Super Rugby 2023
-
@antipodean said in Super Rugby 2023:
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
Andrew Hore is also correct that NZR need to stop at the point of being the overall comp owner and let franchises do their own thing. NZR can always put some rules around numbers of NZ based/eligible players which should keep the pathways in place.
SA and AU pick from every competition, though they restrict the numbers they choose. I can't see NZR allowing players to play in Northern Hemisphere comps and get selected for AB's any time soon, but I can see them eventually allowing players to be picked from teams in competitions they are aligned with, such as SRP. Meaning NZ players in the 5 Australian clubs would become eligible, which would strengthen them, strengthen SRP and give players being dragged off into marginal contracts in Europe, USA and Japan a different route.
I can't think of a better way to force a decline in the All Blacks.
I believe there is an element of tunnel vision from NZR and it's been this way pretty much since the game went pro, or at least this century. Everything leads to the All Blacks, which is fine as far as it goes, but don't drop the talent and the fanbase ball, don't reap the short term benefits at the risk of ruining the game long term (now medium term IMO).
-
Super Rugby can revive itself with a quasi-American model
The goal of Rugby Australia and New Zealand Rugby should be to create an entertainment product worth more than the All Blacks and Wallabies.
Don't agree with a draft but I'd say most can get on board with this...
**One of the biggest commercial failings of New Zealand Rugby is not finding a way to work with Rugby Australia to get a piece of the Australian sports market, which is competitive, but a much, much larger pie than their own.
If they can work together on re-imagining Super Rugby into an elite sporting league and agree on a new revenue sharing model, they will both end up in much stronger positions if it is a success.
Taking steps to address the unequal distribution of playing talent across Super Rugby is a necessity to achieving that.
New Zealand’s stronger playing pool is not shared, leaving Australian teams to remain behind them most of the time. A ton of young New Zealand players that could be playing simply aren’t.
We hear frequently of New Zealand fans lack of interest in watching Australian teams play and even trans- Ta$man clashes if their own team isn’t featuring.
All Blacks and Wallabies’ eligibility must be expanded within Super Rugby to spread the playing resources, breaking the current mould.
As long as players are contracted within in the competition, they can remain available for international duty.**
-
The problem with such a model is neatly summed up by the following scenario: High profile All Blacks move across the Ta$man for more money and an attempt to increase interest with marquee signings. These players play every minute of every match to get the best possible return for their new team, leaving them flogged or injured so as not in peak form for the All Blacks. Even aspiring players are going to be at the mercy of poor coaching S&C routines etc.
-
@antipodean said in Super Rugby 2023:
The problem with such a model is neatly summed up by the following scenario: High profile All Blacks move across the Ta$man for more money and an attempt to increase interest with marquee signings. These players play every minute of every match to get the best possible return for their new team, leaving them flogged or injured so as not in peak form for the All Blacks. Even aspiring players are going to be at the mercy of poor coaching S&C routines etc.
How are the Aussie teams going to find all this money to attract high profile All Blacks anyway? There are none rolling in it as far as I can see. But agree with your other points though.
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
One of the biggest commercial failings of New Zealand Rugby is not finding a way to work with Rugby Australia to get a piece of the Australian sports market, which is competitive, but a much, much larger pie than their own.
Trouble is that Aus have proven over the years the their successful sports comps are 'in house'. I mentioned before how even their womens rugby comp does well as Oz v Oz. Add in some Aupiki teams and the table would look like the men's one and Oz fans would lose interest.
Basketball has had endless accusations of the comp trying to make things as hard as possible for the Breakers, Football with the Phoenix and League with the Warriors. Thos examples are only one NZ potentially upsetting the picture of Australian sporting greatness.
Supercars (V8s) are one of the few that haven't suffered from kiwis doing well (McLaughlin and SVG being dominant) but that's because the drivers are aligned to either true Oz teams or the Ford v Holden rivalry.
It is very difficulet to get a piece of the Oz sorts market/ population without them picking up their ball and going home. I can't see how Women's rugby will solve the puzzle either. We want more games and a wider market, they want winners. -
It has been mentioned here before but fans love stats . If we like the US models you can't ignore that they are brilliant at providing talking points through stats.
Here, it is a huge struggle for anyone bar media and staff to access the detailed stats in a comp.
