Australia AGAIN !!! Why ????

First topic message reminder :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/22724323

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-play-australia-yet-again-4032456

Once again, it's an international the weekend (30th November) before a Heineken Cup weekend (7th December probably).
It's once again outside the IRB window
Once again our regions are hamstrung by W @nkers R U s as if we haven't enough problems already !!

As part of the Agreement, PRL shall be solely responsible for negotiating the sale of their own TV, media & Sponsorship rights and giving directions to ERC in respect of England's position on the sale of the TV, media and sponsorship rights related to the European Rugby Cup and European Challenge Cup.

Therefore the 110 million shared between prem clubs over the period of the agreement is RFU funding of the PRL alone, the PRL go out and get media, sponsers and donations on top of that, of which the ERC funds are a part of.

Leicester tigers reported ticket sales of less than 5million (average home crowd 20k, 86% capacity) and said that equated to less than a third of their total income. Total matchday income (corporate, sponsorship,hospitality) for the year was 7.7million equating to less than half of their total income.

So the other 50% of their income was 3.5 the PRL hands to them from the money raised by the RFU? OR are you forgetting the TV, media and sponsorship deals, including the ERC on top of that...

When you compare Leicesters 15million income last year to what the regions receive in the 3.75 that encorporates all exterior funding the regions get it kinda highlights a little flaw to your reasoning.

Are you Piers Morgan?

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:
You will be surprised to know, no doubt that the welsh regions receive more funding on average than the aviva clubs in England. £3.75 million compared to £3.5million in England.

You might as well make this your username the amount of times you dribble this garbage out, if however you knew how the funding worked I may be able to take you more seriously!

Luckless

It's easy, the WRU can afford central contracting in the way they put the proposal toward the regions...

If the regions give up control of their prize assets, the WRU are willing to pay wages of those prized assets and do what they will with them. All seems very pleasant until you read the fine print...

The regions will no longer receive funding whatsoever Therefore signing away their best players and losing out on the peanut shells they all sit around the table and beg for now!

Bluesman

Aviva clubs funding from tv and rfu: £3.5million.
Welsh regions from tv and wru: £3.75million.

Leicester attendance: 18k
Blues attendace: 8k

This is not rocket science. Engage your brain for once! Think! What is the solution? The answer is staring you in the face! Why are Leicester making money? Is it because they receive more funding from the RFU? NOOOOO!

Do they receive any money directly from the RFU? NOOOO!

And this 3.5 million you speak of, is this not central funds only, making up but a part of their yearly income?

The AP clubs get paid slightly less (per team) for player release and European competitions. OTOH on average they're contributing less players (per team) to the international side.

On the TV money side, the Welsh region' share of HC TV revenue is higher per team than the AP. This is more than offset by the domestic competition TV revenue the English clubs get, which they are paid for directly by the broadcaster. And of course the AP sides tend to have better gates. The Ospreys in particular do compete well on shirt sales at least.

The biggest problem the Regions face is the historic debt millstone - that is down to past poor management. Pre-recession the regions spent big, assuming the money would come rolling in - who let Gordon Brown give them financial advice? Clearing that debt and running a team is hard - and the regions' debts are large enough that the WRU can't simply assume it without making its bankers very nervous, especially as the WRU has its own debt as well.

So all in all, the WRU are in a position not far off George Osborne's - they can pump most of their resources into paying down their own debt, and risk seeing the regions on-field fortunes decline, (which means less income from other sources as fair (or even moderate) weather supporters give up), or they can divert more money to the regions in the hope that some success will encourage more support, winning spectators and players back from soccer, but at the cost of delaying debt clearance.

Pete

Welsh regions don't get paid player release, and the idea of so is within the 3.75mill budget, whereas Englands player release / credits is not within the central funding the RFU provides the PRL.

As I said Leicester ran off an income of over 15million last season, of which less than half was earnt through their big crowds that scrum highlights is the difference between Welsh regions and AP clubs!

He is however a lost cause and has a big blind spot for WRU propoganda!

thebluesmancometh wrote:As part of the Agreement, PRL shall be solely responsible for negotiating the sale of their own TV, media & Sponsorship rights and giving directions to ERC in respect of England's position on the sale of the TV, media and sponsorship rights related to the European Rugby Cup and European Challenge Cup.

