Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rugbynutter39]

Its not about next season.

Harking back to my post of over a decade ago until about 4 years ago I always said the move to a NDC will take 4 to 5 years.

Phase 1 is to establish the framework for the system to operate and new structures to be developed, and as I have countless times said we should copy US franchise models, were the governing body establishes a competition structure and invites private owners to invest and run the competition.

Phase 2, and done in lock step with phase 1 is the selling of the idea to the broader rugby family, and be inclusive and be flexible and by that I mean take on board the views of all stakeholders.

Phase 3, is selling the concept to private investors.

Phase 4 is the implementation of the above.

HOWEVER the issue today is we no longer have 4 to 5 years. Maybe two and a bit, so we need to work quicker and smarter.

The media deal with the Nine group provides time and enough cash to undertake the first three phases above. WE should not waste the limited time we have.

BUT we will go to a NDC the taro cards and tea leafs say so. If not the taro cards and tea leafs then the TV ratings do.

Its coming its obvious its coming, so lets do it well and unite behind it.

Money and investment could accelerate but I still think longer time frames asn would need some big money and visionary approach like the world league concept backed by PE world rugby was pushing and got scuppered by northern hemisphere nations. In absence of that I see the approach I suggested. 6 teams for sure next year which includes Fiji. And additional champions league games against nz (I think Japan will be too early to have set up).

Champions league games against nz and Japan is critical to provide enough content whilst also creating another rugby product to sell to broadcasters and fans.

I agree by the way that we need an independent body to run the competition as history shown with the nzrus and RAs of the world they would struggle to make it succeed given other competing agendas stop them focussing on this being the best competition it can be.

 

[Dan54]

Still we had Sanzaar as a seperate board, not sure to many would want a completely seperate board though (much as I would) as a seperate board would only be interested (rightly) in what was the best comp. And it may decide the best comp doesn't involve 5 teams from Aus or NZ, or PI or Drua. But I with you RN that once comp is set, it needs or would have to be run by another board, even if it will end up being similar to what we had.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Still we had Sanzaar as a seperate board, not sure to many would want a completely seperate board though (much as I would) as a seperate board would only be interested (rightly) in what was the best comp. And it may decide the best comp doesn't involve 5 teams from Aus or NZ, or PI or Drua. But I with you RN that once comp is set, it needs or would have to be run by another board, even if it will end up being similar to what we had.

The idea is what half has is some high money seeing the opportunity to invest - the challenge to that of course is maybe the investment proposition does not stack up with league etc. But I agree with you Dan regardless of what it may look like we need an independent organisation involved in leading the design and running of the competition and whose key kpis are to make it a successful competition and then battle the nzrus and RAs to align knowing they have different competing agendas. But yes need to learn lessesns of Sanzaar as that was far from independent organisation and not the model we want.

 

[Adam84]

Corrections are fair. Its all fairly mute when you consider its most of above is 2020 figures that included AB games which is where they yield most of the revenue.

The $55mil I was referring to is more recent (April / May 2021) and inline with the revenue prediction that NZRU have been publicly stating since April last year. (nil AB revenue) EG: https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2020/04/29/new-zealand-rugby-annual-report

As Dan54 has indicated, the TV deal only yields about $80mil in a full AB playing year, so for SRAO it would be much less. NZRU will still have to pay the fees to Sky for the 5% share as per the 5yr deal. Its akin to owning (and still paying off) part of an oil refinery while owning a dry oil well, and there is a crude oil shortage.

Majority of media reporting and NZRU in April 2021 reported it as (specifically using these words) writedown of Sky Television shares which was interesting and may be due to the odd arrangements of the deal and to make a point as its still fairly convoluted (Rights owner being part owner of broadcaster who was the sole bidder for the rights). What NZRU have not mentioned is that Sky is / was in talks (with NZRU) to claw back rights (and $$) earlier this year. To what value is unknown but Sky revenue is already sliding.

Agree to disagree. The terminology and figures are from media reporting.

