Where to for Super Rugby?

[Killer]

This is an over-simplification, but Australians are not usually keen venture capitalists. What do you think would happen if RA went to the capital market with a prospectus which, in essence, called for bids for the ownership of, say, twelve regionally based rugby franchises, with a view to setting up and selling a competition to one of the television companies?


Are there twelve possible angels out there, who love rugby, have very deep pockets, and are prepared to wait for a very long time to make money? No guarantees, of course.

Haha,
I'm sure there probably are the people or syndicates.
But one thing is for sure they will not trust clyne and RA so it will never happen under the current way RA operates.
On the other hand I bet they would trust a competition overseen and run by the likes of a Twiggy. He has the integrity and the resources to give it every chance of success.
Too bad clyne and RA are in charge, aust rugby will just continue to lurch from one disaster to another and progressively deeper.

 

[wamberal]

Do you believe in Father Christmas, too?

Name some names of rich people who are busting to invest in rugby.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Not exactly. It doesn't have to be Super Rugby. And I am not a massive fan of the current set-up at all. But "it" must be at a commensurate level to Super Rugby. At the moment, despite the enthusiasm from many, we just cannot know if a new competition, maybe a development of Forrest's IPRC, will sit at that level. Which is why I get concerned when some posters have declared we should walk away from Super Rugby, without a well-defined replacement for it, and think some lower level "semi-pro" comp would be the same thing.

Not necessarily.

It may just be a re-organisation of the current schedules. Move the NRC into the Super Rugby window and play it over two rounds. Leading into the soon to be July Test window. Have all professional players involved. Wallabies and all. Same in NZ and SA. Hell, with the new Sth American league looking to launch using Argentina as a primary talent producer they can use that.

From there, run Super Rugby during the current RC window. Same three conferences but playing a 8-10 week home and away season. Top two through to a Super 6 format. RC moves back into late Sept and October then onto the Spring tour.

 

[cyclopath]

Not necessarily.

It may just be a re-organisation of the current schedules. Move the NRC into the Super Rugby window and play it over two rounds. Leading into the soon to be July Test window. Have all professional players involved. Wallabies and all. Same in NZ and SA. Hell, with the new Sth American league looking to launch using Argentina as a primary talent producer they can use that.

From there, run Super Rugby during the current RC window. Same three conferences but playing a 8-10 week home and away season. Top two through to a Super 6 format. RC moves back into late Sept and October then onto the Spring tour.

Interesting. Management of player "load" would be an even more critical issue, I think, but yes, interesting.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Interesting. Management of player "load" would be an even more critical issue, I think, but yes, interesting.

It would provide more content while effectively funnelling talent upward. Everyone would start the season in the NRC competing for higher honours. From there we move into Super Rugby for a short, sharp season with the best two teams going into the finals series (S6). And then to a solid 12 or so week Test schedule.

Player management will be key but certainly would be a refreshing of the current mess. An interesting one at that in my opinion.

 

[dru]

Dru
You have identified we have the resources in Australia but do we have the intellectual ability to identify opportunities, and more importantly do we have the vision and leadership to create an environment to provide opportunities.

WA is providing the sort of vision that is required - albeit I don't think the pathway is right for Australia. Hard to argue that it isn't right for WA, under the shrink to greatness policy. In the mean time within RA AND SANZAR/NZRU etc. No we lack the vision and ability. And it is desperately required.

But "it" must be at a commensurate level to Super Rugby.

OK as a target perhaps, but as long as the teams involved provide a competitive environment I don't think it matters.

And what, in your opinion, does the Australian market want in terms of rugby?

It's been discussed in detail, repeatedly. But for a start a couple of points:

• games in Australian time zones for highlight broadcasting slots. Friday, Saturday and Sunday should always have a game in the right time slot.
• a consistency in home games for every Australian team to build momentum and build home support with regular, marketable games at home.
• more Aus teams to ensure decent pathways and opportunity for the talent pool

Not necessarily.

It may just be a re-organisation of the current schedules. Move the NRC into the Super Rugby window and play it over two rounds. Leading into the soon to be July Test window. Have all professional players involved. Wallabies and all. Same in NZ and SA. Hell, with the new Sth American league looking to launch using Argentina as a primary talent producer they can use that.

From there, run Super Rugby during the current RC window. Same three conferences but playing a 8-10 week home and away season. Top two through to a Super 6 format. RC moves back into late Sept and October then onto the Spring tour.

I would only use the NRC as an interim vehicle. Ideally you see the Waratahs dissolved into 3 or 4 SS teams in Sydney and the Reds into 2 or 3 QPR teams in Brisbane.

I would then use the "Super" comp as a representational system modelled-ish on SOO. A Qld team a NSW team and a combined south team. The talent should be nicely concentrated and lead into the Wallabies.

