Where to for Super Rugby?

[amirite]

Nah, there's still a healty Bloods fan base down south....

Like I said, I am not saying there are no Souths supporters in Melbourne. But it seems you're making the point that Souths becoming Sydney and Fitzroy becoming Brisbane did not greatly negatively impact and reduce their Melbourne fan base.

Here is a discussion that has plenty of points for both our sides - http://www.footyalmanac.com.au/inte...d-the-same-and-do-they-have-a-shared-history/

The logical conclusion is, whilst the move did not kill the Sydney/Souths fan base in Melbourne, it was a negative. Keeping in mind this is in a sport where "Sydney" has to play 10+ Melbourne games a year, on top of the Sydney games. Unlike in rugby where the hypothetical Melbourne and Canberra "home" games would canibalise each other (and the value of memberships).

Why would it automatically follow that there would be an increase in revenue from broadcast rights? particularly in Australia?

If your premise is, everyone that wants pay TV has it, do you think they might lose clients if they fucked off their rugby content? This is one of the few pieces of content they have exclusive rights to nowadays.

The reality is, whether it makes sense or not (it doesn't), whilst sporting viewership stagnates the cost of broadcast deals and sporting teams is increasing.

Rugby would massively buck the trend if they did not sign a contract for a greater or similar amount of money. There's less rugby content, but this format is more sensible and engaging.

Pulver is going full Trump on this one.

Donald Trump just broke his own foreign policy and launched missiles at a foreign nation without the approval of congress. He also has issues with sexism, racism, and just generally lying whilst occupying the single most important leadership position in the world.

Is this a sensible comparison to make?

Melbourne is set to be the biggest city in Australia in the coming decades. No rugby presence here will be as much of a shot in the foot as was the decision to allocate a sixth team to South Africa and the Japanese shermozzle.

In addition to this, post-mining boom Perth looks very different. Can we guarantee your Kotekas, Haylett-Pettys, and Hardwicks of 2025 would ever arrive in Perth?

Not saying I'm for the Force going, but this must be a factor.

 

[NTT]

Like I said, I am not saying there are no Souths supporters in Melbourne. But it seems you're making the point that Souths becoming Sydney and Fitzroy becoming Brisbane did not greatly negatively impact and reduce their Melbourne fan base.

Here is a discussion that has plenty of points for both our sides - http://www.footyalmanac.com.au/inte...d-the-same-and-do-they-have-a-shared-history/

The logical conclusion is, whilst the move did not kill the Sydney/Souths fan base in Melbourne, it was a negative. Keeping in mind this is in a sport where "Sydney" has to play 10+ Melbourne games a year, on top of the Sydney games. Unlike in rugby where the hypothetical Melbourne and Canberra "home" games would canibalise each other (and the value of memberships).


If your premise is, everyone that wants pay TV has it, do you think they might lose clients if they fucked off their rugby content? This is one of the few pieces of content they have exclusive rights to nowadays.

The reality is, whether it makes sense or not (it doesn't), whilst sporting viewership stagnates the cost of broadcast deals and sporting teams is increasing.

Rugby would massively buck the trend if they did not sign a contract for a greater or similar amount of money. There's less rugby content, but this format is more sensible and engaging.

Donald Trump just broke his own foreign policy and launched missiles at a foreign nation without the approval of congress. He also has issues with sexism, racism, and just generally lying whilst occupying the single most important leadership position in the world.

Is this a sensible comparison to make?



In addition to this, post-mining boom Perth looks very different. Can we guarantee your Kotekas, Haylett-Pettys, and Hardwicks of 2025 would ever arrive in Perth?

Not saying I'm for the Force going, but this must be a factor.

So much effort to make such an obscure argument. I hear the ARU might need some new spin doctors. You should apply.

No mining boom = no immigration to Perth? Cool story bro!

 

[lou75]

If i was a private owner i would never sign a contract that had such a clause in it, given how risky a Rugby venture in an unfamiliar territory would likely to be. The odds of either Force or Rebels becoming insolvent without ARU backing would be extremely high. It came to pass that both organisations needed ARU funds to remain solvent.