Some third parties have tried to create stat based websites (eg https://www.rugbydatabase.co.nz/competition/index.php?competitionId=1010) but it is very light on detail for punters, discussion and shonky analysis.
How many times have you heard or read a comment in media and though "I wish I could see that for someone else"
It has been a rugby failing for a long time. Even the basic AB records over the years were held in Almanacs for so long that it took the Rugby Museum (via an ex-ferner) to build a database which existed by itself for a long time until NZR saw the value. -
As it is you could make a team out of Kiwis playing in Oz franchises, if you took away Kiwis already in their franchises they would really struggle, I am yet to see that being acknowledged.
-
-
@Tim said in Super Rugby 2023:
The media has been strangely quiet about NZRU's massive $47M loss. I'm not an accountant, but I'm not familiar with a massive loss being called investment. What will the return on spending $20M on women's rugby be? Ha ha ha.
"It would be great to sit back and trust that a $47m loss is all part of the grand plan, but there are too many red flags flying to be sure whether it’s the financial team or storytellers driving NZR’s commercial operation."
Gregor Paul: The truth behind NZ Rugby’s $47m loss - NZ Herald
OPINION: There are many red flags hidden in the detail.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Tim said in Super Rugby 2023:
The media has been strangely quiet about NZRU's massive $47M loss. I'm not an accountant, but I'm not familiar with a massive loss being called investment. What will the return on spending $20M on women's rugby be? Ha ha ha.
whats the current situation with Silverlake? we cant have received any money yet if we're posting a loss?
-
@Kiwiwomble As I understand it correct me if I am wrong, that money was being dripfeed to grassroots.
-
@Kiwiwomble the money coming in isn't classed as revenue (as it's not from 'normal operations'), but it has been classed as an expense when it's been dispersed around the country. So effectively every dollar spent thanks to Silver Lake is going to result in a one dollar loss for NZR - which is why just looking at the profit/loss for the year is not the best way of analysing the financial situation.
-
@SBW1 said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble As I understand it correct me if I am wrong, that money was being dripfeed to grassroots.
i never read too much of the details but thats on me but i assumed from the press the the grass roots were getting a boost as part of the deal but that the top level we're getting cash but maybe not?
-
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@SBW1 said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble As I understand it correct me if I am wrong, that money was being dripfeed to grassroots.
i never read too much of the details but thats on me but i assumed from the press the the grass roots were getting a boost as part of the deal but that the top level we're getting cash but maybe not?
Cash reserves have gone up from the rest of the injected money.
Agree with @Mr-Fish above as well.
As for the stupid comments about 'return' from spending on Womens rugby ($20M) why isn't the same question asked about increased spending on the rest of the game (Men's) which was an extra $155M? The return from the womens side may just be bigger considering the investment has already won the hosting of the first WRXV. -
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
Anyone care to share the paywalled opinion piece?
I'll go and read some facts maybe. I trust my own opinion as much as Gregor Paul's (not saying much)
OPINION:
When it comes to evaluating private equity investment in professional sport, the trick is trying to determine whether the storytellers or financial managers are the real stars of the show.
Investments of the scale and nature such as the one into which New Zealand Rugby has entered with Silver Lake carry a level of complexity that makes it difficult even for financial experts to pick through the numbers in the annual report and fully understand what they are reading.
It ends up being an exercise in trust almost – that everyone simply has to hope that NZR’s upbeat, everything is on track response to the record $47m loss posted in 2022 is a triumph of strategic planning and investment nous, and not a victory for its communication team which managed to at least partly blame Covid and inflation for causing some of the deficit, while explaining that $21m had also been invested in the women’s game to support “ongoing participation growth”.
With a further $37m having been distributed to provincial unions as part of the Silver Lake investment, and $95m now parked in reserve, it seems more accurate to view the $47m gap in the accounts as a massive investment in the future growth of the game, rather than a massive loss.
And with the Black Ferns having won the World Cup at the end of last year, a 10-year strategic plan to grow women’s rugby having been signed off, and a further $100m coming from Silver Lake in July, there is enough evidence to suggest that the annual accounts are indeed a victory for the financial acumen of NZR and vindication of its decision to sell a stake in its business.
But to believe that NZR has made a major investment in the game, there has to be confidence that a return will be forthcoming.
And this is where it’s hard to be confident the financial results of 2022 are part of a long-term master plan that will save the game and not in fact a sign of a looming catastrophe, hidden by clever spin-doctoring.
