New European Rugby cup (or whatever it is called) - Qualification agreed

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:42 pm

First topic message reminder :

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About
Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).
They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).
I wouldn't expect Tigers to sell out as they have a fairly big stadium, but clubs like Exeter were selling out (average 10k for HCup). Average about 7K for Aviva Premiership last year.
No HC sell-outs at Sandy Park last year (not even for Leinster), and the AP average was a little higher.

Last season:

Sale Sharks 5,568
Saracens 6,141
Quins 8,472
Warriors 7,295
Wasps 7,557
L Irish 7,557
Bath 10,744
L Welsh 7,317

etc. etc..

Heineken Cup
Clermont 9,819
Scarlets 9,258
Leinster 10,198

At least 2k more per game (and tickets are also more expensive).

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:44 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:What does annoy me though about these sporting bodies being in tax havens(ireland isnt off course a tax haven bar sports admin)

Bodies shouldn't make a profit ever!!

Everything should go back into the game
Isn't eBay UK set up in Ireland? Thought it was for tax purposes?

yeah Ireland had low corp tax rates at 12% (uks is 20%) . I think Irelands tax rate has gone up a bit now but I doubt it is up to 20%

They did it to push for international investment.

But sports admin is tax exempt

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:47 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:What does annoy me though about these sporting bodies being in tax havens(ireland isnt off course a tax haven bar sports admin)

Bodies shouldn't make a profit ever!!

Everything should go back into the game
Isn't eBay UK set up in Ireland? Thought it was for tax purposes?

Corporate tax rate is 12.5% - much lower than a lot of other place.

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:48 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:What does annoy me though about these sporting bodies being in tax havens(ireland isnt off course a tax haven bar sports admin)

Bodies shouldn't make a profit ever!!

Everything should go back into the game
Isn't eBay UK set up in Ireland? Thought it was for tax purposes?
yeah Ireland had low corp tax rates at 12% (uks is 20%) . I think Irelands tax rate has gone up a bit now but I doubt it is up to 20%

They did it to push for international investment.

But sports admin is tax exempt

Yes, I understand the reasons, and it worked. Not so sure about the future in that regard though as there are discussions on global tax reforms.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:50 pm

It didnt really work at all.

And the EU is rightfully p!ssed of with it, as ireland are net beneficiary's of the EU

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:56 pm

mystiroakey wrote:It didnt really work at all.

And the EU is rightfully p!ssed of with it, as ireland are net beneficiary's of the EU

Well, they might be, but why do you say it didn't work? No investment in Ireland with these multi-billion dollar companies setting up there? No much needed job creation?

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:57 pm

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
geoff998rugby wrote:quinsforever it strike you are very selective in what you read and what you choose to rememeber.

The IRB have made it clear they will block a cross Union competition if it is to the detriment of existing competitions. NO, THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID THEY WILL ENDORSE A CROSS BORDER COMPETITION IF IT IS SUPPORTED BY THE RESPECTIVE UNIONS. IRB DOESNT WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN SAYING WHO SHOULD BE IN WHICH TOURNAMENTS. JUST WANTS TO MAKE SURE UNIONS ARE AT THE TOP OF EACH NATION'S GAME.
The WRU have made it quite clear they do not want an expanded Aviva. NOPE. HAVENT MADE THAT CLEAR AT ALL. FIND ME ONE LINK, A SINGLE LINK MAKING THIS CLEAR.

If you think an anglo-Welsh tournament can close to matching the French financial arrangements you obviously are not aware of the figures being talked about for French TV. The BT deal palls into insiginificance without European. SO WHAT? FRENCH RUGBY IS ALREADY THE 800LB GORILLA. AND THEY'RE GETTING BIGGER, YES I AGREE. DOESNT MEAN THAT THE AP WOULDNT BE BETTER FOR PRL CLUBS AND RRW TEAMS TOGETHER.

That is why a European deal is key for both England the Pro12 - otherwise the French will suck all of us dry.
We may be first but you will follow I UNDERSTAND YOUR FEAR, BUT JUST DONT SEE IT AS SUCH A THREAT. WHO CARES IF THEY PAY TOP DOLLAR. PLAYERS HAVE A RIGHT TO PLY THEIR TRADE WHEREVER THEY WANT. SOUTH AFRICAN STARTING PLAYERS ARE ALL OVER THE WORLD. YET THE SA TEAM ARE DOING JUST FINE. AND IF THE FRENCH TEAMS DOMINATE H-CUP, WELL DONE THEM. I LOVE SEEING THESE STAR-STUDDED FRENCH TEAMS.

