Melbourne Rebels 2024

[Raytah]

The Tarneit thing for me doesn't solve the problem. How do we generate enough revenue from Super Rugby to cover the $5.5 mill salary cap (mandated at 95% spend, I believe)

It doesn't. A $30m equity cheque to pay off $22m of debt to prop up a franchise with minimal cultural relevance to play a beleagured competition in a niche sport on the outskirts of a city with 20+ other professional provincial sporting teams.

It's a tricky one - both a cost and revenue problem - wage inflation imported from Japan & France is only getting worse.

 

[Proud Pig]

The Tarneit thing is not a complete solution but it could be part of a solution to the problem. The only issue is that the rest of the solution requires RA to see beyond the Sydney Eastern suburbs which will never happen. The game is not sustainable in Australia at the current revenue levels. It is a pretty simple idea but RA seem to not understand that revenue needs to be higher than costs for a sustainable business model.

The salary cap for all of the Super Rugby sides needs to be slashed mercilessly so that they can cut back on their cost base. Yes, the best players will all go overseas to earn the big pay packets but that will happen anyway in a few years when revenues continue to plummet as cutting teams means lower broadcasting revenue.

The future of Australian Rugby is not pretty if we continue down the path RA has us on.

It will start with the Rebels being chopped and the broadcasters saying by cutting Melbourne you have cut 6.8 million possible viewers in a country that is just short of 27 million people and on top of that 1 less side means 20% less content. We will be forced to cut what we pay by at least 40% given that.
A couple of years later and it will be the Brumbies head on the block because they cannot make enough revenue out of Canberra. Down to three sides and then revenues have dropped again because the amount of content has dropped by another 25% this time.
Queensland who had up till now been happily just in the black column find themselves pushing into the red because funds that are needed to support the game in this country is earmarked to strengthen the Tahs as they are the Jewel in RA crown.
A couple of more years and unfortunately the Reds have had to go by the wayside as well. The amount that Twiggy is having to fork out has now gone through the roof as the only revenue stream open to Australia is the Wallaby tests as broadcasting revenues are tiny and 6000 people at Tahs and Force games barely covers stadium costs. So, Twiggy says time for the Force to stand on their own two feet as he is not going to continue to throw good money after bad.
It is a very negative outlook and there may be a couple of golden days over the next few years but that money has already been spent.

If and only if Rugby Australia accepts that we are a third string competition and need to be paying players accordingly is there any chance of the game's survival in Australia. If the game dies in Australia please be aware NZ that it will die there too as your population cannot sustain a competition where the combined salaries of professional Rugby is around the 30 million mark. Your population of 5.2 million will not get you close to making the sort of money you need to survive.

Each club should have a hard salary cap of 2 million at the most and let's force clubs to live within their means.

 

[Tazzmania]

Each club should have a hard salary cap of 2 million at the most and let's force clubs to live within their means.

You do realise with a squad of about 35 each, thats below, the median wage for an average Australian worker.

 

[Derpus]

You do realise with a squad of about 35 each, thats below, the median wage for an average Australian worker.

Yeah pretending everyone got paid equally that's a mere 57k pp. Imagine trying to live off that in Sydney. Hope you like sleeping in a cardboard box.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I mean, what do people think the Super Rugby W players are going to do?

 

[Derpus]

I mean, what do people think the Super Rugby W players are going to do?

I know very little about the grossly underfunded women's side of the game but I had assumed it was still more or less still semi-pro and that they would otherwise have regular jobs.

 

[swingpass]

I know very little about the grossly underfunded women's side of the game but I had assumed it was still more or less still semi-pro and that they would otherwise have regular jobs.

The Rebel women (and others?) are now full time pro, i have no idea what they are paid though.

Proud Pig is correct. i wrote earlier that the financials simply do NOT stack up at the current income/cost (mostly wages) imbalance. simply not sustainable.

 

[Proud Pig]

The issue is the amount people need to be paid cannot supersede what the game can afford to pay. If that means that 10 of the 35 are amateurs then so be it. The game will not survive if we continue over spending to the degree we are.

