Where to for Super Rugby?

[waiopehu oldboy]

"A group backed by All Black legend Bryan Williams will table a bid to become the sixth Super Rugby franchise for 2021, selling itself as a Pacific bid for Pacific people.

"Moana Pasifika has been working on its pitch since June, and has a heavyweight group of backers, including the former Attorney-Generals of Samoa and Tonga.

"It’s understood there’s informal support for the bid from the Samoan, Tongan and Fijian rugby unions."

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/122743885/aucklandbased-pasifika-bid-for-super-rugby-unveiled

Cool logo, too:

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Personally bit disappointed from oz perspective after Fiji drua involvement in nrc and Fiji, Samoa involvement in GRR that we seem to have missed putting a pacific Island team in our side of the competition. But supposed that reflects would need outside investment like twiggy did for rapid rugby for that to happen

 

[Dan54]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...despite-missing-deadline-20200904-p55skq.html

So I thought I read Clarke was meant to tell us on Friday who was interested etc, think he may of been better not to give deadlines in papers (if he did) , same as the deadline for comp, you better to keep it in house so you not seen as perhaps not being in a strong position.

 

[Dan54]

"A group backed by All Black legend Bryan Williams will table a bid to become the sixth Super Rugby franchise for 2021, selling itself as a Pacific bid for Pacific people.

"Moana Pasifika has been working on its pitch since June, and has a heavyweight group of backers, including the former Attorney-Generals of Samoa and Tonga.

"It’s understood there’s informal support for the bid from the Samoan, Tongan and Fijian rugby unions."

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/122743885/aucklandbased-pasifika-bid-for-super-rugby-unveiled

Cool logo, too:

View attachment 11830

That seems to be a pretty well thought out plan, I know any Island teams tend to get rubbished on on this bored, but if (and I do say IF) the report is accurate, it could be very very good. Seems to have some reasonably competent people involved and done a lot of planning. I do wonder about putting a team together in time, but maybe they have had discussions behind scenes. Certainly seems the most well thought out additional team I have heard of so far.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ BeeGee isn't going to let his name be associated with anything that's half-arsed. I think this has a good chance of getting over the line, provided of course the financials stack up.

 

[Rebels3]

So I thought I read Clarke was meant to tell us on Friday who was interested etc, think he may of been better not to give deadlines in papers (if he did) , same as the deadline for comp, you better to keep it in house so you not seen as perhaps not being in a strong position.

Please go away and read up on NDAs, tender processes, etc. it will answer your questions.

 

[Rebel man]

Both boards need to stop looking for other sides to add and come the the realisation that professional rugby in either nation can’t turn a profit unless they host the Lions or a World Cup. Why add all this expense of trying to run pacific sides? While I am not against the concept it’s a medium term proposition not something to be considered for 21 or 22

 

[wamberal]

That seems to be a pretty well thought out plan, I know any Island teams tend to get rubbished on on this bored, but if (and I do say IF) the report is accurate, it could be very very good. Seems to have some reasonably competent people involved and done a lot of planning. I do wonder about putting a team together in time, but maybe they have had discussions behind scenes. Certainly seems the most well thought out additional team I have heard of so far.

Would love to see a Fiji/Samoa/Tonga team put together. But. Having spent some time in Tonga I am a bit sceptical that long-standing rivalries (both between nations, and internally) can be put to one side, permanently. All the participants will be serving two or more masters; that is just the nature of things.

 

[hoggy]

Both boards need to stop looking for other sides to add and come the the realisation that professional rugby in either nation can’t turn a profit unless they host the Lions or a World Cup. Why add all this expense of trying to run pacific sides? While I am not against the concept it’s a medium term proposition not something to be considered for 21 or 22

Well maybe if both Unions had supported better domestic set ups, then we both wouldn't have to to completely rely on decade separate sugar hits.
So lets kick the can down the road for say another 10,20 years then.

 

[Rebel man]

Well maybe if both Unions had supported better domestic set ups, then we both wouldn't have to to completely rely on decade separate sugar hits.
So lets kick the can down the road for say another 10,20 years then.

Don’t disagree with that, just think in the next few years we need to focus on building the TT comp. That will provide a far better product to fans and broadcasters than the old Super Rugby. Then hopefully when we have interest in that trending in the right direction we should start doing the leg work to include pacific teams

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Personally bit disappointed from oz perspective after Fiji drua involvement in nrc and Fiji, Samoa involvement in GRR that we seem to have missed putting a pacific Island team in our side of the competition. But supposed that reflects would need outside investment like twiggy did for rapid rugby for that to happen

Reminds me that NSWRU under the then Andrew Hore stopping the consortium to establish Western Sydney team in GRR was such a huge missed opportunity - as would have solved the 6th team issue for Super Rugby Au and would have had investor backing behind it with the consortium that was behind it at the time (plus Twiggy support as would have been part of rapid rugby teams). Such a huge shame and missed opportunity and yet again NSWRU have really held back opportunities for rugby to flourish (with their lack of support for NRC another major fail compared to benefits Reds got out of it by getting behind it which now seeing with strong Reds side).

 

[mst]

Both boards need to stop looking for other sides to add and come the the realisation that professional rugby in either nation can’t turn a profit unless they host the Lions or a World Cup. Why add all this expense of trying to run pacific sides? While I am not against the concept it’s a medium term proposition not something to be considered for 21 or 22

It's a very interesting point you raise (in general terms). For me this is all as though the overwhelming evidence of the continuing decline in ratings and crowds in Super Rugby (SANZAAR) indicating a product that really is not that popular seems to be willingly ignored. Generally NZ games broadcast here rated lower that the Aussie product.

