Rugby for sale?

[ronk]

This still doesn't fit. 2 conferences of 6 still leaves 2 places to be shared among Georgia, Canada, USA, Samoa, Fiji, Japan etc. Conferences would be heavily unbalanced and pointless because they'd exist on paper only (fixtures would be the same).

The Pacific Islands aren't well prepared to host so many big matches so suddenly.

[blockhead]

Does the proposed plan make more money for the Anzac's?
Yes. Then nothing else matters.

[nc6000]

It gets worse......CVC looking to buy stake in the Six Nations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47547746

[jimbobjoe]

These guys really have their lasers firmly focused on rugby - here's hoping the unions won't be lured in by the promise of short term cash.

[Ruckedtobits]

These guys really have their lasers firmly focused on rugby - here's hoping the unions won't be lured in by the promise of short term cash.

Unfortunately there's now two reasons why they might take the money and run:
1. The marketability, or the ability of the Six Nations Board to market the Competition, has fallen like a stone since 2017; and
2. The potential advent of an International Board worldwide competition that effectively distributes the surplus from the Six Nations competition among the Southern Hemisphere teams.

The prospect of having to share the revenue from the Six Nations scares the sh#t out of countries like Ireland and Scotland. England and Wales have got wholly owned national stadiums which are cash cows, alongside their 6N income. Scotland and Ireland support their entire national game from6N proceeds.

In Ireland, we have highly profitable debenture sales, but they are irregular income. We now also have the windfall from sale of Newlands Cross. But only one Province runs a clear surplus and is self-sufficient. Ulster can wash its face, if they can attract back STH & Sponsors who disappeared after the Trial. Munster cannot make Thomond work without success on the pitch and the two-centre distortion is debilitating. Connacht are producing players, but cost a net €5m plus p.a.

So overall annual Provincial defecit (inclusive of all Womens Rugby and both Sevens Squads) in real terms is probably c. €8-10m, including support of domestic rugby - which is largely personnel paid for by the IRFU.

An injection of the rumoured €100m per 6N participant might be acceptable to the IRFU, who just like the F1 bosses, cannot visualise how they would generate anything like that figure if they stay with 6N or allow the World Rugby proposal to proceed.

Suits not Committees, will determine this call and money will probably win out.

[Fan with smartphone]

Guardian reporting: “The feeling was expressed in a recent meeting that Premiership Rugby was becoming increasingly bullish after its deal with CVC and that the Rugby Football Union needed to show some leadership. It is understood the RFU has been considering contingency plans should it fail to reach agreement with its clubs over the international calendar. One would even see newly formed English regional teams entering the Pro14 with players centrally contracted.”

Is probably just negotiating strategy to fire a warning shot across English clubs to keep them honest, but at this stage I think it’s what they should do. I thought it’s what they should’ve done when the old European cup got torn apart by the same English clubs. They are out of control.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

I thought it’s what they should’ve done when the old European cup got torn apart by the same English clubs. They are out of control.

100% agree. The RFU needed to take control years ago and have been completely useless. The salary cap stuff and the fact that most teams were running at a loss showed that they needed to rein them in but things have just spiraled out of control. The clubs seem to think that they can just keep spending money because they can just come up with shitty new ideas to grab cash, but it's not sustainable. I suspect some teams will really regret the way they're spending the CVC money, it shouldn't just be an excuse to go out and sign big names, it's like a kid going mad with communion money.

[paddyor]

I thought it’s what they should’ve done when the old European cup got torn apart by the same English clubs. They are out of control.

100% agree. The RFU needed to take control years ago and have been completely useless. The salary cap stuff and the fact that most teams were running at a loss showed that they needed to rein them in but things have just spiraled out of control. The clubs seem to think that they can just keep spending money because they can just come up with shitty new ideas to grab cash, but it's not sustainable. I suspect some teams will really regret the way they're spending the CVC money, it shouldn't just be an excuse to go out and sign big names, it's like a kid going mad with communion money.

I think there's a snow balls chance in hell of the RFU setting up it's own teams and frankly it would be a disaster trying to take control of 12 teams. It's not even a well run union given the losses they've recently posted after making a big profit of the RWC. Made a mess of US rugby too with the help of Quins that left them needing a bail out to host the 7s WC.

