Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

[Omar Comin']

You can't have it both ways: pull out of Super Rugby but expect to remain part of SANZAR come Test season. See how much revenue you get from playing the PI, Japan etc c.f. AB & 'boks & the effect that has on the ARU' already precarious finances.

Of course NZRU want what's best for their #1 earner, the AB. That includes a proper domestic comp & Super Rugby to develop the next generation(s) of AB. They will absolutely not tolerate anyone trying to undermine either comp.

Is it the Waratahs fan/potential fan or rugby fan base that's tiny in WS? No doubt there's a massive potential rugby fan & talent base out there but who's gonna prop up a WS side until that potential is realised? In the absence of a sugar daddy it has to be at the expense of the 'Tahs, even if indirectly by way of them losing sponsors to the new entity.

There is zero chance of NZ and South Africa not playing test matches against Australia. It would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. NZ is economically dependent on Australia - an economy 4 times the size of South Africa's and in a much better time zone. When it comes to the 2nd tier, why should the ARU continue to go along with a structure that may suit NZ but is losing Australian rugby money every year, while its competitors for fans and athletes go from strength to strength?

The NZRU have done plenty to undermine Super Rugby by the way. Don't forget the 'conditioning program' of 2007!

Yes the Waratahs fan base is tiny in WS. They are seen as a North Shore and Eastern Suburbs, private school old boys team. But you're right, any new Western Sydney team at super rugby level or equivalent would have to be propped up by private investment and new sponsorship. But I don't think that would be impossible to achieve given the interest there is from private consortiums to take over the Waratahs license. And I doubt the Tahs would lose anything from having a cross-town rival. Two teams in Sydney would raise the profile of the sport.

 

[Pfitzy]

Rugby does not run on wishes and rainbow-farting unicorns guys - yes financial input is required, but the potential ROI is good if you put the hard work in.

The rugby base in Western Sydney isn't huge, but its not as small as people think. There are a lot of people who love rugby but feel marginalised because they ARE marginalised to a large degree. It is fertile ground for expansion and look no further than the AFL's sledgehammer move of putting GWS there.

 

[Polynesian Warriors]

Its no secret that the ARU are losing money every year on super rugby and rugby in general. Can you imagine what it would be like in NZ rugby if there wasn't a US$200 million Adidas and US$80 AIG sponsorship deal?

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

There is zero chance of NZ and South Africa not playing test matches against Australia. It would be cutting off the nose to spite the face. NZ is economically dependent on Australia - an economy 4 times the size of South Africa's and in a much better time zone. When it comes to the 2nd tier, why should the ARU continue to go along with a structure that may suit NZ but is losing Australian rugby money every year, while its competitors for fans and athletes go from strength to strength?

The NZRU have done plenty to undermine Super Rugby by the way. Don't forget the 'conditioning program' of 2007!

Yes the Waratahs fan base is tiny in WS. They are seen as a North Shore and Eastern Suburbs, private school old boys team. But you're right, any new Western Sydney team at super rugby level or equivalent would have to be propped up by private investment and new sponsorship. But I don't think that would be impossible to achieve given the interest there is from private consortiums to take over the Waratahs license. And I doubt the Tahs would lose anything from having a cross-town rival. Two teams in Sydney would raise the profile of the sport.

If ARU were dumb enough to walk away from Super Rugby I reckon SARU & NZRU would quickly arrange the resumption of full tours, the only question being who gets to host the first: NZ 'cos the 'boks haven't toured since 1994 or SA 'cos the TV rights would be worth more.

The NZ economy isn't as dependant on the Oz as you seem to think, but in any case were not talking about the general economy, of which rugby constitutes a tiny part even in NZ, but the rugby economy where right now the AB are worth way more than the Wallabies.

IIRC there were 2 NZ sides in the semis in 2007 & none from Oz so how did NZ's conditioning program undermine Super Rugby that year? Pretty sure everyone rested key players that year just like everyone does every RWC year, they just didn't feel the need to dress it up as something ground-breaking.