I believe yo uare wrong regarding the requirment of Welsh teams and serving notice to the Pro12. NOPE. WELSH REGIONS ARE NOT SIGNED UP TO RABO OR H-CUP. THEY ARE NOMINATED BY WRU WHO ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE TEAMS. THAT'S WHY ALL THE MONEY GOES THROUGH THE WRU COFFERS AND NOT A SINGLE PENNY DIRECTLY TO THE REGIONS.

On the French negotiations it was widely reported last week that the clubs have signed a contract committing themselves to the HC next year. THEY HAVENT SIGNED ANYTHING. WHAT THEY SIGN WILL BE PART OF THIS "CONVENTION". What I suspect is under discussion is the nature of qualfication. splitting money between clubs and the like not participation itself. As to discussion how ERC administered I suspect this is much to do with the length of any agreement and the split of shares between FFR and LNR

The French teams want the, very lucrative, TV deal wrapped up before they commit to the coming years regarding the league
Stuart Gallacher
Regional Rugby Wales chairman:

"And the four Welsh regions are themselves tied into agreements to play in the Pro12 alongside teams from Ireland, Scotland and Italy."

BBC Sports. 28/03/2013

As far as Gallacher is concerned, the 4 Welsh regions are tied to the Rabo.

yes, that is the Participation Agreement they have with the WRU. which needs to be renewed by the end of this month. they play in the rabo in exchange for the money from WRU.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 4:59 pm

Irish Londoner wrote:
Intotouch wrote:The French regularly bitch about the ERC being in Dublin. At least in the articles I read in the French papers. It will be moved and will be given a different name but I'd be surprised if much else changes.
Isn't the main reason that ERC is based in Dublin something to do with the tax arrangements that apply in Ireland, if they moved ERC or "son of ERC" would there be a big tax hit - particularly in Hollande's France?

can't be that big of a tax hit as it is a not-for-proft, so what are they going to tax?

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:00 pm

If its not working, why do you think we want to hold onto it then?

There are lots of other countries that do something similar. For instance, the corporate tax rate for small businesses in France is 15%.

Portugal's tax rate also starts at 12.5% (their mean is about 15%).

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:02 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Irish Londoner wrote:
Intotouch wrote:The French regularly bitch about the ERC being in Dublin. At least in the articles I read in the French papers. It will be moved and will be given a different name but I'd be surprised if much else changes.
Isn't the main reason that ERC is based in Dublin something to do with the tax arrangements that apply in Ireland, if they moved ERC or "son of ERC" would there be a big tax hit - particularly in Hollande's France?
can't be that big of a tax hit as it is a not-for-proft, so what are they going to tax?

The income from the broadcasting rights for starters Smile

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:06 pm

ireland's tax rate works because it is the lowest within the EU and is an english-speaking country, hence is the corporate headquarters for lots of American businesses in Europe. fair play to ireland i completely respect the ability of countries to keep the pressure on other countries by keeping taxes low. otherwise it would just mean govt weeing away even more money everywhere (revealing my true colours now LOL)

re ERC, i just dont see why they would pay any tax if set up as a not-for-proft (lots of options there) in a different country? am i missing something? ERC profit from memory last year was a few hundred thousand euros, enough to finance working capital for the next year. but not enough for whatever tax rate applies to make any real difference compared to the EUR50m or so that SKy pays for the TV rights annually.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:09 pm

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Irish Londoner wrote:
Intotouch wrote:The French regularly bitch about the ERC being in Dublin. At least in the articles I read in the French papers. It will be moved and will be given a different name but I'd be surprised if much else changes.
Isn't the main reason that ERC is based in Dublin something to do with the tax arrangements that apply in Ireland, if they moved ERC or "son of ERC" would there be a big tax hit - particularly in Hollande's France?
can't be that big of a tax hit as it is a not-for-proft, so what are they going to tax?
The income from the broadcasting rights for starters

companies dont pay tax on income they pay tax on profits. and they pay out the monies to the various unions and clubs as an expense which is why profit is so low.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:10 pm

anyway, i think this location of ERc is a bit of a red herring for us. seems like the french are the only ones who are particularly against in being in Ireland.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:11 pm

The erc shouldnt be making anything on Broadcasting rights- it should all be going back to the unions

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:13 pm

As i pointed out before quinns, the erc is clearly making a nice little slice of money for a few people rather than the game

One of many reasons to get rid of it!

