Where to for Super Rugby?

[NTT]

$1.7 million per year over 5 years equals $8.5 million for each team...

No one is suggesting that the other teams get $8.5M more than the Rebels, and the Rebels do not receive $6M more than the other teams.

As the article you posted states:

The Rebels get $6M over 5 years, with a chunk of that up front...

The rest of the teams get $1.7M every year over 5 years... or $8.5M each all round.

In no way, shape or form has the Rebels ever been disadvantaged by receiving less money than the other franchises. The figure they have received extra that no other team has is the Rebels have needed $13 million in extra funding to stay viable. To now run a narrative of poor us we are so disadvantaged is completely misleading and total garbage. No other club has received anywhere near that sort of sum and the fact that the ARU has had to add a $6 million sweetener for administrative cost funding to ofset short term losses just to sell the franchise is ridiculous.
All of the clubs receive an equal share of the broadcast revenue. All of the clubs until the sale of the Rebels received the same total grant to run administration. To twist the two different revenues into one of such falsity and victimization is wrong and absolutely untrue. To say and repeat that the Rebels will receive less revenue than the other clubs from tv money is wrong.

If you had said to me the Rebels will receive less money than the other franchises for administrative support funding over the next 5 years, as is actually the case i thought you would have made, i would have agreed with that seeing as it is now a private business set up and run how the investor wants, with investor money. There is a distinction between the two types of funding that has been blurred and needs to be correctly represented.

 

[Slim 293]

Show me where i have ever said get rid of Melbourne. I support all 5 teams to stay. I am only arguing against the statement that the Rebels are receiving $8.5 million less than the other franchises.

No one stated that.............

 

[Dan54]

Mehrtens said that nz need for us to be strong

Of course NZ really needs Aus to be strong IS, NZRU has always said as much, it important for quite a reasonable number of countries to be strong, or otherwise you end up with a league or AFL scenario, where absolutely noone else in the world cares!!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

^^^^^^^^^Mccardle rsponded to the suggestion by saying Tew was more interested in SA.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Signed.

Signed

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

https://www.strongerasfive.com/

We might need to shop this around the other threads

I agree green and gold can be a bit anal about posts should only be on this thread etc but should be exception here and put this link on other threads

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Interesting revelation in the article that almost all of the extra broadcast money received was eaten up by the extra costs involved in running a Super 18 tournament.

I suppose that it's too much to expect that SANZAAR, ARU, SARU & NZRU undertook some sort of cost-benefit analysis before proceding with Super 18?

In fairness I am sure they did not project the fallout on crowd and fan support.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

^^^^^^^^^Mccardle rsponded to the suggestion by saying Tew was more interested in SA.

It's been Tew's line ever since he became CEO. Whether it's a Steve Tew opinion, or an NZRU opinion or a NZ rugby public opinion I don't know, but he's consistently said that NZ wants to test themselves regularly against SA teams or words to that effect.

 

[Quick Hands]

In fairness I am sure they did not project the fallout on crowd and fan support.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

I'm sure that they didn't, which is part of the problem.

Anyone who thinks that the sporting public are going to maintain interest in a competition where "their" team is sporadically invisible is kidding themselves. Add to that the Byzantine conference and finals strucure and you're almost inviting fans to go somewhere else.

Nor was the decline in the product either unforseen or unforeseeable. Even the "experts" on these threads who are nothing more than amateurs with no training in sports management predicted it.

Two independent reviews, both presented to the ARU, predicted that expansion of super rugby would be a disaster for the game in this country.

So, one wonders what modelling these highly trained sports management people used to go to the current structure. Pulver was hailed as a genius for his role in the negotions.

 

[TOCC]

In fairness I am sure they did not project the fallout on crowd and fan support.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

If that's the case they failed to conduct due diligence on the new deal

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

It's been Tew's line ever since he became CEO. Whether it's a Steve Tew opinion, or an NZRU opinion or a NZ rugby public opinion I don't know, but he's consistently said that NZ wants to test themselves regularly against SA teams or words to that effect.