Therefore the 110 million shared between prem clubs over the period of the agreement is RFU funding of the PRL alone, the PRL go out and get media, sponsers and donations on top of that, of which the ERC funds are a part of.

Leicester tigers reported ticket sales of less than 5million (average home crowd 20k, 86% capacity) and said that equated to less than a third of their total income. Total matchday income (corporate, sponsorship,hospitality) for the year was 7.7million equating to less than half of their total income.

So the other 50% of their income was 3.5 the PRL hands to them from the money raised by the RFU? OR are you forgetting the TV, media and sponsorship deals, including the ERC on top of that...

When you compare Leicesters 15million income last year to what the regions receive in the 3.75 that encorporates all exterior funding the regions get it kinda highlights a little flaw to your reasoning.

Are you Piers Morgan?

Cardiff Blues total turnover: £6million.
Of which:
Tv money: £2.25million
WRU funding: £1.5million
Gate receipts and sponsorship: £2.25million

Based on your figures:

Leicester Tigers gate receipts and sponsorship income is £7.7million compared to Blues £2.25million.

Once again the reason for our regions financial problems are staring you in the face! THINK!!

The WRU cannot subsidise this discrepancy in sponsorship and matchday income for eternity. More WRU funding is just a short term fix to the longer term problem of poor management and leadership at our regions.

Scrumdown wrote:The regions need to generate more money themselves from sponsorship and gate receipts so that they can increase their salary cap and be competitive in Europe. This is the only long term solution. Otherwise WRU control is inevitable.

Hell of a lot easier to generate your own funding when you have access to your internationals on weekends outside international windows and are able to prepare properly for Heineken Cup games. Not saying you're wrong that the regions need to do more to help themselves but this trend of scheduling extra test matches isn't exactly helping them help themselves.

thebluesmancometh wrote:Pete

Welsh regions don't get paid player release, and the idea of so is within the 3.75mill budget, whereas Englands player release / credits is not within the central funding the RFU provides the PRL.

As I said Leicester ran off an income of over 15million last season, of which less than half was earnt through their big crowds that scrum highlights is the difference between Welsh regions and AP clubs!

He is however a lost cause and has a big blind spot for WRU propoganda!

But half of £15million is more than the total turnover recorded by every single one of our regions in their last set of accounts you cretin!

Scrumdown wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:As part of the Agreement, PRL shall be solely responsible for negotiating the sale of their own TV, media & Sponsorship rights and giving directions to ERC in respect of England's position on the sale of the TV, media and sponsorship rights related to the European Rugby Cup and European Challenge Cup.

Therefore the 110 million shared between prem clubs over the period of the agreement is RFU funding of the PRL alone, the PRL go out and get media, sponsers and donations on top of that, of which the ERC funds are a part of.

Leicester tigers reported ticket sales of less than 5million (average home crowd 20k, 86% capacity) and said that equated to less than a third of their total income. Total matchday income (corporate, sponsorship,hospitality) for the year was 7.7million equating to less than half of their total income.

So the other 50% of their income was 3.5 the PRL hands to them from the money raised by the RFU? OR are you forgetting the TV, media and sponsorship deals, including the ERC on top of that...

When you compare Leicesters 15million income last year to what the regions receive in the 3.75 that encorporates all exterior funding the regions get it kinda highlights a little flaw to your reasoning.

Are you Piers Morgan?

Cardiff Blues total turnover: £6million.
Of which:
Tv money: £2.25million
WRU funding: £1.5million
Gate receipts and sponsorship: £2.25million

Based on your figures:

Leicester Tigers gate receipts and sponsorship income is £7.7million compared to Blues £2.25million.

Once again the reason for our regions financial problems are staring you in the face! THINK!!

The WRU cannot subsidise this discrepancy in sponsorship and matchday income for eternity. More WRU funding is just a short term fix to the longer term problem of poor management and leadership at our regions.

Firstly the turnover from what I know (and I havn't seen actual figures, if you have them please send me alink) of the Blues is closer to 7.5 than 6, I know corporate, hospitality and international corporate were over 1 mill revenue last year alone, so I can't beleive ticket sales were 1 million also. Depends what year your looking at too, if the CCS was involved I well beleive it.