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:27 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:It didnt really work at all.

And the EU is rightfully p!ssed of with it, as ireland are net beneficiary's of the EU
Well, they might be, but why do you say it didn't work? No investment in Ireland with these multi-billion dollar companies setting up there? No much needed job creation?

not the place to get into it dude.

I dont want this place to get really nasty Wink

to many sensitive souls..

Lets make a general statement and leave it at that.

many western nations have been very short sighted in recent years.

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:30 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Irish Londoner wrote:
Intotouch wrote:The French regularly bitch about the ERC being in Dublin. At least in the articles I read in the French papers. It will be moved and will be given a different name but I'd be surprised if much else changes.
Isn't the main reason that ERC is based in Dublin something to do with the tax arrangements that apply in Ireland, if they moved ERC or "son of ERC" would there be a big tax hit - particularly in Hollande's France?
can't be that big of a tax hit as it is a not-for-proft, so what are they going to tax?
The income from the broadcasting rights for starters

companies dont pay tax on income they pay tax on profits. and they pay out the monies to the various unions and clubs as an expense which is why profit is so low.

Looking at the PRL's accounts they list their key financials as:

Turnover: 38M (I'm rounding the figures)
Cost of Sale: 33M
Gross Profit: 3.3M
Operating Profit: 28K
Pre-Tax Profit: 7K

Taxation: 7K

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:33 pm

There you go prl made nothing- that is breaking even, as it should do

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:34 pm

what we need to see is the ERC accounts

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:35 pm

mystiroakey wrote:As i pointed out before quinns, the erc is clearly making a nice little slice of money for a few people rather than the game

One of many reasons to get rid of it!

You mean its making profits for its shareholders Wink

Like the LNR (they have an 8% shareholding in the company, given to them by the FFR).

ERC Ltd
Turnover last year 51.6m
Pre-tax profit 100,000K
Post-tax profit 100,000K

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:38 pm

well there you go then- they arnt making any money either- fine, its not held in dublin for tax reasons.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:39 pm

but as i mentioned, ERC does not make profit. so i still dont understand what the tax advantage of having it in dublin is? i really dont think there is one. not-for-profit companies dont have to pay VAT either. i suspect it is un dublin because that's where the 6Nations company was already based so it made sense, and it was started by the celtic nations before england and france were on board.

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:40 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:It didnt really work at all.

And the EU is rightfully p!ssed of with it, as ireland are net beneficiary's of the EU
Well, they might be, but why do you say it didn't work? No investment in Ireland with these multi-billion dollar companies setting up there? No much needed job creation?
not the place to get into it dude.

I dont want this place to get really nasty

to many sensitive souls..

Lets make a general statement and leave it at that.

many western nations have been very short sighted in recent years.

Everyone was caught out when the bubble burst, mystir. Irelands tax incentive seems to have worked though. Creates investment, and creates jobs, and all to the benefit of EU when considering debt repayment. Maybe not so much when considering tax avoidance, but hey, as some said here when others complained of how PRL conduct their business; 'it's just business in the real world' Very Happy

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:40 pm

remember that a lot of the costs involved are just going back to unions and then to clubs or players who are paying tax on the money.(or not as the case may be for most who arnt making anything!!)

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:42 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:It didnt really work at all.

And the EU is rightfully p!ssed of with it, as ireland are net beneficiary's of the EU
Well, they might be, but why do you say it didn't work? No investment in Ireland with these multi-billion dollar companies setting up there? No much needed job creation?
not the place to get into it dude.

I dont want this place to get really nasty

to many sensitive souls..

Lets make a general statement and leave it at that.

many western nations have been very short sighted in recent years.
Everyone was caught out when the bubble burst, mystir. Irelands tax incentive seems to have worked though. Creates investment, and creates jobs, and all to the benefit of EU when considering debt repayment. Maybe not so much when considering tax avoidance, but hey, as some said here when others complained of how PRL conduct their business; 'it's just business in the real world'

As i said - not getting in to it- but you are missing a lot of key aspects. It doesn't bother me personally!! I have even thought about setting up my head office in Ireland..

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:45 pm

quinsforever wrote:but as i mentioned, ERC does not make profit. so i still dont understand what the tax advantage of having it in dublin is? i really dont think there is one. not-for-profit companies dont have to pay VAT either. i suspect it is un dublin because that's where the 6Nations company was already based so it made sense, and it was started by the celtic nations before england and france were on board.

profit or non profit it doesn't matter- You dont pay vat!!

