A leading figure in the campaign to challenge the existing Welsh Rugby Union leadership has expressed confidence that sufficient backing already exists amongst member clubs to trigger a dramatic Extraordinary General Meeting, featuring a motion to remove the entire board.

The group, which describes itself as a “coalition of the willing”, is demanding the WRU suspend proposals to reduce regional teams from four to three until the decision-making process undergoes independent examination.

Hayley Parsons, who founded GoCompare, one of the UK’s leading price comparison firms, argued that the plan to axe a region and maintain just a single team in west Wales requires independent evaluation, with the union disclosing all relevant data and explaining why it determined that sustaining four regions is now “unsustainable”, even with any new unequal funding arrangement.

OPINION

Additional members of the group include Rob Regan, former chief operating officer at Principality Building Society and Legal and General, alongside technology entrepreneur Glenn Melford-Colegate.

The WRU has signalled it will soon release data – though the level of detail and presentation format remain uncertain – regarding this decision, along with the scoring criteria should the Scarlets and Ospreys choose to participate in a competitive bid process for the single WRU licence allocated to west Wales.

However, the coalition’s stance is that the union cannot cherry-pick what information is disclosed, and that an EGM would effectively provide the clubs with a referendum on whether a region should be eliminated, reports Wales Online.

Regardless of the outcome, even with three clubs, benefactor backing will be essential. There is also the ever-present risk, as witnessed not only in Wales but across the professional game in England in recent years, of another club collapsing financially.

The deadline for submitting a motion for the WRU’s annual general meeting this autumn has now elapsed, so the coalition, which is in discussions with numerous clubs, is concentrating on securing an EGM.

A motion, which, if approved, would result in the current board being required to step down with immediate effect, would not encompass the chief executive of the WRU, Abi Tierney, who, while serving on the board, is an employee of the union and therefore cannot be removed by the clubs.

Under section 62 of the WRU’s articles of association, a no-confidence resolution would need only a simple majority of clubs voting at the EGM to pass. To be quorate, it would require 95 members in attendance.

Proxy and remote electronic voting would be permissible.

For the EGM to proceed, it would first require support from 10% of the 282 member clubs. Should this threshold be met, the union would have 21 days to formally acknowledge the request and schedule the meeting.

This would usually be around a month later. Should the board be removed, a temporary board would need to be created, comprising representatives from the districts – though not those currently serving on the board.

They would not require club approval to bolster their ranks by bringing in external people with commercial expertise.

However, what is being contemplated by the coalition, based on initial legal advice and discussions with club representatives, is another possible motion to change the articles of association, which would require a 75% majority, so that any temporary board would have external members from the outset. This could be voted on at the EGM before the vote of no confidence.

The WRU would be confident of seeing off any no-confidence motion against the entire board. Should the EGM be called, it would lobby hard, making the case for three regions and a commitment to invest £28m in the pathway development of the game over the next five years.

Last year, with lower attendances than projected at international games at the Principality Stadium, the WRU’s original revenue forecast was blown off course by around £6m. If that were to be repeated this autumn – though the Six Nations home games against England and Ireland should sell out – their argument that four regions is financially unsustainable would be amplified.

The governing body has drawn up a shortlist for a new chair. It is understood that a number of potential candidates ruled themselves out due to an expectation of having to endorse the four-to-three strategy.

Should an EGM be called, the WRU is unlikely to pause announcing the new chair, even if there is a possibility that they could be removed along with all other board members.

Swansea Council has also restarted its legal action against the union over its plans for just one region in west Wales, while effectively protecting the Dragons and Cardiff, which they own. Other interested parties may soon join the action.

Ms Parsons said: “We have clubs contacting us and, from those conversations, we are confident that they have more than enough clubs for an extraordinary general meeting. So, we have the numbers now, but we will be looking to put the EGM to the WRU in a few weeks’ time. We have some really impressive people, literally from around the world, contacting us and offering their support free of charge.”

She said the temporary board could involve some of the figures supporting the coalition of the willing, but there is also scope to bring in external advisory board members to support the WRU going forward in sustaining four regions – though she noted that, after a review period of around six months, the conclusion could be that three is the right number.