Of all the arguments NZR made to support its proposal to sell equity to Silver Lake, the least powerful was the fact it would deliver an immediate provincial union cash windfall.
There’s little to no evidence to suggest that the $37m that has been pumped into the provincial game will deliver any significant increase in participation or profile.
Previous cash dumps, such as the one that the unions received from hosting the 2017 British and Irish Lions tour, have proven that money is not the panacea to the issues impacting community rugby.
No matter how much money has been thrown at the provinces, it hasn’t been able to arrest the decline in participation, which dropped another nine per cent in 2022 according to NZR’s financial statements, to 147,847.
That’s partly because money can’t stop kids from being scared of injury or feeling like the person coaching them is overbearingly intense, and partly because the unions haven’t been brilliant at investing strategically.
The Deloitte Sports Review: State of the Union report for 2017 showed that provinces only increased their spending on growing the game by 1.5 per cent after taking possession of their Lions windfall.
The $37m payout to the provinces will likely disappear with no tangible legacy benefits for the community game, and it should be seen for what it is - a sweetener from NZR to help gain approval for the equity sale to Silver Lake.
The communications team may have scored another victory in the presentation of the participation numbers as they pertain to the women’s game.
For all the positive statements made in the press release about growing female participation, the numbers posted tell a different story.
According to the financial statements, female participation declined nine per cent in 2022, from 27,562 women being involved in 2021, to 25,298 in 2022.
The growth story being promoted is based on registrations this year, which according to NZR projections, are likely to be 40 per cent up on last year, with the forecast that as many as 35,000 females will play rugby in 2023.
That’s a figure to be celebrated, but while it’s a 40 per cent increase on last year, the impact of Covid regulations must be considered as lockdowns and stricter protocols saw female participation drop from 31,000 in 2019 to 25,000 by 2022.
The numbers posted in 2023 represent only a 12 per cent increase on the pre-Covid peak in 2019.
The word only is being applied because everyone hoped that the Black Ferns World Cup victory in November last year would generate a huge participation boom, but a 12 per cent leap is in line with the annual growth rates that were posted between 2016 and 2019.
The Black Ferns were brilliant, the World Cup was brilliant, but they may not have inspired the next generation to take up the game in the sort of numbers NZR was hoping for.
One clear win for the communication team was in the promotion of now having $95m in cash reserves.
Some super anxious types will sleep easier knowing that there is a stack of cash tucked away in case of disaster, but this desire to take $262m of private equity money and mostly use it to build an enormous rainy-day fund has never made sense.
Presumably that money will be invested at short-term deposit rates, which will almost certainly deliver NZR less interest than the distribution payment they will have to return to Silver Lake next year.
Next year NZR will have to pay Silver Lake and other investors if they take up a capital raise offer later this year – up to 8.7 per cent of net commercial revenue.
And if revenue numbers are similar to this year, that means an estimated $20m will be flowing out to equity stakeholders, which is why it seems that NZR has given itself expensive access to an overdraft – one way bigger than it actually needs.
It would be great to sit back and trust that a $47m loss is all part of the grand plan, but there are too many red flags flying to be sure whether it’s the financial team or storytellers driving NZR’s commercial operation. -
Ok, I trust Gregor Paul's opinion less than my own.
So much poor analysis and narrow measures to create a 'story'.
I totally agree that investment needs to show results or benefits but these can come in many more forms than he describes.
He declares "no tangible legacy benefits for the community game". Has he checked how much money has gone into renewing and refreshing club grounds and clubhouses? Infrastructure that, if left alone, would have rotted the game alongside itself?
Halting decline is as valuable as increasing participation at the moment. Any increase is probably worth double.
Then he goes on the criticise impact from the WRWC on numbers when the season has barely started plus that bounce back from declining numbers is huge. -
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
He declares "no tangible legacy benefits for the community game". Has he checked how much money has gone into renewing and refreshing club grounds and clubhouses? Infrastructure that, if left alone, would have rotted the game alongside itself?
i see first hand what a difference that infrastructure has in keeping interest in the game, my clubs clubrooms are over a km away from where we play, we get a tent up for the bbq and that it....is see the crowds the other clubs get that have proper facilities and i understand why we struggle for numbers, hard to quantify but hugely important