As mentioned it is just in Dublin-- it is not there for tax purposes based on those accounts

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:51 pm

quinsforever wrote:but as i mentioned, ERC does not make profit. so i still dont understand what the tax advantage of having it in dublin is? i really dont think there is one. not-for-profit companies dont have to pay VAT either. i suspect it is un dublin because that's where the 6Nations company was already based so it made sense, and it was started by the celtic nations before england and france were on board.

I'm sorry, not for profit companies do have to pay VAT.

ERC was incorporated in 1995.
Six Nations Company was incorporated in 2002 (prior to that it was organised by a committee of the 6 Unions.)

France was involved in the setting up of the Heineken Cup right from the start.
England & Scotland were not.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:54 pm

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:but as i mentioned, ERC does not make profit. so i still dont understand what the tax advantage of having it in dublin is? i really dont think there is one. not-for-profit companies dont have to pay VAT either. i suspect it is un dublin because that's where the 6Nations company was already based so it made sense, and it was started by the celtic nations before england and france were on board.
I'm sorry, not for profit companies do have to pay VAT.

ERC was incorporated in 1995.
Six Nations Company was incorporated in 2002 (prior to that it was organised by a committee of the 6 Unions.)

France was involved in the setting up of the Heineken Cup right from the start.
England & Scotland were not.

no they dont.

the erc is a company and a tax paying one(if it was in another country that isnt sports admin exempt).. just like many others are, you just have to be vat registered.

but its set up to distribute all its money back to the unions. it is still fundamentally a company to make profit- but it just doesn't.

It wouldnt have to pay vat in the UK

Its not like a charity or a club.

by broadlandboy Wed 04 Dec 2013, 5:54 pm

Ebay makes a profit. ERC shouldn't. It should take the money from sponsorship & media rights (who ever got them)take out as little as possible for costs ( no free junkets) & split the rest between Unions/clubs as has been agreed.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:00 pm

i have just come across a Lapasset (IRB honcho) Q&A session which makes really interesting reading. will translate it as i think it's important:

qn - Could FIRA-AER be transformed into the UEFA-like entity tasked with running european club rugby?
Lapasset - in europe FIRa has a role to play. we need to develop new competencies at the heart of FIRA. thats what i told them on Friday. i want them to come to us with proposals for running international club competitions. But not only with France or england. With rumania or Georgia too. European rugby needs to open up. like football 50 years ago. it is imperative to have a vision of enlarged competitions with multiple levels. We need a rapid solution. In a year we need the ideal modern governance capable of coping with the demands of the modern professional game.

qn - will clubs be favourable to a reformed FIRA-AER running european cups?
Lapasset - the important thing is to carve out an area of responsibility giving clubs real commercial and organisational responsibility for the competitions. we have to find a way to make this work for the clubs. Inevitably, clubs' responsibilities need to be enlarged relative to today's situation. This is the area where we should be able to meet the needs of everyone.

qn - what's going on with the FFR-LNr convention with respect to european cups?
Lapasset - not going to comment on a french-french issue. but one thing is certain: nothing can happen without agreement with the English. We have to pay attention to what is happening between the PRL and RFU. because european competition and its reform concerns, and needs to involve, everyone. we're not there yet, but i think we're moving in the right direction.

qn - you say nothing can happen without the english clubs. yet they claim not to be able to participate because of their BT contract...
Lapasset - (cutting journo off!) I don't care about that! i didnt sign the contract. i dont know what's in it. i dont know if anyone has seen the contract and i don't know whether the french clubs really know what's in the contract. this is not the IRB's problem. everyone needs to take responsibility for their own actions. and this is not something that should have any influence on my decision to to share my vision for how european rugby needs to evolve.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:02 pm

Well its spot on from my point of view- raises the important questions,

and the questions are answered in the best possible way

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:08 pm

He really isn't happy with the PRL signing the BT contract, methinks.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:10 pm

He sounded like he wanted to tear him a new one for mentioning it.

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:14 pm

Very interesting that Lapasset states that this is his vision for European rugby.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:14 pm

Or is the reason it's in Ireland is because they will never be audited...???

Numbers are just numbers and mean nothing if your company isn't checked out..

I wonder how many brown envelopes they have in there inventory.

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:17 pm

A bit of a step up from organising the Junior World Cup & Cyprus v Austria to the Six Nations & Heineken Cup!