She said: “So, what we do need is fresh, independent people. I don’t think we could have anyone involved before, as that just wouldn’t work. What we need is the right group of people, and there is a right group of people to do this.

“At no point have I ever said I was going to be putting my name forward for the chair role. I would be involved in the short term, because I think it would be the right thing to do, not because I would want any involvement long term.

“And I think that is quite important, as one of the problems I think you do have in rugby is that some people are in it for their own self-interest. What we are proposing for board members is no salaries or expenses.”

The temporary board would at some point give way to a new permanent board based on three-year terms.

Should an EGM take place and the motion to remove the board fail, she said: “I don’t think there would then be anything that people could do, and we would just sit back and watch our game die over the next five years.”

Yet, if a new direction is taken, there remains time to fully examine the case for maintaining four regions. The WRU plans to have three teams in the United Rugby Championship for the start of the 2028-29 season.

Ms Parsons said: “There is time here to look at generating new revenue lines. If you look at the latest statement [from the WRU on three regions], it is a defeatist attitude. But in that time we could bring in people to secure additional investment and look at things differently.

“We also need to think more about what could be done with the stadium, the hotel, Cardiff Rugby, etc.”

However, even if the board are ousted and the new one looks to support the WRU executive in seeking to drive revenues to maintain four regions, there are no guarantees it will result in a significant uplift.

A social impact rugby bond would require regulatory approval. It would need to appoint a fund manager to raise funds and invest in conventional assets such as shares and bonds.

Investors could forego an element of projected returns for investment into the game.

This could be hypothetical in specific areas, such as the community and women’s game. But to have an impact, the funds under management would have to run into the tens of millions, which, even if achievable, could take years to reach.

Previous WRU regimes considered a sale-and-leaseback of the Principality Stadium and securitisation deals by drawing down capital against future income from rugby matches and other events such as concerts.

However, things like a sale-and-leaseback, while providing a huge upfront sum, would have to be repaid, with a profit margin for the lender(s) over the duration of the arrangement.

The stadium is a valuable asset, although it requires continuous investment. Any sale-and-leaseback would also need approval from Cardiff Council, as it is a shareholder in the WRU subsidiary company that owns and operates the stadium, Principality Stadium Plc.

There is certainly scope, with rugby touching all communities in Wales and rugby clubs also serving as community hubs, to secure more funding for the community game – which could be separated from the governance of the professional game – in the form of grant funding from the Welsh and UK governments.

While the WRU is in receipt of government funding, it could learn from how the Football Association of Wales has, in recent years, secured millions of pounds in funding for the growth and infrastructure of the game, especially at grassroots level. But this will take time and investment.

The coalition of the willing are also exploring the tax benefits of all community clubs acquiring charitable status. But, like their position on the WRU plans, this would need to be challenged and tested.

On the WRU’s decision to publish data, Mr Regan said it had to do so for every scenario assessed.

He added: “Just sharing data to show that one could work with a set of assumptions doesn’t change anything, as it doesn’t answer the question of how do we know that is the only one. While constitutionally they can do this, ultimately they should give the choice to the clubs. So, if they are confident this has support, then give the rugby public (member clubs) their vote.

“So, we continue as planned (EGM). Our interest is to ensure that decisions about the number of pro clubs in Wales, that have distracted so many for so long, sucking energy, focus and money out of the game, are made based on evidence and data and in an open, transparent and engaging way.

“We have been building a long list of people who would be prepared to step in and support an interim transition with a transparency mandate.

“We are looking to maximise breadth of capability for a core group of 8-10 people, with an advisory panel supporting. We have set out principles that this should be short-term, pro bono work with no conflicts.

“We want to plug core gaps in current board capabilities. We want to engage the entire rugby family in creating a credible, capable, values-driven group who bring deep understanding of Wales’s rugby heritage and culture, as well as strong commercial skills. More collaboration, less ego. A genuine desire to listen, learn and build relationships. We imagine a transition and support period of at least six months, where we’d be looking for people to be able to dedicate a couple of days a week to public scrutiny of current plans and governance documents while we build a new board with a new mandate.”

Ms Parsons was on the board of Cardiff Rugby for six years before it collapsed into administration and was acquired in a pre-pack deal by the WRU with the joint administrators from PwC.

