Ideas for NRC

[TOCC]

Good thing we never took those pesky risks with the Western Force or Melbourne Rebels.

Apples and oranges..

Super Rugby is a professional rugby competition which has the critical mass to generate revenue and allow clubs to be relatively self sustaining(including grants). NRC doesn't, no club has the ability to generate enough revenue to move a squad of 25 players for 10 weeks.

Let's say conservatively rent for hosting the player is $200/week and payment in lieu of wages is $750/week, that's $950/week for one player, or for a squad of 22 it's $20'900. Over the 10 weeks of completion it adds up to $209'000. Add in a few coaches, a few extra players, costs of flights and you're looking st $300'000 annum in overheads that no other team in the competition has.

Other clubs don't need to pay wages or rent because there are players already based in those cities. You need to ask yourself, is it worth $300'000 just to host a team in Adelaide for only 4 home games a season??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TOCC]

What does that have to do with the Rams pool of players?

Use your imagination




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Apples and oranges..

Super Rugby is a professional rugby competition which has the critical mass to generate revenue and allow clubs to be relatively self sustaining(including grants). NRC doesn't, no club has the ability to generate enough revenue to move a squad of 25 players for 10 weeks.

Let's say conservatively rent for hosting the player is $200/week and payment in lieu of wages is $750/week, that's $950/week for one player, or for a squad of 22 it's $20'900. Over the 10 weeks of completion it adds up to $209'000. Add in a few coaches, a few extra players, costs of flights and you're looking st $300'000 annum in overheads that no other team in the competition has.

Other clubs don't need to pay wages or rent because there are players already based in those cities. You need to ask yourself, is it worth $300'000 just to host a team in Adelaide for only 4 home games a season??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's why I'd prefer to see a Blackfalcons squad enter say the Shute. They could then use players from their local structures. How I would approach it would be like this. Get them in the Shute from 2017. Guarantee them for four seasons leading to the next set of negotiations. Hopefully, by then the NRC would have consolidated and reached a stable platform.

During their time in the Shute the SARFU work on building their business case for inclusion including the funding side of things. Come 2020at the end of the Shute their worthiness is assessed. If they are then ajudged to be ready then yes, elevate them.

 

[kiap]

You need to ask yourself, is it worth $300'000 just to host a team in Adelaide for only 4 home games a season?

Depends who is paying.

For a pleb like me the price is too high. It's also undesirable for the ARU to stump up that sort of sum. But would it be possible for the crow eaters to round up a couple mill to secure a 5 year licence? It might be. And if someone wants to t̶h̶r̶o̶w̶ ̶a̶w̶a̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶i̶r̶ ̶c̶a̶, ... erm, ... invest in the game of rugby, then let 'em.

Obviously won't be happening in 2016, tho.

Yes, expenses have to be curtailed, but each franchise pays most of their own way. And the NRC is a budget sort of sports comp.

The Sydney Stars didn't go bust. They got the boot, it would seem, for other reasons. i.e. they had fewer friends than the other teams when the NSW consolidation was decided.

 

[Jagman]

Base an Adelaide team in Sydney. Relocate 3-4 of the best adelaidian rugby players. Fly in fly out, also during the week send a a couple of players to schools, clubs to have a presence but fly them back without staying the night. It's not as though NSW country and QLD country aren't effectively doing the same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiap]

The Shute Shield ain't gonna want Adelaide.

They don't even like Penrith stinking up the joint.

 

[Slim 293]

What if they disguise them as the 'Coogee' or 'Mosman' Falcons?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Mate, the Stars may have gone but the Rams are still charging along. We could do with new fans. Why not jump aboard and see where it leads you.

I will follow the Rams now stars gone but will only go to games close to inner west. Leichhardt oval now free at that time so maybe Rams should play a couple of games there.

Whilst supported the stars I was a realist that one team Shute shield model would never work. Not sure I like the rationalisation - particularly putting all the talent in nsw country who only play one home game in Sydney - dumb

Rugby in inner west important market as growth area so not sure Rams can cover this - time will tell

 

[Rugbynutter39]

The Shute Shield ain't gonna want Adelaide.

They don't even like Penrith stinking up the joint.

At some stage want to target Adelaide as growth area for rugby e.g nrc, Shute shield involvement - but suggest we leave that to next tv rugby deal where with success of 2020 strategic plan the next tv deal is landed for $2b so aru can fund propping up Adelaide team in the early years

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It really does. Not sure that the Brumbies want it though.

The only way it would have even an ice cream's chance in hell is for it to be another partnership where the third party brings all the dough and the Ponies mainly contribute in kind (i.e. release players and perhaps provide coaches).

Plus they'd have to be bullied into it by the ARU.

I mean even the Vikings' money wasn't good enough for sanctified Canberrans () so the Brumbies are going to boot the Red and Whites into touch.


That's aiming high!

But I like that goal - even the Rams as a potential 6th Supe side.

Makes lot of sense as target - including 2 teams for Rams given western Sydney important target growth market for rugby

 

[TOCC]

Depends who is paying.

For a pleb like me the price is too high. It's also undesirable for the ARU to stump up that sort of sum. But would it be possible for the crow eaters to round up a couple mill to secure a 5 year licence? It might be. And if someone wants to t̶h̶r̶o̶w̶ ̶a̶w̶a̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶i̶r̶ ̶c̶a̶, ... erm, ... invest in the game of rugby, then let 'em.