So your telling me the 5 million discrepency between Blues and Leicester personal income is the problem, and has nothing to do with the 4 mill surplus in funding received from the governing body directly or indirectly?

The RFU also saw profits dip, whereas the WRU boasted record profits recently, 54m last year wasn't it? 54million!!!

How exactly do the regions raise revenue (ticket sales aside because I agree with you they need boosting) when the WRU also monopolise player usage, advertising, and merchandise.

This all excludes the underfunding of the academies (the regions are all having to part fund the little set ups they have), not being able to afford an A team, and offering no support to grass roots rugby in areas that need the boost, all of which the RFU provide!

Notch wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:The regions need to generate more money themselves from sponsorship and gate receipts so that they can increase their salary cap and be competitive in Europe. This is the only long term solution. Otherwise WRU control is inevitable.

Hell of a lot easier to generate your own funding when you have access to your internationals on weekends outside international windows and are able to prepare properly for Heineken Cup games. Not saying you're wrong that the regions need to do more to help themselves but this trend of scheduling extra test matches isn't exactly helping them help themselves.

I know, but our regions are supposedly run by hard nosed businessmen who make good business decisions. One of the decisions they made was to sign the participation agreement with the WRU in exchange for agreed levels of funding over 5 years. The 4th AI was agreed as part of the participation agreement signed.

That is business in the real world. Those businesses that have people in charge that make good decisions succeed. Those that don't fail.

The regions are failing because Gallagher, Hazell and the rest are simply not up to it.

thebluesmancometh wrote:Pete

Welsh regions don't get paid player release, and the idea of so is within the 3.75mill budget, whereas Englands player release / credits is not within the central funding the RFU provides the PRL.

As I said Leicester ran off an income of over 15million last season, of which less than half was earnt through their big crowds that scrum highlights is the difference between Welsh regions and AP clubs!

He is however a lost cause and has a big blind spot for WRU propoganda!

According to the RFU's annual report

Payments to Premiership clubs increased by £1.7m, from £12.5m to £14.2m, mainly due to the fees and bonuses payable to
the England team for playing in the Rugby World Cup.

That's player release money - equivalent to the £6m the WRU puts up for player release. HEC/Amlin TV money goes through on top, making up the £3.5m per club.

You're right though, the real gap in funding between the regions and the AP clubs isn't gate takings. It's TV money for the AP - which is much higher than the Rabo, and likely to get even more pronounced with the BT deal. There's very little the regions can do about the TV money gap.

Bluesman,

Your mixing up turnover with profit!

Do you seriously think the WRU made a profit of £54millon?!!!

What planet are you on?

No wonder you think the WRU should be allocating more funding to the regions!

Scrumdown wrote:

Glas a du wrote:OK, say we scrape a win. How will you feel when all four Welsh regions are knocked out of Europe the following week?

What about Leicester, Saracens and Harlequins whose internationals will also be away with England and therefore similarly affected?

Think!!

Engage your brain!!

OK.

Right.

Hang on, it's a bit warm and there are a few distractions...

Here...here we go...

"the WRU are hiding behind their debts and are preferring to pay them off at an accelerated rate than properly funding the regions. This is because they are concerned about a 90s style dearth of playing talent which we see half empty stadiums after the current crop of talented players retire. However what they fail to consider is that the impact on the regions in Europe will become ever more important to the regional fans who are increasing year on year. Further that playing one off tests on a regular basis as part of a nakedly commercialised autumn international series does not engage the fans in the same way that the traditions of the six nations do. Further still that the law of diminishing returns will see less and less attendees at these matches denuding the income generated from them at the same time as player burn out from an overcrowded international schedule only inhibits those players and their regions. The WRU is prepared to accept support from the regions in developing the players who pull on the red shirt, but are less forthcoming in their support of the regions. This in dangerously short sighted and inadequate administration on the part of the WRU."

Blooming eck, you’re right, I should have tried that ages ago!

Pete C

£3.5million includes all tv moneys received by aviva clubs.

