The Future for the PRO14 - Part 4 - A Global Club Championship

First topic message reminder :

Following the Union Balldance of the last 12 months, another union has finally joined the party - SARU. The PRO12 league is gone with Martin Anayi's announcement of a global club championship involving conferences of teams from five unions with the potential for more to be included.

At first glance, it looks like a smart play - albeit somewhat fortuitous with SARU having to shed two teams from the Super Rugby competition. It brings together a lot more viewers that are attractive to media companies and business sponsors. Celtic Rugby Ltd still owns the competition with just its three founding shareholders - IRFU, SRU and WRU. No club or franchise owners involved. FIR failed to meet the required performance that would have made them shareholders at the beginning of July. And SARU weren't persuasive enough to get their seat at the table just yet. Rumours of a new company being set up failed to materialise. But they still signed up to a six-year agreement with £6m in funding each year.

It's not clear if this money is coming from SARU or directly from SuperSport, their broadcast partner. It is SARU who have signed the agreement to provide two teams so presumably the financial buck stops with them. It's more likely the £6m is a participation fee paid by SARU, similar to what FIR was charged when it joined in 2010. Media reports have said that the monies will be split equally amongst the 12 teams with travel and logistics costs for SA trips met centrally by Celtic Rugby Ltd since these will vary for clubs depending on whether they play one or both teams in SA.

Next on Anayi's agenda is the negotiation of a new media deal involving PPV and terrestrial TV, and online platforms. SuperSport may have already got their slice - all 20-22 home games involving Cheetahs and Kings plus some/all of the finals stages. Or perhaps not. Sky and possibly other PPV broadcasters such as Eir Sport may be willing to bid more to be the primary broadcaster for a higher profile, expanded Championship. But Anayi will want to keep a slice for terrestrial TV since they have a much better viewership reach. The current deal is for four years. Would a six-year deal be a better strategic move to guarantee increased revenues for a longer period? It would link in with the duration of the SARU agreement. And it would outlast the current participation agreement for the European Cup run by EPCR.

Further expansion is obviously the other key consideration with possibly other teams from SA, US and Europe coming on board. The danger is that Celtic Rugby goes too far and repeats the mistakes of Super Rugby. Better to build slowly to see if they will still come.

The coming season will be a fascinating one to see how the new structure and Championship beds in. Will attendances increase? Will there be more surprise results and potentially another new team to lift the cup next May?

Roll on 1 September.



Further info on PRO14 can be found here:
http://www.pro14rugby.org/2017/08/01/guinness-pro14-championship-qa/

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

It's funny that the stone age model works and the Welsh one (to date) doesn't?  Is that not funny?   Back to the stone age for you guys maybe?  Better diets anyway, less sugar, bigger muscles.

The Pro12 was won last year by "the Welsh one".

The RCC has now been won how many times ina  row by the same model?

5 times... before that it had been won 5 times in 7 years by the provinces including an all Irish final in 2012. Leinster are the current favourites this year too and the only team to be qualified after 5 rounds.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

It's funny that the stone age model works and the Welsh one (to date) doesn't?  Is that not funny?   Back to the stone age for you guys maybe?  Better diets anyway, less sugar, bigger muscles.

The Pro12 was won last year by "the Welsh one".

The RCC has now been won how many times ina  row by the same model?

Never mind the model...the Welsh model and the English/French model are different. The French and English have enough 'Professional' teams and a big enough of a spread in territory terms to make their model viable. Welsh rugby doesn't and the Welsh Regions couldn't survive playing each other week in and week out in an ultra mini League; not in a way that would keep or buy best players anyway.
The Welsh clubs have a different 'model' They seem to be eternally clamouring for more money and the English/French are thrown money like it's confetti.

If the model that works so well in England and France is a model that can be repeated in all corners of the world, then Wales would not need to lie in bed with Ireland, Scotland, Italy and South Africa. They'd have their own well oiled 'DOMESTIC' machine going.