I dislike the S18 format as much as the next bloke but the reality is we're probably gonna be stuck with it. Maybe if (& it's a big if) over the next 5 years NRC takes off there may be an opportunity to set up some kind of Pacific basin comp involving NRC, ITM & PI teams, but there's just no way it's gonna happen in 2016.

 

[Polynesian Warriors]

We said the ARU would walk away from Super rugby not the Bledisloe Cup or The Championship Series.
The NZRU and the ARU aren't stupid enough to walk away from the biggest rivalry in the SH when it comes to TV ratings and broadcasting rights. Yes, the test matches between the two Tasman rivals is worth more to each others than against the Springboks.

Again, your talking about the economy of the two countries and the All Blacks in general. We all know what the AB's is worth and are more popular and rich than the Wallabies but we are talking about super rugby level. Without the Australian teams super rugby in NZ could not survive on its own or even with the South African teams.

Since 2007 crowds in New Zealand super rugby games haven't been the same since. maybe fans realized that they are paying to much to watch games without some if its stars. This is also the case with the ITM Cup where interest in both crowds and tv ratings have drop massively since AB's were discourage from playing.

I don't mind the S18 format to be honest, I rather see new teams and new countries add to the mix so if the format is successful maybe they might see adding a Pacific Is, Japan, Hong Kong, USA teams in the future as attractive. I'm a rugby lover first and a fan second so if super rugby is going to get countries like USA, Japan, Hong Kong, Argentina or even the Pacific Is stronger at international level then I'll support that than seeing the same nations in the top five every year.

My ideal format is to have a Australia conference with the current super rugby teams plus West Sydney, Gold Coast or a PI team, NZ conference as the ITM Cup and SA conference with the Currie Cup and a fourth conference with Asia, USA, Argentina teams.
The success of the Heineken Cup in Europe should make this format work for teams and fans in my opinion.

 

[Omar Comin']

As it's written by Roy Masters people on this site will refuse to believe it isn't all made up, but this article provides some stark figures.

http://www.irrigator.com.au/story/2286889/pulvers-super-rugby-tv-deal-promise-premature/?cs=12

"A subsequent GMS report in 2014, commissioned by the Rugby Union Players Association highlighted that the current Super Rugby competition would continue to make losses of approximately $14 million per year.

The new 18-team model is even worse, with a projected annual loss of $19 million.

While Pulver has promised his five Australian teams a rise in annual grants of more than the current annual payment of $4.5 million each, the GMS report claims they need an increase of 165 per cent in rights fees to ensure the Australian Super Rugby teams break even."

 

[Train Without a Station]

What code hasn't achieved at least 165 percent increase in their rights deals in the last decade?

 

[wamberal]

What code hasn't achieved at least 165 percent increase in their rights deals in the last decade?

Ours.

 

[p.Tah]

Roy Masters also stated the AFL would only get $900m for their recent broadcast deal. He was off by a measly $300m.

He also canvassed for Alan Jones to be Wallaby coach in 2007.

 

[wamberal]

Roy Masters also stated the AFL would only get $900m for their recent broadcast deal. He was off by a measly $300m.

He also canvassed for Alan Jones to be Wallaby coach in 2007.

Masters is biased against the AFL, and he does not know a lot about rugby (he also hates the game with a passion).

However, that does not mean his analysis is wrong. It rings pretty true to me, maybe exaggerated, but still very, very worrying indeed. We are a code in crisis, what the hell happens if Pulver's blue sky numbers turn out to be wide of the mark? We are on thin ice, even if he gets what he predicts.

I suppose we can always go back to shamateurism, maybe have a national universities competition, the tertiary sector seems to have the money and the support. Club rugby will continue, maybe merged with the top tier of subbies.

We would lose all our best players to overseas unions and the NRL, but we could allow the overseas players to represent the Wobbs.

 

[Omar Comin']

What code hasn't achieved at least 165 percent increase in their rights deals in the last decade?