 

[Rebel man]

The Rebel women (and others?) are now full time pro, i have no idea what they are paid though.

Proud Pig is correct. i wrote earlier that the financials simply do NOT stack up at the current income/cost (mostly wages) imbalance. simply not sustainable.

No way they are full time.

 

[Crashy]

Wallaroos are full time. Supe w are not. Assume the best supe w players also might get a bit of coin from their clubs as well. ( shute shield/ hospital cup).

 

[KevinO]

The Rebels women were the first team in Super W to get paid, but it's not a full time gig. Men's season is to short, let alone the women's to pay a full years wage.

 

[Crashy]

Major sponsor of tahs for example is 250k over 2 years.
Was 50k per year….

 

[Rebel man]

Wallaroos are full time. Supe w are not. Assume the best supe w players also might get a bit of coin from their clubs as well. ( shute shield/ hospital cup).

No way they are full time. That’s fake news. There is absolutely no way they are full time when they play a 5 week season. The AFLW players are not full time

 

[Adam84]

Wallaroos are part-time, it varies based on the tier they’re in, they can earn up to $75k as of 2024, most are earning significantly less

 

[Braveheart81]

Each club should have a hard salary cap of 2 million at the most and let's force clubs to live within their means.

The biggest problem though is that simply cutting expenses doesn't solve your problem if you're lowering the quality of the product to a degree that interest in the competition destroys your revenue.

Personally I don't see the quality of players being able to be substantially reduced without making it a completely non-viable product in terms of charging a reasonable price for memberships and tickets and getting a decent (or any) broadcast deal.

It's an incredibly difficult problem to solve.

I'm not sure there's a solution that doesn't involve private owners being willing to fund ongoing losses. We are essentially seeing this the world over barring a very limited number of exceptions.

 

[Mick The Munch]

The biggest problem though is that simply cutting expenses doesn't solve your problem if you're lowering the quality of the product to a degree that interest in the competition destroys your revenue.

Personally I don't see the quality of players being able to be substantially reduced without making it a completely non-viable product in terms of charging a reasonable price for memberships and tickets and getting a decent (or any) broadcast deal.

It's an incredibly difficult problem to solve.

I'm not sure there's a solution that doesn't involve private owners being willing to fund ongoing losses. We are essentially seeing this the world over barring a very limited number of exceptions.

And then if you cut - top talent will go overseas and you can't select them

 

[Proud Pig]

I am not sure that the quality of the product is as big an issue as people think. The Rugby watching public in Australia is the diehards only anyway. Having your Valetini's and Topou's playing in Australia is not bringing more people through the gates or watching on the telly. Apart from the Rugby Tragics like us the only interest in Australian Rugby is in International's and the state of the domestic game won't change that. If you lower the salary cap you obviously have to scrap the Giteau rule and allow the Wallabies to be selected from anywhere the same way the A-league and Socceroos work. As long as all teams are on an even footing the competition will keep the interest for the die hards and may even increase the local interest as the representation extends further into the local regions.

 

[Braveheart81]

Let's say what you ended up with is NRC standard. How do you generate enough revenue from that model to pay $2m to the players?

I'm not paying $50+ a ticket to watch that live nor is a broadcaster paying significant dollars to broadcast it.

Is the semi-professional competition significantly better than club rugby?

 

[Proud Pig]

NRC was a second string competition, it already had a higher-level competition in Super Rugby sitting above it. That is the key consideration here, a weakened Super Rugby will still be the best Rugby competition in Australia and as such will retain the majority of the support it currently has.

Cutting costs is the only way the game survives in Australia. Rugby does not raise sufficient revenue to support itself at the current cost model.
There are also not enough random Billionaires willing to just burn cash to keep the competition afloat while paying a fortune to keep players in Australia.

 

[Crashy]

just on that - anyone have a clue what Twiggy is plowing into the Force? and if he's generating a loss? I know some of his companies sponsor them so the funding comes in a few different ways I guess.