The Pro14 is NOT a domestic competition. We don't dictate that WRU buys up the Regions and the Regions don't dictate that IRFU sells off their Provinces.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

how very altruistic

They are a business and making a profit matters since they have shareholders they have a fiduciary duty to turn a profit

That's not what I'm debating though is it. I'm arguing that this statement from Secretfly is false:

" I'm sure for damn certain the owners are making/or intend making a profit from rugby"

And that's different because....

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

It's funny that the stone age model works and the Welsh one (to date) doesn't?  Is that not funny?   Back to the stone age for you guys maybe?  Better diets anyway, less sugar, bigger muscles.

The Pro12 was won last year by "the Welsh one".

The RCC has now been won how many times ina  row by the same model?

Never mind the model...the Welsh model and the English/French model are different.  The French and English have enough 'Professional' teams and a big enough of a spread in territory terms to make their model viable.  Welsh rugby doesn't and the Welsh Regions couldn't survive playing each other week in and week out in an ultra mini League; not in a way that would keep or buy best players anyway.  
The Welsh clubs have a different 'model'  They seem to be eternally clamouring for more money and the English/French are thrown money like it's confetti.

If the model that works so well in England and France is a model that can be repeated in all corners of the world, then Wales would not need to lie in bed with Ireland, Scotland, Italy and South Africa.  They'd have their own well oiled 'DOMESTIC' machine going.

The Pro14 is NOT a domestic competition.  We don't dictate that WRU buys up the Regions and the Regions don't dictate that IRFU sells off their Provinces.  

The English and the French also have different models. English clubs for instance have the 2 marquee signing rule and stricter salary caps... also they receive money from the RFU based on the amount of English players are in the squad. They also have centrally contracted players. France have also been trying to implement the JIFF rule. Each country has different models to try get the best out the teams. The model the provinces use is the best for them but may not work elsewhere.

Edit: sorry only 7s players are centrally contracted with the RFU.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

Why else would an Irish business man buy Wasps? Of course he wants to make money. Its like when Man United fans thought JP McManus bought the club because of his love for the club only for him to sell the club for a 500 million euro profit a couple years later.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

Why else would an Irish business man buy Wasps? Of course he wants to make money. Its like when Man United fans thought JP McManus bought the club because of his love for the club only for him to sell the club for a 500 million euro profit a couple years later.

JP............... the tears of emotion in the man when he talks about the auld football.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Aye, Toulon's owner is looking to sell up, perhaps he could come over and bring us up to speed with the other clubs?

Apart from the way the chairman conducts himself, Toulon are THE model every club should be aiming for.

ehhh... https://www.rugbypass.com/news/maa-nonu-toulon-exit-top-14-club-cash-money/

"the double World Cup winner has made no secret of the fact that he would be keen to extend his stay at the club for one more season – but mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

"Toulon no longer has the wherewithal to hold on to its ‘Galactico’ stars – and Champions Cup qualification is vital to the club’s budget."

"Club president Mourad Boudjellal did not immediately reply to requests for a comment from the paper’s journalists. But, in November, he indicated his unwillingness to extend any contracts until the club had secured its place in next season’s Champions Cup."

"Toulon’s battle for an economically vital Champions Cup slot is likely to last until April at least – by which time Nonu’s future away from Stade Mayol could be decided, L’Equipe suggests. Another big name, Duane Vermeulen, is already on his way out, though his born-again Springboks ambitions were reportedly a key factor in his departure. And recently arrived league convert Semi Radradra is reported to be a big-money target for Bordeaux."

I was wondering why Toulon's recruitment was very underwhelming last summer compared to their glory years. Toulon are also currently struggling to get that top 6 place and may not get out of their group this year.

This is interesting. German billionaire and Stade Francis owner, Hans Peter Wild, has visited the Southern Kings.

https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/PRO14/billionaire-pays-kings-a-visit-20180116

LeinsterFan4life wrote: mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

So let me get this straight...the author of this article thinks that a team with a 25.5m Euro budget and spending close to a 10m Euro squad salary cap is "in economy mode"?