I know live sport has become more and more valuable to broadcasters but rugby crowds and ratings have fallen over the last decade. So why would rugby get a 165% increase? Especially given the proposed model will actually reduce the amount of content.

If they don't then is there a plan B? Or will they have to accept an offer that will lose them millions every year?

Does SANZAR even have a vision of what super rugby will look like in 10 years? Who knows what they're working towards. If the idea is to expand into Asia and the Americas then why are they doing it so slowly? Surely the plan should be to have multiple teams in both as soon as possible so you can have conferences that make sense.

 

[mst]

I know live sport has become more and more valuable to broadcasters but rugby crowds and ratings have fallen over the last decade. So why would rugby get a 165% increase? Especially given the proposed model will actually reduce the amount of content.

If they don't then is there a plan B? Or will they have to accept an offer that will lose them millions every year?

Does SANZAR even have a vision of what super rugby will look like in 10 years? Who knows what they're working towards. If the idea is to expand into Asia and the Americas then why are they doing it so slowly? Surely the plan should be to have multiple teams in both as soon as possible so you can have conferences that make sense.

Its not only SANZAR you will need to convince - its the closed minded supporters and rugby administrators that need to wake up to themselves. If you recall the missed cross promotion with the MLB when it was in Sydney and how it was brushed off by the by the "old school" supporters as a non-issue and a waste of time, Funny how the Kiwi's and now the Scots can see the $$$ by playing in / against America yet we are still too stupid to realise we are the joke as we had the chance and didn't give it credit.

 

[Braveheart81]

Its not only SANZAR you will need to convince - its the closed minded supporters and rugby administrators that need to wake up to themselves. If you recall the missed cross promotion with the MLB when it was in Sydney and how it was brushed off by the by the "old school" supporters as a non-issue and a waste of time, Funny how the Kiwi's and now the Scots can see the $$$ by playing in / against America yet we are still too stupid to realise we are the joke as we had the chance and didn't give it credit.

This is such a reinvention of history.

 

[mst]

This is such a reinvention of history.

Its funny how an opinion can be attributed as fact validating it so it can be criticised and dismissed. Regardless missed opportunities are still missed opportunities regardless of how you wish to recall history. Are the Kiwi and Scots getting $$$ and exposure in a another market? Yes. Is it a good financial decision? yes. Are we (any Australian rugby) getting the chance to get the US $$$ and potential marketing or sponsorship benefits? We did -but. Like in any business did we use the opportunity or lead to explore for potential financial benefits - Um no! Imagine how much AIG and RBS could gain in brand exposure alone if their teams are splashed all over a media that 10's of millions may see? I am pretty sure happy sponsor would translate to happy teams.

Ironically your single line answer actually validated my original assertion - trying to overcome attitudes. If our PM can be news in the Washington Post today for being unpopular it shows we live a truly global environment and that people are informed and make choices - and they want to watch rugby in the US apparently!

An opportunity for a photo, brief introduction, a quick conversation, a brief email, or a simple question like what if or would you be interested? - all would have been the small things that potentially created the opportunity for the AB's to be running round with $280+ million in global (not Kiwi companies) sponsorships and playing in emerging markets for further financial benefit.

 

[Braveheart81]

Ironically your single line answeractuallyvalidated my original assertion - trying to overcome attitudes. If our PM can be news in the Washington Post today for being unpopular it shows we live a truly global environment and that people are informed and make choices - and they want to watch rugby in the US apparently!

An opportunity for a photo, brief introduction, a quick conversation, a brief email, or a simple question like what if or would you be interested? - all would have been the small things that potentially created the opportunity for the AB's to be running round with $280+ million in global (not Kiwi companies) sponsorships and playing in emerging markets for further financial benefit.

I think that is complete bullshit.

There was an opportunity for a photo shoot that the Waratahs were keen to take. The photo was scheduled for a particular day and then got delayed through the day and eventually cancelled because one of the MLB players wasn't available or something. The Waratahs had Folau available and ready for that whole day to be part of the promotional photo.

