Australian Rugby / RA

[WorkingClassRugger]

URC does this. Sheffield Shield does this.

The point is to use Wallaby revenue to employ as many professional rugby players as we can afford.

It's pretty much the same up north. Six nations pays for almost all rugby up there. They just make so much money out of it that they can afford longer better domestic comps as well

Not quite. The Pro 12/14 did this. But since the league moved to include SA teams and rebranded to the URC there's been an effort to build the leagues profile and branding. Now considering the economies in which it operates that may be a more difficult proposition than many assumed it still doesn't change that there's more emphasis on building the league commercially is important.

International Rugby is awesome and will likely drive the majority of revenues in the game going forward but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking to development the club game further.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeah that's fair. Does the BBL rate better than the national side though?

No. Never said it did. From what I can tell it gets about 40% of the national teams average sitting at around 500k a night. But that's the thing. It doesn't need to match the national team. What it is designed to do is keep Cricket front and centre throughout the summer and it does that fairly effectively. And there's value in a property that draws in those numbers.

I'm not suggesting we ever look to usurp the Test match level of the game. I mean it looks like it's going to delivering a $1.5b sponsorship deal if reports are correct and I would hope that means any broadcasting agreement would significantly exceed that. So there's very clearly value in it. But by look to develop a better product for domestic consumption that sits below it it would go a long way to helping secure the future of the game in this country.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Not quite. The Pro 12/14 did this. But since the league moved to include SA teams and rebranded to the URC there's been an effort to build the leagues profile and branding. Now considering the economies in which it operates that may be a more difficult proposition than many assumed it still doesn't change that there's more emphasis on building the league commercially is important.

International Rugby is awesome and will likely drive the majority of revenues in the game going forward but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking to development the club game further.

Like I said, they can afford to do that because of the six-nations river of gold.

Ireland is pretty much the same as us. They pay vastly more for their URC players than what revenue the league generates. International rugby generates >80% of revenue for them as well. It's just a lot more than our 80%. Replicating NZs, or Ireland's success means earning more money at Wallaby level, not at URC or Super Rugby/NPC level.

Even the RFU make a huge contribution to the GP clubs from international revenue

The Rugby Football Union (RFU) and Premiership Rugby have reportedly agreed to a new eight-year Professional Game Partnership (PGP) worth more than UK£264 million (US$331 million) for English rugby’s top-flight clubs.

Of course we should try and find a way to improve our second tier. Let's just be realistic about where it is at the moment. If our international team earnt as much as Ireland we too could afford a comp like the URC. On the other hand without international rugby there would be no pro rugby in Australia.

 

[mst]

Yeah that's fair. Does the BBL rate better than the national side though?

That depends on format but BBL is not the little thing on the side.

Foxtel said its average audience across Foxtel and Kayo for Test cricket was 306,000 while its average audience for Big Bash games was 235,000.

State of the Game: Australian Cricket - Sports Industry AU

Heading into the 2023-24 Summer season, Cricket found itself having to answer a number of questions – what is the BBLs place in the world with burgeoning developments in South Africa, and rumoured expansion of the IPL on the horizon. Can Test cricket remain relevant in the modern era of fast...

www.footyindustry.com

 

[Omar Comin']

Of course we should try and find a way to improve our second tier. Let's just be realistic about where it is at the moment. If our international team earnt as much as Ireland we too could afford a comp like the URC. On the other hand without international rugby there would be no pro rugby in Australia.

Why not look at France as the benchmark? They have an NRL/AFL type of competition in addition to the national team. It's the economic powerhouse of the sport where rugby is in the rudest health, and there's a lot of competition there too.

The fact that the international game is a huge driver of revenue doesn't mean the club tier can't also be a huge driver of revenue.

 

[Slim 293]

Why not look at France as the benchmark? They have an NRL/AFL type of competition in addition to the national team. It's the economic powerhouse of the sport where rugby is in the rudest health, and there's a lot of competition there too.

The fact that the international game is a huge driver of revenue doesn't mean the club tier can't also be a huge driver of revenue.

We might need a few billionaires...

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

No. Never said it did. From what I can tell it gets about 40% of the national teams average sitting at around 500k a night. But that's the thing. It doesn't need to match the national team. What it is designed to do is keep Cricket front and centre throughout the summer and it does that fairly effectively. And there's value in a property that draws in those numbers.

