Where to for Super Rugby?

[half]

Saying's that spring to mind.

Can't see the forest for the trees,
Blind leading the blind,
Stuck in the past,

OK its a local paper, grrrrrrr in a population of 634, 000, the 7th biggest city in Australia with the Central Coast not that far away, with another 350K population.

Its part of Fairfax not News, the name I think gives that away.

Its widely read, across the region.

Put into context the Hunter has more players and a city twice the size of Canberra.

But lets all look at why it won't work thats the rugby way.

 

[Braveheart81]

If we had a national league with 8+ teams I agree there should be a Newcastle team.

The metrics of it are challenging though. Newcastle has been a disaster financially for a number of sports. They have had periods of success but the low points have been very low and costly.

I'm still not really sure how that's relevant to the media articles you posted. Are you suggesting that no one in the country follows any rugby or other sport that isn't written about specifically in their local paper?

 

[wamberal]

I am sure Nathan Tinkler would be interested in taking on a Newcastle based franchise, he had such a big success with the Knights. Any other suggestions?

 

[sunnyboys]

Gold Coast is bigger than Newcastle and no one would suggest a team based there.

I would think a Newcastle team would also struggle.

I would be inclined to have a Country team that played there once a year as one of its home games - before committing a team there.

having watched the reception the two Country teams have received in the NRC, it wouldn't be crazy to have a country team. its just a matter of travel etc for players. picking a home base etc.

The Titans have had some decent crowds on their travels via Toowoomba and Gladstone. not massive by any stretch but it is a great way of engaging with regional and rural areas.

If they know they will get one game a year it can be developed into a bit of an event for the local union community.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I am sure Nathan Tinkler would be interested in taking on a Newcastle based franchise, he had such a big success with the Knights. Any other suggestions?

Start a bidding war between Tinkler & Clive Palmer?

 

[sunnyboys]

the one negative against roving Country teams is TV production costs.

 

[wamberal]

the one negative against roving Country teams is TV production costs.

There are a few actual or potential negatives. Not to sound like a grouch, but costs in general would be higher (other than ground rental, and even then every team would probably need some sort of permanent base, the cost of which would be an overhead, no matter where they play), revenues would probably be lower.

Moving games around would militate against the growth of membership.

I would still like to see games in the country, don't get me wrong, but we have to be realistic about the economics.

 

[sunnyboys]

There are a few actual or potential negatives. Not to sound like a grouch, but costs in general would be higher (other than ground rental, and even then every team would probably need some sort of permanent base, the cost of which would be an overhead, no matter where they play), revenues would probably be lower.

Moving games around would militate against the growth of membership.

I would still like to see games in the country, don't get me wrong, but we have to be realistic about the economics.

Totally agree. Deep down you’d love to have it but realistically know it has big challenges.

 

[wamberal]

Totally agree. Deep down you’d love to have it but realistically know it has big challenges.

I think it is absolutely essential to move some games to country locations. Another factor is that these games would, by definition, be played at grounds which do not have adequate lighting, meaning day light games. Good for spectators at the venue, but not so good for the wider audience and, of course, absolutely not good for the host broadcaster.

 

[hoggy]

"What we've seen so far this year in terms of ratings is an adjustment and it's certainly been a lot more positive than in 2017," Marinos said. "There's been a renewed interest and the upside is that we've also seen a lot more competitive games from all teams."My initial engagement with the broadcasters has that it's been stable and steady on their platforms so we're no longer in a continual downturn. So we're reasonably happy so far, but there's still a long way to go in the season."

That from Andy Marions, "So we're no longer in a continual downturn". Yep sums it up.

 

[Killer]

"What we've seen so far this year in terms of ratings is an adjustment and it's certainly been a lot more positive than in 2017," Marinos said. "There's been a renewed interest and the upside is that we've also seen a lot more competitive games from all teams."My initial engagement with the broadcasters has that it's been stable and steady on their platforms so we're no longer in a continual downturn. So we're reasonably happy so far, but there's still a long way to go in the season."

That from Andy Marions, "So we're no longer in a continual downturn". Yep sums it up.

just bouncing along the bottom of the chart, in companies this can go on for years before it either breaks up or dies. While there is still enough money to limp along nothing will change.
Change is expensive and could bring about the end quickly, no CEO wants that on their record when they can keep getting a paycheck and pretending all is well to the shareholders.
NZ isn't really in a position to help either, my guess is they don't see alot to be confident about so are battening down the hatches.
Looks like Twiggy and his 100m a year for 10 yrs is going to have a easy time of it, especially with world rugby onside.

 

[Strewthcobber]

According to my numbers (which aren't the same as what's in the article!), if we exclude Force home games, ratings are basically the same in 2018 as they were in 2017.

