What is the biggest brand name in rugby?

Simple question - the Lions or the All Blacks?
In terms of replica tops sold, I guess it would be England but consider history, reputation, emotions stirred, desire to see the team play, attraction for the opposition etc

I'ld say the All Blacks, because they play more often and win more games.

OzT wrote:I'ld say the All Blacks, because they play more often and win more games.

That's got an Einsteinesque feel to it.

What's the equation of Brand Success? NZ = Black X Wins

The Lions do themselves few favours. If they had a winning rate up there at 70% plus then they would probably be bigger than they are and theyre fairly huge now going by the popularity in Oz. I started watching rugby with the 77 Lions and they were fantastic after the 71 and 74 series wins and there was a real fear this juggernaut was going to take the world over. But that series they lost to a fairly lowly AB side despite impressing hugely in the tour matches.

Since then theyve been a real disappointment here but no doubting the pull power which is all done before the tour. Perhaps this tour might elevate them back to those heights a bit.

But like all good brands, it needs to be successful to have credibility.

InjuredYetAgain wrote:Simple question - the Lions or the All Blacks?
In terms of replica tops sold, I guess it would be England but consider history, reputation, emotions stirred, desire to see the team play, attraction for the opposition etc

...on what basis do you say England replica shirts would outsell others...

More poms than kiwis would be a big start

sirBiggles wrote:

InjuredYetAgain wrote:Simple question - the Lions or the All Blacks?
In terms of replica tops sold, I guess it would be England but consider history, reputation, emotions stirred, desire to see the team play, attraction for the opposition etc

...on what basis do you say England replica shirts would outsell others...

Thought about that myself and put it down to a much bigger market than any of the other major rugby countries- France aside I suppose.

Adidas...!

AIG. Aotearoa is the Grestest.

In terms of a global brand I'm always surprised at how many people who know nothing about rugby but who know the ABs and their strange dance. I've explained the Lions concept to people in Spain and have yet to meet somebody who knows the Lions concept even by those who have watched matches before. Then again they often don't know who the best team is so their rugby knowledge is shaky at best. They know Lomu but couldn't tell you a current player.

Strangely Spanish people who do watch rugby often support England. I have a friend in Cadiz who if you say Gibraltar in the English way will stop smiling and access his dark place. I'd have thought Ireland would've been a more natural choice.

Growing up I had never heard of the Lions. I knew about the Al Blacks though. That's comes from having no contact with rugby people, just the media.

Allblacks followed by Wilko

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-06/world-cup-win-would-lift-all-blacks-brand-past-nz-100-million.html

When the All Blacks became the first New Zealand brand to gain one million Facebook followers in August, the Springboks’ page was the next-best among national rugby teams with about 390,000. More than 800,000 of the All Blacks fans came from overseas, the Wellington-based New Zealand Rugby Union said.

Ospreys (galacticos)
Gavin Henson

GloriousEmpire wrote:When the All Blacks became the first New Zealand brand to gain one million Facebook followers in August, the Springboks’ page was the next-best among national rugby teams with about 390,000. More than 800,000 of the All Blacks fans came from overseas, the Wellington-based New Zealand Rugby Union said.

Remember some of those 'fans' will be guys looking for something to complain about rather than actual fans. How else can they jump on things so quickly.

All Blacks are biggest brand without doubt.

red_stag wrote:All Blacks are biggest brand without doubt.

yes i agree and in fact if you drill down it's the haka that is the real draw...unique in any sport

Brand Haskell

IronMike wrote:Brand Haskell

brilliant. haskelhoff, what a prize plum he is

Beefy, other NZ teams perform the haka like league and basketball but the rugby one is the one everyone recognizes. Similarly other nations like Fiji Tonga and Manu Samoa perform their respective challenges so the haka is by no means unique but it is universally recognized.

the ABs in terms of their regular appearances but overall the lions.

When the ABs tour SA they don't get the same reaction or revenue generation from the home fans and don't bring their own army of supporters (bar a few cape coloured historical anyone bar springboks supporters from the 70s).

The lions get panned a lot for their lack of regular victories but they have a better record in SA then NZ and a better record in NZ then SA so overall I would say the lions are a bigger brand.

We have to remember that NZ is a country of only what 4MM people, the lions encompasses 68MM people and has a lot of expat fans in SA, AUS, NZ. So the ABs pound for pound are easily ahead.

