Super Rugby - The Future
-
yeah i don't know the A-League math
A quick google tells me Victory and City have wage bills of about $5.6m for 18 players, or an average of a little over $300k. I had a look at Victory's financials, and they have about $20m in revenue but lose a couple of million a year.
-
jesus the A-league's broadcast deal is dogshit! it makes the ARU look loaded.
Where the fuck is their money coming from?
-
actually Melbourne city is owned by the city group isnt it, Machester city, one of the MLS teams...so bankrolled by the middle east
also smaller squads will help, fewer truly specialist positions, i defender can play up front if they have too, keeper pretty much the only one
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@canefan but how does money get into these pro teams if not through the crowds?....so yeah, there are loads of clubs (south Melbourme is still pushing for their own A-League spot).....but theyre not bank rolling the pro clubs
One of them is owned by a petro-state.
-
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
That's a point I've made before. Rugby competes with league in Melbourne and it's a non-contest when the league team is so successful.
Doesn't help that for the odd enquiring mind that turns up to see what the fuss is about that it's a vastly easier game to understand and watch.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
-
@antipodean said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
It’s been a total shemozzle. Not just NZRU, the 3 unions. Japan in Japan out. Argentina in Argentina out. SA bigger and bigger. Then out. Force in then out then in again. Rebels in now out.
It’s hard to remain enthusiastic and optimistic about rugby in Australia and NZ. I just don’t care for super rugby anymore. 12 teams with 8 finalists…I’ll probably watch the final and maybe the semis.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
-
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
John O'Neill hoped it would work
5 teams was a stupid idea back then and still was when SRP was introduced. Thankfully the Rebels gave Aust an out.
-
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
I think one of the problems was how quickly Aus expanded at the start.
Aus had 3 team in 2005 then 5 teams in 2011. They only had 5 seasons with 4 teams.
They would have been better off waiting to expand to Melbourne rather than rushing it - which ended up fucking all the Aus teams as it diluted their depth.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
-
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
-
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
In the decades I've been following Super Rugby, I've attended maybe three or four games in person. I'd say that's the case for the majority of fans.
That doesn't mean the fans aren't enthusiastic, they just don't enjoy the stadium experience enough to justify all the additional costs (financial and otherwise) that come with attending a game.
-
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
I know this is a beat down on Super Rugby. But, Super Rugby still draws much better crowds than every sporting option, except the Warriors (who sell out every week). Data on the Phoenix has them averaging 10k (https://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp/a-league/crowds), which includes a 33k sell out. The Breakers are in a basketball arena, so what about 1500 to 2k? Super Rugby data I've seen sits at about 10 to 15k for most of the teams. The Highlanders were at about 12k. Fantastic for a city of Dunedin's size. Otago NPC last year was about 2k. While TV audience data was up about 10% on last year. Super Rugby is well attended and watched compared to other options in NZ.
-
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
I know this is a beat down on Super Rugby. But, Super Rugby still draws much better crowds than every sporting option, except the Warriors (who sell out every week). Data on the Phoenix has them averaging 10k (https://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp/a-league/crowds), which includes a 33k sell out. The Breakers are in a basketball arena, so what about 1500 to 2k? Super Rugby data I've seen sits at about 10 to 15k for most of the teams. The Highlanders were at about 12k. Fantastic for a city of Dunedin's size. Otago NPC last year was about 2k. While TV audience data was up about 10% on last year. Super Rugby is well attended and watched compared to other options in NZ.
Breakers averaged about 6K last season
-
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
-
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
Fair call. It's still a lot less than it was say 10 years ago. The olds used to attend all Hurricanes home games, there was a waitlist for season tickets, and they used to get crowds of 25K+. Maybe Mr Fish is right, most fans can't be bothered heading to the ground to watch games live