I'm not suggesting we ever look to usurp the Test match level of the game. I mean it looks like it's going to delivering a $1.5b sponsorship deal if reports are correct and I would hope that means any broadcasting agreement would significantly exceed that. So there's very clearly value in it. But by look to develop a better product for domestic consumption that sits below it it would go a long way to helping secure the future of the game in this country.

I'm in no way opposed to building up a domestic comp and have it get a heap of eyeballs. I'm just a realist in terms of what keeps people engaged in rugby here: it appears to be the club game at local level and the Wallabies. If there is a way to bring it all together with the bit in the middle I'm all for it.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

That depends on format but BBL is not the little thing on the side.

Foxtel said its average audience across Foxtel and Kayo for Test cricket was 306,000 while its average audience for Big Bash games was 235,000.

State of the Game: Australian Cricket - Sports Industry AU

Heading into the 2023-24 Summer season, Cricket found itself having to answer a number of questions – what is the BBLs place in the world with burgeoning developments in South Africa, and rumoured expansion of the IPL on the horizon. Can Test cricket remain relevant in the modern era of fast...

www.footyindustry.com

I'd be interested to see it combined with the numbers from FTA to get a proper gauge.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I'd be interested to see it combined with the numbers from FTA to get a proper gauge.

Last summer saw FTA averages of around 1.3m for Tests and 500k for the BBL. So combined you're looking at somewhere in the vicinity of 1.6m for Tests and 700k for BBL. Like I said before numbers any other league that isn't the AFL/NRL would be crowing about.

 

[half]

Why would it take 5 years to figure out a way forward when there's really only 2 or 3 options, all of which can be implemented relatively quickly?

There are way more than 2 or 3 options.

You need time, first to convince people of the need to make a major change, and that does take time.

Then you need to explore, what are the various options, then determine of these options which one is best suited to Australian Rugby needs.

Having made this decision, determine what structural changes are needed and like all of the above these need to be negotiated.

Having reached this point, its a matter of selling the idea to all the major backers, sponsors, broadcasters etc.

Then bring all the people together and implement the plan, maybe it would not take five years but I doubt it could be done in under four years.

The reason the Nobody Really Cares competitions failed was because they were rushed, from start to finish in six months.

I maintain it can't be done quickly

 

[hoggy]

Why not look at France as the benchmark? They have an NRL/AFL type of competition in addition to the national team. It's the economic powerhouse of the sport where rugby is in the rudest health, and there's a lot of competition there too.

The fact that the international game is a huge driver of revenue doesn't mean the club tier can't also be a huge driver of revenue.

Yet the thinking here is that a successful Wallabies cannot co exist with a domestic based club/franchise rugby competition, somehow if we are not playing overseas teams weekly the game cannot survive in Australia, it really is a strange way to look at things.

Your to weak & pathetic to survive alone, yet to thrive we must be one of the best in the world, I'm not sure how that is supposed to happen.

 

[Omar Comin']

We might need a few billionaires...

Not sure how many actual billionaires but rugby certainly has more than its fair share of very high net worth supporters in Australia.

Imagine RA announced tomorrow that it was leaving Super Rugby, intended to start a new pro domestic competition, and asked for expressions of interest for investing in 3-5 new teams (or in elevating existing clubs to a professional level), with an open mind on locations, team names etc. Lets say there was a minimum required commitment of $30 million over a 5 year period in order to be considered. Do you think they'd receive significant interest or not? My hunch is they'd easily get it off the ground.

 

[Steve_Grey]

Not sure how many actual billionaires but rugby certainly has more than its fair share of very high net worth supporters in Australia.

Imagine RA announced tomorrow that it was leaving Super Rugby, intended to start a new pro domestic competition, and asked for expressions of interest for investing in 3-5 new teams (or in elevating existing clubs to a professional level), with an open mind on locations, team names etc. Lets say there was a minimum required commitment of $30 million over a 5 year period in order to be considered. Do you think they'd receive significant interest or not? My hunch is they'd easily get it off the ground.

Yes - Twiggy probably pays more than that now.

 

[mst]

Not sure how many actual billionaires but rugby certainly has more than its fair share of very high net worth supporters in Australia.