As I may already have said, that's no longer true but NZRU maintain the fiction as it' looks better than admitting the new reality that British/ European & Asia TV money makes the wheels go round.

If the money on offer from UK & Europe for the next rights deal isn't what it was for the last one, NZRU will drop SA & go after the Asian & North American money instead. To a degree they're prepping for it with pushing the Sunwolves' barrow, staging AB & Maori AB matches in the US, etc.

 

[Lindommer]

Signed.

In all the discussions about culling a coupla teams here or there no mention has been made about the Sunwolves' future. I fail to understand why this artifice was ever included in the first place; surely the architects of the S18 labyrinth were too sensible to be seduced by the temptations of time and money. No? Developing rugby in Japan and other parts of Asia isn't SANZAAR's responsibility, it's the iRB/WR (World Rugby)'s.

I sincerely hope some sort of top-level pro competition involving a Japanese side gets up in the future, possibly including Hong Kong and Singapore, and the AliBaba fella from China. But it's not our job to get this up.

 

[Sauron]

Would be nice if there was a running tally of numbers!

 

[liquor box]

Signed.

In all the discussions about culling a coupla teams here or there no mention has been made about the Sunwolves' future. I fail to understand why this artifice was ever included in the first place; surely the architects of the S18 labyrinth were too sensible to be seduced by the temptations of time and money. No? Developing rugby in Japan and other parts of Asia isn't SANZAAR's responsibility, it's the iRB/WR (World Rugby)'s.

I sincerely hope some sort of top-level pro competition involving a Japanese side gets up in the future, possibly including Hong Kong and Singapore, and the AliBaba fella from China. But it's not our job to get this up.

True but if SANZAAR is smart they will try to seduce any country outside of Europe to form a voting block to get control over the IRB

 

[zer0]

In all the discussions about culling a coupla teams here or there no mention has been made about the Sunwolves' future. I fail to understand why this artifice was ever included in the first place; surely the architects of the S18 labyrinth were too sensible to be seduced by the temptations of time and money. No? Developing rugby in Japan and other parts of Asia isn't SANZAAR's responsibility, it's the iRB/WR (World Rugby)'s.

I'd hazard a guess it was largely driven by the NZRU. They have strategic interests in building their presence in Japan.

 

[Omar Comin']

I keep swinging back and forth between (side A) the benefits of fewer teams to strengthen the depth of the other 4 and (side B) the benefits of a broader commercial, fan and pathway base.

Get yourself firmly with us believers in side B because the side A argument has an easy counter - if there isn't enough depth in Australia for 5 teams recruit more players from overseas.

Why should the fans, participants, volunteers etc in an entire region have to have their team wiped away when rugby has a global player market? Do fans of the Top 14 in France or the English Premier League etc care what % of their team's players come from overseas or do they just want a locally based team to support? Rugby has to be more visible in Australia, not less.

Argentina only have 1 team in Super Rugby, primarily because they can't afford more than that at this point in time. Why don't the ARU forge some partnership with the UAR and get a few more fringe Pumas players in Australian teams for example? It'd be a win/win.

 

[John S]

https://www.facebook.com/RugbyPlayersAus/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE&fref=nf

I can't believe that there are muppets saying we should cut a team (in the comments on the link to their petition)

 

[p.Tah]

Signed

 

[kiap]

I'd hazard a guess it was largely driven by the NZRU.

Nah, it was ARU as well.

Sunwolves are at least in a workable time zone for us even though it is a looong way away. Beats Argentina in that respect. Even if they're better at rugby than Japan, games in Buenos Aires may as well be invisible to us.

I think the divergence from the NZRU is the Aussies now applying that hat to the Saffers as well as the Argies.

Post-season it could perhaps be made to work but regular season, no.

 

[Dan54]

^^^^^^^^^Mccardle rsponded to the suggestion by saying Tew was more interested in SA.

Well if McCardle said it ,I suppose it must be true