England should not be discounted from this though. England are by far the biggest union, the biggest revenue generators in sport and I'm sure they would win any shirts sale contest with any other union... perhaps by demographics alone.

Lets say Nike had a contract with both England and NZ rugby and they were told they could only keep one.... which one would they take.... it would be England hands down.
England is the biggest market and still not close to being domestically saturated... how many more shirts can you sell in NZ... as much as its talked about I've never met someone wearing a AB shirt who isn't from NZ bar the odd bru from Mitchells Plain.

100%beefy wrote:

red_stag wrote:All Blacks are biggest brand without doubt.

yes i agree and in fact if you drill down it's the haka that is the real draw...unique in any sport

I agree with you 100% (if you'll pardon the pun!)

I got into rugby around 2000. My primary school didn't offer rugby and I only starting playing when I moved to secondary school in 2000.

New Zealand came to Dublin in 2001 and I remember going to it. I knew they were the best team but I had never seen them play.

I remember Umaga led the Haka and the entire stadium lit up like strobe lighting with everyone taking so many photos of it.

A hugely unique thing that makes them a memorable brand. Adidas have been incorporating the Haka into their marketing so much in last few years.

red_stag wrote:

100%beefy wrote:

red_stag wrote:All Blacks are biggest brand without doubt.

yes i agree and in fact if you drill down it's the haka that is the real draw...unique in any sport

I agree with you 100% (if you'll pardon the pun!)

I got into rugby around 2000. My primary school didn't offer rugby and I only starting playing when I moved to secondary school in 2000.

New Zealand came to Dublin in 2001 and I remember going to it. I knew they were the best team but I had never seen them play.

I remember Umaga led the Haka and the entire stadium lit up like strobe lighting with everyone taking so many photos of it.

A hugely unique thing that makes them a memorable brand. Adidas have been incorporating the Haka into their marketing so much in last few years.

Dublin 2001 was McCaws international debut.

Is a chap like Umaga allowed to lead the Haka??? I thought he was pure Samoan... I always assumed the leader had to be of Maori specifically descent?

fa0019 wrote:Is a chap like Umaga allowed to lead the Haka??? I thought he was pure Samoan... I always assumed the leader had to be of Maori specifically descent?

He has led it on several occasion I believe. Here he is against France. I know he played a big part in the introduction of Kapo o Panga.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g3QbH_i2VU

red_stag wrote:Newport Gwent Dragons are biggest brand without doubt. I love them.

Thanks pal

Dragons are not a brand. They are an entire institution. A rugby legacy.

Sure Deccie coached them for a [very brief] while. They are cut from the same cloth as Munster.

Brothers in arms

red_stag wrote:Dragons are not a brand. They are an entire institution. A rugby legacy.

Sure Deccie coached them for a [very brief] while. They are cut from the same cloth as Munster.

Brothers in arms

Umaga was allowed to lead the haka because he was deemed to have sufficient mana which like my user name is difficult to translate but is a combo of honour integrity and spirit. I reiterate though the haka is not unique. Other countries and sports in Nz perform Hakas or versions thereof. If NZ didn't have their win ratio the haka would be seen like the Fiji cibi.

And I see what you're saying fa but to me branding is recognition. Your argument is more related to revenue and even that is arguable. The Lions generate so much interest because it's only every 4 years. Imagine if they played 12 tests a year. Would they generate the revenue NZ does when it plays overseas.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Umaga was allowed to lead the haka because he was deemed to have sufficient mana .

Ah, big World of Warcraft player is he, makes sense. I expect he'd be a mage or something... What's his DPS?

t1000advancedprototype wrote:Ospreys (galacticos)
Gavin Henson

Only in the western hate mails sports pages! I'd say NZ. There's always all black shirts in sport shops throughout the UK and Ireland. As well as Munster too for some reason...

I've seen more neutrals wear NZ rugby shirts than England/Lions. Plus you're far more likely to see an AB shirt on sale in random countries than the others-I saw proof in Chile and Germany for example. The Lions take over the calendar and everything else in a way a World Cup does-but obviously NZ catches up in the three other dormant years of the cycle. I'd say you're more likely to see a person wearing an England/Lions shirt in a random country as there are more British and Irish obviously.