Right.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

how very altruistic

They are a business and making a profit matters since they have shareholders they have a fiduciary duty to turn a profit

That's not what I'm debating though is it. I'm arguing that this statement from Secretfly is false:

" I'm sure for damn certain the owners are making/or intend making a profit from rugby"

And that's different because....

Because the owners and benefactors of independent teams are not pumping money in so they can make a profit.

There's 40 - 50 pro teams in Europe. How many make a profit? A handful. You think wealthy benefactors want in on this slice of pie because it's so lucrative?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote: mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

So let me get this straight...the author of this article thinks that a team with a 25.5m Euro budget and spending close to a 10m Euro squad salary cap is "in economy mode"?

Right.

For a self proclaimed rugby fan you really are f**king clueless about whats going on in rugby

Do you know how we know they are in economy mode, because their owner has said so. He's said he can't keep funding them and is actively trying to sell the club

He's not renewing contracts until they secure their place in next seasons Champions Cup

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

how very altruistic

They are a business and making a profit matters since they have shareholders they have a fiduciary duty to turn a profit

That's not what I'm debating though is it. I'm arguing that this statement from Secretfly is false:

" I'm sure for damn certain the owners are making/or intend making a profit from rugby"

And that's different because....

Because the owners and benefactors of independent teams are not pumping money in so they can make a profit.

There's 40 - 50 pro teams in Europe. How many make a profit? A handful. You think wealthy benefactors want in on this slice of pie because it's so lucrative?

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote: mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

So let me get this straight...the author of this article thinks that a team with a 25.5m Euro budget and spending close to a 10m Euro squad salary cap is "in economy mode"?

Right.

For a self proclaimed rugby fan you really are f**king clueless about whats going on in rugby

Do you know how we know they are in economy mode, because their owner has said so. He's said he can't keep funding them and is actively trying to sell the club

He's not renewing contracts until they secure their place in next seasons Champions Cup

You only have to look at their squad this year compared to 3-4 years ago to see how much they have cut back. The fact that an aging Chris Ashton was their big signing this season should tell you something.

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

This show has well and truly had the last curtain call.

Enough!  Enough, for Christ's sakes!  This thread - and the others that were done years ago but look exactly the same - needs to be sent to the nut house.

I'll go mad if I have to listen to more bunk about the Private backers in rugby who know how to be Professional more than the Unions but who seem to have this notion that they either don't want money, don't need money, don't pump money, don't divine for money, throw money back in your face if you give it them, actively run away from profit, frown on profit, are allergic to profit, hate the thoughts of breaking even, don't want any prize money, don't want any development money, don't want to buy the best players, don't like curry on their bloody chips!

Enough.  The debate is over.  'Professional' Rugby stinks of ineptitude.

SecretFly wrote:

I'll go mad if I have to listen to

You don't have to listen to anything.

Are we free to discuss anything rugby related here? Or is it only things you want discussed? Unsurprising.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Why do they want better players? To stuff their heads and put them on their millionaire palace walls beside the elks and the rhinoceroses? To play marbles with? Why do they want better players?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote: mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

So let me get this straight...the author of this article thinks that a team with a 25.5m Euro budget and spending close to a 10m Euro squad salary cap is "in economy mode"?

Right.

For a self proclaimed rugby fan you really are f**king clueless about whats going on in rugby

Do you know how we know they are in economy mode, because their owner has said so. He's said he can't keep funding them and is actively trying to sell the club

He's not renewing contracts until they secure their place in next seasons Champions Cup

You only have to look at their squad this year compared to 3-4 years ago to see how much they have cut back. The fact that an aging Chris Ashton was their big signing this season should tell you something.

To be fair it doesn't mean they are spending less just their recruitment is short term, pretty sure Ashtons on a nice wedge at Toulon and Nonu, Vermeulen and Habana are among the best paid players though they have shed Halfpenny, Giteau and Goromaru in recent years who were said to be earning around £3m between them

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Really? So they give them money solely so they can sign players?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

I'll go mad if I have to listen to

You don't have to listen to anything.