I think Coxy expected to break even in his first year (2016) and then the new tv rights deal would bring home the bacon for ever after , so he did not expect it to be a loss making enterprise , he is a canny business man after all - unfortunately he didn't count on a major loss of i. sponsorships, ii. memberships and iii. walkins.

 

[RedsHappy]

No argument from me here . Apologies to the passionate supporters of Rugby in the west , but having a well run , professional Rugby presence in Melbourne for all of the other competing interests in the city ,has far more upside .
In its first three years the Rebels crowds , sponsorship , membership and tv viewing numbers were significantly higher than both the Force and the Brumbies .I know this as fact .
Problem was from its very outset the club bleed money for both self inflicted and ARU inflicted reasons .What is not remembered here is how difficult the ARU made it for the Rebels to recruit its original playing roster with it being impossible for the Rebels to sign ARU contracted players in its initial setup.
This lead to the roster being a combination of expensive foreign players (Cipriani, Delve etc , grizelled wounded veterans (Mortlock , Freier), League converts ( Saffy , Vuna , Rooney ) and untried youngsters ( Pyle , Phibbs,Du Plessis).
And this team cost 7.5 million a year almost 3 million more than the other Oz teams with there abundance of Wallaby top ups . And a little reported fact is the Rebels received less ARU funding than the rest of the teams in its first two years .All of this on top of the self inflicted issues such as appointment of the first CEO lead to the club losing 12 million dollars in its first two years . This includes 5 million in 2010 when they hadn't kicked a football yet
This is a financial burden the club has never recovered from despite a lot of people with solid business acumen including the current owners best endeavours .
Unfortunately the business model just doesn't work , even in good times let alone when you throw this current cluster fxxx into the mix .
That's why I'm putting myself in Coxs shoes and from a business perspective saying "How do I get out and take these bastards money with me as I leave "

Many, many good points above.

But the heart of the matter was and is surely this:

- the ARU badly wanted to enter the Vic market

- any such high-risk venture with large financial investments required etc requires a first-class business plan, outstanding and experinced management and risk mitigation strategies

- and obviously a top-notch rugby coaching group from the get-go to get the new RU off to a solid start in playing, team building and crowd-pleasing terms

- an excellent local board and seasoned rugby advisory council, or such like

...........the above pre-requisites are the absolute bare minimum so that a major new franchise stands an even chance of success in a tough, highly competitive sports market where rugby was just, for Melburnians, some place in England before the venture started

But

None of the above ever happened, or was even deemed necessary by JO'N and the 'esteemed' ARU board of business and rugby luminaries.

The lack of sound management and a business plan of proper quality and execution excellence (and built further upon a sound sub-plan to ensure the game is of a consistently good quality for fans) is at the heart of all described in the post quoted above, and all that had happened in the VIC Rebels since and that still exists today.

You open highly risky, high exposure new ventures in a challenging new market, you simply have to manage them from Day One exceptionally well. There is no alternative, none.

Otherwise stay at home and live different dreams.

 

[blues recovery]

Agree 100%

 

[amirite]

This whole "transparent" process is bordering on corruption when a board member breaks ranks and states he is uncomfortable with how this process come come about you have to start asking questions

He was just being transparent.

So much effort to make such an obscure argument. I hear the ARU might need some new spin doctors. You should apply.

No mining boom = no immigration to Perth? Cool story bro!

Do you not think the economic outlook of Perth is uncertain post-mining boom? That would be a massive consideration, rugby in Perth and Melbourne has a massive ex-pat presence and those ex-pats follow economic opportunity.

This is without considering the potential flow-on effects of less disposable income within the WA ecosystem. To say this would not effect the Force (an entertainment commodity) is bold to say the least.

Here is an article about it: https://theconversation.com/western...s-uncertain-after-the-mining-boom-study-67229

 

[Rebels3]

Can someone please put some context and figures behind the assertion that rugby can't be a success in Melbourne?