So main discrepancy is gate receipts and sponsorship not tv money.

Scrumdown wrote:Bluesman,

Your mixing up turnover with profit!

Do you seriously think the WRU made a profit of £54millon?!!!

What planet are you on?

No wonder you think the WRU should be allocating more funding to the regions!

haha I meant 5,4M but my full stop button isn't working correctly

But your right is was 4,5M profit last year not 5,4M

But then that also takes into account the pretty little overpayments on the MS loan which has been reduced by over 4 mill last year wasn't it? From 19 to 15?

Lets keep this civil though, I agree with you part of the problem is ticket sales, but you have to concede part of the issue is lack of funding '£102m over 8 years is what the English see as a payment for International Players outside of the IRB window. For the WRU, that value is (at present) £54m'

The other issue is the monopoly the WRU holds on alternative revenue streams throughout the nation!

Also the regions aren't funded by business men and used as business's, they are funded by businessmen who are fans of the sport. The regions aren't run particularly well financially, but then again Lewis isn't running the sport particularly well, we need a balance and that has to come from the PRGB which Lewis is frightened of allowing to occur now he realises the neutrality of the vote!

Scrumdown wrote:Bluesman,

Your mixing up turnover with profit!

Do you seriously think the WRU made a profit of £54millon?!!!

What planet are you on?

No wonder you think the WRU should be allocating more funding to the regions!

haha I meant 5,4M but my full stop button isn't working correctly

But your right is was 4,5M profit last year not 5,4M

But then that also takes into account the pretty little overpayments on the MS loan which has been reduced by over 4 mill last year wasn't it? From 19 to 15?

Lets keep this civil though, I agree with you part of the problem is ticket sales, but you have to concede part of the issue is lack of funding '£102m over 8 years is what the English see as a payment for International Players outside of the IRB window. For the WRU, that value is (at present) £54m'

The other issue is the monopoly the WRU holds on alternative revenue streams throughout the nation!

Also the regions aren't funded by business men and used as business's, they are funded by businessmen who are fans of the sport. The regions aren't run particularly well financially, but then again Lewis isn't running the sport particularly well, we need a balance and that has to come from the PRGB which Lewis is frightened of allowing to occur now he realises the neutrality of the vote!

Scrumdown wrote:Pete C

£3.5million includes all tv moneys received by aviva clubs.

So main discrepancy is gate receipts and sponsorship not tv money.

It doesn't though, it is part of the 'participation agreement' in which is received for having at least a player in one of the EPS, Saxons, U20's or junior elite system.

All TV money is sourced by the PRL and distributed as well as the 110M from the RFU

Glas a du wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

Glas a du wrote:OK, say we scrape a win. How will you feel when all four Welsh regions are knocked out of Europe the following week?

What about Leicester, Saracens and Harlequins whose internationals will also be away with England and therefore similarly affected?

Think!!

Engage your brain!!

OK.

Right.

Hang on, it's a bit warm and there are a few distractions...

Here...here we go...

"the WRU are hiding behind their debts and are preferring to pay them off at an accelerated rate than properly funding the regions. This is because they are concerned about a 90s style dearth of playing talent which we see half empty stadiums after the current crop of talented players retire. However what they fail to consider is that the impact on the regions in Europe will become ever more important to the regional fans who are increasing year on year. Further that playing one off tests on a regular basis as part of a nakedly commercialised autumn international series does not engage the fans in the same way that the traditions of the six nations do. Further still that the law of diminishing returns will see less and less attendees at these matches denuding the income generated from them at the same time as player burn out from an overcrowded international schedule only inhibits those players and their regions. The WRU is prepared to accept support from the regions in developing the players who pull on the red shirt, but are less forthcoming in their support of the regions. This in dangerously short sighted and inadequate administration on the part of the WRU."

Blooming eck, you’re right, I should have tried that ages ago!

Why are they paying the debts off at an accelerated rate?????

I'm not going to tell you. Find out for yourself because you clearly need to do some research.

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:Pete C

£3.5million includes all tv moneys received by aviva clubs.

So main discrepancy is gate receipts and sponsorship not tv money.

It doesn't though, it is part of the 'participation agreement' in which is received for having at least a player in one of the EPS, Saxons, U20's or junior elite system.