Also on the board at the time was current WRU board member and former chief executive of FTSE 100 company Halma, Andrew Williams.

Following the death of former chairman and long-term benefactor Peter Thomas, the club needed new benefactors to fulfil the then funding agreement with the WRU.

Helford Capital, a Jersey-based special purpose vehicle with no assets, owned by co-directors Neal Griffith and Phil Kemp, became majority owners of the club. However, they failed to inject the required benefactor funding agreed, and the club’s board had no alternative but to put the business through administration. The WRU would have faced significant penalties from the United Rugby Championship if they had not acquired Cardiff Rugby by leaving the league one team short.

The board of Cardiff were seduced by the promise of major investment, via Helford, from the Middle East, but they also needed to secure new benefactors.

Ms Parsons said: “I was on the board for six years and we made great strides in lots of areas, but Peter [Thomas, the former chair] passed and the investors came in and they were absolute fantasists.

“They had this big deal coming from Abu Dhabi and it even got to the point where we were told the deal was done and the money was there, worth millions of pounds, but we were just saying, ‘Show us the evidence.’ It never happened.”

She said that, in the aftermath of the Rafferty report into allegations of sexism and racism at the WRU – although the terms of reference never required an assessment of the BBC documentary that led to its establishment – the union was always going to appoint a woman in a senior role.

Ms Parsons said: “This is not about Abi, but you cannot say one of the jobs [chair or CEO] had to go to a female. That was fundamentally wrong and wouldn’t happen in business.

“A man was appointed as chair [Richard Collier-Keywood], so the CEO had to be a woman. You also automatically put a target on that woman straight away.

“There were men who had applied who had done that type of role elsewhere in rugby and with more experience to do that job.”

Andy Burnham has launched a review into how business rates are calculated for pubs and hotels, in an attempt to make the tax fairer for two sectors hit hard by this year’s revaluation.

The prime minister has appointed Jerry Schurder, a business rates expert who has repeatedly called for reform of the levy, to lead an independent review into valuations. Schurder will report his recommendations to the Treasury by March 2027, in time for them to be implemented at the next revaluation.

Government insiders said they expected the review to lead to a major change in business rates, given his previous comments and the evidence he has submitted to earlier government consultations.

Schurder has called for “fundamental reform, not tinkering”, including pressing for business rates to be cut significantly to ensure competitiveness with local property taxes in the EU.

He has stopped short of saying business rates should be scrapped altogether. He has said revaluations should be undertaken annually, and that the revenue HMRC takes from business rates should fluctuate directly in line with changes in property values. Both proposals, if adopted, would change the tax from a fixed sum the Treasury collects regardless of market conditions into one that moves with the property cycle.

The government is also launching a call for evidence from landlords, brewers, hoteliers and business owners.

Why April hurt

The review follows concerns that the way businesses are valued does not reflect the realities of the pub and hotel market.

Pubs are not valued on floor space in the way an office or a warehouse is. They are valued on their fair maintainable trade, an estimate by the Valuation Office of the annual turnover, excluding VAT, that the property might be expected to achieve under reasonably efficient management. Trading history, location, food, accommodation and gaming income all feed into the figure, and a percentage is then applied to arrive at a rateable value.

That method is what made this year’s revaluation so painful. The rateable values that took effect on 1 April 2026 were based on trading conditions in April 2024. The previous list had been drawn from a 2021 baseline, when pandemic restrictions had flattened pub takings. Comparing a recovered year with a shut one produced steep increases across the sector.

The ending of those pandemic-era valuations sent some pubs and hotels out of business in April and left others teetering on the edge. In the hotel sector, the scale of the shift prompted calls to freeze revaluations altogether after Northern Ireland paused its own process.

A cut that did not reach everyone

Last month Burnham announced a 20 per cent cut to business rates for pubs, social clubs and live music venues from April 2027. The government said the measure would be worth about £1,100 a year to a typical pub and would reach nearly 32,000 venues, at a cost of £100 million a year, funded by reviewing reliefs for businesses that do not contribute and by tightening compliance among online marketplace sellers.