The Friday night 9:30 games in the WA timezone were a big drag last year - and of course the regular lack of lead-in games out east was a big factor in that.

 

[Killer]

just bouncing along the bottom of the chart, in companies this can go on for years before it either breaks up or dies. While there is still enough money to limp along nothing will change.
Change is expensive and could bring about the end quickly, no CEO wants that on their record when they can keep getting a paycheck and pretending all is well to the shareholders.
NZ isn't really in a position to help either, my guess is they don't see alot to be confident about so are battening down the hatches.
Looks like Twiggy and his 100m a year for 10 yrs is going to have a easy time of it, especially with world rugby onside.

And btw Braveheart knowing of your love affair with clyne, a RA with the Force and Twiggy would be very different to your RA with the rebels and clyne (even a RA with the Force, the rebels and Twiggy but no clyne would be vastly more positive)
Clyne just forced through his agenda regardless of changing circumstances, typical of someone who lives off the corporate's with no skin in the game, good luck.

 

[half]

If we had a national league with 8+ teams I agree there should be a Newcastle team.

The metrics of it are challenging though. Newcastle has been a disaster financially for a number of sports. They have had periods of success but the low points have been very low and costly.

I'm still not really sure how that's relevant to the media articles you posted. Are you suggesting that no one in the country follows any rugby or other sport that isn't written about specifically in their local paper?

BH

I don’t believe Super Rugby will grow and expand rugby over the coming decades. I doubt it will survive another 15 years. My reasons, hidden on a broadcast subscription platform that in and of itself will also struggle to survive into the future with worldwide patterns of falling subscriptions and falling rating across many traditional sports. Further local domestic competition world over including Australia are better supported than forced multi national competitions.

With this as my starting premises, I have often nay very often argued for a workable Plan “B” which I think needs between 3 & 4 years of planning and negotiation to ensure a workable chance of success.

Recently and in the past I have bemoaned a lack of separation of powers, between the governing body RA and the professional game. Most successful competitions have the professional game run by those taking part in it. Most US sports and the EPL in England are obvious examples. The current soccer civil war in Australia between FFA and the A-Leagues clubs is essentially about the clubs breaking away from FFA.

To this end I believe we need an independent body to run the professional game in Australia.

Lets call it Pro-Rugby Corp.

Pro-Rugby Corp will have between 8 & 10 teams to start with, Pro-Rugby Corp will run and operate the National Domestic competition.

Thus my post about the Hunter / Newcastle with the Central Coast as well. We have one million people and 20 tier 3 clubs, lots of local support and lots of local media support.

I know investors in Newcastle prepared to put up too 600K a season into a Newcastle team at NRC level. Make it a national team in a division 1 competition and money will flow.

Add Twiggy, Buildcorp, Redbull, and IMO finding private investors while difficult is very feasible.

The private backers will essentially fund the short fall.

In context we need to move to a fully independent body which will run and fund Australia’s national domestic competition.

To me its beyond obvious that is the path we need to go down.

 

[Bandar]

I agree

Unfortunately it is much easier to renew the existing competition, which is what will happen and RA will continue to lose money.

 

[wamberal]

There have been a number of us who have posted about the reality of semi-professionalism. While it is true that the amateur ethic is a hugely important virtue of our game (in the true sense: people play it, support it, and watch it because they love it), have a closer look at the Shute Shield in Sydney.


It will be there in 100 years time. It will have changed a fair bit, but it will be there. It is, of course, semi-professional.

And it will be on your screeens on Saturday night, courtesy of Fox Sports.

 

[James Pettifer]

I agree

Unfortunately it is much easier to renew the existing competition, which is what will happen and RA will continue to lose money.

Except with 4 teams, reduced ratings, pressures on sporting broadcast rights and the threat of SA moving to Europe (probably less likely due to the Pro14 involvement being less successful than planned) they are going to get a lot less money than last time.

 

[sunnyboys]

So CBS (owners of Ten) have signed on to broadcast the new US rugby comp. meanwhile Ten have zero local sports content.

With the BBL, Ten showed they know how to turn around a faltering competition.

faint hope perhaps???

 

[Rebels3]

How long are they locked into the A-League deal for?

I am all for FTA, but if it happens it needs to be all in or not in from the TV station. I don't want some crappy 1 game a week hidden on a secondary channel. At a minimum it needs to be games involving Australian teams shown live.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

How long are they locked into the A-League deal for?

I am all for FTA, but if it happens it needs to be all in or not in from the TV station. I don't want some crappy 1 game a week hidden on a secondary channel. At a minimum it needs to be games involving Australian teams shown live.

Five years. I think. But they didn't exactly break the bank on that deal. The FFA pretty much took the highest offer from a bunch of pretty dire offers.