-
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
I doubt he settled for just his contract, so Raylene's comment about wildly inaccurate could be $6million and her weasle words would be accurate.
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
I doubt he settled for just his contract, so Raylene's comment about wildly inaccurate could be $6million and her weasle words would be accurate.
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
If it was less than his contract he would have gone to court, he's not shown any indication of backing down before this. And with all the cash to fund it, why would he take less?
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
To your point it is possible Folau has had a massive change of heart since this matter went private, but nothing from his actions at the start of the controvery would be consistent who would take 50 cents on the dollar and give up his chance of being a martyr on this one.
-
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
If it was less than his contract he would have gone to court, he's not shown any indication of backing down before this. And with all the cash to fund it, why would he take less?
Of the two parties in this dispute, you could argue Israel is the more erratic. I admit I was surprised when the settlement was announced, as I was under the impression from his words that this wasn't about money at all, it was about religious freedom.
He wanted his day in court, and so did his backers. After all it wasn't just about him and his cash, it was about everyday religious people across the country and indeed the globe.
However, there's a chance that he just wanted to get on with his life. I've heard from people close to this saga that he genuinely wants to play for the Wallabies again, and until recently thought that there was a strong chance he could do that.
Clearly the court case affected his playing prospects, and maybe he just wanted it over with so he can get back on the field. So RA offers to pay out his contract and apologise, he can claim a victory of sorts and get on with his life.
Of course the flipside is that he was intent on fighting the fight until RA caved and offered him $6-8m. But given his initial claim was $14m, it was still a downgrade from what he wanted.
We will never really know how much it was, so all we can do is speculate.
-
@Toddy said in The Folau Factor:
Any chance this can be picked up in the financial statements next year.
Looks like there's quite a bit of variability between years so maybe not.
I have heard the settlement would have been paid by RA's insurer so I doubt we'd see that.
The legal fees should show up in some form, though.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
If it was less than his contract he would have gone to court, he's not shown any indication of backing down before this. And with all the cash to fund it, why would he take less?
Of the two parties in this dispute, you could argue Israel is the more erratic. I admit I was surprised when the settlement was announced, as I was under the impression from his words that this wasn't about money at all, it was about religious freedom.
He wanted his day in court, and so did his backers. After all it wasn't just about him and his cash, it was about everyday religious people across the country and indeed the globe.
However, there's a chance that he just wanted to get on with his life. I've heard from people close to this saga that he genuinely wants to play for the Wallabies again, and until recently thought that there was a strong chance he could do that.
Clearly the court case affected his playing prospects, and maybe he just wanted it over with so he can get back on the field. So RA offers to pay out his contract and apologise, he can claim a victory of sorts and get on with his life.
Of course the flipside is that he was intent on fighting the fight until RA caved and offered him $6-8m. But given his initial claim was $14m, it was still a downgrade from what he wanted.
We will never really know how much it was, so all we can do is speculate.
Sorry why is he considered the eratic one?
ARU took a rash and ultimately stupid decision to virtue signal. And nobody could ave predicted that sort of stupidity -
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
Why rash and stupid?
They have kept their sponsors and rid themselves of a problem.
Costs covered by insurance.
That's what I don't get. (if covered by insurance) it seems some people are just gutted that they didn't get to see Folau go down in flames in court so are saying ARU are namby pambys.
I've never been in a business where the first option was to go to an open court. It was always the last resort
-
@Crucial I very much doubt all the costs will be covered by insurance, even taking into account whatever large (by yours and my standards) excess they had, I expect ARU had to front up with some of thier own cash...or Qantas' cash
-
@taniwharugby said in The Folau Factor:
@Crucial I very much doubt all the costs will be covered by insurance, even taking into account whatever large (by yours and my standards) excess they had, I expect ARU had to front up with some of thier own cash...or Qantas' cash
I would say that the majority of the payout was covered though. I'd also say that the position eventually taken was dictated by the insurer to minimise cost.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Folau Factor:
@Crucial their legal counsel usually try to avoid it getting to court in the first place...even when they do not accept liability and make settlements.
That is exactly what happened here wasn't it. That was mediation they went into the other day, not court.
-
I personally think ARU on a hiding to nothing (not implying not of their own making), but settlement leaves it open that they weren't as convinced as they said in the media it was open and shut case. Even if they were convinced they would win, it was well known they didn't have deep pockets (like they once had) and any long term legal dispute they would struggle to cover.
Everyday this was also played out in the public it made them look worse and a long case, also doesn't help them here either.
In a way I think its the best case scenario for both parties..even if numbers vary -
@Donsteppa said in The Folau Factor:
It will be very interesting to see what competition Folau might turn up in next.
I hear that Toronto mob are offering out plenty of cash. Not sure how SBW beliefs will gel with his though.
Sports requiring athletes to support cultural positions