All TV money is sourced by the PRL and distributed as well as the 110M from the RFU

Yes, I know. PRL distributed approx £42million to the aviva clubs in total last year which equates to £3.5million on average. A club such ad Leicester will obviously receive more than London Welsh or Sale.

Scrumdown wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:Pete C

£3.5million includes all tv moneys received by aviva clubs.

So main discrepancy is gate receipts and sponsorship not tv money.

It doesn't though, it is part of the 'participation agreement' in which is received for having at least a player in one of the EPS, Saxons, U20's or junior elite system.

All TV money is sourced by the PRL and distributed as well as the 110M from the RFU

Yes, I know. PRL distributed approx £42million to the aviva clubs in total last year which equates to £3.5million on average. A club such ad Leicester will obviously receive more than London Welsh or Sale.

LW were reported as receiving 800k less than the founders, of which Sale had 3,5M.

The PRL distributed that 3,5M that was received through the participation agreement, but then they also sorced alternative revenue in TV, ERC, Media and sponsorship elsewhere to distribute.

As I said, Leicester income last season that had nothing to do with their stadium or self revenue was over 7M, similar to the Blues entire income for the same period!

Leicester received £3.2m from PRL last year (http://www.leicestertigers.com/downloads/Annual_Accounts_Report_2012.pdf)

Turnover comprises:
Rugby income 4,992
Premier Rugby Limited income 3,220
Commercial income 9,121
Total 17,333

Commercial activities
Income from ticket sales, including season tickets, fell by 17 per cent to £5 million, accounting for 29 per cent of our total income. The average number of tickets sold for Premiership home games was 20,705, which represented stadium occupancy of 86 percent. Season ticket sales were 13,003. The comparable figures for season 2010/11 were 21,091 and 12,875. The averages for match and season tickets for Premiership clubs in 2011/12 were 11,458 and 5,600 respectively.

Income from matchday hospitality sales and advertising was £2.7 million, in line with the previous year. This was
a good performance in a tough market. All 26 of our executive boxes were sold, as were memberships of our 1880 executive club. Revenues generated by Tigers Events Limited (TEL), the international hospitality arm of our business, fell by 11 per cent to £1.9 million. Though there were no autumn internationals due to the World Cup, TEL continued to expand its business base into other areas, notably Formula 1 motor-racing, tennis, horse-racing and golf.

The conference and events team continued to bring in new bookings for our facilities away from matchdays. Income from this source was £1.13 million, in line with the previous year. Welford Road is now licensed for civil partnerships and weddings as well as providing a venue for corporate conferences, exhibitions and roadshows.

The retail partnership with Kitbag, the world’s leading on-line sports retail specialist, has completed its first year.

This resulted in a planned reduction in revenue, but drove a threefold increase in contribution.

Overall they made a £1m loss.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Leicester received £3.2m from PRL last year (http://www.leicestertigers.com/downloads/Annual_Accounts_Report_2012.pdf)

Turnover comprises:
Rugby income 4,992
Premier Rugby Limited income 3,220
Commercial income 9,121
Total 17,333

Commercial activities
Income from ticket sales, including season tickets, fell by 17 per cent to £5 million, accounting for 29 per cent of our total income. The average number of tickets sold for Premiership home games was 20,705, which represented stadium occupancy of 86 percent. Season ticket sales were 13,003. The comparable figures for season 2010/11 were 21,091 and 12,875. The averages for match and season tickets for Premiership clubs in 2011/12 were 11,458 and 5,600 respectively.

Income from matchday hospitality sales and advertising was £2.7 million, in line with the previous year. This was
a good performance in a tough market. All 26 of our executive boxes were sold, as were memberships of our 1880 executive club. Revenues generated by Tigers Events Limited (TEL), the international hospitality arm of our business, fell by 11 per cent to £1.9 million. Though there were no autumn internationals due to the World Cup, TEL continued to expand its business base into other areas, notably Formula 1 motor-racing, tennis, horse-racing and golf.

The conference and events team continued to bring in new bookings for our facilities away from matchdays. Income from this source was £1.13 million, in line with the previous year. Welford Road is now licensed for civil partnerships and weddings as well as providing a venue for corporate conferences, exhibitions and roadshows.