 

[half]

This is an over-simplification, but Australians are not usually keen venture capitalists. What do you think would happen if RA went to the capital market with a prospectus which, in essence, called for bids for the ownership of, say, twelve regionally based rugby franchises, with a view to setting up and selling a competition to one of the television companies?


Are there twelve possible angels out there, who love rugby, have very deep pockets, and are prepared to wait for a very long time to make money? No guarantees that they ever would make a profit, of course.

Wam

Don't know where to start, if you offer the right environment with good governance, and a decent outline, there are people willing to put their hands up.

Many people want to own sporting clubs.

It comes down to price,

If you could say you will loose no more than between 1.5 & 2 million per year then finding say 8 people willing to invest is very achievable. Twiggy is not the only well off rugby fan.

It takes a while to gain acceptance, coverage, revenue etc.

This is kinda at the most successful side of the chart but I post to illustrate purely to show you how successful it can be.

I mentioned in my post the MLS is a great model to use and again at the most successful side of the equation.

But 72K fans singing for a team roughly 4 years old maybe a tad more. In an area everyone said would fail i.e red neck deep south America... its 30 seconds only ...

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I would only use the NRC as an interim vehicle. Ideally you see the Waratahs dissolved into 3 or 4 SS teams in Sydney and the Reds into 2 or 3 QPR teams in Brisbane.

I would then use the "Super" comp as a representational system modelled-ish on SOO. A Qld team a NSW team and a combined south team. The talent should be nicely concentrated and lead into the Wallabies.

Using the clubs would be far too divisive. It would be better to grow the NRC structure than bring in this club over that club. If there's demand and room for growth then introduce teams at that level but not clubs. Sorry, but that's the only way I see it being workable.

I'd keep the current 4 teams for the Super Rugby segment. Would be taking players from 7 teams to 4 and then 1. I think 10 games is the minimum number they'd need in order to prepare for the Test season. You idea is basically a move back to the original three. I really don't know how'd people take that. Especially after the Force fiasco. I suppose that if you did go down that path you could have the Force and Rebels in the NRC. The Tahs, Reds and Brumbies effectively acting as our 'rep' squads n a conference with the Sunwolves and a PI side based out of Hawaii (there is a group actually keen on that). Don't know.

 

[Joe King]

Not necessarily.

It may just be a re-organisation of the current schedules. Move the NRC into the Super Rugby window and play it over two rounds. Leading into the soon to be July Test window. Have all professional players involved. Wallabies and all. Same in NZ and SA. Hell, with the new Sth American league looking to launch using Argentina as a primary talent producer they can use that.

From there, run Super Rugby during the current RC window. Same three conferences but playing a 8-10 week home and away season. Top two through to a Super 6 format. RC moves back into late Sept and October then onto the Spring tour.

Love it!

I reckon way more people would watch this. And if you give the fans what they want, it will only grow.

The real obstacle is the NZRU, who will want to keep the current set-up because it has made them better than ever.

My worry is that if the current Australian Super Rugby teams start to improve, and the SA teams continue to compete well against NZ, then the NZRU might convince the rest to keep the faith for another cycle, and everyone will be fooled all over again into thinking that the current set-up will prevent rugby in Australia from dying a slow death.

 

[Joe King]

The other thing is NZRU have always been adamant about playing Super Rugby early in the year, and their NPC later in the year during the test season. Can you see this changing WCR?

 

[Rebelsfan]

Do you believe in Father Christmas, too?

Name some names of rich people who are busting to invest in rugby.

I guess Andrew Cox would want another crack at it

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The other thing is NZRU have always been adamant about playing Super Rugby early in the year, and their NPC later in the year during the test season. Can you see this changing WCR?

Both NZ and SA have been keen to ensure their traditional structures are maintained. This reorganisation would place renewed emphasis on them. They'll become even more vital in the process and like the NRC will feature AB and Bok players. It would effectively be a revival for these structures. I think that could be attractive.

As for Super Rugby. They'll still have it. Just at a different time of year and slightly shorter. Could even go back to the future with it and do away with the conference system and playing each team once.

 

[Quick Hands]

Not necessarily.

It may just be a re-organisation of the current schedules. Move the NRC into the Super Rugby window and play it over two rounds. Leading into the soon to be July Test window. Have all professional players involved. Wallabies and all. Same in NZ and SA. Hell, with the new Sth American league looking to launch using Argentina as a primary talent producer they can use that.

From there, run Super Rugby during the current RC window. Same three conferences but playing a 8-10 week home and away season. Top two through to a Super 6 format. RC moves back into late Sept and October then onto the Spring tour.

I've advocated this before and it's by far the best outcome for Australian rugby- which almost guarantees that it won't happen.

I for one have lost interest in super rugby. My only interaction with it is with the mainstream media, which means that I barely ever hear about it. I understand though that the Waratahs have been either overseas or having a bye for about half of the time so far- not sure if this is going to build interest beyond the hard core rusted on masochists.