It's clear the Kiwis are looking to expand outside of their strong but limited (population) domestic market, but does Aussie rugby (and NZ riding who are naively banking relying on the Aussie market), with such a limited supporter base and very small comparatively "home" footprint think that this is a viable product?

All the Super Rugby franchises were struggling to break even yet we are trying to add additional teams without a home market in difficult financial times. For all the argument about better time zone alignment etc, it still not a popular concept based on the rating data that's been available for many years.

The focus need to be back on the respective domestic markets (especially in Australia) in the short term and see where we land in future for TT and other concepts. The market is simply not there now nor is there any fertile market to try and grow in.

The reality is to be variable the product needs to grow the supporter base. The current Super Rugby AU maintains existing supporters and beyond that there is not product that cultivates interest or opportunity. Club rugby and the like will not attract any new supporters.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It's a very interesting point you raise (in general terms). For me this is all as though the overwhelming evidence of the continuing decline in ratings and crowds in Super Rugby (SANZAAR) indicating a product that really is not that popular seems to be willingly ignored. Generally NZ games broadcast here rated lower that the Aussie product.

It's clear the Kiwis are looking to expand outside of their strong but limited (population) domestic market, but does Aussie rugby (and NZ riding who are naively banking relying on the Aussie market), with such a limited supporter base and very small comparatively "home" footprint think that this is a viable product?

All the Super Rugby franchises were struggling to break even yet we are trying to add additional teams without a home market in difficult financial times. For all the argument about better time zone alignment etc, it still not a popular concept based on the rating data that's been available for many years.

The focus need to be back on the respective domestic markets (especially in Australia) in the short term and see where we land in future for TT and other concepts. The market is simply not there now nor is there any fertile market to try and grow in.

The reality is to be variable the product needs to grow the supporter base. The current Super Rugby AU maintains existing supporters and beyond that there is not product that cultivates interest or opportunity. Club rugby and the like will not attract any new supporters.

My issue is they (NZRU) want to expand the product but are not willing to be innovative to look at model that would appeal which to my mind is franchise model with more marquees, open borders (ie players playing in the competition eligible for All Blacks) which is why it needs private equity investors to come in and shake up the burecratic and conflicting interests of NZRU and RA risking designing a competition they think serves their national teams interest rather than just designing a great competition that would have fan appeal and opportunity to grow the footprint across Asia Pacific.

 

[Pone's Mullet]

Only one team in the Gallagher Premiership made a profit last year, Private investment is key- might sound counterintuitive but RA should focus on getting Private Equity signed up and plough profits into driving participation.

And get on FTA - dump Fox

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Only one team in the Gallagher Premiership made a profit last year, Private investment is key- might sound counterintuitive but RA should focus on getting Private Equity signed up and plough profits into driving participation.

And get on FTA - dump Fox

Private investment in a broader competition construct to my mind could be the catalyst for major change - prefer it to be twiggys private investment vehicle but that is just because his conditions for investment have been outlined which aligns to my views on governance clean up required. If other private equity investors bring same demands would equally be positive

 

[Dan54]

Please go away and read up on NDAs, tender processes, etc. it will answer your questions.

Don't get upset, all I said that Clarke (not I) said he would tell us last Friday, he didn't say go and read. Why would I read on NDA's or tender processes, it is not what he was meant of said.

We’ve had very good dialogue with a range of broadcasters,” Clarke told the Herald on Wednesday. “As to what comes in in the form of official proposals on Friday, I’ll tell you on Friday."

 

[Dan54]

Only one team in the Gallagher Premiership made a profit last year, Private investment is key- might sound counterintuitive but RA should focus on getting Private Equity signed up and plough profits into driving participation.

And get on FTA - dump Fox

If only one team made a profit, it is not private investment, but private donation surely!

 

[Dan54]

Would love to see a Fiji/Samoa/Tonga team put together. But. Having spent some time in Tonga I am a bit sceptical that long-standing rivalries (both between nations, and internally) can be put to one side, permanently. All the participants will be serving two or more masters; that is just the nature of things.

Yep but we have that now anyway, anyone that plays for a club etc in NH or SH and then is aligned to PI/USA etc etc is serving 2 masters. I understand the worry about rivalries etc, but the people who seem to be setting it up have been involved with these rivalries their whole lives and may have more idea than us whether it will work or not!
I know the trendy thing in here to do is knock it because it a PI team, but I remain hopeful that it can work, and as I said it seems to have some good people behind it. Let's be positive about some things and not just give reasons why it won't work, but try and be a little positive, it's what our game needs!

 

[Dan54]

Both boards need to stop looking for other sides to add and come the the realisation that professional rugby in either nation can’t turn a profit unless they host the Lions or a World Cup. Why add all this expense of trying to run pacific sides? While I am not against the concept it’s a medium term proposition not something to be considered for 21 or 22

I think you will find the proposal being talked about is funding itself? And will add to TV rights etc packages.

 

[Rebel man]

I think you will find the proposal being talked about is funding itself? And will add to TV rights etc packages.

Just like the money from the Sunwolves and Jaguares where going to be the financial saviours of super rugby