That announcement was largely welcomed, but it came with calls to apply the relief to a wider range of businesses and to go further with broader changes to the system. Ahead of it, there was disquiet that relief would be targeted at pubs alone while restaurants, hotels and leisure operators facing similar increases were left out, and hotel and holiday park bosses pressed for relief to be extended beyond pubs.

The distinction between the two interventions matters for anyone budgeting beyond next spring. The 20 per cent cut is a discount applied to a bill. The review deals with the number the bill is calculated from, and would reset valuations permanently rather than for the life of one relief scheme.

James Murray, financial secretary to the Treasury, said: “Pubs and hotels are vital for communities and bringing growth to every postcode.

“Last month we announced tax cuts for pubs to give them the breathing room they need. Today we’re going further with a rethink of valuations, so that we can build a fairer system for the future.”

Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association, said: “For years pubs have paid a disproportionately higher business rates bill which has ground down their ability to keep the doors open, so this review is sorely needed and hugely welcome.”

Neal Jones, EMEA president at Marriott International, said: “The current valuation methodology creates a significant burden for hotels, and it is right that the system is being examined to ensure it is fair, transparent, and reflective of today’s market realities.”

Allen Simpson, chief executive at UK Hospitality, said: “Business rates remain a significant burden for hospitality businesses and the system needs to better reflect the trading realities for the sector.

“Comprehensive review and reform can address these challenges, while also supporting investment and growth.”

For operators, the immediate practical point is the call for evidence. It is open to landlords, brewers, hoteliers and business owners, which means the trading data that has been used to argue the current method is unfair can be put in front of the person writing the recommendations rather than only in front of a trade body.

The timing also leaves a gap. Schurder does not report until March 2027, and any change he recommends lands at the next revaluation, so the bills that arrive next April will still be calculated the way this year’s were.

Nearer term, No 10 has said it will look to set out further reform, including small business rates relief, at the budget. That is the moment for firms outside the pub, club and live music categories to find out whether the wider changes they have been asking for are coming, or whether they wait for Schurder.

Jamie Young

Jamie Young is Senior Reporter at Business Matters, covering SME finance, employment law and Westminster policy since 2016. He has reported on every Budget and Autumn Statement since 2018, helped make sense of the ‘covid era’ and the bounce-back loan scheme from launch through the fraud investigations, and broke the magazine’s coverage of the 2024 late-payment reforms. He joined Business Matters straight from completing his BA in Administration from Exeter University and is NCTJ-qualified. Reach him at jyoung@cbmeg.co.uk

Yes. Corporate subscriptions are available for teams and organisations, with discounted rates as user numbers increase. Pricing starts from $1,625 + GST per user.
Get in touch
to discuss the right option for your organisation.

Business News subscriptions are used by executives, investors, consultants and professionals who need to stay informed and make better decisions about the WA market. When you subscribe you’ll get

• Unlimited access to WA’s most trusted business journalism
• Data & Insights — detailed profiles of WA companies, people, projects and deals
• MyBN — a personalised feed based on the companies, people and sectors you follow
• Special publications and industry reports
• Daily and weekly email newsletters

Data & Insights is a research tool built specifically for the WA market. It draws on more than 30 years of Business News reporting, updated regularly to reflect what’s happening now. Use it to:

• Look up detailed profiles of WA companies, including financials, directors and ownership
• Find decision-makers and track their career movements
• Research live and completed projects across WA industries
• Monitor deals, appointments and market activity
• Access industry rankings and league tables

Data & Insights is updated daily by our dedicated research team, which uses the latest announcements, ASX filings and editorial coverage to keep our person, company, list and project records up to date.

Business News welcome all opportunities to make our dataset accurate, complete and current, so if you have an update request, please email the team at
general@businessnews.com.au, and we’d be happy to assist.

MyBN
is part of every subscription. It’s your personalised view of Business News. You can follow the companies, people, sectors and projects that matter to you, and get a news feed and alerts tailored to your interests. You can save articles to read later and retain only what you need.

Only subscribers have full access to all content on the Business News website.

If staying informed about the WA economy is part of your job, and/or you’re looking for networking opportunities in WA, Business News is built for you.