Imagine RA announced tomorrow that it was leaving relinquishing control of Super Rugby and any professional Rugby below the Wallabies level opening up for take over by other management with options including intended to start a new pro domestic competition, and asked for expressions of interest for investing in 3-5 new teams (or in elevating existing clubs to a professional level), with an open mind on locations, team names etc. Lets say there was a minimum required commitment of $30 million over a 5 year period in order to be considered. Do you think they'd receive significant interest or not? My hunch is they'd easily get it off the ground.

Fixed. Remove RA and I would bet you will get some uptake. They are the issue and what is keeping investors and sponsors away from Rugby below the Wallabies.

 

[dru]

Fixed. Remove RA and I would bet you will get some uptake. They are the issue and what is keeping investors and sponsors away from Rugby below the Wallabies.

I suspect that relinquishing control and allowing a management team to take control - well I think it is a much bigger more important issue with Super and both NZRU and RA. It would be better in a domestic comp as well, but nothing like the same issue, I think.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Usual reminder that RA are bound by the constitution to represent the state member unions, Super Rugby licence holders and professional players.

It's not RA that needs to give up control. It's their shareholders.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Not sure how many actual billionaires but rugby certainly has more than its fair share of very high net worth supporters in Australia.

Imagine RA announced tomorrow that it was leaving Super Rugby, intended to start a new pro domestic competition, and asked for expressions of interest for investing in 3-5 new teams (or in elevating existing clubs to a professional level), with an open mind on locations, team names etc. Lets say there was a minimum required commitment of $30 million over a 5 year period in order to be considered. Do you think they'd receive significant interest or not? My hunch is they'd easily get it off the ground.

I think they'd get absolutely none. Best hope would be Twiggy ups his stake and owns the comp. Even if some very high wealth individuals or groups love the sport they aren't interested in losing their money. Unlike sports like Basketball we don't have players who have made un-Godly amounts of money and can throw it back in like the NBL is getting with Bogut, Ball and recently with Carmelo Anthony (made 410m playing) saying he is buying into an expansion team.

 

[stillmissit]

URC does this. Sheffield Shield does this.

The point is to use Wallaby revenue to employ as many professional rugby players as we can afford.

It's pretty much the same up north. Six nations pays for almost all rugby up there. They just make so much money out of it that they can afford longer better domestic comps as well

I have never given much thought to how they are paid, I assume there was an insufficient win bonus (if there is one).
Why not pay the guys the basics and let companies or individuals sponsor our best International players, that way average guys may look elsewhere and if the money is good enough and they want to stay we get to keep the top players.

 

[Wallaby Man]

I think they'd get absolutely none. Best hope would be Twiggy ups his stake and owns the comp. Even if some very high wealth individuals or groups love the sport they aren't interested in losing their money. Unlike sports like Basketball we don't have players who have made un-Godly amounts of money and can throw it back in like the NBL is getting with Bogut, Ball and recently with Carmelo Anthony (made 410m playing) saying he is buying into an expansion team.

I don’t think people of extreme wealth would truly care if they lose money. The money a potential rugby team could make is pittance so they would never invest for any financial reasons, infact I think most would expect to lose considerable amounts on it. Reason why someone might be interested is if the team allows them to grease the wheels of their existing businesses/interests. Does owning a team bring with it notoriety? Does it provide a platform to wine and dine corporate partners? Will it bring them social clout with the importance of the team to the community?

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I have never given much thought to how they are paid, I assume there was an insufficient win bonus (if there is one).
Why not pay the guys the basics and let companies or individuals sponsor our best International players, that way average guys may look elsewhere and if the money is good enough and they want to stay we get to keep the top players.

The third party endorsements are only good if the sport has a profile which Rugby has a small one as of now. We aren't going to just see Adidas throw the money they do at Nathan Cleary at Tate McDermott. People don't care enough.

I don’t think people of extreme wealth would truly care if they lose money. The money a potential rugby team could make is pittance so they would never invest for any financial reasons, infact I think most would expect to lose considerable amounts on it. Reason why someone might be interested is if the team allows them to grease the wheels of their existing businesses/interests. Does owning a team bring with it notoriety? Does it provide a platform to wine and dine corporate partners? Will it bring them social clout with the importance of the team to the community?

I tend to think a lot of these people made a lot of money because they are pretty brutal with it. Again, does Rugby have or maintain a profile to increase their networks? I'd assume most in that realm who would like Rugby are already aware and in contact with each other. I don't think owning a Rugby Club would bring a lot of notoriety really. Do we know most of the A league owners? I know I don't and if we had a domestic comp it would start much smaller than that I think.