Where to for Super Rugby?

[kiap]

A hint of the changing landscape from Rear Window @ AFR:
"And again, it seems, technology has caught Telstra on its heels. Streaming immigrant Netflix and fledgling local Stan (half-owned by Fairfax Media, our publisher) murdered Foxtel's own (with Seven West Media) foray, Presto. Over-the-top content studios (HBO, Showtime) will further desecrate the value of the cable (and indeed derivative streaming) model as they go direct to customers. Sport codes will do the same, even though their traditional broadcast partners are on their knees. Optus is streaming English Premier League. America's biggest cellular network AT&T is merging with content giant Time Warner. And under the terms of its equity position in Foxtel, Telstra can't produce or distribute its own content, let alone acquire a content producer like, say, Nine Entertainment Co.

Read more: http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-windo...stras-andy-penn-20170522-gwa0n6#ixzz4hqTv8R9S
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook"

I liked this post.

Not for reasons of supporting the message, but because it's the one that added the most on the page.

It's not even a particularly new message – that the traditional sports media are being hollowed out worldwide – just another nail being hammered home. Telstra knows about it, Foxtel knows about it. Hell, even the ARU knows it.

For our little corner of it, Super Rugby has been on a long steady decline in interest … even before the self-inflicted debacles of the last two seasons.

It's fundamentally flawed and there won't just be another turn of the handle at the end of 2020 to tweak out another five years.

The replacement has to be starting now.

 

[wamberal]

Good post, Kiap. The voice of reason is seldom heard in these parts.

 

[BLR]

Just noting again: not a single one of these directors has a senior managerial track record in pro sports administration or strategy, let alone a demonstrably successful track record in that professional management zone.

Does RugbyWA count?

 

[James Pettifer]

Does RugbyWA count?

Nah, there is no rugby in WA ...

Seriously, though. I would say so and perhaps that is one of the reasons why he voted against the proposal.

 

[James Pettifer]

I liked this post.

Not for reasons of supporting the message, but because it's the one that added the most on the page.

It's not even a particularly new message – that the traditional sports media are being hollowed out worldwide – just another nail being hammered home. Telstra knows about it, Foxtel knows about it. Hell, even the ARU knows it.

For our little corner of it, Super Rugby has been on a long steady decline in interest … even before the self-inflicted debacles of the last two seasons.

It's fundamentally flawed and there won't just be another turn of the handle at the end of 2020 to tweak out another five years.

The replacement has to be starting now.

It is going to be a massive issue on a global scale. Look at the massive layoffs in ESPN for on air talent.

On a positive side, the other codes and Rugby overseas have further to fall.

Australian Rugby has an opportunity to be proactive and try and plan for the change which will hit us from 2020. Or we can just muddle along and wait for the oncoming iceberg.

 

[swingpass]

the shit is aLREADY HITTING THE FAN AND THE REALITY IS THAT THE NEW TV DEAL, IF THERE EVEN IS ONE, WONT PROVIDE THE INCOME CURRENTLY GENERATED (sorry not yelling just hit the caps by mistake and cant be bothered retyping). it would seem a domestic comp largely state based, current 5 super +/- NSW/Qld country and then a THREE team super/trans tasman/oceania competition, devoid of ARU input / restrictions and run independently from the SARU and NZRU also (REDS, WARATAHS and combined WA,Vic & ACT) is the financially responsible way to go forward after 2020. i suspect even this wouldn't be financially sustainable

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Australian Rugby has an opportunity to be proactive and try and plan for the change which will hit us from 2020. Or we can just muddle along and wait for the oncoming iceberg.

I am a pessimist.
When the going was good we spent like drunken sailors.
We have little to show for it.
And if the signs are of a world in which the sports produce the content and have direct access to the "fans" does anyone think the ARU will be able to ride that tiger?
How many of our "fans" are incidental fans - they get foxtel which includes rugby by default so they watch it. Are they going to acquire the SANZAAR or ARU app - unlikely.

 

[KOB1987]

I am a pessimist.
When the going was good we spent like drunken sailors.
We have little to show for it.
And if the signs are of a world in which the sports produce the content and have direct access to the "fans" does anyone think the ARU will be able to ride that tiger?
How many of our "fans" are incidental fans - they get foxtel which includes rugby by default so they watch it. Are they going to acquire the SANZAAR or ARU app - unlikely.

