The Awful Truth About The ARU's Financial Position

[Strewthcobber]

Do we get money from the tour? I thought we just got our costs covered? Didn't England suggest that when they toured here? They said they didn't make anything out of the tour?

Here we go Reg

When England toured Australia this year, the ARU pocketed all the gate revenue, as well as any sponsorship deals which, embarrassingly, fell well short. Similarly, when Australia embark on their spring tour, they make no money from Tests they play, unless a match falls outside the official November touring window. This year the Wallabies have organised a Test against England outside the window, and the RFU will pay the ARU a fee of about $1.6 million.

 

[Quick Hands]

http://annualreport.cricketaustralia.com.au/financial-report/
last season's TWaS

You'll note, outrageously, CA don't declare any spend at all on community cricket

But is CA responsible for community cricket?

But there is a note in the Cricket NSW annual report (page 112) that CA give $281,200 to the Sydney grade clubs by way of grants.

http://www.cricketnsw.com.au/about/publications/annual-report


I do note that CA also allocate $106,259,000 to state associations.

A further note that Cricket NSW allocate $344,600 in grants to their Sydney grade clubs and give the grade clubs a further $316,000 towards coaching.

Rugby clubs anywhere in Australia can only dream of such support from above.

 

[Pfitzy]

So both the Wales AND England games are outside the official window?

 

[Highlander35]

Autumn Internationals window is from the Monday before the 2nd Saturday, to the 4th Sunday in November IIRC.

 

[Strewthcobber]

So both the Wales AND England games are outside the official window?

Yep - both are outside - the window is only 3 weekends - only recently confirmed that Wales are getting their full team from the English clubs

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...ip-players-allowed-face-australia-autumn-test

“As a gesture of flexibility, the Premiership Rugby clubs will release their players outside the approved Test window for matches on the weekend of 4-6 November,” a Premiership Rugby spokesperson said. “This comes as we continue deliberations on a new post-2019 global season structure to find an appropriate balance between club and international rugby.
“We are showing flexibility to help a number of unions who have decided to play on this particular weekend, but we must stress this is a one-off variation to the allowed window while discussions continue.”

 

[p.Tah]

But is CA responsible for community cricket?

But there is a note in the Cricket NSW annual report (page 112) that CA give $281,200 to the Sydney grade clubs by way of grants.

http://www.cricketnsw.com.au/about/publications/annual-report


I do note that CA also allocate $106,259,000 to state associations.

A further note that Cricket NSW allocate $344,600 in grants to their Sydney grade clubs and give the grade clubs a further $316,000 towards coaching.

Rugby clubs anywhere in Australia can only dream of such support from above.

If I recall correctly that was the model the ARU attempted. They gave the funds to NSWRU for example and they funded club rugby?
But yes, not to the tune that cricket can provide funding.

 

[Quick Hands]

If I recall correctly that was the model the ARU attempted. They gave the funds to NSWRU for example and they funded club rugby?
But yes, not to the tune that cricket can provide funding.

Certainly there's no way the AR can provide funding like CA.

I'm honestly not sure exactly what the ARU model is at the moment.

 

[A mutterer]

What do you mean by that?

george brings fans, therefore more money

 

[Micheal]

george brings fans, therefore more money

I see. Half the bloody team are now "big names" so crowds should be drawn to that, but also the team should see considerable success so heres to hoping that helps with crowd attendance. The Reds should be fine and heres to hoping the Waratahs can emulate that to take some pressure off the ARU. Its the Rebels, Force and (perhaps most significantly) the Brumbies that are the real worry.

 

[Tip]

It's a brilliant tactical move by Billy P.

Ensuring that the two biggest games in terms of revenue, viewership and competitiveness fall outside of the Test Window.

Which means the richest unions have to pay a "appearance fee".
Getting something (1.6mil) instead of nothing from England? Go Billy P, Go you good thing!

 

[gel]

I've noticed quite a bit of discussion about one of the super rugby teams being ditched. A lot of the chat has revolved around the force and rebels - more so the force.

Why are the Reds not considered the team to be ditched?

The premiership rugby will continue regardless, so there will be no trouble still creating the players that the rebels, force and brumbies can use. With unhindered access to the qld players, the force could easily make money. The rebels are in a sports teams dream location. The brumbies always develop their players well.

Apart from a momentary blip (which really does look like it was largely due to the overwhelming power of one man), the Reds have shown nothing to indicate that they are serving Australian rugby well. Have we contributed to the wallabies this year outside of Kerevi? That's a pathetic effort considering our resources. Shameful really.

We can have all our players back twice a year or whatever when we play the tahs and an international team or whatever as a purely representative side, but as a franchise, maybe the Reds should be the ones to drop off the radar.

The profits of the last few years are a by product of Ewen!s legacy -we'd have made a huge loss this year if it weren't for the ARU. P

 

[TOCC]

I've noticed quite a bit of discussion about one of the super rugby teams being ditched. A lot of the chat has revolved around the force and rebels - more so the force.