The retail partnership with Kitbag, the world’s leading on-line sports retail specialist, has completed its first year.

This resulted in a planned reduction in revenue, but drove a threefold increase in contribution.

Overall they made a £1m loss.

Do you know what the 'rugby income' is made up of?

Money?

Blimmin 'eck. I didn't realise how much long-term debt the WRU was holding - £61million.
http://www.wru.co.uk/downloads/WRU_ARA_2012.pdf

It wasn't just the regions blowing money in the good times then

Scrumdown wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Leicester received £3.2m from PRL last year (http://www.leicestertigers.com/downloads/Annual_Accounts_Report_2012.pdf)

Turnover comprises:
Rugby income 4,992
Premier Rugby Limited income 3,220
Commercial income 9,121
Total 17,333

Commercial activities
Income from ticket sales, including season tickets, fell by 17 per cent to £5 million, accounting for 29 per cent of our total income. The average number of tickets sold for Premiership home games was 20,705, which represented stadium occupancy of 86 percent. Season ticket sales were 13,003. The comparable figures for season 2010/11 were 21,091 and 12,875. The averages for match and season tickets for Premiership clubs in 2011/12 were 11,458 and 5,600 respectively.

Income from matchday hospitality sales and advertising was £2.7 million, in line with the previous year. This was
a good performance in a tough market. All 26 of our executive boxes were sold, as were memberships of our 1880 executive club. Revenues generated by Tigers Events Limited (TEL), the international hospitality arm of our business, fell by 11 per cent to £1.9 million. Though there were no autumn internationals due to the World Cup, TEL continued to expand its business base into other areas, notably Formula 1 motor-racing, tennis, horse-racing and golf.

The conference and events team continued to bring in new bookings for our facilities away from matchdays. Income from this source was £1.13 million, in line with the previous year. Welford Road is now licensed for civil partnerships and weddings as well as providing a venue for corporate conferences, exhibitions and roadshows.

The retail partnership with Kitbag, the world’s leading on-line sports retail specialist, has completed its first year.

This resulted in a planned reduction in revenue, but drove a threefold increase in contribution.

Overall they made a £1m loss.

Do you know what the 'rugby income' is made up of?

I think the "rugby income" is the ticket sales - £4,992,000 ~ £5m. They've put the £2.7m from corp. boxes/stadium signage into the "commercial income" box. Presumably beer & pie sales are in "commercial" too - actually, they probably take a fixed fee from whoever comes in and runs the stalls.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Blimmin 'eck. I didn't realise how much long-term debt the WRU was holding - £61million.
http://www.wru.co.uk/downloads/WRU_ARA_2012.pdf

It wasn't just the regions blowing money in the good times then

That's a lot of V Australia games!!! I think they should try fitting in two a month over an entire season. 1 million a game. That's about 18 million a season. Still slow work but three and a half years should do it.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Blimmin 'eck. I didn't realise how much long-term debt the WRU was holding - £61million.
http://www.wru.co.uk/downloads/WRU_ARA_2012.pdf

It wasn't just the regions blowing money in the good times then

But £37million of that debt is debentures which entitles holders to buy tickets in the millenium stadium. WRU will just sell the debentures on to exisiting or new holders when they become due. So it will never really be repaid.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Blimmin 'eck. I didn't realise how much long-term debt the WRU was holding - £61million.
http://www.wru.co.uk/downloads/WRU_ARA_2012.pdf

It wasn't just the regions blowing money in the good times then

Thats not quite accurate as an oweing debt though, It is more like the 30mill figure, and more than half of that is the stadium that is being repaid at an enormous rate, so will be less debt than projected too.

The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

Scrumdown wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:Blimmin 'eck. I didn't realise how much long-term debt the WRU was holding - £61million.
http://www.wru.co.uk/downloads/WRU_ARA_2012.pdf

It wasn't just the regions blowing money in the good times then

But £37million of that debt is debentures which entitles holders to buy tickets in the millenium stadium. WRU will just sell the debentures on to exisiting or new holders when they become due. So it will never really be repaid.