Are we free to discuss anything rugby related here? Or is it only things you want discussed? Unsurprising.

.................!...........

Ever heard of a Theatrical Flourish?

marty2086 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote: mounting cashflow concerns at a club that is very much in economy mode could mean his contract will not be extended"

So let me get this straight...the author of this article thinks that a team with a 25.5m Euro budget and spending close to a 10m Euro squad salary cap is "in economy mode"?

Right.

For a self proclaimed rugby fan you really are f**king clueless about whats going on in rugby

Do you know how we know they are in economy mode, because their owner has said so. He's said he can't keep funding them and is actively trying to sell the club

He's not renewing contracts until they secure their place in next seasons Champions Cup

You only have to look at their squad this year compared to 3-4 years ago to see how much they have cut back. The fact that an aging Chris Ashton was their big signing this season should tell you something.

To be fair it doesn't mean they are spending less just their recruitment is short term, pretty sure Ashtons on a nice wedge at Toulon and Nonu, Vermeulen and Habana are among the best paid players though they have shed Halfpenny, Giteau and Goromaru in recent years who were said to be earning around £3m between them

Nonu and Vermeulan are already confirmed to be leaving. They could have went for an AB or even James Lowe but instead signed Ashton who couldn't get into the England squad and a Fijian league convert who are usually the lowest paid players on the NRL. They haven't replaced the likes of Giteau and Halfpenny. Goromaru was Toulon's desperate attempt to break into the Japnese market.

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Why do they want better players?  To stuff their heads and put them on their millionaire palace walls beside the elks and the rhinoceroses?  To play marbles with?  Why do they want better players?

To win more games

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Really? So they give them money solely so they can sign players?

Yes Marty.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Why do they want better players?  To stuff their heads and put them on their millionaire palace walls beside the elks and the rhinoceroses?  To play marbles with?  Why do they want better players?

To win more games

Good. Now why do they want to win more games?

SecretFly wrote:

Good.  Now why do they want to win more games?

Lots of reasons. Keep good players. Grow fanbase. Maximize income.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And why are they pumping money into the clubs then?

Because they want them to be able to sign better players.

This is basic, basic stuff.

Really? So they give them money solely so they can sign players?

Yes Marty.

Because you say so?

So Sarries playing in Belguim and the US and wanting games in SA are just excuses for a jolly?

marty2086 wrote:

So Sarries playing in Belguim and the US and wanting games in SA are just excuses for a jolly?

What's that got to do with the modus operandi of why benefactors put money into rugby clubs?

I love how this debate has got so base, so vanilla and peurile that somebody just asked me "Why do rugby teams want to win matches?"

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Good.  Now why do they want to win more games?

Lots of reasons. Keep good players. Grow fanbase. Maximize income.

Yeah... so to put their team in the headlines, interest a better standard of sponsor or sponsors, have a slice of top money on offer for competition placements, sell more shirts and merchandise, buy in even better players who might want to come then not just for the money but for the glory of winning with a reputable team

And thus the cycle becomes hopefully self perpetuating... the better players now keep the team in a safer place at the top of Leagues, and even bigger sponsors are then interested because of the new lure of continuity of quality, and even more money comes in to help fund even more of the better players...

So, what was your problem earlier when you suggested certain owners neither want nor need to make a profit?  It's all about profit and trying to make the club/region/province pay its own way.... to become self sustaining.  That's the objective.

And then...and then....if the club became viable enough and profitable enough............. then sell it for a hefty price.  That's where the two models you talk about separate.... in the clubs being buyable and sellable for profit's sake.  Not exactly the heart of rugby lovedom, is it?  Just cold, calculating business... like JP McManus.

RugbyFan100 wrote:I love how this debate has got so base, so vanilla and peurile that somebody just asked me "Why do rugby teams want to win matches?"

You don't like simple questions now?

I thought you liked the idea of making things understandable by a guy like say Trump? I put a few Trump-easy questions to you and you melt a little from the effort of answering them?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

So Sarries playing in Belguim and the US and wanting games in SA are just excuses for a jolly?