Some of the PRL teams haven't spent up to the cap and the cash injection will help and what's more they actually have capacity to grow revenue at their ground like Sale and even Wasps who rarely seem to fill the Ricoh though it seems doubtful they will.

Looks like CVC are out of the picture now anyway with anoth PE group blowing them out of the water.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

I wasn't saying that they should set up their own teams and agree that that's nonsense.

But when the salary cap stuff broke 4/5 years ago they should have got the support of the clubs that weren't breaking it and that were struggling financially and had some idea of the direction they wanted to go, instead of just letting the worst offenders bully the smaller clubs because those smaller ones were afraid of losing the income that that the bigger ones provided.

I think Bath are actually clean when it comes to the cap but when you think of the nonsense that Bruce Craig has spouted over the years (larger squads and midweek games for example) then you really have to question why people would follow him with stuff like the rejigging of the Heineken Cup.

[paddyor]

I wasn't saying that they should set up their own teams and agree that that's nonsense.

But when the salary cap stuff broke 4/5 years ago they should have got the support of the clubs that weren't breaking it and that were struggling financially and had some idea of the direction they wanted to go, instead of just letting the worst offenders bully the smaller clubs because those smaller ones were afraid of losing the income that that the bigger ones provided.

I think Bath are actually clean when it comes to the cap but when you think of the nonsense that Bruce Craig has spouted over the years (larger squads and midweek games for example) then you really have to question why people would follow him with stuff like the rejigging of the Heineken Cup.

Ryan Walkinshaw the former Gloucester owner did a tweetstorm after the latest Sarries story and he implied breaking the cap was fairly widespread and that's why it never went any further than a slap on the wrist for Craig and Wray. They m,ight be clean now but they had to loan Attwood out in France for a year to bring themselves back in line. Given Ritchie now works for PRL it looks like he was in their pocket all along. I think the mid week games idea is back btw, the Bristol owner Lansdown was talking about a few ago.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

I think that's the case now but not back then. IIRC the talk at the time was that the Prem owners had a meeting about it and the offenders basically said "try to penalise us and we'll just walk away from the league and leave you behind", so potentially a European Super League style thing. Not standing up to them then meant that they had no choice but to start spending more cash themselves.

[paddyor]

I think that's the case now but not back then. IIRC the talk at the time was that the Prem owners had a meeting about it and the offenders basically said "try to penalise us and we'll just walk away from the league and leave you behind", so potentially a European Super League style thing. Not standing up to them then meant that they had no choice but to start spending more cash themselves.

I heard completely differently. The threat was they'd drag them thru court for a couple of years and Wray and Craig had the pockets to do that but the others didn't. The cap was essentially a gentlemens agreement rather than something legally enforceable like they are in the states. Tbh I don't think they could just walk off and start a euro super league as they don't have the domestic or international fan base to take with them the way say Man U or Liverpool do. It's Sheriff Bart in balzing saddles stuff. Why would the French walk away from the Brennus? And who'd go into business with snakes like that.....ah the Welsh!

Walkinshaw thread is here

https://twitter.com/ryanwalkinshaw/stat ... 09057?s=21

[Ruckedtobits]

And so the next Chapter opens. Mark McCafferty, CEO of Premieeship Rugby, has been head-hunted by CVC Partners and will play a key role in their pursuit of stakes in 6N rugby, Pro14 rugby, EPCR and, ultimately, Top 14 Rugby.

McCafferty has been a very effective operator, if you're looking from a Premiership perspective. From an Irish ruesy perspective he was one of the major movers and proponents of hijacking the Heineken Cup into the EPCR structure. He battled with the RFU about player release for English internationals and is a hard-nosed money man who is not known for his love of "Player Welfare".

He'll be a 'gloves-off' executive for CVC and probably knows more about the various agreements governing all the European Rugby competitions than any Executive in any of the Unions. A difficult opponent.

[Dave Cahill]

World Rugby can confirm that that it has taken the reluctant decision to discontinue plans for the Nations Championship after the required unanimous agreement by unions to enter into exclusive negotiations was not achieved by Wednesday’s deadline.

Despite strong progress in collaboration with unions, competition owners and International Rugby Players, including full engagement on the detailed process of financial due diligence, a lack of consensus on key issues, particularly the timing and format of promotion and relegation, left World Rugby with no alternative but to discontinue the project.

