Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?
-
@mariner4life Even more reason for the All Blacks name not to be attached to the NZ 7s team
-
we need some sort of global crisis to remind us how trival things like marketing really are....i can honestly say what the teams are officially called has never affected my enjoyment watching them and have never heard anyone mistaking results of the 7's team with the All Blacks
-
@kiwiwomble What about someone with only the slightest passing interest in rugby but who has heard about the All Blacks unparalleled winning record against all comers over more than 100 years seeing that the name All Blacks has been associated with a loss to Japan such as the NZ 7s team have inflicted upon us (ok that was in at the Rio Olympics so not technically the NZRFU 7s Team but rather the NZOCG 7s side? That casual acquaintance probably would not be able to distinguish between the two formats and forever think the real and one and only All Blacks have lost their mantle to a certain degree. I mean who loses to Japan in proper rugby, other than the Springboks of course?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
@kiwiwomble The NZ 7s have never suffered the indignomy of being defeated by them. I. Foster was involved in both of those All Black humiliations, something that Sir Gordon nor C. Laidlaw have ever given us.
South Africa, Wales, England, France, Australia were the only countries to have taken the All Blacks down in a Test Match until the advent of I. Foster who was personally involved in both Ireland and Argentina joining that list in the last few years. -
@higgins im not sure the point your arguing now sorry, are we still talking about the overuse of "All Blacks" or is it about Fozzie....or are they both part of the same conspiracy?
-
@kiwiwomble It is still about the attachment of All Blacks to teams other than the All Blacks. Fozzies name only came about to illustrate how he has been involved in the last two teams no longer allowing All Blacks invincibility against them.
-
So, is there any latest info/gossip on the Silver Lake deal?
CVC have just acquired 10% of the Spanish La Liga broadcast rights, but this is being challenged by four clubs.
Which all seems strangely familiar ...
-
OPINION:
The vexed issue of Silver Lake will be back on the table this week and while New Zealand Rugby remains adamant that a deal with the US private equity group is imperative for the game to grow, the national body has, in the last few months, almost eliminated their own rationale for striking an alliance.
Back in February when news became public that Silver Lake wanted to buy a stake in NZR's future revenue for $387m, there was such uncertainty about likely income and the relative strength of the game's finances that the basis to entertain the proposal was undeniably strong.
NZR was bleeding cash in a pandemic-impacted world and couldn't be sure when or if it would ever stop – and for how much longer they could keep dipping into their cash reserves, however seemingly deep they appeared.
Somewhat curiously, NZR also campaigned to sign with Silver Lake on a vote of no confidence in themselves. The argument to bring in Silver Lake was two-fold – the business needed money, but just as importantly said NZR, it needed expertise.
NZR said they had looked at all sorts of ways to raise capital, but dismissed those which didn't bring with it access to capability – suggesting that if the business was flooded with cash, they wouldn't have the contacts, strategic vision or financial wherewithal to effectively use it.
The argument keeps being made that the key to sustainable growth is growing the presence and value of the All Blacks brand in offshore markets and therefore it would be best to hand this responsibility to international figures with contacts and knowledge of how things work in far-off places.
Stay ahead of the gameFor the NZR executive and board to paint themselves as incapable of delivering in the cut and thrust of global commerce was always a risk - because while it was intended to vindicate their support for a deal with Silver Lake, it made many wonder whether the better course of action would be to simply repopulate the executive and board with people who are.
The argument that NZR needs the acumen brought by Silver Lake has always been the harder one to swallow, but now it has no chance of slipping down the gullet of even staunch advocates of private equity investment.
In the last few months, NZR has proven unequivocally it is neither impoverished nor bereft of commercial expertise having secured in excess of $50m a year in sponsorship for real estate on the All Blacks kit.
NZR's commercial team have delivered a four-fold increase on the current deal with AIG which is estimated to be worth about $12m a year.
It was a process that attracted the biggest corporate names in the world, including Amazon, and has rubbished any notion of NZR needing to be in bed with Silver Lake to gain access to those with the deepest pockets.
