WRU to pay £1M to regions to retain stars

First topic message reminder :

WRU are investing an extra £2.5M in rugby following an excellent year on the pitch (and therefore financially off it). £1M is to help the regions to retain players but no specific details how it will be distributed.

Watch this space

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/23072439

My estimates may be a bit off as it's guesswork, but this is sort of my point Hammer - it is fairly well documented that players are leaving because they are being offered more elsewhere. So if the regions really do have £3.5m to spend only on players, and that is more than in England, then how come we can't pay them the sort of wages they do in England? That's all we're trying to clear up - what is the money being spent on, because it's obviously not all on wages.

Scrumdown wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:
So multimillionaire owners such as Peter Thomas can keep his £200million safely in the bank whilst enjoying his weekend hobby of running a rugby club at the expense of the WRU and the regional rugby supporter!

Chairman not owner and he'll be gone soon apparently, so somebody else will take over. Cardiff also owe him around about £7m. Hope he doesn't ask for it to be paid back.
Company accounts available here (will only cost you a quid);
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/toolsToHelp/findCompanyInfo.shtml

he is the ultimate controller because he owns the majority of shares in cardiff rfc ltd which owns cardiff blues.

£7million is about the amount I would expect someone to pay in order to have complete control over decision making at the cardiff blues when they are not qualified to make those decisions.

lets be honest, if I had £200million I would be happy to pay £7milluon for the amount of influence that he has in welsh rugby.

Or is CAC the major shareholder. I forget.
Anyway, I would agree that Cardiff Blues since their inception have in general under achieved both on and off the field and it might have been very different had John Smart taken the reigns back in 2004. Saying that things are at last looking up.

Griff wrote:My estimates may be a bit off as it's guesswork, but this is sort of my point Hammer - it is fairly well documented that players are leaving because they are being offered more elsewhere. So if the regions really do have £3.5m to spend only on players, and that is more than in England, then how come we can't pay them the sort of wages they do in England? That's all we're trying to clear up - what is the money being spent on, because it's obviously not all on wages.

If you really want to know, Companies House is your friend.

Edit: Oops, sorry Griff I thought I was replying to Coleman. As for the Drags accounts, bit murky isn't it as far as i'm aware.

Griff wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that the funding from the WRU is not good or is insignificant. It's just that there may be other things that are hidden perhaps that we don't see. I just can't fathom how the Dragons' salary spend is reportedly (by the coach) £2m under the amount we're given. There must be extra costs that come out.

And yes, the £3.5m cap is on the HC squad only. So that's about £100,000 per player average. The top earners are probably all £200,000 plus so there must be quite a few players lower down the pay scale to get to that average. In other words, £3.5m is not a huge amount for 35 pro rugby players (in comparison to others outside Wales).

From what your saying, sounds like the dragons could do with a visit from the FRAUD SQUAD.

Griff wrote:My estimates may be a bit off as it's guesswork, but this is sort of my point Hammer - it is fairly well documented that players are leaving because they are being offered more elsewhere. So if the regions really do have £3.5m to spend only on players, and that is more than in England, then how come we can't pay them the sort of wages they do in England? That's all we're trying to clear up - what is the money being spent on, because it's obviously not all on wages.

To quote you again as it is an interesting point you make because for a region to employ a team Wales player, there are obvious add on extras which have to be accounted for, like it or not ie a player's salary is only part of the equation.
So what does it really cost a region to employ a team Wales player on mega bucks? Who foots the bill when a hamstring is tweaked? Who pays for a replacement?

Scrumdown wrote:

Griff wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that the funding from the WRU is not good or is insignificant. It's just that there may be other things that are hidden perhaps that we don't see. I just can't fathom how the Dragons' salary spend is reportedly (by the coach) £2m under the amount we're given. There must be extra costs that come out.

And yes, the £3.5m cap is on the HC squad only. So that's about £100,000 per player average. The top earners are probably all £200,000 plus so there must be quite a few players lower down the pay scale to get to that average. In other words, £3.5m is not a huge amount for 35 pro rugby players (in comparison to others outside Wales).

From what your saying, sounds like the dragons could do with a visit from the FRAUD SQUAD.  

Give it to Sweeney. 70s Sweeney. No messing.

Scrumdown wrote:

Griff wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that the funding from the WRU is not good or is insignificant. It's just that there may be other things that are hidden perhaps that we don't see. I just can't fathom how the Dragons' salary spend is reportedly (by the coach) £2m under the amount we're given. There must be extra costs that come out.

And yes, the £3.5m cap is on the HC squad only. So that's about £100,000 per player average. The top earners are probably all £200,000 plus so there must be quite a few players lower down the pay scale to get to that average. In other words, £3.5m is not a huge amount for 35 pro rugby players (in comparison to others outside Wales).

From what your saying, sounds like the dragons could do with a visit from the FRAUD SQUAD.  