The core objective of the Nations Championship was to secure a strong and sustainable financial and competition model for unions, provide for the first time a meaningful competition pathway for all emerging nations, further inject excitement into the international game for fans and broadcasters and develop new markets for the betterment of all.

The concept was underpinned by a game-changing 12-year £6.1 billion guarantee from leading sports marketing agency Infront Sports & Media, backed by Hong Kong-based parent company Wanda Sports. Importantly, ownership of the competition would have been retained by the unions and competition owners without any sale of equity. Infront Sports and Media and Wanda Sports remain fully committed to World Rugby's objectives.

Throughout extensive consultation with unions and the international game’s major stakeholders, World Rugby has demonstrated flexibility and made every effort to provide solutions and reassurance on key areas including the format of the second division, the financial package for relegated teams and key player welfare considerations.

World Rugby Chairman Sir Bill Beaumont said: “World Rugby undertook this important project with the best interests of the global game at heart in line with our vision to grow the sport as a game for all. While we are naturally disappointed that a unanimous position on the Nations Championship could not be achieved among our unions, we remain fully committed to exploring alternative ways to enhance the meaning, value and opportunity of international rugby for the betterment of all unions.

“This includes our continued commitment to competition and investment opportunities for emerging nations to increase the competitiveness of the international game with a view to possible Rugby World Cup expansion in 2027.

“I would like to thank all stakeholders for their detailed consideration and engagement, World Rugby’s executive team for their hard work and Infront Sports and Media for their full and ongoing support of our vision to grow rugby’s global footprint.”

https://www.world.rugby/news/431488

[Ruckedtobits]

So, has Wanda's potential investment in World Rugby been scuppered by CVC Partners. investments in European Rugby? Four, possibly five, of the ten Nations involved in the key decisions, stand to benefit directly from the CVC Parrtners investment in the Pro14 (ongoing) and Premiership Rugby (completed). Add in the further discussions of CVC with the 6N committee and there is now a narrow majority of countries potentially being "fed" by the CVC purse.

Ultimately this is about money and its not over yet.

[johng]

CVC have agreed a deal with 6Ns - £300m for 15% according to the Times.

With the deal with Premiership already signed, that with Pro14 (£115m for 27%) due to be signed next month they effectively have a stake in ERC. Apparently Lions are in their sights next.

[Ruckedtobits]

CVC have agreed a deal with 6Ns - £300m for 15% according to the Times.

With the deal with Premiership already signed, that with Pro14 (£115m for 27%) due to be signed next month they effectively have a stake in ERC. Apparently Lions are in their sights next.

Typical of how this entire process has been formulated. Every significant development has occured under the radar, i.e. no detailed statement of objectives, business plan or proposed distribution among beneficieries and in the shadow of major rugby events, in order to minimise scrutiny and detailed analysis by objective observers or inquisitive media. I remain opposed in principle to the disposal of OUR game and entirely distrustful of all those involved, on both sides.

As previously stated, the only way that such investments in sports organisations can make a substantial return to investors is by a cumulative growth in core income i.e. punters will pay more. This was proven in Formula 1 and the same outcome is inevitable in rugby. CVC are not sport benefactors, that are parasites who thrive by their presence at the heart of a sport.

[Oldschool]

Steve Hansen has called for a global season and has accused the 6Ns of being selfish.
Can anyone explain why is the SH strapped for cash and why is it the NH's fault.
Bear in mind Lion's tours and that the NH countries also make tours to the SH
Is it simply the case that they want the NH to continue to finance their historical dominance, NZ's in particular.
Strange timing too but that's just by the by.
Supplementary question.
Who will be the winners and losers financially of a global season.
I seem to recollect that the Polynesian Island teams were being shafted and more recently the SH didn't jump up and down at the suggestion that Japan join their tournament. Quite the opposite was my own impression.

[tomthefan]

You'd kind of see Hansen's point if the Northern hemisphere was winning all the World Cups.
But now, let me see...we've had eight World Cups completed so far and the Northern hemisphere has won exactly... one.

[FLIP]

Not content with leaching off the north financially, designing the game around how they play, and referees turning a blind eye against their foul/illegal play, now they want the NH to fund even more.

Let's cancel the Lions and Summer tours. Let's play tours against European and American tier 2 sides instead. See how long they'd last on their own.