Fair point, as long as team Wales can keep selling out the stadium. That still leaves £22m worth of long term bank loans (and a £7m overdraft). Or 1 stadium roof

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

Scrumdown wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

True, but on average they're losing less players each to int'l duty

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

True

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

True. And they have no long-term debt to maintain, which means they can afford to spend 4 times as much as Wales to on running their international side. Granted the results don't reflect that . They also pump about 3 times as much money into grass roots support as Wales does

No, that's for the extra release time, not funding for each club. So it's £32M for 32 players. Similar to the Welsh squad. If anything each player loss has more impact at the regions due to the number of teams being selected from.

Is turnover what you want to look at though? Surely the outgoings are larger too (not counting EPS deal).

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

True, but on average they're losing less players each to int'l duty

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

True

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

True. And they have no long-term debt to maintain, which means they can afford to spend 4 times as much as Wales to on running their international side. Granted the results don't reflect that . They also pump about 3 times as much money into grass roots support as Wales does

How are the regions better off though, the 6mill over 4 regions includes things that the RFU funding doesn't! Plus the AP clubs aren't in a market totally monopolised by the governing body who are direct competition!

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

True, but on average they're losing less players each to int'l duty

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

True

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

True. And they have no long-term debt to maintain, which means they can afford to spend 4 times as much as Wales to on running their international side. Granted the results don't reflect that . They also pump about 3 times as much money into grass roots support as Wales does

How are the regions better off though, the 6mill over 4 regions includes things that the RFU funding doesn't! Plus the AP clubs aren't in a market totally monopolised by the governing body who are direct competition!

Does it? Is that the extra AI every other year or something else?

HammerofThunor wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

True, but on average they're losing less players each to int'l duty

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

True

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

True. And they have no long-term debt to maintain, which means they can afford to spend 4 times as much as Wales to on running their international side. Granted the results don't reflect that . They also pump about 3 times as much money into grass roots support as Wales does

How are the regions better off though, the 6mill over 4 regions includes things that the RFU funding doesn't! Plus the AP clubs aren't in a market totally monopolised by the governing body who are direct competition!

Does it? Is that the extra AI every other year or something else?

For a start the ERC money received for participation is included, whereas the PRL are responsible for dealing with that.

AP advertising doesn't directly compete with the RFU.

Merchandise isn't monomolised by the RFU.

'International hospitality' revenue is buoyed by the RFU

You have to realise how focussing on 1 small comparitive element of funding doesn't prove much, there is little the regions can do to compete with the AP clubs especially as in the larger picture that the WRU are attempting to let the regions go under so they can take ownership at a fraction of the cost.

Plus I agree turnover is a waste of time, profit margin is the name of the game and the WRU are actively boasted record profits, actively boasting overpayments on the stadium debt, and meanwhile at the same time restricting funding for grass roots, restricting funding for the WP, and putting central contract offers on the table to the regions which will essentially slash the funding they receive AND give up control of their best assets!

Not to mention the constant threat of losing pro status of one of the regions and the bump in the North and fasttracking RGC as a possible replacement.

It's almost like everything the WRU is doing is very USA pre vietnam esque, they are essentially trying to work in the new WRU order!!!

thebluesmancometh wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU give the PRL £110M over 8 years for extra release time with players. This is very similar to the deal the WRU have with the regions except England only have 3 internationals every other year.

So that's £13.75M per year. So about double what the WRU for a similar deal.

The combined premiership TV rights were sold for about £54M for 3 years, so about £18M per year. On top of this is ERC money but I don't know how much this is. Same with sponsorship.

But £13.75 million between 12 clubs is less than £6million between 4!

True, but on average they're losing less players each to int'l duty

So regions still to better than the english clubs on average out of their deal with WRU.

True

Also RFU turnover is more than double that of the WRU so they can afford to pay more.

True. And they have no long-term debt to maintain, which means they can afford to spend 4 times as much as Wales to on running their international side. Granted the results don't reflect that . They also pump about 3 times as much money into grass roots support as Wales does

How are the regions better off though, the 6mill over 4 regions includes things that the RFU funding doesn't! Plus the AP clubs aren't in a market totally monopolised by the governing body who are direct competition!