What's that got to do with the modus operandi of why benefactors put money into rugby clubs?

Everything

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

So Sarries playing in Belguim and the US and wanting games in SA are just excuses for a jolly?

What's that got to do with the modus operandi of why benefactors put money into rugby clubs?

Everything

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

Wrong marty!

The Saracens go to America coz they simply like Trump. It was a fan trip. They all brought their cameras, hoping to see the Orange One in the flesh... autograph books ready.

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Good.  Now why do they want to win more games?

Lots of reasons. Keep good players. Grow fanbase. Maximize income.

Yeah... so to put their team in the headlines, interest a better standard of sponsor or sponsors, have a slice of top money on offer for competition placements, sell more shirts and merchandise, buy in even better players who might want to come then not just for the money but for the glory of winning with a reputable team

And thus the cycle becomes hopefully self perpetuating... the better players now keep the team in a safer place at the top of Leagues, and even bigger sponsors are then interested because of the new lure of continuity of quality, and even more money comes in to help fund even more of the better players...

So, what was your problem earlier when you suggested certain owners neither want nor need to make a profit?  It's all about profit and trying to make the club/region/province pay its own way.... to become self sustaining.  That's the objective.

And then...and then....if the club became viable enough and profitable enough............. then sell it for a hefty price.  That's where the two models you talk about separate.... in the clubs being buyable and sellable for profit's sake.  Not exactly the heart of rugby lovedom, is it?  Just cold, calculating business... like JP McManus.

The problem, as I've already stated twice now, is this inaccurate statement from you:

" I'm sure for damn certain the owners are making/or intend making a profit from rugby"

Any "profit" we are talking about is going to go to the club. Not the owner(s) / benefactors. By you making out that these benefactors are in it for themselves is a huge disservice to these people that prop up club rugby just because they want to.

If you want to claim semantics and say that your statement of "making a profit from rugby" was meant to be a club making profit not the benefactors making profit then I guess you now will. But your statement is there in black and white. You disrespect these benefactors because you think their agenda is evil. When they are the very people that are investing in rugby union and should be praised.

marty2086 wrote:

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

Right, well I think they'll be waiting a long time for any lucrative schemes to be made from rugby union. People have been quick to give the amounts that Saracens are in debt. Now people are claiming that the owners are in it for the profits. Amuses me.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

Right, well I think they'll be waiting a long time for any lucrative schemes to be made from rugby union. People have been quick to give the amounts that Saracens are in debt. Now people are claiming that the owners are in it for the profits. Amuses me.

So debt means that people aren't in to make money?

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

Right, well I think they'll be waiting a long time for any lucrative schemes to be made from rugby union. People have been quick to give the amounts that Saracens are in debt. Now people are claiming that the owners are in it for the profits. Amuses me.

So debt means that people aren't in to make money?

Not necessarily. The sentiment from many though with Saracens is that they are a lost cause financially and spend way beyond their means. Then you get people saying these nasty owners are just plotting to take all the profits for themselves.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

These are exercises in growing the clubs profile and fan base which will make it more profitable

Just because the clubs aren't making profits now doesn't mean the end goal isn't to for the owners to eventual turn a profit from, long term investments are actual things. It's not like rugby is growing globally and there's such a focus on US and Japan, two of the worlds biggest commercial marketplaces

Right, well I think they'll be waiting a long time for any lucrative schemes to be made from rugby union. People have been quick to give the amounts that Saracens are in debt. Now people are claiming that the owners are in it for the profits. Amuses me.

So debt means that people aren't in to make money?

Not necessarily. The sentiment from many though with Saracens is that they are a lost cause financially and spend way beyond their means. Then you get people saying these nasty owners are just plotting to take all the profits for themselves.

The sentiment from who?

marty2086 wrote:

The sentiment from who?

People who slag Saracens off. And people who accuse owners of rugby teams of intending to personally profit from rugby.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

The sentiment from who?

People who slag Saracens off. And people who accuse owners of rugby teams of intending to personally profit from rugby.