Stats wise NZ have like an 85% winning record against all comers. Since 1905 that's probably the winningest record in the history of global team sports. The Lions could possibly come close to that as they play tour games and have a pretty good record in those, but it's the test series that matter and capture the public eye. They don't have to try to emulate NZ's test winning percentage but they need to win a couple of series on the bounce. Not that NZ care that much-as corporate as they are they'd rather have a great team than a great brand. The brand was built by the legacy.

When I was a little kid my favourite cartoon was Voltron. I got all excited seeing the lions combing into one big f**k off robot and kick arse. I get the same feeling about the Lions-and I reckon the coaches do too as this is the closest they get to playing fantasy rugby in real life. But the others on here are right-results mean a hell of a lot and unless they pick up their act and start winning again the interest won't be anywhere near what it could. Great Lions teams captivate the world of rugby. I hope it happens again.

disneychilly wrote:I've seen more neutrals wear NZ rugby shirts than England/Lions.

WHAT... neutrals wearing ENGLAND shirts... Never....

No non English person would give an English shirt drawer space, never the less wear one... Scrum V made Rick O'Shea wear and support England this 6 Nations as a journo's challenge, and I believe he is still having therapy for it....

Lions, I can accept, had them myself back in the 70s, 80s and a 2009 and 2013 one. I wouldn't buy an All Black shirt, as I'm Welsh not a New Zealander, but I'd wear one if I was given it. But an English Shirt.... NO WAY... If I was given one, it would be given to the local Dog Kennels for bedding...

My brother had an Australian jersey Biggles. Wore it all the time. Thing was he was a dairy farmer and he said he couldn't think of any garment more appropriate for being covered in sh*t. True story.

sirBiggles wrote:

disneychilly wrote:I've seen more neutrals wear NZ rugby shirts than England/Lions.

WHAT... neutrals wearing ENGLAND shirts... Never....

No non English person would give an English shirt drawer space, never the less wear one... Scrum V made Rick O'Shea wear and support England this 6 Nations as a journo's challenge, and I believe he is still having therapy for it....

Lions, I can accept, had them myself back in the 70s, 80s and a 2009 and 2013 one. I wouldn't buy an All Black shirt, as I'm Welsh not a New Zealander, but I'd wear one if I was given it. But an English Shirt.... NO WAY... If I was given one, it would be given to the local Dog Kennels for bedding...

When I lived in Spain I saw a good few Spanish people wearing England jerseys oddly enough. I wouldnt wear one. Id consider wearing an Argentina jersey but only because I like it.

sirBiggles wrote:

disneychilly wrote:I've seen more neutrals wear NZ rugby shirts than England/Lions.

WHAT... neutrals wearing ENGLAND shirts... Never....

No non English person would give an English shirt drawer space, never the less wear one... Scrum V made Rick O'Shea wear and support England this 6 Nations as a journo's challenge, and I believe he is still having therapy for it....

Lions, I can accept, had them myself back in the 70s, 80s and a 2009 and 2013 one. I wouldn't buy an All Black shirt, as I'm Welsh not a New Zealander, but I'd wear one if I was given it. But an English Shirt.... NO WAY... If I was given one, it would be given to the local Dog Kennels for bedding...

And that pleases this England fan greatly.

The haka wouldn't be quite so electrifying if Italy did it and then promptly lost most times. It would just be mildly amusing.

This extremely cool tribal challenge is always backed up by their unbelievably consistent brilliance at rugby. It's New Zealands record, and their distinctive all black kit and their sublime rugby skills that generate the awe/fear/determination etc. in the opposition when they watch the haka.

The All Blacks are the biggest brand in rugby without a doubt. The Lions have had some brilliant moments. But they're few and far between to be honest.

Has to be Steve Walsh or Hersh

What are the biggest domestic rugby brands?

Maybe Toulouse and Munster in Europe?

Bulls seem huge in South Africa. Crusaders have a brilliant pro era record. But were Auckland once top dogs in New Zealand? I know so little about the southern hemisphere domestic game

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Umaga was allowed to lead the haka because he was deemed to have sufficient mana which like my user name is difficult to translate but is a combo of honour integrity and spirit. I reiterate though the haka is not unique. Other countries and sports in Nz perform Hakas or versions thereof. If NZ didn't have their win ratio the haka would be seen like the Fiji cibi.

And I see what you're saying fa but to me branding is recognition. Your argument is more related to revenue and even that is arguable. The Lions generate so much interest because it's only every 4 years. Imagine if they played 12 tests a year. Would they generate the revenue NZ does when it plays overseas.