Does it? Is that the extra AI every other year or something else?

For a start the ERC money received for participation is included, whereas the PRL are responsible for dealing with that.

AP advertising doesn't directly compete with the RFU.

Merchandise isn't monomolised by the RFU.

'International hospitality' revenue is buoyed by the RFU

You have to realise how focussing on 1 small comparitive element of funding doesn't prove much, there is little the regions can do to compete with the AP clubs especially as in the larger picture that the WRU are attempting to let the regions go under so they can take ownership at a fraction of the cost.

For a start the ERC money received for participation is included, whereas the PRL are responsible for dealing with that.

Actually it's not included in the £6m, that's in the separate £9m TV pot that the WRU distributes. Direct, per-club/region income from current TV and Union grants is broadly similar in Eng/Wales.

If the WRU are pocketing money for region's shirt deals then that's a worry.

And presumably the money the likes of the Tigers earns from hospitality at internationals isn't available to the regions because the debenture holders are taking those seats.


As an aside, does anyone have any links to annual reports for the regions, my Googling's drawn a blank.


Given what I've heard in the past about regional debt levels, coupled with the WRU debt, if I was a cold-hearted money man letting the regions fail would be one way out of the financial hole Welsh rugby as a whole is in. I bet the Greek government wishes they could do that .

thebluesmancometh wrote:Plus I agree turnover is a waste of time, profit margin is the name of the game and the WRU are actively boasted record profits, actively boasting overpayments on the stadium debt, and meanwhile at the same time restricting funding for grass roots, restricting funding for the WP, and putting central contract offers on the table to the regions which will essentially slash the funding they receive AND give up control of their best assets!

'actively boasted record profits'? WTF are you on about???? That soesn't even make sense! The WRU are not posting record profits! Get that into your head bluesman!! Don't ever mention record profits again!! Profits were a moderate £616,000. That doesn't even cover Howley and Gatland's Salary for next year.

The bank loan has to be paid or Barclays take the stadium off the WRU. Get that into your head! Repaying the stadium debt is not optional.

WRU have agreed to repay the debt at an accelerated rate in exchange for £10million of the debt being written off by Barclays.

So that's £10million of additional funding that will be available to invest in welsh rugby and not repaid to Barclays. That is good financial management.

Your hate campaign against the WRU has no basis to it other than your own ignorance.

It's record turnover the WRU was boasting about.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19777099

Also growth

the WRU said it was on target to be debt-free by 2021.

The WRU said the results showed it had the highest year-on-year growth rate of any of the major rugby unions between 2007 and 2011.

Mr Lewis said the growth in revenue had been remarkable, adding: "The best is yet to come".

"Together we can continue to take Wales to the world, welcome the world to Wales and play our part in defining Wales as a proud and united nation."

In total, there was a 1% rise in money that went to the regions from the WRU compared with the previous year.

Kinda highlights that the only way the regions are part of the WRU's plan for development is letting them 'Bleed to death' Brown, to take control and the WRU's success "seems to come at the expense of the regions." Paul Rees

That was jus the first thing I came to, there are many more quotes from those in charge happy to pat themselves on the back, and many more from neutral bystanders commenting on the downfall of regional rugby in order for the WRU to take control on the cheap.

The WRU is officially the Illuminati struggling for a new Welsh order.

Because the WRU don't give a flying you know what about the Regions as long as the stadium is full

And carry on like this and the stadium won't be full.

Scrumdown is a nice calm fellow, isn't he?

Notch wrote:Scrumdown is a nice calm fellow, isn't he?

Yes he is!! Now don't mention that again!!!! Ok???

I kinda like the cut I his jib, Notch - he's knowledgable, can't argue with that

HammerofThunor wrote:

Notch wrote:Scrumdown is a nice calm fellow, isn't he?

Yes he is!! Now don't mention that again!!!! Ok???

I was just pointing it out- he's a good guy, GET THAT IN YOUR HEAD!!!

I wish you'd just THINK.

To be fair most of what he said made sense. The exact details of how much money comes in from where and where it goes isn't always very clear.

One thing I can see coming from the ERC stuff is more direct involvement from the Regions.

This thread has ruined my morning!