Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
The risk is we turn into France: owners start playing heavy because they want to protect their product.
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
The risk is we turn into France: owners start playing heavy because they want to protect their product.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
It’s the same argument many companies have before going public on the share market, you can get a significant injection of capital but you also lose some independence, come under greater scrutiny and regulation.
eastman
John Solomon (38)
There's also the allure that you get the management skills and expertise from the private equity company that you might not have otherwise to better run the business - it's all about aligning incentives as much as possible in that a more successful Super Rugby is in the best interest of the ARU and PE.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
That is good point Pfitzy, so there needs to be pretty tight controls on what money is taken and how much power it gives them. I think it one of reasons everyone is slightly apprehensive. Look at Twiggy (and I like what he doing with Force), he seems to be saying to RA at times you do it how I want or I will take Force elsewhere. He may not, and I sure he is doing what he thinks is good for rugby, but if you have 2-3 private equity owners doing similar it could end up a schmozzle. I have said it before remamber what happened in A league with Clive Palmer , soccer Aus didn't play to his tune , team got scrapped. We want the money but don't let the boards lose control.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
That is the logic.
In practice? The evidence isn't conclusive that private ownership creates better outcomes in business generally.
Layer an irresponsible slash-n-burn type of investor on top of rugby here and you could get dire outcomes.
Back to my point about France: basically the top teams are billionaires having dick-measuring contests, and putting themselves front and centre in the public eye. Kind of like Twiggy at times.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Clive Palmer is a demonstrably bad actor in corporate Australia. He's a perfect example of someone who happened to be in the right place at the right time, and isn't troubled by a conscience.
No doubt he's cunning enough to take advantage of soft government policy and legal avenues.
You have to question a system where someone's net worth jumps from $600M 5 years ago to $4B in 2019 to $9B today.
Did he "work hard" for that and "pull himself up by his bootstraps"? Fuck no.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
A private equity firm taking a stake is completely different to a single owner having a stake in a club though, equity firms are faceless organisations governed by their own board. I don’t think you will have the ego issues or dick measuring if a private equity firm were to take a stake.
Absolutely there is a pursuit for profit mentality though, they will seek to extract the greatest return at every opportunity. TV rights will be the biggest point, the benefits of FTA exposure won’t factor in the discussion, they’ll simply want the highest cash offer from a broadcaster.
Keeping a private equity firm to a minority stake would be absolutely critical, and I don’t see how a private equity firm could buy into ‘RA’, rather I see a private equity firm buying a stake in the Super Rugby and the TRC.
Absolutely there is a pursuit for profit mentality though, they will seek to extract the greatest return at every opportunity. TV rights will be the biggest point, the benefits of FTA exposure won’t factor in the discussion, they’ll simply want the highest cash offer from a broadcaster.
Keeping a private equity firm to a minority stake would be absolutely critical, and I don’t see how a private equity firm could buy into ‘RA’, rather I see a private equity firm buying a stake in the Super Rugby and the TRC.
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
I honestly struggle to accept the notion that private equity is the panacea for Australian rugby. Private donations would help, or public ones for that matter, but as others have pointed out, there is no profit to be made.
Anybody who puts money into the game needs to have a very good understanding of the limitations under which we operate. We are at the mercy of World Rugby, and we gain much of our revenues from inbound tours. We change the rules (in the wider sense) at our peril.
By definition, any investor who is willing to stay the course is almost certainly already one of the despised insiders. The insiders know the ropes, and understand the limitations.
Anybody who puts money into the game needs to have a very good understanding of the limitations under which we operate. We are at the mercy of World Rugby, and we gain much of our revenues from inbound tours. We change the rules (in the wider sense) at our peril.
By definition, any investor who is willing to stay the course is almost certainly already one of the despised insiders. The insiders know the ropes, and understand the limitations.
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
I think that misrepresents Twiggy. I think he makes a lot of concessions on what he wants, but does need to stand firm on a few things to keep the playing field fair. He has said he is willing to invest big money in Australian Rugby but only with constitutional reform. Those reforms are fair and prevent a NSW/QLD stranglehold on the game. Yes, those are the biggest rugby states, but you don't grow the game that way and you don't give Twiggy any confidence that money invested won't be wasted by whose self-interest outweighs the greater good.
I am not a Twiggy fan, but where Rugby and the Force are concerned, he has never been unreasonable. Can't say the same about those he has been reasoning with.
Clive Palmer on the other hand is Australia's answer to Donald Trump. Any sporting organization stupid enough to get into bed with him deserves everything they get.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Isnt this basically inevitable? Either we somehow get the funds to be able to offer competitive wages or we become a second rate comp.
eastman
John Solomon (38)
Generous benefactors to provide funds without conditions/ wanting influence is definitely ideal however..
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
The poster known as "half" will be along any time now telling us that there is a conga line of potential investors, all chafing at the bit to put heaps of money into rugby franchises.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
The other side of private equity in the game is they're not interested in anything besides profit and will seek that profit with a shorter term mindset than what the game requires.
That means the professional game and the immediate support layer for it gets almost exclusive attention, and grassroots (actual grassroots) goes by the wayside.
That means the professional game and the immediate support layer for it gets almost exclusive attention, and grassroots (actual grassroots) goes by the wayside.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
Conversely if private equity are only a minority stakeholder, that means RA as the majority stakeholder is also earning a healthy profit. Which can then be diverted back into actual grassroots.
Any sale of the game would need to split the professional competition and grassroots.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Yep mate, not getting at Twiggy or saying he the same in anyway, merely pointing out that you don't want the likes of Palmer putting money in, and have to be very careful that all players know how much power they have. I am sure that Twiggy is doing exactly what he feels is right and probably is, but I get a little worried if someone says I will put in money if the constitution is changed to how I want, if that is what he said. As I say not against Twiggy in any form just urging caution.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
I think we should always be questioning the motives of wealthy individuals investing in sporting teams. Not saying they're evil or anything, just that their goals may not be aligned with other punters involved in the game. That said, Twiggy didn't have to chip a cent of his money for anything to do with rugby in WA, but did anyway. Without him the game would be practically dead as a professional concern in this state. For that alone I'm thankful and also for the money put into the grass roots. I also think he's absolutely right to challenge the old guard running the sport in this country. A shakeup has been a long time coming and we're starting to see it now. I thank him for his part in that too.
dru
David Wilson (68)
Mini World Cup?
https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2021/01/17/australia-mclennan-mini-rugby-world-cup
In short - plenty of NH countries are having COVID difficulties in get ting their National teams game time. Some are already here in Winter so why not extend the invitation? RA looking into the possibility of extended international is Aus this year.
Seems like a long shot but a great idea all-the-same.
https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2021/01/17/australia-mclennan-mini-rugby-world-cup
In short - plenty of NH countries are having COVID difficulties in get ting their National teams game time. Some are already here in Winter so why not extend the invitation? RA looking into the possibility of extended international is Aus this year.
Seems like a long shot but a great idea all-the-same.
Rugbynutter39
Michael Lynagh (62)
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
If the B&I Lions series goes ahead, in whatever form. Then the only teams available from Europe are France and Italy, and they're both coming down to Australia and New Zealand already. Fiji are already playing a test in New Zealand. Japan are really the extra team who could come down.
So could have a mini world cup of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, France and Italy. But New Zealand aren't going to travel to Australia, so those game will remain there. In Australia, we could possible get an extra test match or two featuring Japan and Fiji playing each other.