EDIT I don't agree with the Super Rugby part of your suggestion though. I think that the Super Rugby trans continental model is a dead parrot. The only question is how much money will be poured into it before we pull out.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I've advocated this before and it's by far the best outcome for Australian rugby- which almost guarantees that it won't happen.

I for one have lost interest in super rugby. My only interaction with it is with the mainstream media, which means that I barely ever hear about it. I understand though that the Waratahs have been either overseas or having a bye for about half of the time so far- not sure if this is going to build interest beyond the hard core rusted on masochists.

EDIT I don't agree with the Super Rugby part of your suggestion though. I think that the Super Rugby trans continental model is a dead parrot. The only question is how much money will be poured into it before we pull out.

It's not necessarily a must have. Just working with structures we already have in place.

 

[Quick Hands]

I haven't watched them (and probably won't), but I just went onto the Waratahs website. In the 7 weeks of the compeition so far, they've had 2 games in Sydney, played games in Durban, Tokyo, Canberra, Argentina and a bye. How can a competition structured in this way generate public interest? Three weeks out of 7 at a time when fans/potential fans can engage with the team.

It's madness.

 

[wamberal]

I haven't watched them (and probably won't), but I just went onto the Waratahs website. In the 7 weeks of the compeition so far, they've had 2 games in Sydney, played games in Durban, Tokyo, Canberra, Argentina and a bye. How can a competition structured in this way generate public interest? Three weeks out of 7 at a time when fans/potential fans can engage with the team.

It's madness.

Another idiocy is that the Soup starts before our the big two competitors. So we have a very narrow window of time when we are the only game in town.


I am not into continual criticism and carping, but this is sheer incompetence by whoever is responsible for scheduling.

 

[hoggy]

Love it!

I reckon way more people would watch this. And if you give the fans what they want, it will only grow.

The real obstacle is the NZRU, who will want to keep the current set-up because it has made them better than ever.

My worry is that if the current Australian Super Rugby teams start to improve, and the SA teams continue to compete well against NZ, then the NZRU might convince the rest to keep the faith for another cycle, and everyone will be fooled all over again into thinking that the current set-up will prevent rugby in Australia from dying a slow death.

I agree with this point. RA are desperate for the Aussie teams to be a bit more competitive, what this does is let them re-sign for another 4 years, and the slow decline will continue, ultimately this is all about the top level getting there weekly pay-checks not about the game growing in Australia.

 

[Quick Hands]

I agree with this point. RA are desperate for the Aussie teams to be a bit more competitive, what this does is let them re-sign for another 4 years, and the slow decline will continue, ultimately this is all about the top level getting there weekly pay-checks not about the game growing in Australia.

Agree, Super Rugby is sucking money and resources out of Australian rugby while fewer and fewer people in Australia are interested in it.

The longer this goes on, the worse things will become for rugby in Australia.

 

[wamberal]

Agree, Super Rugby is sucking money and resources out of Australian rugby while fewer and fewer people in Australia are interested in it.

The longer this goes on, the worse things will become for rugby in Australia.

The Soup does bring in some revenue, though, doesn't it? Broadcast rights? What is the profit and loss outcome?


Which is not to say that the road ahead is not very rocky. The custodians of our game will face some impossible choices. Whatever they choose will be wrong, by definition.


The only certain way to survive is to retreat to our heartlands and revert to a semi-professional game. That would be a horrible outcome. But any other forseeable way ahead is at best highly problematic and at worst impossible.


Unless Twiggy is prepared to toss in a lazy 100 mill or so.

 

[Quick Hands]

The Soup does bring in some revenue, though, doesn't it? Broadcast rights? What is the profit and loss outcome?


Which is not to say that the road ahead is not very rocky. The custodians of our game will face some impossible choices. Whatever they choose will be wrong, by definition.


The only certain way to survive is to retreat to our heartlands and revert to a semi-professional game. That would be a horrible outcome. But any other forseeable way ahead is at best highly problematic and at worst impossible.


Unless Twiggy is prepared to toss in a lazy 100 mill or so.

According to the 2016 NSWRU annual report (which is the last one I could find), the Waratahs lost $92,777 for the year and their accumlated losses were $205, 856.

The Waratahs consolidated financial statement appear after the NSWRU financial statement, which is right near the end of the attached document.

I make no claim to be a financial expert or an accountant, but I have a reasonable grasp of mathematics and I can't see how this is sustainable.

I think that we need to revert to a domestic competition as soon as we can. If this is semi-professional, rather than full-time, then so be it. The game can't sustain the financial drain of what's going on now. If the domestic semi-pro competition was well-run and engaged with new and old fans, I believe that it could eventually evolve into a full time set-up.

EDIT: The above figures being AFTER receiving a grant of over $7 million from the ARU, which presumably would be from the broadcast agreement.

http://www.nswwaratahs.com.au/Portals/35/assets/documents/2016/2016 AnnualReport [ONLINE].pdf