Launchbury - RFU Knew of Wasps Decline for 5 Years PLUS Administrator Report

[Rossm]

Whilst I understand the need to blame someone & the RFU/PRL are great scapegoats but Wasps Management have to be mostly to blame.

They took a gamble & it didn't pay off.
It could have done & it could have looked like the model for how a modern rugby club should be financed but outside factors meant it crashed & burned.

Should they have taken that gamble? Given the option was Wasps disappearing 10 years ago, then yes, probably.

I note the invitation for players to speak at the DCMS hearing was withdrawn, I wonder why?

Covid crapped on all our planned multiple income streams. It is impossible to guess, but if the pandemic and associated lockdowns didn't happen, would our future have been different? I believe the answer to that is a resounding YES.

[RogerE]

Given that at a time when interest rates were less than 1% to offer a bond at 6% seemed amazing at the time. In hindsight it was ludicrous, but I assume that recommendation came from financial institutions

Like others I can't get my head round how ACL "owned" the stadium, but Wasps "owned" the stadium debt.

That is another thing that RFU must also address as well as the "fit and proper" owner problem.

[baldpaul101]

That is another thing that RFU must also address as well as the "fit and proper" owner problem.

not just the RFU I assume, surely FSA & Fraud office?

[baldpaul101]

The administrator report is shocking.
The club never had a bloody chance.

Does this mean you've seen it BigAd?

[Neils]

The administrator report is shocking.
The club never had a bloody chance.

Does this mean you've seen it BigAd?

It is out but can't find a link (or forgotten it!). It is on SBT for their subscribers but thrown off many moons ago.

[MarleyWasp]

I am presuming this might be the report.

[bigad82]

The administrator report is shocking.
The club never had a bloody chance.

Does this mean you've seen it BigAd?

It is out but can't find a link (or forgotten it!). It is on SBT for their subscribers but thrown off many moons ago.

Yes saw it at work yesterday off somebody on SBT.I have registered this morning but Nick seems to be a sleep at the wheel,a bit like Wasps directors for the past 3 years.

[baldpaul101]

I am presuming this might be the report.

thanks, I, & I guess quite a few on here, will need someone who understand business/legal jargon to explain that

[Neils]

I am presuming this might be the report.

Thanks for that. Some read but much of it duplicated. The bidding process and the creditors list are certainly eye openers. Accepted bidder priced at £15.8m (exc running cost payments) and the bidder (Armstrong's Group?) who wanted it all as a running concern but couldn't get RFU/PRL agreement offered £42m. That just seems bonkers. The chosen bidder certainly got a steal.

I am assuming there has to be further Reports by the Administrator to come.

Sad end.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Reads like a giant snowball of financial ineptitude. Only ever going one way, downhill, and was only ever going to get bigger and bigger.

[westwaleswasp]

Being realistic though does he need to speak for us to understand what’s happened. Obviously there is fine detail and nuance but as I see it it’s a fairly clear process:
1) Identify the need to move from AP and at the same time find a way to secure income streams to be sustainable. The Cov move happens.
2) To drum up interest cash is poured in for top players whilst growing the academy.
3) Covid shuts everything down.
4) Global factors spark huge market uncertainty.
5) Re-financiers beat the retreat.
6) Left dangling with unserviceable debt and a market that provides no options.
The really sad thing is that it’s a model rugby should applaud. I’m also convinced that whilst there may be some mistakes and ineptitude involved in some of it it was all well intentioned. For me Richardson put cash in up front and wanted some back. I’m sure he hoped the club would be in good health when he got it back but to expect him to not want to do the best for himself at the end is a bit unfair.

If he would be bankrupt by it I would agree. Otherwise, if he is still a millionaire he should have taken the hit, and I think guys like Sam Spink, Eliott S and Charlie A would probably disagree with the idea that Derek should have done the best for himself at the club's expense.

[westwaleswasp]

I understand that some people are blaming Derek, but I wonder how it is the CEO, the actual person in charge of running thr company, who was supposed to fix all our problems and was being paid hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to do so has managed to walk away without any blame at all.

I guess I don't expect the CEO to have to be worth the millions Derek is still presumably worth, and frankly, the CEO is an employee.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Being realistic though does he need to speak for us to understand what’s happened. Obviously there is fine detail and nuance but as I see it it’s a fairly clear process:
1) Identify the need to move from AP and at the same time find a way to secure income streams to be sustainable. The Cov move happens.
2) To drum up interest cash is poured in for top players whilst growing the academy.
3) Covid shuts everything down.
4) Global factors spark huge market uncertainty.
5) Re-financiers beat the retreat.
6) Left dangling with unserviceable debt and a market that provides no options.
The really sad thing is that it’s a model rugby should applaud. I’m also convinced that whilst there may be some mistakes and ineptitude involved in some of it it was all well intentioned. For me Richardson put cash in up front and wanted some back. I’m sure he hoped the club would be in good health when he got it back but to expect him to not want to do the best for himself at the end is a bit unfair.

If he would be bankrupt by it I would agree. Otherwise, if he is still a millionaire he should have taken the hit, and I think guys like Sam Spink, Eliott S and Charlie A would probably disagree with the idea that Derek should have done the best for himself at the club's expense.

So your objection was that after saving the club and giving us a decade of glorious rugby he should have just kept spending until he couldn't spend any more?

Is it beyond the realms of possibility that he did exactly that? He has lost more money that most of us will earn in our entire lifetimes and far from all of it is shown in that report.

It feels to me a little like he is being targeted because he was rich, but not rich enough.

[Neils]

I think it is the silence that is stirring people up. Now whether that is for legal reasons we don't know but silence causes all this angst.

[baldpaul101]

Much as Derek should bear responsibility for this, it should be also remembered that he gave us 10 years of "Glorious Rugby" as VV puts it that we wouldn't have got without him.
He took a chance, the question for me is whether when it started going wrong, did he do the right things? If there's a suspicion of anything dodgy, whether good intentioned or not, it needs to come out.
I can't complain when a guy who has spent huge amounts of money keeping the club I love afloat decides enough is enough, but I want to understand how it went wrong.

He owes the fans that I think