Well that would then be up to the ARU to determine whether that is in the best interest of the game. Lets say this financier decides to fund an Adelaide team for a few years, then 3 years later and $1million spent he decides to pull the pin. What happens then, the ARU takes over and accepts liability or cancels the license?

Look what happened when Harold Mitchell pulled out of the Rebels, it placed a massive financial drain on the ARU and almost sent the code bankrupt. The ARU made the right decision to persist with the Rebels, because pulling the pin would have cause irreparable damage to rugby union in Melbourne and ruined the chance of Melbourne getting another Super Rugby team in the next 15 or so years.

A similar mindset needs to be used when talking about expansion of the NRC, if the expansion team isn't sustainable, if there is no chance of it breaking even then consideration needs to be given whether the competition is better off waiting a further 5 or so years until it is sustainable and the doing it then instead of risking it now. Look at the A League expanding too quickly onto the Gold Coast, Townsville and Wellington, likewise with the Super League expanding into Adelaide, Perth and SEQ..

 

[kiap]

Lets say this financier decides to fund an Adelaide team for a few years, then 3 years later and $1million spent he decides to pull the pin. What happens then, the ARU takes over and accepts liability or cancels the license?

Meh. You are conflating the NRC with Super Rugby. Because the NRC is wholly owned by the ARU, they can do just about anything they like with it ...

That includes removing the licence (just ask Wozza Livingston) or relocating the team to Pitcairn Island. Most likely Foxsports, or the potential next television arrangement, is the only major outside consideration.

If operating on ~15-20% of the budget, there is hardy a comparison to Harold Mitchell's Rebels.

 

[TOCC]

The issue isn't whether they can remove a license or not, it's the damage that removing a license would do to rugby in the city/region.

Closer to home just look at the Sunshine Coast Stingrays, rugby union has lost a lot of momentum in growth and participation figures on the Sunshine Coast since the Stingrays collapsed.

Granting a team to Adelaide and then removing that license 3 years later could easily do more damage to rugby union in the city then never granting a license at all.

That's why any bid for expansion needs to prove it has a sustainable business model and not one reliant on a wealthy individual propping the club up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The issue isn't whether they can remove a license or not, it's the damage that removing a license would do to rugby in the city/region.

Closer to home just look at the Sunshine Coast Stingrays, rugby union has lost a lot of momentum in growth and participation figures on the Sunshine Coast since the Stingrays collapsed.

Granting a team to Adelaide and then removing that license 3 years later could easily do more damage to rugby union in the city then never granting a license at all.

That's why any bid for expansion needs to prove it has a sustainable business model and not one reliant on a wealthy individual propping the club up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You've just described the model used in many of the world's biggest leagues. Some not so big ones as well.

 

[kiap]

Granting a team to Adelaide and then removing that license 3 years later could easily do more damage to rugby union in the city then never granting a license at all.

Soft cock nonsense. Rugby in Adelaide will survive either way.

You've gotta have a go, yer mug.


Even the much-derided, big-spending Melbourne Rebels are kicking on.

 

[TOCC]

Fortunately none of you are running rugby in this country...

I'm sure someone thought It was soft 'cock nonsense' when people opposed the expansion of the a league into Townsville and Gold Coast..

Financial sustainability is imperative to ensure the NRC's future existence. Not whimsical fantasies of expanding into new regions without credible business models to support the team.

 

[kiap]

Who's arguing against financial sustainability?

Of course any bid has to stack up financially. But it's dishonest to pretend that running an NRC team is anything like the risk to the ARU that the Harold Mitchell venture in Melbourne was.

Or for that matter, the Reds and the Waratahs who had to be bailed out in the recent past.

All the while our ersatz Chief Executive is putting plans in place for Adelaide to play in the Shute!!

 

[Brumby Runner]

Have to say I am more than a little bit concerned with the removal of the Stars and the realignment of Souths to the Rays side.

I have a feeling that with these changes, the Rams will struggle big time to put a competitive side on the field (especially if Eastwood also decide to go North), and after a few years of perhaps struggling at the basement end of the ladder the temptation will be there to remove them also.

Alternatively, if most of the displaced Stars' players elect to go to the Rams, then NSW Country could find themselves in the situation I described above.

And I cannot see a lot of ex-Stars' fans (were there ever lots?) transferring their allegiances to either the Eagles or the Rams.

I accept that the model of the Stars being essentially a one-SS backed side probably wasn't going to survive long term, but I just hope that its demise is not the first in a chain of similar problems for the NRC.

I am not sure what the solution should be, but I have an uneasy feeling that it might need to embrace two NRC teams supported by the Brumbies, with three teams remaining in Sydney (Rays, Rams and Stars) where the Stars must be supported by Randwick and Easts as well as Uni. Don't know if anyone can bang heads and make it happen.

 

[mst]

Let 's hope that changes of team identity slow right down. A very important factor in the survival of the NRC is that viewers become supporters. Hopefully even members, of a particular franchise.


That will not happen if the team identities keep changing.

I cant agree more with you on this one wamberal. With the Canberra Vikings about to get identity reassignment and the Stars folding it signals instability and politics and supporters just wont subscribe simply because of the fear of change.

 

[TOCC]

Who's arguing against financial sustainability?.

Anyone who is arguing for expansion of the NRC into Adelaide..
Only one team made a profit in 2015, and that was leveraging home grown players and facilities. What hope does Adelaide have if they have an additional $300k in overheads just on relocation expenses...

Let's start talking practically instead of wishful thinking, what sort of crowds and sponsorship revenue do you think an Adelaide team will receive.