I'm not accusing them of fraud at all. I'm saying that there are obviously other costs that we don't get to see that accounts for the other half of the WRU funding. Maybe there are big loans, like someone said earlier. Maybe we have to pay back stadium development (although I thought Tony Brown did that out of the goodness of his own heart). Maybe the academies are a lot more expensive to run? Maybe, when people are comparing costs to the English Prem, they forget to take into account the travel implications for the Pro 12 - flying abroad every other week must cost more than taking a coach around England.

The whole point is that we just don't know. We're making assumptions based on one figure written in a financial report or posted on a website (£15.1m last year rising for next year). People are then accusing the regions of squandering the money and being over funded in comparision to English teams when they simply do not know what the money pays for, the operating costs of the clubs and where this money comes from, etc.

Just found this on the Rugby Paper site, talking about funding in England. Assuming that the clubs get their TV monies direct, then this seems like a lot of funding from the RFU. The regions get their TV money, then 6 million between them so £1.5m each. The RFU is giving £3.5m to some? Is that seperate to the competition monies?

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/domestic-club-rugby-union/english-rugby-premiership/8452/revealed-major-gulf-in-funding-of-top-clubs/

"In real terms this results in clubs like Bath, Sale, Gloucester, Saracens, London Irish and Worcester receiving funding from PRL and the RFU (in English Qualified Player payments) of around £3.5m yearly, while promoted clubs such as Exeter and London Welsh have to survive initially on as little as £1.4m."

I know that when we travel to Italy that is covered by the Italians as part of their participation agreement to join the league. I'm not sure what it involves though, is it just air fare or air fare and accommodation? But trips to Ireland and Scotland most weeks will still be adding up. Do the Dragons get less money from the WRU because they're half owned by the WRU?

Griff wrote:Just found this on the Rugby Paper site, talking about funding in England.  Assuming that the clubs get their TV monies direct, then this seems like a lot of funding from the RFU.  The regions get their TV money, then 6 million between them so £1.5m each.  The RFU is giving £3.5m to some?  Is that seperate to the competition monies?

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/domestic-club-rugby-union/english-rugby-premiership/8452/revealed-major-gulf-in-funding-of-top-clubs/

"In real terms this results in clubs like Bath, Sale, Gloucester, Saracens, London Irish and Worcester receiving funding from PRL and the RFU (in English Qualified Player payments) of around £3.5m yearly, while promoted clubs such as Exeter and London Welsh have to survive initially on as little as £1.4m."

I think you miss read that . £3.5M comes from RFU AND PRL. The RFU money is roughly split evenly with the difference 'smoothed' but not removed. The RFU money works out to be about £110M over 8 years (depends how much money is made from 4th AI). This works out to be £1.2M per club per year (£13.75M per year in total). This is the equivalent to the £6M the WRU give the regions.

So it includes the TV monies?

The RFU money doesn't. So the RFU give the clubs EPS money, £13.75M (equivalent of the £6M the WRU give the regions). Giving them the control of TV rights, etc is the equivalent of the £9.2M that's given to the regions.

That article suggests that the combined PRL and RFU payments to the clubs is £3.5M. That's the equivalent of the £3.75M (£15.2M/2) that the regions get every year. On top of this both will have ticket sales, etc.

Overall it doesn't seem like there is that much between the funding for the regions and the clubs once Union payments, TV, sponsorship, etc has been taken into account.

This is all based on the idea that the article in the rugby paper is accurate.

Thanks Hammer.

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU money doesn't. So the RFU give the clubs EPS money, £13.75M (equivalent of the £6M the WRU give the regions). Giving them the control of TV rights, etc is the equivalent of the £9.2M that's given to the regions.

That article suggests that the combined PRL and RFU payments to the clubs is £3.5M. That's the equivalent of the £3.75M (£15.2M/2) that the regions get every year. On top of this both will have ticket sales, etc.

Overall it doesn't seem like there is that much between the funding for the regions and the clubs once Union payments, TV, sponsorship, etc has been taken into account.

This is all based on the idea that the article in the rugby paper is accurate.

Hammer, does the English set up have a "Participation Agreement" similar to what we have across the bridge?

Cardiff Dave wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU money doesn't. So the RFU give the clubs EPS money, £13.75M (equivalent of the £6M the WRU give the regions). Giving them the control of TV rights, etc is the equivalent of the £9.2M that's given to the regions.

That article suggests that the combined PRL and RFU payments to the clubs is £3.5M. That's the equivalent of the £3.75M (£15.2M/2) that the regions get every year. On top of this both will have ticket sales, etc.

Overall it doesn't seem like there is that much between the funding for the regions and the clubs once Union payments, TV, sponsorship, etc has been taken into account.

This is all based on the idea that the article in the rugby paper is accurate.

Hammer, does the English set up have a "Participation Agreement" similar to what we have across the bridge?