Business News subscribers are:

• Executives and directors tracking competitors, clients and market movements
• Investors and advisers researching companies, deals and industry trends
• Consultants and professionals staying across sectors relevant to their clients
• Business owners looking for leads, context and market intelligence

Most Business News publications cover national or global markets. Business News is focused entirely on Western Australia, which means the journalism, the data and the intelligence are all built around WA companies, people and projects — not adapted from a national feed. Data & Insights, included with every subscription, combines more than 30 years of WA-specific editorial research with live business data. There’s no comparable product for the WA market.

The Morning Digest Email provides a comprehensive wrap of the major headlines, relevant to WA business, and includes with a snapshot of the overnight news covering oil, gold and ASX-listed companies.

The Afternoon Wrap Email focuses on the news covered by our team of journalists during the course of the working day, including exclusive stories and analysis, all of which relates to WA business and the local economy.

The BN Weekender Email contains a wrap of the Business News from the week that was, highlighting the top stories in each area of WA business.
Sign up for free.

We’re happy to help.
Get in touch
and our team will come back to you.

Scott Grannis was Chief Economist from 1989 to 2007 at Western Asset Management Company, a Pasadena-based manager of fixed-income funds for institutional investors around the globe. He was a member of Western’s Investment Strategy Committee, was responsible for developing the firm’s domestic and international outlook, and provided consultation and advice on investment and asset allocation strategies to CFOs, Treasurers, and pension fund managers. He specialized in analysis of Federal Reserve policy and interest rate forecasting, and spearheaded the firm’s research into Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). Prior to joining Western Asset, he was Senior Economist at the Claremont Economics Institute, an economic forecasting and consulting service headed by John Rutledge, from 1980 to 1986. From 1986 to 1989, he was Principal at Leland O’Brien Rubinstein Associates, a financial services firm that specialized in sophisticated hedging strategies for institutional investors.

Visit his blog: Calafia Beach Pundit (https://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/)

SEOUL — South Korea’s benchmark KOSPI index tumbled 215.99 points, or 3.12%, to 6,696.96 as of 3:32 p.m. local time Monday, as Samsung Electronics shares plunged more than 8% following investor disappointment over the technology giant’s newly unveiled shareholder return plan.

The KOSPI’s decline extended a weaker session that began even before Samsung’s results reaction took hold. According to TradingKey, Japanese and South Korean stocks opened lower across the board Monday, weighed down by consolidation in U.S. technology stocks and broadly cautious market sentiment following overnight trading in the United States. The index initially fell 1.17% to 6,832.23 points at the open, with Samsung Electronics down 4.26% in early trading while SK Hynix bucked the broader trend, surging 3.58%.

The selloff deepened sharply as the session progressed. According to India.com’s coverage of Monday’s trading, Samsung Electronics plunged 8.35% after investors reacted negatively to the company’s latest shareholder return announcement, dragging the broader KOSPI down more than 3% for the day. SK Hynix, notably, continued to buck the broader semiconductor selloff, closing the session up 2.4%, even as the KOSDAQ, South Korea’s smaller technology-focused exchange, moved higher as investors rotated capital toward smaller technology, healthcare and growth stocks away from the large-cap chip sector.

The core driver of Monday’s decline traced directly back to Samsung’s own corporate announcement. According to India.com, the KOSPI came under heavy selling pressure as investors booked profits following the recent rally in South Korean chip stocks, with Samsung Electronics becoming the single largest source of pressure after its newly disclosed shareholder-return plan failed to meet expectations that had built up among investors in the days leading up to the announcement.

That reaction stands in sharp contrast to the anticipation that had built around Samsung’s expected capital return plan in the preceding days. Samsung had been widely expected to unveil a historic shareholder return package potentially exceeding 100 trillion won, following a similarly record-setting 40 trillion won buyback and cancellation program announced by rival chipmaker SK Hynix earlier in the month. The scale of that anticipation appears to have set a bar that Samsung’s actual announcement ultimately failed to clear in the eyes of many investors, prompting the sharp sell-the-news reaction that dragged the stock down more than 8% Monday.

