's not a fixed payment. It's a business initiative. If nobody buys a branded shirt from the club shop, then the player doesn't get paid a single extra penny. That's not a salary spend. That's why it doesn't get included in official audit figures.

Sexton's extra $$$ is a guaranteed top up. - a sweetener included into his yearly salary figure paid by a wealthy individual.

Except it's not as you've already been told, it's quite ironic that you say Irish posters on here try to make claims about the French spending then you come off with this stuff

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

It's absolutely hilarious that people think Sexton is getting this "top up" out of the goodness of a wealthy individuals heart. As if he hasn't had to appear in multiple adds, wear the logo on his clothes etc etc. Sexton is a big name in Ireland, I'm sure there were other companies other than topaz lining up to get him as a brand ambassador.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

Ah right. The Irish Times must have got it wrong then

Topping-up sponsorship is the IRFU’s main weapon. This is not just Denis O’Brien, in Sexton’s case, and Bank of Ireland, for Heaslip; there are plenty of quiet Irish millionaires who love their rugby......the cost of having to bring Sexton home is over €700,000 (shared on the Leinster and IRFU payroll) and that’s before the O’Brien sweetener.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irfu-strategy-may-backfire-when-schmidt-bids-farewell-1.3279067

Guess who owns Topaz?

Really not seeing your point here. Rich man pays somebody through a company still equals rich man paying somebody.

I think O'Brien might also own Haiti if rumours are true. The man is pretty ambitious in the megalomania real-estate bizz ...allegedly.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:
It's absolutely hilarious that people think Sexton is getting this "top up" out of the goodness of a wealthy individuals heart.

Honestly? After all the details provided to you - you still have this opinion?

Staggering.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:
It's absolutely hilarious that people think Sexton is getting this "top up" out of the goodness of a wealthy individuals heart.

 

Honestly? After all the details provided to you - you still have this opinion?

Staggering.

You use the Irish Times as your source... Forgive me for not accepting anything they provide. I don't think Denis obrien would ever throw money around like this for the sake of it. There is always something in it for him, whether it's for tax breaks or to further promote his companies brand.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sexton earns money as a brand for Topaz, they aren't a wealthy individual, they are a company. Seems getting the facts right aren't something you are too keen on yourself

Ah right. The Irish Times must have got it wrong then

Topping-up sponsorship is the IRFU’s main weapon. This is not just Denis O’Brien, in Sexton’s case, and Bank of Ireland, for Heaslip; there are plenty of quiet Irish millionaires who love their rugby......the cost of having to bring Sexton home is over €700,000 (shared on the Leinster and IRFU payroll) and that’s before the O’Brien sweetener.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irfu-strategy-may-backfire-when-schmidt-bids-farewell-1.3279067

Guess who owns Topaz?

Really not seeing your point here. Rich man pays somebody through a company still equals rich man paying somebody.

Because that's not the case since he is being paid to fulfil a role. He's getting paid by a company to do a job, it's funny how you apply different logic to the Irish than you do to others

The boss of Topaz moved in person to Dublin for a few years and he had nothing negative to say about Leinster's financial management

marty2086 wrote:

Because that's not the case since he is being paid to fulfil a role. He's getting paid by a company to do a job, it's funny how you apply different logic to the Irish than you do to others

Can you see how that is a fixed term amount, agreed beforehand......as opposed to being paid potential profits of something that may or may not sell?

If you cannot see this, then you are incapable of contributing to this discussion further.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:


You use the Irish Times as your source... Forgive me for not accepting anything they provide. I don't think Denis obrien would ever throw money around like this for the sake of it. There is always something in it for him, whether it's for tax breaks or to further promote his companies brand.

Funny how all the articles I post are dismissed as "not acceptable".

As for your second point - that's what some ignorants say about benefactors of the game in the likes of England, France and Wales - and time and time again they are proved wrong.

Houses, holidays, vehicles? What's the score?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Because that's not the case since he is being paid to fulfil a role. He's getting paid by a company to do a job, it's funny how you apply different logic to the Irish than you do to others

Can you see how that is a fixed term amount, agreed beforehand......as opposed to being paid potential profits of something that may or may not sell?

If you cannot see this, then you are incapable of contributing to this discussion further.

Excuse me? What gives you the right to decide who can and cannot contribute?

Who said anything about profit sharing?

marty2086 wrote:

Excuse me? What gives you the right to decide who can and cannot contribute?

me

Who said anything about profit sharing?

me

Ans what exactly has profit sharing got to do with what was being discussed?

marty2086 wrote:Ans what exactly has profit sharing got to do with what was being discussed?

French player add ons Marty. Keep up.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Ans what exactly has profit sharing got to do with what was being discussed?

French player add ons Marty. Keep up.

Except we were talking about Sexton so seems its you who needs to keep up

Any other annual extra payments to French players above and beyond the Cap and above the branded tee-shirt sales numbers?

SecretFly wrote:Any other annual extra payments to French players above and beyond the Cap and above the branded tee-shirt sales numbers?

All relevant to Johnny Sextons deal with Topaz apparently...Keep up Fly

This is painful

RugbyFan100 wrote:This is painful

I'd have thought you were used to made a fool of yourself

RugbyFan100 wrote:This is painful

I know. It's like trying to pull teeth, isn't it. The patient wants the dentist to examine his teeth but he won't sit in the bloody chair!