There seems to be a coalescing view here that the only reason to retain Melbourne is because of the legal cudgel held by the Rebels.

It does a great disservice to the vibrant rugby community in this state; the 10,000 paid members in 2016 (about par with many establishment NRL clubs) and the thousands who attended every Friday night game through the past seasons in the busy sporting market here.

Melbourne is set to be the biggest city in Australia in the coming decades. No rugby presence here will be as much of a shot in the foot as was the decision to allocate a sixth team to South Africa and the Japanese shermozzle.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Its very frustrating, there is a sudden tidal wave of misinformation going around now, that is interpreted as gospel. Things such as the Force have produced more players etc, where infact after 6 seasons the Rebels have marginally more players than the Force did, iv heard TV viewing figures are better, iv heard more local playing numbers, produced more wallabies etc. it's all been swept up in emotion and people are just saying things without actually knowing. Someone else thinks oh that fits my narrative, ill run with that. Then because 2/3 people state it, a proportion of the wider community sees it as gospel. Some things are true when you look at things from a snapshot, but once you add some appropriate context they are completely unfactual. For the record there is very little between both sides when looking at metrics, particularly the ones iv highlighted above.

Apples for Apples people!

 

[GaffaCHinO]

And more from the insider this morning on TWF

Ok firstly, I'm the Vice Chairman of Rugby WA. My name is John Edwards and all my Rugby mates call me the General .
So what has happened here is that they ran a financial model that assumed the Rebels owner sued for circa $4.75mm and that the Victorian Goverment would not sign Heads of Agreements to support the 2020 Blediloe and the next Lions Tour ( which is a decade away). In our case they assumed they would either keep the keys ,not re-sign the Road Safety and not see any improvement in our financial performance ever or retaining the Force meaning that we get the keys back and we have are no further burden on them. They even had a model where we get binned,the Rebels stay but in 2 years the Rebels owner pulls up stumps and they have to assume the business again. In any pro Rebel case they assumed they had almost no costs to wind us up and no claims.
The major flaws were that they assumed the ARU would not reassign the Bledisloe and Lions match and that the Rebels owners asking price would be met without debate. Now if you assumed that we held both those important national matches in our stadium and they negotited something more reasonably reflecting the Rebels owners costs then our case looks a whole lot better particularly when you consider we will probably need to pay something to get the license back as they have not assumed this . On every other aspect of their evaluation of a Rugby nature we smashed both the Rebels and the Brumbies ( who were not considered a financial risk in any way which is also flawed)
Again this is not the basis for filing the writ in the Supreme Court. They are considering breaching our Alliance Agreement and we are not going to allow this with out and almighty scrap.

 

[RedsHappy]

And more from the insider this morning on TWF

One thing for sure these tawdry revelations demonstrate:

The deal the ARU did with Cox has way more ARU expensive and risky commitments, complex burdens, contingent guarantees and other mysterious clauses of obligation than the ARU has even vaguely admitted in all its hoopla of 2015 re this alleged 'privitisation' deal.

 

[barbarian]

I know this is an emotional subject for many on here, but let's not stoop to personal attacks please.
.

 

[amirite]

One thing for sure these tawdry revelations demonstrate:

The deal the ARU did with Cox has way more ARU expensive and risky commitments, complex burdens, contingent guarantees and other mysterious clauses of obligation than the ARU has even vaguely admitted in all its hoopla of 2015 re this alleged 'privitisation' deal.

True. But, if this is purely a financial decision, the ARU have to react to how the table is set.

If this is what keeps rugby in Melbourne in 2018, it is what it is. I am unhappy the Force are getting the can, they were my team pre-Rebels and clearly have a more positive on-field thing going in 2017 than Melbourne (though they themselves show how quickly this can change).

That being said, we are fans and we could be off base. Maybe the Rebels will go. Doesn't look that way at this point, but who knows. We've gotten bad press before.

 

[barbarian]

I understand proponents of both sides pushing the case for their teams to remain. But it's important to remember that both teams are failures across most available metrics.