Doesn't sound at all made up

Imagine the horrid thought of someone making money from a business

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Any "profit" we are talking about is going to go to the club. Not the owner(s) / benefactors. By you making out that these benefactors are in it for themselves is a huge disservice to these people that prop up club rugby just because they want to.

If you want to claim semantics and say that your statement of "making a profit from rugby" was meant to be a club making profit not the benefactors making profit then I guess you now will. But your statement is there in black and white. You disrespect these benefactors because you think their agenda is evil. When they are the very people that are investing in rugby union and should be praised.

They own the clubs and seek to make a profit for themselves at one point or another.  They OWN the clubs, the profit they seek to make is theirs.  It's like suggesting that when a Millionaire buys a yacht, well it's not for him, it's to entertain important clients and business partners.  It's his.  It's already part of him.  

And when these owners sell a club, they get the Proifit from that sale if they are smart enough to sell it for more than they bought it.  They make the proifit.... not the flyhalf, not the groundsman, not the tea lady.  They do.  The owners.

You just don't like it that your throw-away comment about Saracens and Wasps was picked up on.  When it was picked up, you ran to the ownership of the regions to try to distract attention away from your Saracens and Wasps comment.  But the hounds stuck with the initial comment.....

RugbyFan100 wrote: Then you get people saying these nasty owners are just plotting to take all the profits for themselves.

They're not nasty people. They are cold and calculating business people.... business people, by their nature, have an obsession with turning one dollar into ten, or 50 or 100. That's what business is.

It's you that seem to think all these hard nosed guys with stocks and shares and companies dotted around the planet are in it just as childlike 'fans' of the sport. They may like or love rugby, but they're in it for business.... as you've already admitted to with your acceptance of why they want their teams to win.

I don't think you can put all owners onto one bracket. Some will be out to improve the team they support maybe never intending to hit even. Some will want to up the profile then make the club self sufficient. Some just want to see some fun on the pitch. Some are out to turn s profit for themselves and get out etc etc

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Any "profit" we are talking about is going to go to the club. Not the owner(s) / benefactors. By you making out that these benefactors are in it for themselves is a huge disservice to these people that prop up club rugby just because they want to.

If you want to claim semantics and say that your statement of "making a profit from rugby" was meant to be a club making profit not the benefactors making profit then I guess you now will. But your statement is there in black and white. You disrespect these benefactors because you think their agenda is evil. When they are the very people that are investing in rugby union and should be praised.

They own the clubs and seek to make a profit for themselves at one point or another.  They OWN the clubs, the profit they seek to make is theirs.  It's like suggesting that when a Millionaire buys a yacht, well it's not for him, it's to entertain important clients and business partners.  It's his.  It's already part of him.  

And when these owners sell a club, they get the Proifit from that sale if they are smart enough to sell it for more than they bought it.  They make the proifit.... not the flyhalf, not the groundsman, not the tea lady.  They do.  The owners.

No. They don't make a profit. You're completely wrong, I can't make it any clearer.

You just don't like it that your throw-away comment about Saracens and Wasps was picked up on.  When it was picked up, you ran to the ownership of the regions to try to distract attention away from your Saracens and Wasps comment.  But the hounds stuck with the initial comment.....

The comment still stands. As the model is the same. Wealthy people pump money in.....and get nothing out, financially speaking.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

The sentiment from who?

People who slag Saracens off. And people who accuse owners of rugby teams of intending to personally profit from rugby.

Doesn't sound at all made up

Imagine the horrid thought of someone making money from a business

There's no money to be made in Rugby Union by individuals seeking to place themselves on the board of Directors at a club. The fact you think there is speaks volumes.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I don't think you can put all owners onto one bracket. Some will be out to improve the team they support maybe never intending to hit even. Some will want to up the profile then make the club self sufficient. Some just want to see some fun on the pitch. Some are out to turn s profit for themselves and get out etc etc

And some are a complex mix of all those reasons.

I'm not downing Owners, I'm not downing Privately owned clubs, I'm not downing owners that want to make their club viable and turn in a profit.