You're probably right... if you asked people around the world who didn't know rugby the ABs would probably come up tops in terms of name recognition. The haka is probably a big driver of this.....

Its not necessarily to do with success rates either.... up until 1998 SA had a winning record against all teams and was the most successful amateur nation of all time but the ABs always had this mystery about them (its not like the ABs was bad up until then though)... a bit like Brasil and football.
Perhaps its the style of play as well, smooth attractive rugby etc which has been the hallmark at least with the influx of a PI element into your game.

Feckless Rogue wrote:What are the biggest domestic rugby brands?

Maybe Toulouse and Munster in Europe?

Bulls seem huge in South Africa. Crusaders have a brilliant pro era record. But were Auckland once top dogs in New Zealand? I know so little about the southern hemisphere domestic game

Probably Western Province rugby IMO (a little biased mind). We're the biggest club in SA, we have the biggest support in world rugby in terms of attendance... most bulls players are either WP or FS men originally. The bulls are big on marketing though... you can buy almost anything sponsored by the bulls.... my own theory is that other than the bulls there ain't that many things attractive in the highveld.

We certainly churn out the highest number of pro players....

however the biggest money spenders IMO in SA are the Durban Sharks... they are financially very astute.

Feckless Rogue wrote:What are the biggest domestic rugby brands?

Maybe Toulouse and Munster in Europe?

Bulls seem huge in South Africa. Crusaders have a brilliant pro era record. But were Auckland once top dogs in New Zealand? I know so little about the southern hemisphere domestic game

I dug out the NH club jersey sale figures a few weeks back, (on the "Munster in financial trouble thread"), Leicester, Munster & Ospreys were all big sellers, can't remember who else were up the top.


Before the AIG deal Adidas were paying NZ more for the ABs brand than England were getting from CCC and O2 combined - apparently the AIG deal meant the AB's jersey brings in twice as much revenue to the NZRU as the RFU. Sales figures may differ - but Adidas/CCC pocket the sales money, and their licencing fees probably aren't tied to jersey sales

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:AIG. Aotearoa is the Grestest.

In terms of a global brand I'm always surprised at how many people who know nothing about rugby but who know the ABs and their strange dance. I've explained the Lions concept to people in Spain and have yet to meet somebody who knows the Lions concept even by those who have watched matches before. Then again they often don't know who the best team is so their rugby knowledge is shaky at best. They know Lomu but couldn't tell you a current player.

Strangely Spanish people who do watch rugby often support England. I have a friend in Cadiz who if you say Gibraltar in the English way will stop smiling and access his dark place. I'd have thought Ireland would've been a more natural choice.

I wonder what your friend thinks of Ceuta and Mellila?

That doesn't fit in with his concept of Perfidious Albion so they are irrelevant in his eyes. Who said ethnocentrism had to be logical?

kiakahaaotearoa wrote: That doesn't fit in with his concept of Perfidious Albion so they are irrelevant in his eyes. Who said ethnocentrism had to be logical?

Lol, it's surprising how the Spanish can have such double standards when it comes to collecting enclaves and overseas territories!

tigerleghorn wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:AIG. Aotearoa is the Grestest.

In terms of a global brand I'm always surprised at how many people who know nothing about rugby but who know the ABs and their strange dance. I've explained the Lions concept to people in Spain and have yet to meet somebody who knows the Lions concept even by those who have watched matches before. Then again they often don't know who the best team is so their rugby knowledge is shaky at best. They know Lomu but couldn't tell you a current player.

Strangely Spanish people who do watch rugby often support England. I have a friend in Cadiz who if you say Gibraltar in the English way will stop smiling and access his dark place. I'd have thought Ireland would've been a more natural choice.

I wonder what your friend thinks of Ceuta and Mellila?

They are both quite strange places I must say. Add Perejil Island to that list. Gibraltar itself is an odd place but very interesting. Interesting that one of the most industrial parts of southern Spain, Algeciras is positioned just upwind from Gibraltar. Tells you everything you need to know about Spain's attitude to Gibraltar.

The lions typify us here in Britain. Self indulgent and bigger in our own minds than they will ever be, globally. My Indian friends know who the all blacks are but I had to spend time explaining the concept of the lions - they'd never heard of it before. The lions are "global" in Britain and let us be honest, never quite deliver on the promise.