Taking away grassroots development (an important part of the debate without question, but just one part), it's hard to point to any successes that either the Force or Rebels have had. Aside from the Mauritius 10s.

Both sides don't win many rugby matches, and as a result crowds have stayed away and TV channels have been changed. They are both financial basket cases, with the ARU having to sink massive amounts of cash in to both just to keep them afloat.

There is no evidence that any of this will change any time soon.

Whose fault is this? Well that's a broader question and I certainly understand that it doesn't rest solely with the teams themselves - they've been facing an uphill battle due to environmental/administration failures beyond their control.

But I think (understandably) the commentary from both Rebels and Force fans has been a bit too willing to overlook the above factors.

I don't even know what point I was trying to make now I get to the end of this post, and it probably sounds overly harsh. I suppose what I'm saying is it's easy to overplay the positives of rugby in Perth/Melbourne, when it's very much a 'least worst' scenario at this point in time.
.

 

[blues recovery]

True. But, if this is purely a financial decision, the ARU have to react to how the table is set.

If this is what keeps rugby in Melbourne in 2018, it is what it is. I am unhappy the Force are getting the can, they were my team pre-Rebels and clearly have a more positive on-field thing going in 2017 than Melbourne (though they themselves show how quickly this can change).

That being said, we are fans and we could be off base. Maybe the Rebels will go. Doesn't look that way at this point, but who knows. We've gotten bad press before.

As I've said before I strongly think the ultimate decision is Cox's

 

[amirite]

As I've said before I strongly think the ultimate decision is Cox's

Maybe. This could be an out from a bad contract for Cox. He certainly sounds like he wants to stay the course though.

I shudder to think what will happen down here if the Rebels get the can. As is, our most talented 18 and 19yos got pinched by the Brumbies this year.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Maybe. This could be an out from a bad contract for Cox. He certainly sounds like he wants to stay the course though.

I shudder to think what will happen down here if the Rebels get the can. As is, our most talented 18 and 19yos got pinched by the Brumbies this year.

So did ours

 

[Slim 293]

I shudder to think what will happen down here if the Rebels get the can. As is, our most talented 18 and 19yos got pinched by the Brumbies this year.

Ahem.........

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't really understand why the ARU would be nervous about a B&I Lions test in 2025. It's a goldmine to any city and will sell out wherever it is held.

Whether the non Sydney/Brisbane test is held in Melbourne or Perth, both state governments would be keen for the event largely because it brings so many travelling fans who will spend numerous days in the city. It's a no-brainer to throw a few million dollars behind in bidding for the event.

 

[Slim 293]

I don't really understand why the ARU would be nervous about a B&I Lions test in 2025. It's a goldmine to any city and will sell out wherever it is held.

Whether the non Sydney/Brisbane test is held in Melbourne or Perth, both state governments would be keen for the event largely because it brings so many travelling fans who will spend numerous days in the city. It's a no-brainer to throw a few million dollars behind in bidding for the event.

Exactly..........

The idea that the Victorian Government wouldn't host these games, Rebels or not, is utter bollocks...............

 

[blues recovery]

Maybe. This could be an out from a bad contract for Cox. He certainly sounds like he wants to stay the course though.

I shudder to think what will happen down here if the Rebels get the can. As is, our most talented 18 and 19yos got pinched by the Brumbies this year.

He's positioning in my view

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Exactly....

The idea that the Victorian Government wouldn't host these games, Rebels or not, is utter bollocks.....

Hence why the force board is not happy with the parameters set out nor the ridiculous assumptions being made by the ARU.

An ARU board member (admittedly a member from wa) has broken ranks and has openly stated he is uncomfortable with how this has come to pass.

The ARU assumed the force would just roll over and die. It's got to the point now that if in deed they do die then I hope the take as many of the ARU plonkers down as they can.

Yes I'm angry and yes Barbar I'm probably over reacting but for far to long iv sat here in Perth and had to see this crap play out in the east now they want to take our team away well good luck.