• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

For Sale: One Gallagher Premiership!

Status
Not open for further replies.
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^ TLDR: & there's fuck all The RFU can do about it 'cos whereas they can veto the sale of a Club, obviously no one contemplated the possibility of the comp in which the Clubs play being sold!

I'm kinda hoping the deal is done & the new owners run it as a true business rather than one that loses ~60Mn p.a.: not 'cos I give a shit about Tigers or Saracens or the Not-Nots but 'cos if they have to live within their means they won't be able to pay stupid amounts of money to players who SH rugby really needs to retain if it's to redress the tv/ streaming revenue imbalance by producing a better product (plus anything that pisses off the Twickers Nigels gets my vote just on principle:)).
 
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
waiopehu oldboy said:
^^^^ TLDR: & there's fuck all The RFU can do about it 'cos whereas they can veto the sale of a Club, obviously no one contemplated the possibility of the comp in which the Clubs play being sold!

I'm kinda hoping the deal is done & the new owners run it as a true business rather than one that loses ~60Mn p.a.: not 'cos I give a shit about Tigers or Saracens or the Not-Nots but 'cos if they have to live within their means they won't be able to pay stupid amounts of money to players who SH rugby really needs to retain if it's to redress the tv/ streaming revenue imbalance by producing a better product (plus anything that pisses off the Twickers Nigels gets my vote just on principle:)).
Click to expand...
+1. Those fuckers steal our players and complain about running at a loss.

Formula 1 isnt exactly killing it at the moment, though.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Presumably if they sell the competition each team's right to a share of broadcast revenue decreases going forward. They surely can't be giving away 100% of the broadcast rights forever as that would make no sense.

So they get a cash injection of say $40m per team for selling the competition but how much of their annual revenue are they then giving away?

If the new owner decides to increase or reduce the number of teams, where do they stand then?

It's an interesting situation and presumably some more detail of what the potential deal entails will come out soon. I'm not sure selling the competition is likely to force the teams to live within their means though.

Half the teams are privately owned. Are they the ones losing most of the money?
 
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
Braveheart81 said:
Presumably if they sell the competition each team's right to a share of broadcast revenue decreases going forward. They surely can't be giving away 100% of the broadcast rights forever as that would make no sense.

So they get a cash injection of say $40m per team for selling the competition but how much of their annual revenue are they then giving away?

If the new owner decides to increase or reduce the number of teams, where do they stand then?

It's an interesting situation and presumably some more detail of what the potential deal entails will come out soon. I'm not sure selling the competition is likely to force the teams to live within their means though.

Half the teams are privately owned. Are they the ones losing most of the money?
Click to expand...
I had assumed they were being subsidized by the RFU but now that i think about it that's a pretty big assumption.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^^^^^ re: your fourth point, my hope is the new owners impose a salary cap that's based on a teams earnings rather than how deep their owner's pockets happen to be in any given year. It's the only way it's sustainable IMO unless every team is owned by someone willing to lose an unlimited amount year after year after year.
 
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
waiopehu oldboy said:
^^^^^^^^ re: your fourth point, my hope is the new owners impose a salary cap that's based on a teams earnings rather than how deep their owner's pockets happen to be in any given year. It's the only way it's sustainable IMO unless every team is owned by someone willing to lose an unlimited amount year after year after year.
Click to expand...
Seems to work for the EPL
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Derpus said:
I had assumed they were being subsidized by the RFU but now that i think about it that's a pretty big assumption.
Click to expand...


The RFU does pay a fee to all the teams which gives them access to players for certain windows etc.

From my understanding it's a very different arrangement to Super Rugby in that the RFU doesn't collect the broadcast revenue for the competition and then distribute what they want.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^^^ yeah, PRL owns & sells the rights to EPR & distributes the proceeds, TRFU owns & sells the rights to Ringinland's home games plus of course gets the gate for matches at Twickers.

Derpus said:
Seems to work for the EPL
Click to expand...

If EPL is Microsoft EPR is Oracle i.e. big but nowhere near as big.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
Derpus said:
I had assumed they were being subsidized by the RFU but now that i think about it that's a pretty big assumption.
Click to expand...
The clubs do get compensated by the RFU for losing their players during international periods and also get funding for player development. It's a couple of million per club per year I think.

Tv deal is around 4m GBP per club each year

Club owners, through interest free loans that are likely to never be paid back are covering most of the gap between revenue and expenses

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top