National Rugby Championship 2014

[RugbyFuture]

when I was pushing for ARC a few years back the logistical response to no pro players was to have the adelaide team as a feeder to melbourne and perth collectively (offsets super level player load on those teams and contributes to adelaide too) its only 8 weeks right now...

 

[Train Without a Station]

I don't know how that offsets the housing costs though. If you could find accommodation for an 8 week period (would need to be longer, teams would want to be training as early as available leading up) it's still going to be at least around $1600 per player. That's $25,000 for the season. It's more likely you'd have to play a 6 month lease so that figure blows out to around $80,000. possibly double that to allow for importing close to the whole squad. Then there's ground hire and all other costs associated, lower corporate appetite for rugby there so lower sponsorship.

Seems basically fucking insane considering it probably doubles the running costs in what is likely to be the most poorly supported market initially.

 

[Pfitzy]

Judging by all the bullshit flying around on the ARU's fb announcement, there are a LOT of poorly supported markets.

Fuck I'm sick of "club stalwarts" complaining that they should have just amped up Premier Rugby because they have the history and support. To those people I say:

1) You don't have the support as evidenced by pretty much everything about club rugby

2) You are correct in one thing: club rugby = history.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Exactly. If club rugby was going to be the solution, they should have done what the VFL and NSWRL did. They didn't, they protected their own self-interest at the expense of rugby as a whole, time moved on. Shut the fuck up and get on board or get out of the fucking way. If club rugby was already supported they would be handing back the ARU hand outs every year and telling them to fuck off when they try and dictate the terms of rugby, not crying poor every time it's reduced.

 

[RugbyFuture]

based on operating costs of the teams thats only a 25% rise in costs (from this season) that could be holistically supported by sponsorship, share arrangements and community engagement. so you look into 2 years time when the cost would be scaling down in terms of total cost and the fact that it would have a whole state supporting it corporately I think it would be viable

 

[Train Without a Station]

How will the costs scale down? As the competition grows, costs will only increase. Greater sports science, administration and playing roster costs.

But my point anyway is, that these additional costs are required in the worst place to be able to raise sponsorship and community engagement for rugby.

 

[TOCC]

Jim Carmichael has said the NRC is costing the QRU $1million or $500'000/team..

It is obviously a very big gamble, let's hope they find sponsors willing to back the teams..

 

[Pfitzy]

Jim Carmichael has said the NRC is costing the QRU $1million or $500'000/team..

As mentioned, Jim Carmichael is a shrewd operator and I think would say what he needed to ensure he wasn't seen as breaking even if he could help it.

Each consortium was supposed to raise funding themselves - so are the QRU controlling both teams up there?

 

[Train Without a Station]

Yes

 

[RugbyFuture]

The only consortium who had to raise money themselves were the sydney teams. All others were associated with existing identity's and/or supported by the ARU

 

[Train Without a Station]

RF you make it sound like anti Sydney bias

 

[RugbyFuture]

no, I make it sound like what in reality it was. It was a reasonable stance considering the Sydney clubs want to control things and the sustainability a Sydney team can have. If the Sydney clubs didn't want input then they probably would have been run by the state union.

 

[Forcefield]

Jim Carmichael has said the NRC is costing the QRU $1million or $500'000/team..

It is obviously a very big gamble, let's hope they find sponsors willing to back the teams..

Jim should be positive about the opportunity to develop players. Another season like this one and the QRU will be losing almost as much in memberships and gate takings.

 

[TOCC]

Jim should be positive about the opportunity to develop players. Another season like this one and the QRU will be losing almost as much in memberships and gate takings.

And if the Force have another season like last or the year before then they too could be losing money..

These comments contribute little

 

[Forcefield]

It wasn't as much meant to sound like having a dig as it was a simple point: There is risk in not supporting/proceeding with the NRC. Lets not piss about with resistance or over cautiousness. We are roughly in the same place we were 7 years ago when the ARC was canned. In the current economic climate and sporting market we probably can't cope with another 7 years of that. So sometimes the biggest risk is in not doing anything at all.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Jim Carmichael has said the NRC is costing the QRU $1million or $500'000/team..

Is that sustainable?

 

[Wilson]

Jim should be positive about the opportunity to develop players. Another season like this one and the QRU will be losing almost as much in memberships and gate takings.

Pretty sure he was being positive, saying it to show that they were committed to the NRC, going all in financially. From the courier mail article:

We are injecting $1 million in hard cash and infrastructure around two teams to greatly benefit from bridging the development pathway between club rugby and Super Rugby

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...lster-2015-squad/story-fnii0lxl-1226991240171

Is that sustainable?

I imagine the first year costs are going to be much higher then later years.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I imagine that $1M is there outlay for the first season, with no consideration for any funding from the ARU from competition revenue, match day revenue or merchandise and membership sales. So no, it's not sustainable if the competition does not make any revenue, but we already knew that.

I'm sure the QRU have closely looked at this, considered costs of existing programs such as the Academy, etc. and made a decision based on what is best for them in the long term.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I'm sure the QRU have closely looked at this, considered costs of existing programs such as the Academy, etc. and made a decision based on what is best for them in the long term.

Me too.
I like their approach - which I don't think could work in Sydney.
But man that is a big punt - if you spent that at Eagle Farm tomorrow the return would be more reliable.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Shute Shield clubs would prevent it from working in Sydney. Clubs like Eastwood want to be in charge but don't want to pay for the privilege.