Ok, I haven’t seen $55million annual revenue forecast anywhere, if you can post a link I’d be interested to see.

To clarify, NZRU don’t pay Sky any fees, they received the 5% stake back in 2019 and the impairment is due to SkyTv capital raising last year which diluted NZRUs stake. If my math is correct it would be closer to 1.8% now.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

No, because what was been proposed by NZR was a competition which simply promoted short-term self interest, not long-term regional growth. It completely missed the mark by culling Australian teams without any dialogue with Australia’s. Which is why everyone had their nickers in a twist, rightly so.

Nailed it....

 

[half]

HHHHHHmmmm much doubt in posting this but what the heck…

In my life I have watched and studied a lot of various sports management systems and leaders in sporting codes.

In Australia, my belief is two sports leaders stand out as they took their codes from being in decline when they took over to major growth and established excellent systems. These are Wayne Jackson in AFL, & Ken Arthurson in league.

Both changed the perception of their codes and both found ways to not only stop the decline their codes were having at the time, but to grow their codes. Both found ways to connect to their fan bases.

You could also argue that Kerry Packer with cricket had a similar effect.

Now, I do sometimes over watch this stuff maybe a morbid sense of looking for stuff. Every now and then you come across something enlightening, sometimes something insane, often you hear something smart but see no way it could be used in Australia or say rugby.

Sometimes you hear, sports heads talk in new ways and relook at old issues with a new focus.

Today I heard what could become my third sporting head talking about how to grow, broadcast, recognise problems and look to combining traditional media to connect to modern media.

Whats weird I think its an English show interviewing an Australian sports leader.

His name is Danny Townsend, IMO he will change the way sport is delivered hhhmmmm nay he will change the way people measure the connection to sport and I think the AFL will be the first to follow his lead and then so will league.

We have so smart people in rugby now and I am sure they will pay very very very close attention to what outcomes are achieved by this guy.

I won’t give any indication what he is going to say, but this interview starts well, and as it goes by with talks and converting traditional media to IT data collections and AI, I have never ever heard a sports person in Australia with such a well-researched plan for recovery and growth.

If interested in this kinda stuff and its certainly not for everybody, its well worth a listen even if over three or six times i.e. not all at once, roughly 45 minutes if you choose to watch, listen from say 16 minutes if you wanta get away from the almost pure code talk and media deal analysis.

 

[Dan54]

I will have a listen over next week or so half, I always find it interesting to hear what people who actually have experience etc in these things have got to say.

 

[half]

I will have a listen over next week or so half, I always find it interesting to hear what people who actually have experience etc in these things have got to say.

Suggest as I posted you listen from say 16 minutes.... then if you want go back and listen to the first 16 minutes...the way this guy talks about using IT & AR and fan connections is beyond interesting and if he can pull it off, he will force every code to follow his league...

The first 16 minutes is about soccer and what their new structure is and the Ten Deal

 

[Adam84]

Ok, I haven’t seen $55million annual revenue forecast anywhere, if you can post a link I’d be interested to see.

To clarify, NZRU don’t pay Sky any fees, they received the 5% stake back in 2019 and the impairment is due to SkyTv capital raising last year which diluted NZRUs stake. If my math is correct it would be closer to 1.8% now.

Further to above NZRU set to sign a $20million/annum sponsorship deal with Amazon, this compares to the reported $4million Cadbury paid for the Wallabies. On too of the broadcast rights, $80million paid to NZRU vs $30million paid to RA.

Gulf between NZRU and RA’s budget is growing bigger and bigger, RA won’t be able compete with NZ player depth in coming years, worse so then now.

 

[KOB1987]

Further to above NZRU set to sign a $20million/annum sponsorship deal with Amazon, this compares to the reported $4million Cadbury paid for the Wallabies. On too of the broadcast rights, $80million paid to NZRU vs $30million paid to RA.

Gulf between NZRU and RA’s budget is growing bigger and bigger, RA won’t be able compete with NZ player depth in coming years, worse so then now.