NZR worked with a marketing firm to land these new deals, which only accentuates the arguments those against Silver Lake have been making, which is that it makes more business sense to pay one-off consultancy fees to recognised experts than it does to sell 12.5 per cent of revenue in perpetuity to Silver Lake.
What it's also done is throw into question what specifically Silver Lake can bring to the table that is not already there.
NZR has locked into six-year deals with new kit sponsors Altrad and Ineos, and has another four years left to run on their broadcast contract – a deal that is looking increasingly like a stroke of genius given the dramas Rugby Australia has incurred by spurning the advances of their long-term partner.
NZR has also organised two additional tests this year for cash payments of about $5m and so it is not clear at all which existing revenue stream it is that Silver Lake feel they can greatly improve.
And if they do have a plan, it will need to be hugely compelling – stack as low-risk and enormously lucrative – as if they come on board under the proposed terms, they will automatically net a share in the existing sponsorship and broadcast deals.
NZR has done all the hard work bringing those deals to fruition, yet if they sell to Silver Lake, the US firm will be entitled to 12.5 per cent of that revenue – an estimated $17m a year.
NZR, through their well-executed commercial sponsorship and broadcast strategies, have killed their own argument that a deal with Silver Lake is imperative and when talks re-ignite with the New Zealand Rugby Players' Association this week, they will need a new basis on which to sell the merits of a private equity deal.
-
Dylan Cleaver
Silver Lake, the NZR stake & the media - a cautionary tale
Silver Lake, the NZR stake & the media - a cautionary tale
NZ Rugby’s links to the US private equity giants were revealed 18 months ago. What seemed fait accompli instead became a schoolyard scrap - I had a ringside seat.
-
This seems to be the key to it:
NZR had to find new ways of sourcing captial. Under the leadership of Steve Tew they started investigating private equity but couldn’t get anything to stick. Then investment bank Jefferies, whose head of global equity sales Matt Foulds was Robinson’s Cambridge rugby captain, came on board and suggested putting all their assets on the table.
NZR was selling the concept as a win-win. The NZRPA saw a sugar hit that could turn into a win-loss as they raised a number of questions around sovereignty, the inherent financial risks associated with private equity, the potential for competing interests and what they saw as a lack of due diligence over alternative capital sources.
(NZR denies this, saying Jefferies “exhaustively” looked at all options).
Reminds me of the "Tim nice but dim" sketches from the Harry Enfield Show.
-
-
@steven-harris said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
Hardly going to take being called the media arm of the Kremlin lying down, but isn't that what the media arm of the Kremlin would say?
-
@mikedogz said in Silver Lake buying a stake in the ABs?:
Dylan Cleaver
Silver Lake, the NZR stake & the media - a cautionary tale
Silver Lake, the NZR stake & the media - a cautionary tale
NZ Rugby’s links to the US private equity giants were revealed 18 months ago. What seemed fait accompli instead became a schoolyard scrap - I had a ringside seat.
Good read. I've subscribed - will see how it goes
-
The Herald on Sunday understands Silver Lake's improved valuation for a 7.5 per cent stake was tabled after the Players' Association officially outlined its intent to not support the 12.5 per cent sale proposal three weeks ago, sparking rumours the deal was dead.
While extracting a higher valuation for a lower sale stake lessens the risks and retains more revenue, reducing the capital injection has the potential to leave the New Zealand game exposed in a fraught Covid-affected climate.
After receiving Silver Lake's improved offer, however, the Players' Association is understood to have responded with a set of conditions to ensure what they believe is a "genuine partnership".
Those conditions include the request for an independent NZ Rugby governance review that assesses the constitution, striking at the heart of the provincial union's control, and whether the existing structure is fit for purpose.
This request comes after attacks on the players by former NZ Rugby chairman Brent Impey, the breakdown of the relationship with Australia and with a view to being fully equipped to work alongside heavyweight global businessess
Exclusive: Dramatic developments as big changes made to Silver Lake deal