Rebelsfan
Billy Sheehan (19)
Obviously if that hypothetical were to happen they’d change the membership prices jeez that’s a thin argument
not an argument, just an observation sir
Obviously if that hypothetical were to happen they’d change the membership prices jeez that’s a thin argument
not an argument, just an observation sir
When they were expanding with the Force and then the Rebels, I was cheering them on in full support.
But now I don't think it would matter (as much) if the Rebels were to be cut. What benefit does it bring to retain them in Super Rugby? Super Rugby isn't growing the game in Australia anyway. And if the Rebels could move to GRR, it would be less dramatic than when the Force were being cut with nothing to go to.
If the only purpose of Super Rugby is to retain enough professional players to keep the Wallabies competitive, then why not revert to 3 teams? They would have greater depth, allowing our Super Rugby teams to regularly rest test players and still remain competitive. Combinations could also be better for the Wallabies.
Don't shoot me. I'm just putting this out there. Trying to expand rugby's footprint in Australia through Super Rugby has been a failed experiment. So what does it matter if the Rebels were to move to GRR?
Or is the main reason for wanting to retain 4 teams because it gives more professional opportunities to play rugby in Australia?
The franchise models need to be self sufficient. My understanding is that RA pay the player salaries and the travel costs. The administration, match day costs and off field support staff needs to be funded by the club itself. Revenue streams include: Club membership, walk ins on match day, sales of club colours and sponsorships. It is surely up to each club to build these revenue streams. If they can't, then the hard decision to cut the club should become a lot easier.
Yes but you can equally argue that the Franchise model given to these clubs is not sustainable, as the clubs have pointed out not enough people are buying our Pizzas, so at what point of shrinkage do you no longer have a franchise model.
If there is no demand for the product then it gets cut
I think we will need to get used to doing with much less, Foxtel essentially funds rugby, they are bleeding badly as we cut those cords and move away from cable to streaming services
Without enough kayo subscriptions there won't even be Super Rugby (unless some other entity steps up)
In the article Raelene says everything is fine. We getting the same as we have now in the next deal.
Nothing to see. We’re all happy it seems
ESPN+ is set to enter the market later this year and have specifically mentioned Rugby as a target for domestic content. They may be a decent option if they decide to get involved.
It is fair to say that Foxtel will be doing the maths in terms of how many subscribers they will lose if the start cutting rugby content, at present I pay $44 a month purely for the rugby and GOT, now that GOT is finished I should really change my subscription to sports only but not too bothered at the moment. Now the minute they cut any rugby content well goodbye Foxtel (I've been a customer since the beginning)
Rugby will always have a home somewhere so my $$$ will go there, as far as the NRC goes (In which whatever format they settle on) I will be more than happy to pay RA directly ($10 a month?) for direct streaming via their site.
IMO Rugby Foxtel will continue live under the Foxtel banner and I don't think we have too much to worry about,
PS: As much as I hate to say it "Go Brumbies!", let's tune in for the quarters and specially the Brumbies game, hoping it cracks the 100k