Why are the Reds not considered the team to be ditched?

It's obvious isn't it?

Money... Reds are still the 2nd highest rating team along side the Tahs and feature in the top rating matches of the year. Reds and Tahs make up a significant amount of the value of the rights, Brumbies as well..

Rebels and Force are the lowest rating teams..

It has nothing to do with the number of Wallabies generated, although there may be a level of correlation.

 

[wamberal]

It's a brilliant tactical move by Billy P.

Ensuring that the two biggest games in terms of revenue, viewership and competitiveness fall outside of the Test Window.

Which means the richest unions have to pay a "appearance fee".
Getting something (1.6mil) instead of nothing from England? Go Billy P, Go you good thing!

Gee, that won't be popular. The ARU did something good?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Gee, that won't be popular. The ARU did something good?

You don't count the NRC or doubling of our TV deal?

 

[gel]

It's obvious isn't it?

Money.

It was my initial thought as well, however I seem to recall a good proportion of the tv rights money is being injected by the northern hemisphere this time round. Do they care about the Reds or their historical rivalry (which has been surplanted by the brumbies anyway)?

The tv rights money increases when people watch, and more people will watch with better quality games, which is why four teams are being sought. Surely then seeking those four teams most likely to deliver quality product is a priority.

Furthermore, I seem to recall something about the big value item in Australian rugby are the wallabies and if that is true then it would make most sense to do whatever it takes to maximise that earning potential. That would indicate focussing efforts on the force, rebels, brumbies and tahs.

A representative match between the Reds and tahs at the end of the season where the Reds get all their players back (tahs don't though since they have the advantage of still having a team in super rugby), could still deliver cash and interest. The players selected would be better trained and more keen to play given they will have been through more competent training and development programs.

 

[wamberal]

You don't count the NRC or doubling of our TV deal?

Errr, if you look carefully you might see some ironing.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Errr, if you look carefully you might see some ironing.

And if you look closely you notice I was playing along.

 

[TOCC]

It was my initial thought as well, however I seem to recall a good proportion of the tv rights money is being injected by the northern hemisphere this time round. Do they care about the Reds or their historical rivalry (which has been surplanted by the brumbies anyway)?.

Northern Hemisphere funding accounted for a major increase in the value of the rights, but the sale of the rights domestically still makes up the majority of the ARU's broadcast revenue. Yes Wallabies are the most lucrative portion of the broadcast rights, but in terms of volume of content that's where Super Rugby comes in and is still worth tens of millions. I don't think we will ever see an exact breakdown of the broadcast rights value though.

Look over the past 10 years and you will find 80% of the top ratings Australian matches will involve the Reds and Tahs with a splattering of the Brumbies in there as well.

Force are the easy target, the time zone difference initially seen as a pro has worked against them, east coast fans turn off by 9:30pm AEST when the Force are playing. Rebels, Tahs, Reds & Brumbies offer more content and flexibility for the AEST prime time segments, which is where the true value of TV rights sits.

 

[gel]

The Reds have some big ratings numbers during Ewen's era, but outside of that it is a pretty steady decline (which i admit is not exclusive to the Reds). The super rugby rights effectively doubled with this northern hemisphere input, didn't it? That would give some indication of the breakdown, and their injection stands to give more with better product. Do the saffas and kiwis care about the Reds vs tahs? Their ratings must also count, surely.

 

[TOCC]

Rights doubled, but there are other factors to consider rather then just the NH value, the method of distribution changed marginally, hedging of the broadcast rights against the US$ at a higher rate then it was 5 years ago and increased value from South Africa, New Zealand, Argentina and Japan.

This is 2016, even when the Reds are abysmal they account for 3 of the top 9 ratings games, Waratahs and Brumbies filling out the rest.. Rebels and Force rarely top 60k, if they do its when they play against either the Reds or Tahs.

1. Reds vs Waratahs - 149k
2. Waratahs vs Brumbies - 120k
3. Crusaders vs Waratahs - 90k
4. Waratahs vs Hurricanes -89k
5. Waratahs vs Brumbies - 87k
6. Reds vs Waratahs - 85k
7. Reds vs Highlander - 85k
8. Waratahs vs Chiefs - 85k
9. Brumbies vs Higlanders (QF) - 83k

Hurricanes vs Chiefs(SF) 98k
Hurricanes vs Lions(GF) 143k


I get what you're saying, but reality is the Force are the least valuable team in terms of TV Rights, thats not a slight on the Force, thats just a reflection of the time zones and size of the local demographic, when the Force play a non-Australian team, the ratings are usually around the 25k-50k. What the Rebels have going for them, is they can play in the AEST Prime Time spot and pick up the casual rugby fan from QLD and NSW, they aren't solely relying on the Melbourne audience.