Yeah RA had no choice but to take a low ball offer this year. At least it’s with a solid company though and if it works for Cadbury they can then leverage off that for the Lions tour in ‘25 and (hopefully) the RWC in ‘27. Bigger picture stuff, NZRU have neither of those big ticket opportunities coming up and their brand is understandably worth a lot more than ours right now.

 

[dru]

Yeah RA had no choice but to take a low ball offer this year. At least it’s with a solid company though and if it works for Cadbury they can then leverage off that for the Lions tour in ‘25 and (hopefully) the RWC in ‘27. Bigger picture stuff, NZRU have neither of those big ticket opportunities coming up and their brand is understandably worth a lot more than ours right now.

And for the foreseeable.

 

[KOB1987]

And for the foreseeable.

Until we win the Bledisloe back. The tide turns right there, whenever that is!

 

[liquor box]

Further to above NZRU set to sign a $20million/annum sponsorship deal with Amazon, this compares to the reported $4million Cadbury paid for the Wallabies. On too of the broadcast rights, $80million paid to NZRU vs $30million paid to RA.

Gulf between NZRU and RA’s budget is growing bigger and bigger, RA won’t be able compete with NZ player depth in coming years, worse so then now.

I wonder if Sky are worried about their TV rights?

I imagine that Amazon would be interested in broadcasting the All Blacks around the world on Prime.

 

[Rebel man]

Look NZ maybe in a better position now but business wise going forward they are inferior to Australia. They have a small population with low levels of growth, their domestic market is already saturated with rugby. Australia at the moment is struggling but we have a lot bigger market and a lot bigger economy yes our sporting market is a lot more competitive but we have the 25 Lions tour and very likely the 27 World Cup and 32 Olympics to help grow the game both in terms or participation and engagement

 

[hoggy]

Look NZ maybe in a better position now but business wise going forward they are inferior to Australia. They have a small population with low levels of growth, their domestic market is already saturated with rugby. Australia at the moment is struggling but we have a lot bigger market and a lot bigger economy yes our sporting market is a lot more competitive but we have the 25 Lions tour and very likely the 27 World Cup and 32 Olympics to help grow the game both in terms or participation and engagement

To me that highlights the importance of having a genuine domestic product to take advantage of any spike in interest these events create.
As stand alone events they are just that, sugar hits. Growth will come from more people engaging with Rugby Union after these events. The important thing is having a product that people will want to engage with.

 

[Dan54]

I wonder if Sky are worried about their TV rights?

I imagine that Amazon would be interested in broadcasting the All Blacks around the world on Prime.

Probably not immediately as NZR have a share of Sky. Though NZR were working with Amazon on streaming a few years back.
But all in all they just speculation at moment, and shows that for NZR the markets isn't 5 million kiwis, but the world?
Kind of negates the argument who are the inferior/superior market though. Not saying either is in stronger position, but rugby market isn't local. I have said repeatedly that son living in Italy was watching NPC cup games live, and actually saw a final before I could see it in Aus, as rightfully Fox was showing NRC final live at same time, so delayed NZ game.
The market for our game is the WORLD!!!!!!

 

[Dan54]

Don't know how much truth there is in this.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...-impasse-as-fijian-drua-moana-pasifika-suffer
A round robin with some double ups and 8 team finals so we can have everyone wins a prize? But no full confrences.

 

[kiap]

Don't know how much truth there is in this.

"New Zealand Rugby is open to an eight-team finals series in a revamped 12-team, single-table Super Rugby...."

Who cares what they're "open to".

Start with our own comp, Fiji included, and only then add the Champions Cup. Otherwise geffarked.

 

[Dan54]

Apparently RA cares, and 8 team finals is seemingly RA idea.

 

[Adam84]

Man what a cringeworthy read, Paul Cully is the mouthpiece of the NZRU these days and that article reads of exactly that. It’s like Chinese propaganda.