I'm explaining to a guy that he keeps forgetting about his word 'Professional' when talking about them in cosy terms ...and yet he says it's the very Professionalism of the set up (the cold business heart, if you like) rather than the old amateurish Unions that makes them the natural model for club ownership.

He has tunnel vision, as another model exists and works.... and what's more.... a large fan base support that other model and don't feel they have no team to support or no team to buy merchandise of.  They feel they are equal to fans of Privately run town or city clubs.  And if the fans are happy...the model is a good one.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

The sentiment from who?

People who slag Saracens off. And people who accuse owners of rugby teams of intending to personally profit from rugby.

Doesn't sound at all made up

Imagine the horrid thought of someone making money from a business

There's no money to be made in Rugby Union by individuals seeking to place themselves on the board of Directors at a club. The fact you think there is speaks volumes.

Really and you base that on what exactly?

SecretFly wrote:
I'm explaining to a guy that he keeps forgetting about his word 'Professional' when talking about them in cosy terms ...and yet he says it's the very Professionalism of the set up (the cold business heart, if you like) rather than the old amateurish Unions that makes them the natural model for club ownership.

How do you think major league baseball teams are funded SecretFly? And NFL teams. And NBL teams?

Are they so successful due to their Unions?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
I'm explaining to a guy that he keeps forgetting about his word 'Professional' when talking about them in cosy terms ...and yet he says it's the very Professionalism of the set up (the cold business heart, if you like) rather than the old amateurish Unions that makes them the natural model for club ownership.

How do you think major league baseball teams are funded SecretFly? And NFL teams. And NBL teams?

Are they so successful due to their Unions?

NBL?

Maybe something to do with the lucrative tv and commercial deals? Not having to build their own stadiums or arenas?

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

The sentiment from who?

People who slag Saracens off. And people who accuse owners of rugby teams of intending to personally profit from rugby.

Doesn't sound at all made up

Imagine the horrid thought of someone making money from a business

There's no money to be made in Rugby Union by individuals seeking to place themselves on the board of Directors at a club. The fact you think there is speaks volumes.

Really and you base that on what exactly?

Erm the fact that all the revenue made by clubs is put back into running them? The fact that only about 5% of pro rugby clubs make a profit. Listening to the benefactors talk, meeting them. Reading their interviews. That sort of thing.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Any "profit" we are talking about is going to go to the club. Not the owner(s) / benefactors. By you making out that these benefactors are in it for themselves is a huge disservice to these people that prop up club rugby just because they want to.

If you want to claim semantics and say that your statement of "making a profit from rugby" was meant to be a club making profit not the benefactors making profit then I guess you now will. But your statement is there in black and white. You disrespect these benefactors because you think their agenda is evil. When they are the very people that are investing in rugby union and should be praised.

They own the clubs and seek to make a profit for themselves at one point or another.  They OWN the clubs, the profit they seek to make is theirs.  It's like suggesting that when a Millionaire buys a yacht, well it's not for him, it's to entertain important clients and business partners.  It's his.  It's already part of him.  

And when these owners sell a club, they get the Proifit from that sale if they are smart enough to sell it for more than they bought it.  They make the proifit.... not the flyhalf, not the groundsman, not the tea lady.  They do.  The owners.

No. They don't make a profit. You're completely wrong, I can't make it any clearer.

You just don't like it that your throw-away comment about Saracens and Wasps was picked up on.  When it was picked up, you ran to the ownership of the regions to try to distract attention away from your Saracens and Wasps comment.  But the hounds stuck with the initial comment.....

The comment still stands. As the model is the same. Wealthy people pump money in.....and get nothing out, financially speaking.

Wrong.  That they get nothing out is the complaints from the Welsh regions.... given that it means they have to put more in.  The 'getting nothing out of' is their continuing point, no?   They want the teams to be self supporting so that they can keep their own money in their pockets.  Meaning that if the team goes into profit, that's profit for the owners as they don't have to throw more dead money at their baby.  Get it?  Profit.  More money in their pockets by making their team more profitable.