D2 Budgets and Top 14

http://www.thescore.ie/top-14-pro-d2-budgets-biarritz-1627448-Aug2014/

These are always going to be difficult to compare with Jeff and Pro 12 teams budgets, as I believe these are the operating budgets rather than players salaries, but did find this bit intresting
As a rough comparison, the IRFU stated an expenditure of €31.8million on ‘Professional game costs’ in 2013/14, which includes the national team and four provinces. A further €3.6million was put into ‘Elite player development’, taking into account the Wolfhounds, Emerging Ireland, academies and U20s.

So IRFU run the entire profession game on Toulouses budget!

Also what does it mean to the majority of Pro 12 teams and English teams that do not even have the top D2 teams budgets?

I don't think the IRFU accounts don't take into account ticket sales, which go straight through the branch. What the average attendance to Provincial home games? 40000? What the average ticket price? What about Provincial sponsorship?

I seem to remember reading something that said Leicester's turnover was about £20M, Saints was £15M and Exeter was £10M.

Kingshu wrote:
As a rough comparison, the IRFU stated an expenditure of €31.8million on ‘Professional game costs’ in 2013/14, which includes the national team and four provinces.

In comparison, the WRU spend 17.4m Euros on the professional game. (£14m)

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
As a rough comparison, the IRFU stated an expenditure of €31.8million on ‘Professional game costs’ in 2013/14, which includes the national team and four provinces.

In comparison, the WRU spend 17.4m Euros on the professional game. (£14m)

Different funding model Chunky and you know that, also IRFU number includes international, your WRU number doesn't. Try harder.

This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

Speaking of tedious...

Cyril wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

Speaking of tedious...

hahaha relax I was JK with my new favourite 'online friend'

I think it was Eric Idle talking about the Four Yorkshiremen sketch. He was saying there's evidence of that type of thing for hundreds of years, "I'm so poor...etc".

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

And yet the game there is only 7.5% as size (based on player numbers). The NZRU is quite wasteful it seems.

 

HammerofThunor wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

And yet the game there is only 7.5% as size (based on player numbers). The NZRU is quite wasteful it seems.

  

Although now you mention it if 7.5% is true it highlights the acheivement of New Zealand to be so superior to a nation literally 15 odd times it's size... You say wastefull I say concentrated and succesfull hahaha

Neutralee wrote: 

HammerofThunor wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

And yet the game there is only 7.5% as size (based on player numbers). The NZRU is quite wasteful it seems.

  

Although now you mention it if 7.5% is true it highlights the acheivement of New Zealand to be so superior to a nation literally 15 odd times it's size... You say wastefull I say concentrated and succesfull hahaha

Yep, and they have same number of RWC's as Australia, for who RU is the 4th sport of choice.  #epic fail

Well yeah, they spend 5 times the money on each player that the RFU does. Of course they're going to be better.

I suggest you have a sit down and sort out your mask. It's beginning to slip again.

  

Apparently 93.78% of any statistics appearing on any rugby board are deeply questionable.

andyi wrote:

Neutralee wrote: 

HammerofThunor wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

Cyril wrote:This "my dad spends less than your dad" argument is getting very tedious, very quickly.

I heard the NZRFU budget is 31% of the RFU's...

And yet the game there is only 7.5% as size (based on player numbers). The NZRU is quite wasteful it seems.

  

Although now you mention it if 7.5% is true it highlights the acheivement of New Zealand to be so superior to a nation literally 15 odd times it's size... You say wastefull I say concentrated and succesfull hahaha

Yep, and they have same number of RWC's as Australia, for who RU is the 4th sport of choice.  #epic fail

And NZ have to have a 'home' RWC before they can win it!

But yet again we have an article  that has nothing to do with NZ rugby, but someone has to throw NZ into the mix.

  

Yawn.

justified sinner wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
As a rough comparison, the IRFU stated an expenditure of €31.8million on ‘Professional game costs’ in 2013/14, which includes the national team and four provinces.

In comparison, the WRU spend 17.4m Euros on the professional game. (£14m)

Different funding model

what's that got to do with it? Every Union is different.

also IRFU number includes international, your WRU number doesn't. Try harder.

Yes it does. Try harder.