Where to for Super Rugby?

[Rebels3]

I'll have to look it up but I've seen it mentioned that the games that rate the highest up north are those featuring both the NZ and Aus teams oddly enough. I agree with you that it will be tough. Absolutely. But things are already snowballing that way anyway with the NH asserting itself more and more both on and off the pitch.

And you're overlooking a significant factor here. A TT competition has a far greater chance of becoming relevant again in Australia. Which is a market that has shown that is has no issue dolling out the cash for a product it see's value in. It's something I consider a huge missed opportunity over the years on behalf of all parties involved in the SANZAAR alliance.

I have heard the same.

I always thought the ratings came from the NZ matches that occupy a breakfast time slot, with the SAF games largely clashing with their own leagues matches for much of the season. The Australian economy is very understated in Rugby circles, as a whole its larger than SAF, NZ and Arg combined, obviously there is other circumstances and reasons why the game doesn't generate huge money here but a product that can gain traction in the market could be very fruitful for all those involved.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I have heard the same.

I always thought the ratings came from the NZ matches that occupy a breakfast time slot, with the SAF games largely clashing with their own leagues matches for much of the season. The Australian economy is very understated in Rugby circles, as a whole its larger than SAF, NZ and Arg combined, obviously there is other circumstances and reasons why the game doesn't generate huge money here but a product that can gain traction in the market could be very fruitful for all those involved.

It's something that's driven me nuts for years. The apparent disregard for the potential in the Australian marketplace if you can get the product right.

 

[dru]

It's something that's driven me nuts for years. The apparent disregard for the potential in the Australian marketplace if you can get the product right.

We have also been told that funds are largely driven by the internationals not the Super. Any one of these suggestions would have competition savings.

The broadcasters aren’t specifically interested in a higher quality company. What they want is level playing field where the comp isn’t dominated by few parties and they want an engaging entertaining product.

The size of the commercial pie in Australia doesn’t even need rugby to top the football popularity stakes. We only need a few percentage points for converts or returning fans to make the thing sustainable.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

We have also been told that funds are largely driven by the internationals not the Super. Any one of these suggestions would have competition savings.

The broadcasters aren’t specifically interested in a higher quality company. What they want is level playing field where the comp isn’t dominated by few parties and they want an engaging entertaining product.

The size of the commercial pie in Australia doesn’t even need rugby to top the football popularity stakes. We only need a few percentage points for converts or returning fans to make the thing sustainable.

Soccer's deal is around $68m a season. Super Rugby still manages to out rate that at present. A significant part of the reason they get that deal is it being largely domestically based. If we get the structure right and put in place measures to ensure the product on the pitch is of high entertainment then anything in that realm will do to start.

 

[RebelYell]

You're absolutely nailing it here @WorkingClassRugger.

Only disagreement is re: the 13 home & away matches (post #12957) - very challenging for teams to market 13 home games over 2 years in regards to sponsor and membership dollars.

I actually believe that the Sunwolves remain a great opportunity. Commercially, every Australian team can benefit from a presence in Japan, the timezone is friendly, and players want to play there. What a shame, and a waste of money, it would be if SANZAAR simply cuts them loose at the end of 2020.

Amazes me that RA/even NZRU wouldn't try to formalise a partnership to take a role in supplying players and coaches to run as a 'franchise away from home' model.

 

[hoggy]

It's something that's driven me nuts for years. The apparent disregard for the potential in the Australian marketplace if you can get the product right.

Totally agree about a proper domestic presence, but with a level of realism. Right now it’s like telling the A-league you must compete with English premier league wages.

The big issue the game faces here is the whole set up is geared towards Test rugby. Our domestic product operates with one hand tied behind it back, with limited ability to adjust to market demands.

This is fine in some ways but in Australia it has compromised the ability of the game to grow at a domestic level, and without growth at lower levels this ultimately affects support for the Wallabies.

It has also affected our ability to attract private investment into the game, you only have to look at the whole Twiggy saga, it was like trying to mix water & oil.

But part of this is the establishments hold on the game, and who exactly is benefiting from the current set-up (we have what 150 professional players and a gloated RA admin all very well paid), yet this is the exact level of the game that is reluctant to pursue change or consider a move out of the tent, I wonder why.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I have heard the same.

I always thought the ratings came from the NZ matches that occupy a breakfast time slot, with the SAF games largely clashing with their own leagues matches for much of the season. The Australian economy is very understated in Rugby circles, as a whole its larger than SAF, NZ and Arg combined, obviously there is other circumstances and reasons why the game doesn't generate huge money here but a product that can gain traction in the market could be very fruitful for all those involved.

When SARU got sprung undervaluing their Super Rugby rights revenue (a proportion of which they have to share) while overvaluing their Currie Cup rights revenue (which they get to keep) I'm pretty sure it emerged that SARU generates the majority of total rights revenue. Those Euro breakfast-time matches you refer to may be popular but it's the SA content that drives the revenue.