Monday’s decline adds to what has already been an extraordinarily volatile year for the KOSPI, a market that has repeatedly whipsawed between record highs and sharp, sudden reversals throughout 2026. According to Yahoo Finance, the KOSPI’s volatility this year has already surpassed the level seen during the 2008 global financial crisis, when the index set its prior annual record of 26 sell-side sidecar trading halts. By late June alone, the exchange had already logged close to 30 sidecar activations and five circuit breakers for the year, with both figures already exceeding the full-year 2008 tally.

Much of that volatility has been concentrated in Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix specifically, given that the two chipmakers together account for roughly half of the KOSPI’s total market capitalization. That concentration means company-specific news from either firm, such as Monday’s shareholder return disappointment from Samsung, has an outsized ability to move the entire benchmark index in a single session, a dynamic that has played out repeatedly throughout the year.

The KOSPI’s broader trajectory in 2026 has been defined by dramatic swings tied to shifting sentiment around the durability of artificial intelligence-driven chip demand. According to Al Jazeera, the index suffered a steep selloff in late July, losing about $2.18 trillion in market value over a two-day span as investor enthusiasm for chipmakers cooled sharply amid reduced confidence in the sustainability of AI-related capital spending. Frank Benzimra, head of Asia equity strategy at Societe Generale in Hong Kong, described the difficulty of calling a bottom during that earlier episode. “If you look at what is falling in the market, it has been the stocks in which you have the most leverage,” Benzimra said at the time. “It’s very difficult to say when will this selloff end, but at the moment, it’s definitely not the trade where we want to be.” Despite that steep pullback, the KOSPI remained up 41.5% in U.S. dollar terms year-to-date at that point, making it the best-performing major global market for the year even after the correction.

The index’s volatility has been punctuated by several historically significant single-session moves throughout 2026, including a plunge that saw the KOSPI fall below the 6,000 level in late July, dropping nearly 6% in a single session after SK Hynix’s second-quarter earnings missed consensus estimates and weakened broader expectations for shareholder returns across the chip sector, according to prior reporting from SBS. That earlier decline triggered both a sell sidecar and a circuit breaker on the same trading day, marking the first time in the Korea Exchange’s history that circuit breakers had been activated in both the KOSPI and KOSDAQ markets on consecutive days.

Despite Monday’s sharp pullback, the KOSPI remains up substantially over the trailing 12-month period, having posted extraordinary gains throughout 2025 and into 2026 driven by South Korea’s central role in the global AI and semiconductor supply chain. That longer-term rally has continued to attract both institutional and retail investor interest even as the index has repeatedly demonstrated its capacity for sudden, sharp reversals tied to company-specific catalysts, particularly those involving Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix.

With Samsung’s shareholder return announcement now fully digested by the market and having triggered Monday’s sharp selloff, investors are likely to continue closely watching whether the stock stabilizes in the coming sessions or whether the disappointment continues to weigh on both Samsung shares and the broader KOSPI index heading into the final stretch of August trading, particularly given the index’s well-documented pattern of extreme volatility throughout the year.

Claudia Batten

[Foreign Language] Good morning. My name is Claudia Batten, and I’m the Chair of Serko. Thank you for joining us this morning. I’ll start with some important points.

Shareholders will be able to vote and ask questions during the meeting. You can send through your questions at any time through the online portal by using the Ask a Question button, and I would encourage you to do so as early as possible. This will allow us to answer these questions at the appropriate time of the meeting. I’ll provide you with further instructions as we progress. If you encounter any issues, please refer to the online portal guide or you can phone the help line on 0800-200-220. We will be using some slides during the meeting. You’ll be able to see these and follow along. They are also available on Serko’s website.

My fellow directors are either joining me here in person or are attending online. Relevant members of Serko’s executive team, management and staff are also in attendance, either online or physically. In particular, Shane Sampson, the Chief Financial Officer, is in attendance and will assist me in answering any shareholder questions. Finally, I’d like to welcome our external auditors, Deloitte; our lawyers, Russell McVeagh; and also the team from our share registrar, MUFG Pension & Market Services. They will help conduct the voting on the formal business later in the meeting and also act as scrutineer. The Company Secretary has confirmed to me that the Notice of Meeting has been sent to shareholders and other persons entitled to receive it on 27 July 2026. I confirm that the requirement for a quorum for this meeting of 3 shareholders has been met, and I declare the meeting open.