Yes.

http://www.rfu.com/news/2007/november/news%20articles/rfuandprlsignneweightyearagreement

HammerofThunor wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Hammer, does the English set up have a "Participation Agreement" similar to what we have across the bridge?

Yes.

http://www.rfu.com/news/2007/november/news%20articles/rfuandprlsignneweightyearagreement

Cheers and I see it includes a limit on non English players which I was unaware of.
http://www.rfu.com/news/2011/april/news%20articles/200411_champ_eqp

Same as us then basically although we don't have a PROFESSIONAL GAME BOARD, yet. Or do we? We did have then suddenly we didn't.

There's a hard limit on foreign players but this doesn't count, Pacific Islanders, South Africans, Europeans or anyone with a passport from one of these countries.

There is then a funding bonus for playing a certain number of EQ players. Since it's come in more EQ are being played each week.

Relationship between RFU and PRL is the best it's even been (IMO) and works pretty well. The RFU use their cash to get what they want. The PRL give more than they need but are compensated well for it.

HammerofThunor wrote:There's a hard limit on foreign players but this doesn't count, Pacific Islanders, South Africans, Europeans or anyone with a passport from one of these countries.

There is then a funding bonus for playing a certain number of EQ players. Since it's come in more EQ are being played each week.

Relationship between RFU and PRL is the best it's even been (IMO) and works pretty well. The RFU use their cash to get what they want. The PRL give more than they need but are compensated well for it.

So the English system is not as restrictive with regards to fielding foreign players?

Cardiff Dave wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:There's a hard limit on foreign players but this doesn't count, Pacific Islanders, South Africans, Europeans or anyone with a passport from one of these countries.

There is then a funding bonus for playing a certain number of EQ players. Since it's come in more EQ are being played each week.

Relationship between RFU and PRL is the best it's even been (IMO) and works pretty well. The RFU use their cash to get what they want. The PRL give more than they need but are compensated well for it.

So the English system is not as restrictive with regards to fielding foreign players?

No. Teams will get fined or points deducted if they field too many 'foreign' players but other than that it's an incentive system rather than restrictive.

Scrumdown wrote:

Griff wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that the funding from the WRU is not good or is insignificant. It's just that there may be other things that are hidden perhaps that we don't see. I just can't fathom how the Dragons' salary spend is reportedly (by the coach) £2m under the amount we're given. There must be extra costs that come out.

And yes, the £3.5m cap is on the HC squad only. So that's about £100,000 per player average. The top earners are probably all £200,000 plus so there must be quite a few players lower down the pay scale to get to that average. In other words, £3.5m is not a huge amount for 35 pro rugby players (in comparison to others outside Wales).

From what your saying, sounds like the dragons could do with a visit from the FRAUD SQUAD.  

Brilliant! The same Dragons 50% owned by the WRU, yeah?

For those interested in why this money is the equivalent of an Elastoplast on a severed limb, here are a couple of excellent blog posts on the subject:

http://rugbyphilbb.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/give-us-the-information-so-that-we-can-decide/

http://rugbyphilbb.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/sink-or-swim/

You can argue the toss all you like. But this idiot talk of 'fat cats' is all well and good if you can come up with something better. Rog can't. His income stream is maximised and in danger of sinking the whole pro game in Wales. Let's let the extremely successful private owners who have subsidised Team Wales for ten years have a fair crack at running their franchises. At the end of the day even what Rog allowed his media buddies to release of the PwC report stated that it is the regions subsidising Team Wales, not the other way around. So maybe it's time to try to grow the game another way instead of from the top down.

Stone Motif wrote:For those interested in why this money is the equivalent of an Elastoplast on a severed limb, here are a couple of excellent blog posts on the subject:

http://rugbyphilbb.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/give-us-the-information-so-that-we-can-decide/

http://rugbyphilbb.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/sink-or-swim/

You can argue the toss all you like.  But this idiot talk of 'fat cats' is all well and good if you can come up with something better.  Rog can't.  His income stream is maximised and in danger of sinking the whole pro game in Wales.  Let's let the extremely successful private owners who have subsidised Team Wales for ten years have a fair crack at running their franchises.  At the end of the day even what Rog allowed his media buddies to release of the PwC report stated that it is the regions subsidising Team Wales, not the other way around.  So maybe it's time to try to grow the game another way instead of from the top down.

Interesting, makes one wonder why the regions signed the PA.
Also, I hope we're not putting PT in the "fat cats" good guy bracket. Yes he's spent millions of his own cash, but from a purely Cardiff point of view he can sod off as quick as he likes. The move to CCS and the build to it was hugely damaging and I doubt he will ever be forgiven actually.

As a reminder, a Penarth bloke has recently chucked in £500k of his own money.

Cardiff Dave wrote:As a reminder, a Penarth bloke has recently chucked in £500k of his own money.

Damn his eyes to hell! How dare he expect the WRU to subsidise this kind of mindless philanthropy?