And many are like me who get Foxtel so they can watch the rugby. And some horse racing. Sometimes when I'm bored on weekends I channel flick to see what else is on but I can live without that. Foxtel doesn't include rugby specifically by default BTW, you have to subscribe to the sports package, but it is included in that.

The main benefit of a 'direct to consumer' model is exactly as the name implies, the provider will get the majority of the income and it won't need as many people to generate the same income. They will also be able to gather specific consumer information from the subscribers / pay per view watchers, and target accordingly.

The question of the ARU riding that tiger is a completely different discussion. One would assume that even with the best board, best CEO, and best media department of any union in the world, this is a function that should be outsourced.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

And many are like me who get Foxtel so they can watch the rugby. And some horse racing. Sometimes when I'm bored on weekends I channel flick to see what else is on but I can live without that. Foxtel doesn't include rugby specifically by default BTW, you have to subscribe to the sports package, but it is included in that.

The main benefit of a 'direct to consumer' model is exactly as the name implies, the provider will get the majority of the income and it won't need as many people to generate the same income. They will also be able to gather specific consumer information from the subscribers / pay per view watchers, and target accordingly.

The question of the ARU riding that tiger is a completely different discussion. One would assume that even with the best board, best CEO, and best media department of any union in the world, this is a function that should be outsourced.

The second and third paragraphs made me smile - this is the ARU

 

[James Pettifer]

the shit is aLREADY HITTING THE FAN AND THE REALITY IS THAT THE NEW TV DEAL, IF THERE EVEN IS ONE, WONT PROVIDE THE INCOME CURRENTLY GENERATED (sorry not yelling just hit the caps by mistake and cant be bothered retyping). it would seem a domestic comp largely state based, current 5 super +/- NSW/Qld country and then a THREE team super/trans tasman/oceania competition, devoid of ARU input / restrictions and run independently from the SARU and NZRU also (REDS, WARATAHS and combined WA,Vic & ACT) is the financially responsible way to go forward after 2020. i suspect even this wouldn't be financially sustainable

Ice Hockey has a national league in Australia.
Baseball has a national professional league in Australia

Surely Rugby Union can manage it.

We may lose some of the top players for a few years (until the bottom falls out of the European TV deals) but I can not believe under any circumstances that we can not run a financially sustainable model.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Ice Hockey has a national league in Australia.
Baseball has a national professional league in Australia

Surely Rugby Union can manage it.

We may lose some of the top players for a few years (until the bottom falls out of the European TV deals) but I can not believe under any circumstances that we can not run a financially sustainable model.

Actually the ABL had all its funding stripped out of it by the MLB in favour of funding academies.

But yeah, Ice Hockey does have a national semi-pro league. The AIHL. I tune into their live streams quite regularly.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

And many are like me who get Foxtel so they can watch the rugby. And some horse racing. Sometimes when I'm bored on weekends I channel flick to see what else is on but I can live without that. Foxtel doesn't include rugby specifically by default BTW, you have to subscribe to the sports package, but it is included in that.

The main benefit of a 'direct to consumer' model is exactly as the name implies, the provider will get the majority of the income and it won't need as many people to generate the same income. They will also be able to gather specific consumer information from the subscribers / pay per view watchers, and target accordingly.

The question of the ARU riding that tiger is a completely different discussion. One would assume that even with the best board, best CEO, and best media department of any union in the world, this is a function that should be outsourced.

On twitter recently there was an article by some sports data company suggesting that there are 2.1m Rugby fans in Australia but only 800k so being fans of Australian teams. Not knowing the metrics used in gathering the data there does appear to be a reasonable market in which to direct such a 'direct to consumer' model toward assuming that it can offer both value and quality.

 

[James Pettifer]

I am a pessimist.
When the going was good we spent like drunken sailors.
We have little to show for it.
And if the signs are of a world in which the sports produce the content and have direct access to the "fans" does anyone think the ARU will be able to ride that tiger?
How many of our "fans" are incidental fans - they get foxtel which includes rugby by default so they watch it. Are they going to acquire the SANZAAR or ARU app - unlikely.

Agree, the ARU screwed up. They were top of the world in 2003 from a financial and profile perspective and stuffed it.

Broadcast deal is $57 million per year (previously was $23 million a year). It is interesting that with an extra $24 million per year that we are suddenly in financial trouble.