Eventually, the photo was confirmed the next day at short notice and Folau was engaged in an existing commitment with a current sponsor at the time. The Tahs offered numerous other Wallabies to take part in the photo shoot but were told that it was Folau or no one. As they couldn't get Folau there in time, they couldn't be in the photo.

That is why I said that your post was a reinvention of history. I am not doubting the importance of getting additional exposure but in my opinion there was plenty of evidence the Tahs did what they could to be involved but it didn't work out. End of story.

 

[mst]

I think that is complete bullshit.

There was an opportunity for a photo shoot that the Waratahs were keen to take. The photo was scheduled for a particular day and then got delayed through the day and eventually cancelled because one of the MLB players wasn't available or something. The Waratahs had Folau available and ready for that whole day to be part of the promotional photo.

Eventually, the photo was confirmed the next day at short notice and Folau was engaged in an existing commitment with a current sponsor at the time. The Tahs offered numerous other Wallabies to take part in the photo shoot but were told that it was Folau or no one. As they couldn't get Folau there in time, they couldn't be in the photo.

That is why I said that your post was a reinvention of history. I am not doubting the importance of getting additional exposure but in my opinion there was plenty of evidence the Tahs did what they could to be involved but it didn't work out. End of story.

I think we might not be playing to the same game plan but generally we are playing for the same trophy. My original comments: If you recall the missed cross promotion with the MLB when it was in Sydney and how it was brushed off by the by the "old school" supporters as a non-issue and a waste of time was not about the details surronding the photo op, but about the attitudes and reactions I encountered after the fact. BTW for the record, if I was pointing my finger it would be at the ARU.

 

[Slim 293]

Roy Masters also stated the AFL would only get $900m for their recent broadcast deal. He was off by a measly $300m.

He also canvassed for Alan Jones to be Wallaby coach in 2007.

I distinctly remember an article Masters wrote following the Wallabies Bledisloe win in 2007 stating that Phil Waugh was not only instrumental in the Wallabies win, but was "man of the match" and must start in the team ahead of George Smith.........

Now, for anyone who remembers that game (I was there) Waugh didn't come off the bench until late in the game, and had absolutely no involvement in the Wallabies' turnaround..........

 

[It is what it is]

As it's written by Roy Masters people on this site will refuse to believe it isn't all made up, but this article provides some stark figures.

http://www.irrigator.com.au/story/2286889/pulvers-super-rugby-tv-deal-promise-premature/?cs=12
."

Roy also gets a bit loose with his facts.
In this article he claims rugby is the No 1 sport in Sth Africa.
It's not, Soccer is and by some way.

 

[Rob42]

I think we might not be playing to the same game plan but generally we are playing for the same trophy. My original comments: If you recall the missed cross promotion with the MLB when it was in Sydney and how it was brushed off by the by the "old school" supporters as a non-issue and a waste of time was not about the details surronding the photo op, but about the attitudes and reactions I encountered after the fact. BTW for the record, if I was pointing my finger it would be at the ARU.

Well, not sure I consider myself an "old-school" supporter but yes, I think the MLB missed cross-promotion was a non-issue. Firstly, because how could it have been fixed by either the Tahs or the ARU? Tell Izzy to break his sponsor commitment? That would have been more counter-productive than missing the photo op. Reschedule the whole thing to fit in with Izzy? Dreamin'. Tell the promoters to accept someone other than Izzy? They tried it, it didn't work.

Secondly, it's one photo op. Yes, it would have been great to have a rugby representative, but these things come and go like the wind. If the photo made big news on US sports websites, I certainly didn't see it. And I'm betting that if it did make it onto those websites, the caption would have included "Sonny Bill Williams, rugby player". The vast majority of Amercicans don't know the difference between league and union, both codes are generally just called rugby there. So we got the promotion anyway.

So that's why I think one missed photo op will make absolutely diddly-squat difference to the success of Australian rugby in the US.

 

[Braveheart81]

@Rob42 - are you sure the jacket in your avatar pic doesn't have leather patches on the elbows?