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:24 pm

mystiroakey wrote:Or is the reason it's in Ireland is because they will never be audited...???

Numbers are just numbers and mean nothing if your company isn't checked out..

I wonder how many brown envelopes they have in there inventory.

You can check out the audited accounts of European Rugby Cup on www.duedil.com (a UK company Wink

- you just need to register).
Ernst & Young are the auditors (HQ London).

ERC's last filing was in April this year.

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:27 pm

I wonder what size brown envelope Ernest and young got Wink

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:33 pm

Well, well, well - no wonder Lapasset is talking up Fira-Aer

- it was their vote that swung him the IRB Presidency (wait for it - over Bill Beaumont) Very Happy

http://www.fira-aer-rugby.com/archives-article-265.htm

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:34 pm

mystiroakey wrote:I wonder what size brown envelope Ernest and young got

Probably about 100K (it will tell you when you download the accounts).

by mystiroakey Wed 04 Dec 2013, 6:36 pm

No that was there fee sin e.

I am talking about the brown envelope that losses all the other brown envelopes.

In all seriousness 100k is a fat fee . I should have stuck with my acca..

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:09 pm

English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.

by maestegmafia Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:30 pm

And in near by France......

Camou has also offered the French clubs €2 million (£1.68 million) each for participating in the ERC tournaments and reportedly set them a deadline of next month to confirm their support or he intends to explore other means of entering French teams through central contracting with the FFR.

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:33 pm

old news maes. unless you know something live from the FFR-LNR "Convention" negotiation that is happening as we speak?

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:34 pm

Munchkin wrote:English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.

as it should be. voted on, by people who have skin in the game.

sounds like the very antithesis of how unions (Camou, Roger Lewis) arrive at decisions

by Guest Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:46 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.
as it should be. voted on, by people who have skin in the game.

sounds like the very antithesis of how unions (Camou, Roger Lewis) arrive at decisions

Do you believe Camou, and Lewis, make decisions without consultation, and finding general consensus within their own organisations? The FFR, and WRU, could vote Camou, and Lewis, out, couldn't they?
I don't think the meeting is being held simply to uphold the principal of democracy. Neither do I believe that Wray, and co. always acted with the full agreement of all those they represent. Who knows what way the vote will go though?

by Totalflanker Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:49 pm

[quote="quinsforever"]

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
geoff998rugby wrote:quinsforever it strike you are very selective in what you read and what you choose to rememeber.

The IRB have made it clear they will block a cross Union competition if it is to the detriment of existing competitions. NO, THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID THEY WILL ENDORSE A CROSS BORDER COMPETITION IF IT IS SUPPORTED BY THE RESPECTIVE UNIONS. IRB DOESNT WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN SAYING WHO SHOULD BE IN WHICH TOURNAMENTS. JUST WANTS TO MAKE SURE UNIONS ARE AT THE TOP OF EACH NATION'S GAME.
The WRU have made it quite clear they do not want an expanded Aviva. NOPE. HAVENT MADE THAT CLEAR AT ALL. FIND ME ONE LINK, A SINGLE LINK MAKING THIS CLEAR.

If you think an anglo-Welsh tournament can close to matching the French financial arrangements you obviously are not aware of the figures being talked about for French TV. The BT deal palls into insiginificance without European. SO WHAT? FRENCH RUGBY IS ALREADY THE 800LB GORILLA. AND THEY'RE GETTING BIGGER, YES I AGREE. DOESNT MEAN THAT THE AP WOULDNT BE BETTER FOR PRL CLUBS AND RRW TEAMS TOGETHER.

That is why a European deal is key for both England the Pro12 - otherwise the French will suck all of us dry.
We may be first but you will follow I UNDERSTAND YOUR FEAR, BUT JUST DONT SEE IT AS SUCH A THREAT. WHO CARES IF THEY PAY TOP DOLLAR. PLAYERS HAVE A RIGHT TO PLY THEIR TRADE WHEREVER THEY WANT. SOUTH AFRICAN STARTING PLAYERS ARE ALL OVER THE WORLD. YET THE SA TEAM ARE DOING JUST FINE. AND IF THE FRENCH TEAMS DOMINATE H-CUP, WELL DONE THEM. I LOVE SEEING THESE STAR-STUDDED FRENCH TEAMS.