 

[kiap]

When SARU got sprung undervaluing their Super Rugby rights revenue (a proportion of which they have to share) while overvaluing their Currie Cup rights revenue (which they get to keep)

Yeah. As old as that story is, SARU are well dodgy. Not that Australian rugby's snouts in the trough have been kept squeaky clean, but the Saffers are the champs.

I'm pretty sure it emerged that SARU generates the majority of total rights revenue. Those Euro breakfast-time matches you refer to may be popular but it's the SA content that drives the revenue.

Pretty sure, or sure; Are you saying Bulls v Sharks and the like is producing big UK revenue?

Thing is, the SA content has also had the super axe taken to it. In a future comp with 15 teams or 14 teams, you've gotta wonder how much more this filler can generate. The bigger share was always brought in by tests.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ very sure it was the case when SARU got sprung which was under the previous rights deal so reasonably sure it's still the case & as I keep saying, broadcasters have been shown various potential comps post-Super Rugby & asked what they're worth & the answer every time has been "not as much as Super Rugby".

 

[kiap]

SANZAAR … for how many years in a row now … are going to rip down the format and start again, just in case.

Viewers and attendances below the floor of the previous deal. All the while, rich uncle Yarpie has cut back teams and contracts.

But Super Rugby is already at the peak of value. Tip-top.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^ very sure it was the case when SARU got sprung which was under the previous rights deal so reasonably sure it's still the case & as I keep saying, broadcasters have been shown various potential comps post-Super Rugby & asked what they're worth & the answer every time has been "not as much as Super Rugby".

I think it could depend on whether the World League concept actually turns out to be treasure trove promised. If it is, then taking a punt on such a format might be worthwhile.

 

[southsider]

Just sat down turned on the tv, and women’s cricket big bash is on channel 7 Saturday during prime time. How the fuck can super rugby not be regularly on free to air at a decent time

 

[brokendown]

Just sat down turned on the tv, and women’s cricket big bash is on channel 7 Saturday during prime time. How the fuck can super rugby not be regularly on free to air at a decent time

because there is less interest!

 

[southsider]

because there is less interest!

You’re telling me there’s more interest in women’s big bash than there is super rugby? Absolute bullshit

 

[gel]

If there was enough interest in it, then the commercial networks would be broadcasting it.

Thats how it works.

 

[southsider]

If there was enough interest in it, then the commercial networks would be broadcasting it.

Thats how it works.

Please wake up it’s shit negotiating plain and simple, the women’s cricket was included because cricket Australia made it part of the package deal when selling broadcast rights for cricket as a whole

 

[kiap]

If there was enough interest in it, then the commercial networks would be broadcasting it.

Thats how it works.

Not really.

"Interest" doesn't only generate the broadcast. Broadcast can also generate the interest.

Women's Big Bash initially built its audience on TEN free to air. It now sends to both live FTA and Pay TV.

It has been 20+ years of Super Rugby and FTA has never been attempted. A mistake, IMO. That first 10-year deal effectively stitched up rugby union. It's been in a cash-dependent noose ever since which has progressively strangled the sport.

To a lesser extent, rugby league was also screwed by Uncle Rupe. They cut themselves loose.

 

[gel]

You seriously think that commercial network stations don't investigate the option of broadcasting super rugby? You think they don't realise that broadcasting it might also increase the interest in it?

They're not commercially naive. They've run the numbers and it doesn't work out and that's why it's not on fta.

 

[southsider]

You seriously think that commercial network stations don't investigate the option of broadcasting super rugby? You think they don't realise that broadcasting it might also increase the interest in it?

They're not commercially naive. They've run the numbers and it doesn't work out and that's why it's not on fta.

So back to your original point, there’s not enough interest in super rugby

Answer me this then

Women’s big bash has a bigger interest in Australia than super rugby? Yes or no

 

[kiap]

You seriously think that commercial network stations don't investigate the option of broadcasting super rugby? You think they don't realise that broadcasting it might also increase the interest in it?

They're not commercially naive. They've run the numbers and it doesn't work out and that's why it's not on fta.

Nein. Ultimately it's not up to commercial network stations. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how it works.

Live sport can be broadcast for an agreed price (in the case of Shute Shield, that's a negative number ) However, as in other sports, including cricket, that's not the only available story. As an example, content providers can package up (and parcel out) all of their products including, say, test matches.

Obviously, in rugby's case now, any move can only be small. They can't afford to take much away from Pay TV. It's too late for that and they're also straight-jacketed by Sanzaar's requirements.

But regardless, the buyer only bids up to a price; the bottom line is the decision remains with the seller.

That decision for Rugby Australia and Soup was, and is, to lock 100% away behind a pay wall. Unfortunately, the trinkets they've got left to flog (to Pay TV or otherwise) are being hollowed out year-on-year and have done for well over a decade. The path they're on is seeing themselves screwed.