It would be interesting to see a split of the deal between the International and Super Rugby. We keep on hearing that it is weighted towards the International but if it were 50:50 then we would need $28.5 million to recover the broadcast money for any future deal.

That would require 285,000 subscriptions at $100 each. Maybe do a tiered scheme with $85 for 1 team, $150 for all teams or something like that.

Of course, there are then extra costs required to broadcast the product.

I don't get Foxtel but I'd buy this (even at a bit more). Alternate option would be to incorporate in membership somehow. Drop the scarf and hat (I have more Rebel hats than I will ever need).

 

[Gnostic]

On twitter recently there was an article by some sports data company suggesting that there are 2.1m Rugby fans in Australia but only 800k so being fans of Australian teams. Not knowing the metrics used in gathering the data there does appear to be a reasonable market in which to direct such a 'direct to consumer' model toward assuming that it can offer both value and quality.

I have been saying it for ages, the "capture" of the actual rugby fan base of people who are already involved with the game is abysmal. Of the blokes I know still playing the game only a small percentage have Fox and being in a regional area very few of us get to the city to watch Super games.

Get a direct to consumer model somehow, or even if Fox provided a limited streaming service and I am positive there would be a large uptick in engagement.

 

[James Pettifer]

Actually the ABL had all its funding stripped out of it by the MLB in favour of funding academies.

But yeah, Ice Hockey does have a national semi-pro league. The AIHL. I tune into their live streams quite regularly.

But the ABL is still going isn't it?

 

[joeyjohnz]

The second and third paragraphs made me smile - this is the ARU

Hell, I was skeptical at the hiring of Hawkers half-pairing from his Shore days, but I was willing to give him a chance in the hope that with his history as a marketing executive he'd lead us to brighter days.

Sadly there's been a void of anything resembling leadership over the past two years. There's been little positive work or open discussion with the Clubs to address the revenue crisis that all Super Rugby teams are having.

Instead they've put 5 teams in the "too hard to work" basket and have now put the whole code in the basket with them. Crowds are down across the board by +30% and their complete contempt towards Rugby followers over the past 3 months have left the code significantly worse off even if the Worlds greatest lawyer managed to cut a team dollar-free.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I have been saying it for ages, the "capture" of the actual rugby fan base of people who are already involved with the game is abysmal. Of the blokes I know still playing the game only a small percentage have Fox and being in a regional area very few of us get to the city to watch Super games.

Get a direct to consumer model somehow, or even if Fox provided a limited streaming service and I am positive there would be a large uptick in engagement.

I've been a fan of a 'direct to consumer' model for some time. But the key will be committing to the model to ensure the content is present and the quality required to determine value is achieved.

But there's no reason why it couldn't be done. The NBL does it and our game makes Basketball look like paupers in terms of income generated. The AIHL streams every game of their full season.

It would require all the Unions investing as the Reds have but it is all doable. If you market it well and price it right you could create a rather successful platform. Well, in my opinion anyway.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Agree, the ARU screwed up. They were top of the world in 2003 from a financial and profile perspective and stuffed it.

Broadcast deal is $57 million per year (previously was $23 million a year). It is interesting that with an extra $24 million per year that we are suddenly in financial trouble.

It would be interesting to see a split of the deal between the International and Super Rugby. We keep on hearing that it is weighted towards the International but if it were 50:50 then we would need $28.5 million to recover the broadcast money for any future deal.

That would require 285,000 subscriptions at $100 each. Maybe do a tiered scheme with $85 for 1 team, $150 for all teams or something like that.

Of course, there are then extra costs required to broadcast the product.

I don't get Foxtel but I'd buy this (even at a bit more). Alternate option would be to incorporate in membership somehow. Drop the scarf and hat (I have more Rebel hats than I will ever need).

That's the key. Providing the content to justify the cost. Which I tend to think could be done. Hell, I'd pay $20/month for access with little issue. I use Foxtel Play to access Super Rugby and that's $45 a month. So $20/month would be much better value providing they can provide the quality and content.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

But the ABL is still going isn't it?

Yes, but to call it professional would be very generous.

 

[Dan54]

So anyway, if all the posturing/law suit threats etc ended up with ARU somehow having to try and talk Sanzaar into changing back to S18 or whatever, that would be I assume for 2-3 more years, and then I would guess we would see Aus having only 3 teams in super rugby? Noone would have any comeback then would they, as surely all agreements end when this broadcast deal runs out. Just wondering where it all ends!