I believe yo uare wrong regarding the requirment of Welsh teams and serving notice to the Pro12. NOPE. WELSH REGIONS ARE NOT SIGNED UP TO RABO OR H-CUP. THEY ARE NOMINATED BY WRU WHO ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE TEAMS. THAT'S WHY ALL THE MONEY GOES THROUGH THE WRU COFFERS AND NOT A SINGLE PENNY DIRECTLY TO THE REGIONS.

On the French negotiations it was widely reported last week that the clubs have signed a contract committing themselves to the HC next year. THEY HAVENT SIGNED ANYTHING. WHAT THEY SIGN WILL BE PART OF THIS "CONVENTION". What I suspect is under discussion is the nature of qualfication. splitting money between clubs and the like not participation itself. As to discussion how ERC administered I suspect this is much to do with the length of any agreement and the split of shares between FFR and LNR

The French teams want the, very lucrative, TV deal wrapped up before they commit to the coming years regarding the league
Stuart Gallacher
Regional Rugby Wales chairman:

"And the four Welsh regions are themselves tied into agreements to play in the Pro12 alongside teams from Ireland, Scotland and Italy."

BBC Sports. 28/03/2013

As far as Gallacher is concerned, the 4 Welsh regions are tied to the Rabo.

Strikes me that rather than tie in dates the following are probably more pertinent reasons as to why RRW might not join AP:

- regardless of AP money versus RABO, the lions share of RRW cash will still come from the WRU
- WRU will be under pressure from IRB not to agree joining of AP because it will kill rugby in Ireland, Scotland and Italy. Without Wales there are not enough teams for a competitive league. So back to the old debate of 'whatever they are playing it won't be rugby union'
- what would make RRW or the WRU for that matter feel confident they could trust PRL in the future based on the debacle that we are currently going through
- lastly the backdrop of the 6 nations and IRB pressure. Yes its a club matter but if it is going to wreck the international cash cow then not likely

by Sin é Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:49 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.
as it should be. voted on, by people who have skin in the game.

sounds like the very antithesis of how unions (Camou, Roger Lewis) arrive at decisions

And how does McCafferty & Goze differ from Camou & Lewis? What skin have them?

Isn't Gallacher a carpet salesman?

by maestegmafia Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:50 pm

Munchkin wrote:English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.

I wonder if those calling for McCafferty to resign will get their way.

I hear that a number of clubs are angry at the loss in revenue by the exclusion in Europe and lack of realistic alternatives they have been left with.

Looks like the English clubs best hope is to either go back on the BT deal over Europe or to try to increase the relevance of the LV= to gain some cross-boarder competition...

by quinsforever Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:52 pm

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:English clubs to hold a crises meeting tomorrow to vote on Europe. Might be a lively meeting.

PRL is split according to some.
as it should be. voted on, by people who have skin in the game.

sounds like the very antithesis of how unions (Camou, Roger Lewis) arrive at decisions
Do you believe Camou, and Lewis, make decisions without consultation, and finding general consensus within their own organisations? The FFR, and WRU, could vote Camou, and Lewis, out, couldn't they? NO
I don't think the meeting is being held simply to uphold the principal of democracy. NO ITS UPHOLDING THE PRINCIPLE OF CAPITALISM. Neither do I believe that Wray, and co. always acted with the full agreement of all those they represent. THEY DIDN'T NEED FULL AGREEMENT (AND I PRESUME YOU MEAN PRL, NOT WRAY WHO IS MERELY A NOISY CLUB OWNER) THEY JUST NEEDED A MANDATE. IT'S CALLED DELEGATION. Who knows what way the vote will go though?

by Gibson Wed 04 Dec 2013, 10:53 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Taken from another forum. Seems that IRB are giving up on ERC
http://www.lerugbynistere.fr/news/h-cup-vers-evolution-fira-remplacer-erc-satisfaire-anglais-francais-toujours-desaccord-0312131138.php
Only taking their word as my French is useless
Lapasset commented recently that IRB were watching over these proposed changes, and also that IRB may be in favour of them. He concluded with re-enforcing IRBs stance of no Club control.
When ERC issued its latest statement it seems that they have allowed for change of name of ERC. Exactly what that means I don't know, but I would doubt very much it has anything to do with a weakening of the Unions position.
Whatever shape the new competition, I hope it's something that the AP teams can sign up to.
Does anyone really care about the ERC as an organisation? Let's replace it with something with the same governance structure, call it s/thing so the PRL ninnies can put their dummies back in, and we can get on with the Heino

Asbo for President. Whisky

by Sponsored content