• 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.

Australian Rugby / RA

KevinO

John Hipwell (52)
  • Gallagher Premiership (England):
    • Regular season: 22 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 2 additional matches for the top 4 teams
  • Top 14 (France):
    • Regular Season: 26 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 6 teams
  • Super Rugby Pacific (Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands):
    • Regular Season: 14 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 8 teams
  • United Rugby Championship (South Africa, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Italy):
    • Regular Season: 18 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 8 teams
All converted to Aussie dollar,
URC - 106 Million
Top 14 - 188 Million
Gallagher - 213 Million
Heineken Cup - 295 Million

Stan pays 30 million a year, Sky in NZ pay 93 million.

It shows how much RA is selling rugby short in this country, yes its got more competition then in the market with the AFL and NRL. But soccer dominates all countries in Europe and they still manage big enough contracts to support the game. Add the 6 Nations/Internationals is a separate TV deal again.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
All converted to Aussie dollar,
URC - 106 Million
Top 14 - 188 Million
Gallagher - 213 Million
Heineken Cup - 295 Million

Stan pays 30 million a year, Sky in NZ pay 93 million.

It shows how much RA is selling rugby short in this country, yes its got more competition then in the market with the AFL and NRL. But soccer dominates all countries in Europe and they still manage big enough contracts to support the game. Add the 6 Nations/Internationals is a separate TV deal again.
Yeah - it's even bigger difference than it first appears because Nine/Stan are paying for test matches too, and in the past that made up a vast majority of what the broadcasters were paying for
 

KevinO

John Hipwell (52)
Yeah - it's even bigger difference than it first appears because Nine/Stan are paying for test matches too, and in the past that made up a vast majority of what the broadcasters were paying for
Yep, I think the last time I saw, it was close to 100 million pounds for 6N and Autumn internationals divided 7 ways.
 

Wallaby Man

Trevor Allan (34)
I agree we are way behind others in professional offerings and income generated but we must add some context to some of these figures as the French league money is divided 14 ways and then from memory 30% provided to lower leagues, the English league divided by 10, etc. our small amount only gets divided by only a handful of teams.

It why I get frustrated when people try and compared t14 salary cap to NRL when NRL salary cap only split between 30 players and some t14 clubs have 55+ players on the books.
 

Wilson

David Codey (61)
I agree we are way behind others in professional offerings and income generated but we must add some context to some of these figures as the French league money is divided 14 ways and then from memory 30% provided to lower leagues, the English league divided by 10, etc. our small amount only gets divided by only a handful of teams.

It why I get frustrated when people try and compared t14 salary cap to NRL when NRL salary cap only split between 30 players and some t14 clubs have 55+ players on the books.
Context doesn't change much, they still blow us out of the water:
Top 14: ($188 million * 70% )/14 = $9.4 million
Gallagher: $213 million/10 = $21.3 million

URC comes much closer to our $6 million per team ($106million/16 = 6.625) but that's ignoring what these teams get from the Heineken cup and the fact that each of these nations have seperate broadcast revenue for tests as mentioned above. Our $30 million has to feed 5 super teams and the Wallabies. Even the New Zealand comparison is stark - I believe they distribute around 8 or 9 million to each of their super sides, leaving something like half their broadcast deal to fund the rest of the game.

The only advantage we have in all this is we own the entirety of our game and don't have to split any revenue with private equity, but for all those other teams and competitions that do that's more of a future issue than a current one.
 

KevinO

John Hipwell (52)
The 6N spilt includes private equity, that's why the split is 7 ways. I'd take giving money to PE if they manage the TV deals and get the kind of money everyone else is managing to get. Even half of what they are getting has to be good enough for now.

RA was actually better off with SA, at least all the TV revenue was pooled then spread between the three parties.
 

dru

Tim Horan (67)
Context doesn't change much, they still blow us out of the water:
Top 14: ($188 million * 70% )/14 = $9.4 million
Gallagher: $213 million/10 = $21.3 million

URC comes much closer to our $6 million per team ($106million/16 = 6.625) but that's ignoring what these teams get from the Heineken cup and the fact that each of these nations have seperate broadcast revenue for tests as mentioned above. Our $30 million has to feed 5 super teams and the Wallabies. Even the New Zealand comparison is stark - I believe they distribute around 8 or 9 million to each of their super sides, leaving something like half their broadcast deal to fund the rest of the game.

The only advantage we have in all this is we own the entirety of our game and don't have to split any revenue with private equity, but for all those other teams and competitions that do that's more of a future issue than a current one.

Now add in a factor for the quantity of content.

(Let's not go to whether or not the product offered suits the market yet.)
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
The 6N spilt includes private equity, that's why the split is 7 ways. I'd take giving money to PE if they manage the TV deals and get the kind of money everyone else is managing to get. Even half of what they are getting has to be good enough for now.

RA was actually better off with SA, at least all the TV revenue was pooled then spread between the three parties.
Only the money for super was split, not the the money for tests etc (rightfully). The super comp was sold apart from tests then.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
The other context to add to this is
Only the money for super was split, not the the money for tests etc (rightfully). The super comp was sold apart from tests then

And South Africa did some clever moves with how much their broadcasters paid for Super Rugby (split) v Curry Cup (not split) as well
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
The other context to add to this is


And South Africa did some clever moves with how much their broadcasters paid for Super Rugby (split) v Curry Cup (not split) as well
Yep and in my opinion rightfully so, neither of us (NZ or Aus) has any entitlement to Curry cup monsy etc.
 

Pone's Mullet

Alex Ross (28)
Just read the Australian article from Sat (had to wait till the library opened asI refuse to ever give Murdock my $$$) the tone sounds like either Brumbies or Force could be cut, back to 3 teams.

Oh and Waugh has enlisted McKinsey for a "review"- probably another few $100k waste so he has a report to hide behind
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
  • Gallagher Premiership (England):
    • Regular season: 22 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 2 additional matches for the top 4 teams
  • Top 14 (France):
    • Regular Season: 26 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 6 teams
  • Super Rugby Pacific (Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands):
    • Regular Season: 14 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 8 teams
  • United Rugby Championship (South Africa, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Italy):
    • Regular Season: 18 matches
    • Playoffs: Up to 3 additional matches for the top 8 teams
half the games and twice as many finalists lol
 

Highlander35

Andrew Slack (58)
half the games and twice as many finalists lol

In a way, that's probably the least objectionable part of the format: there's nothing really equitable about the fixture, so the more teams in the mix in the post-season, the more likely it is for the "best" team to come out on top.
 

wamberal99

Tom Lawton (22)
Just read the Australian article from Sat (had to wait till the library opened asI refuse to ever give Murdock my $$$) the tone sounds like either Brumbies or Force could be cut, back to 3 teams.

Oh and Waugh has enlisted McKinsey for a "review"- probably another few $100k waste so he has a report to hide behind
The McKinsey review will cost nothing, they are doing it pro bono.
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
^ yes, Dan, but SA blatantly lied about the CC/ Super Rugby split which is kinda different...
Had read something about that, though can't remember figures. Still think the idea of everyone looking after own tv rights was best idea, but can see the beauty of having a complete seperate tv deal for super as being good too.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
Just read the Australian article from Sat (had to wait till the library opened asI refuse to ever give Murdock my $$$) the tone sounds like either Brumbies or Force could be cut, back to 3 teams.

Oh and Waugh has enlisted McKinsey for a "review"- probably another few $100k waste so he has a report to hide behind
If there's any truth in this report, I wonder if it might go some way to explain the rather disinterested approach of some of the Brumbies players in the game against the Chiefs?
 
Top