2bluesfan
Nev Cottrell (35)
That's strange, I was led to believe he was an astute businessman.Former Wallaby coach Bob Dwyer is behind a group interested in a private equity takeover of the Waratahs Super Rugby licence at the end of next season.
That's strange, I was led to believe he was an astute businessman.Former Wallaby coach Bob Dwyer is behind a group interested in a private equity takeover of the Waratahs Super Rugby licence at the end of next season.
He he. Nice, Belly! Maybe he has the business alchemy that turns the Tahs from a lead balloon to solid gold??That's strange, I was led to believe he was an astute businessman.
I'm not Belly. Neither of us would be happy with you referring to me as himHe he. Nice, Belly! Maybe he has the business alchemy that turns the Tahs from a lead balloon to solid gold??
Whoops, sorry about that!! Too many windows open at once and I saw "2 blues" and got it wrong!I'm not Belly. Neither of us would be happy with you referring to me as him
But if it does transpire, I hope you are right about that!
It would be hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job of running rugby the the NSWRU and it's varying sub-committees.
Its only the Tahs.
Presumably the license fee (on which we the community game appears to have been short changed $13k this year) is the mechanism for that contribution - so net gain $0 for grass roots.
If running football teams in this country was profitable or even viable we'd have heard about it before now: just think about the clubs that have slipped into obscurity in the last 20-30 years.
Agree with that, although maybe Bob has the model? Or possibly he won't be putting his own money in?
Hard to imagine the NSWRU stirring from its inertia in order to either accept or reject any proposal.
If he had the model, knowing his love of the limelight, we would have heard before now.
To me they simply can't accept the idea: it creates a conceptual division between the source of the games talent and its use.
Accordingly, they almost certainly will!
Is it the ARU or the NSWRU which deals out the licence? My reading of the article was that the ARU had given/sold the licence to the NSWRU, who then decided to create the Waratahs entity as a wholly owned subsidiary.
If the NSWRU were to not take up the licence after the current term expires, they would then be completely irrelevant to Australian rugby.
It would be hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job of running rugby the the NSWRU and it's varying sub-committees.
Is it the ARU or the NSWRU which deals out the licence? My reading of the article was that the ARU had given/sold the licence to the NSWRU, who then decided to create the Waratahs entity as a wholly owned subsidiary.
If the NSWRU were to not take up the licence after the current term expires, they would then be completely irrelevant to Australian rugby.
http://sportsbusinessinsider.com.au...aratahs-post-a-small-financial-loss-for-2013/
- Waratahs Rugby delivered over $7,000,000 in global media value for its sponsors (a 45 per cent increase versus 2012), the highest of any Australian franchise.
- Number one across all 15 Super Rugby franchises for back of jersey position exposure.
- Revenues from gameday increased by 2.8 per cent to $3,234,921.
- Gross sponsorship revenue came in at $5,451,528 (a shortfall of $328,128 versus 2012)
- Annual revenue from corporate hospitality concluded at $255,403, with Chairman’s Club now established as the premium sports hospitality offering in NSW.
- Member numbers were up 26 per cent versus 2012 to 11,050 with total memberships for the season hitting a record 18,502.
- Member satisfaction (as measured by the annual member survey) was 82 per cent, a huge rise from the 34 per cent recorded in 2012.
- Match attendances for the Super Rugby season averaged 16,949, the second-highest of all Australian franchises but down almost 20 per cent on 2012.
Kids memberships are free ?
You get the feeling that the same blokes responsible for assembling the annual rugby participation numbers were behind some of the numbers in the Tahs report.
I don't think they have said that memberships went from 11050 to 18502. I think that say that the membership number was 11050, and that 11050 was 26% higher than 2012 numbers. In that case 2012 member numbers must have been 8769.
The interesting statement is total memberships hit 18502, yet member numbers were 11050.
Does this mean that one member may have had more than one membership?
If John Smith buys a 2 game membership pack, and two 4 game memberships, is that counted as one member number and 3 memberships?