Where to for Super Rugby?

[FiveStarStu]

But seriously, what can the Vic Goverment actually do? Short of buying the license off Imperium and vesting it in the VRU. Actually, that's probably the only thing they can do. I'm not sure a government giving money to a privately owned sports team passes the sniff test.

Government sponsorships are hilariously common regardless of ownership status. The Victory are privately owned and have a long standing relationship with the TAC. City are owned by the UAE and have a partnership with VicHealth.

If the Victorian government gets involved it might be as a sponsorship, a guarantee against Cox withdrawing or an extended MOU of future Test matches that Sydney apparently want to offload.

It absolutely won't be as an owner.

 

[Rebels3]

Hello Victorian Government.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Go you good things.

 

[James Pettifer]

Government sponsorships are hilariously common regardless of ownership status. The Victory are privately owned and have a long standing relationship with the TAC. City are owned by the UAE and have a partnership with VicHealth.

If the Victorian government gets involved it might be as a sponsorship, a guarantee against Cox withdrawing or an extended MOU of future Test matches that Sydney apparently want to offload.

It absolutely won't be as an owner.

TAC has also historically sponsored Geelong, Collingwood and Richmond (and just dropped Geelong so they have some spare cash available). The Tasmanian Government also sponsor Hawthorn so that they can get AFL games in Tasmania. The Vic government also contribute around $60 million per year for the Grand Prix.

And obviously, the Force is sponsored by Road Safe WA.

 

[lou75]

I have a problem with gov sponsorships of privately owned footy clubs when I see the owner paying $615000 for a beach box with one hand and receiving public money with the other hand - so go Geelong , c'wood and Richmond , but mr cox? No I have a problem with him getting money from gov coffers

 

[FiveStarStu]

I have a problem with gov sponsorships of privately owned footy clubs when I see the owner paying $615000 for a beach box with one hand and receiving public money with the other hand - so go Geelong , c'wood and Richmond , but mr cox? No I have a problem with him getting money from gov coffers

So we're not allowed sponsorship because Andrew Cox has money?

(I agree with you that beach boxes are rubbish but still)

 

[lou75]

So we're not allowed sponsorship because Andrew Cox has money?

(I agree with you that beach boxes are rubbish but still)

I guess that sums it up

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

How good is that - that is what working with grass roots and providing a pathway is all about.
ARU take notice.

We're tremendously proud of what we're building with grass roots rugby here. Grade footy and the junior pathways into grade have come on so much over the last 20 years. It's just fantastic.

 

[Slim 293]

Hello Victorian Government.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeaaaaaaaah........... that tweet is not quite a true representation of what was discussed on the show.

"The Vic Govt. would like to be consulted on the future of the Melbourne Rebels.' would've been a tad more honest.

 

[fatprop]

So we're not allowed sponsorship because Andrew Cox has money?

More a philosophical position I think, why should government departments be sponsoring any professional sporting teams?

I would prefer to see no government sponsorship of professional sporting teams. I don't think it is what we have governments departments for, if they can afford to sponsor professional sporting teams, their budget is too high and we are paying too much tax

 

[Dctarget]

More a philosophical position I think, why should government departments be sponsoring any professional sporting teams?

I would prefer to see no government sponsorship of professional sporting teams. I don't think it is what we have governments departments for, if they can afford to sponsor professional sporting teams, their budget is too high and we are paying too much tax

I don't see any difference from them funding the Grand Prix, the MTC or any other cultural attraction for that matter. Governments have a duty to make their states attractive and enjoyable to live in.

Especially Vic with their "sporting capital of the world" - they'll happily fund as many teams that let them claim that title.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Twoilms]

More a philosophical position I think, why should government departments be sponsoring any professional sporting teams?

I would prefer to see no government sponsorship of professional sporting teams. I don't think it is what we have governments departments for, if they can afford to sponsor professional sporting teams, their budget is too high and we are paying too much tax

I agree but to play devils advocate it could be considered a worthwhile investment with non-monetary returns, exactly the kind of investment a state might make where private entities would not.

Edit: If only the ARU could have somehow unearthed all of this support for the two smallest clubs without promising to kill one, we might not have been in this position in the first place.

 

[wamberal]

State Governments should make investments that benefit the people of their state.


Sporting events like the Grand Prix and so on are subsidised because they generate a lot of tourism. Both directly, and also indirectly, through incidental publicity.


Hard to see the Rebels in that category, innit?

 

[Twoilms]

^^^^​

Not really, smaller investment for a smaller return though.​

 

[Dctarget]

State Governments should make investments that benefit the people of their state.


Sporting events like the Grand Prix and so on are subsidised because they generate a lot of tourism. Both directly, and also indirectly, through incidental publicity.


Hard to see the Rebels in that category, innit?

Debatable.
Don't think anyone is suggesting give the Rebels the Grand Prix budget, rather that they should have any funding at all.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

^^^^​

Not really, smaller investment for a smaller return though.​

Mmmm. We actually had friends at court when the Rebels stated. The then Victorian Premier, Ted Ballieu, was a rugby tragic. And the first owner was Australia's King of Media, Harold Mitchell.


That should have been a pretty good kick start.

 

[James Pettifer]

^^^^
Not really, smaller investment for a smaller return though.

Also you want to make sure that you keep Rugby alive in Melbourne. Don't want to lose a Lions test or World Cup matches.

 

[John S]

so when are the rebels players going to turn up and do the same?

Probably when they beat the Tahs this week, it seems everyone else can beat us.

 

[Braveheart81]

More a philosophical position I think, why should government departments be sponsoring any professional sporting teams?

I would prefer to see no government sponsorship of professional sporting teams. I don't think it is what we have governments departments for, if they can afford to sponsor professional sporting teams, their budget is too high and we are paying too much tax

If government departments are to have any marketing budget then it seems just as valid to sponsor a sporting team.

E.g. the Road Safety Western Force. For that sort of government department a reasonable amount of what they do is centred around community awareness so they need to have visibility.

 

[Slim 293]

Also you want to make sure that you keep Rugby alive in Melbourne. Don't want to lose a Lions test or World Cup matches.

They'd still get Lions tests and the odd Bledisloe..........

Whether or not the Rebels survive is irrelevant to that.

 

[FiveStarStu]

They'd still get Lions tests and the odd Bledisloe....



Whether or not the Rebels survive is irrelevant to that.

It is if you want those things to succeed. Why cater for those sports if the base won't be there?

If the Rebels go, the Government will quite rightly rip up any MOU they have with the ARU.