New European cup. (Or whatever it's called) Qualification agreed? Part 2

First topic message reminder :

A continuation of the previous thread. For everyone with more to say.

Chunky...you is a salty old boy, ain't you.

Winning matters.  Unless you say it doesn't - which is Professional Rugby in England and France's new philosophy, I suppose.

They'll both have a competition more to their liking now by all accounts...let's see them talk big on the field with their new 'fairer' system...including that perpetual Home Play off game that will always take place in either England or France against a Pro12 side.

I assume that's still on the cards in this new Fair competition?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

St John The Enforcer wrote:Never would have got that one. I was wondering was she someone who was known for having the greater good at heart.

Christ you really think alot of yourself don't you.

Does the greater good involve contributing only 5m Euros a year to televise European rugby yet taking 16m Euros out of it?

Well, if you keep making the knock-outs, winning home QFs, semis and Finals and actually winning the thing, even Wales could take out 16m out of the competition (though I think you are wrong on that figure, its more like 10m from European competition).

Some countries are picking up close to the same money and never make it out of the group stages (i.e., produce nothing to televise).

Six nations PLUS ERC = 16m Euros.

Nothing to do with how successful a team is. Irish rugby is a leech.

How successful you are determines, in part, how much you get.
Irish sides have been very successful in the HC Welsh sides have been very unsuccessful.
That explains some of the difference

geoff998rugby wrote:

How successful you are determines, in part, how much you get.
Irish sides have been very successful in the HC Welsh sides have been very unsuccessful.
That explains some of the difference

No it doesn't. It plays absolutely zero part in determining the money I am talking about.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

How successful you are determines, in part, how much you get.
Irish sides have been very successful in the HC Welsh sides have been very unsuccessful.
That explains some of the difference

No it doesn't. It plays absolutely zero part in determining the money I am talking about.

What's that money (you're talking about) per head of population?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

St John The Enforcer wrote:Never would have got that one. I was wondering was she someone who was known for having the greater good at heart.

Christ you really think alot of yourself don't you.

Does the greater good involve contributing only 5m Euros a year to televise European rugby yet taking 16m Euros out of it?

Well, if you keep making the knock-outs, winning home QFs, semis and Finals and actually winning the thing, even Wales could take out 16m out of the competition (though I think you are wrong on that figure, its more like 10m from European competition).

Some countries are picking up close to the same money and never make it out of the group stages (i.e., produce nothing to televise).

Six nations PLUS ERC = 16m Euros.

Nothing to do with how successful a team is. Irish rugby is a leech.

Chucky, how much does Welsh rugby contribute and how much do they get out?

(No need to include all those finals in the Millennium Stadium in those figures).

SecretFly wrote:

What's that money (you're talking about) per head of population?

No idea. Why would that be relevant?

Sin é wrote:

Chucky, how much does Welsh rugby contribute and how much do they get out?

(No need to include all those finals in the Millennium Stadium in those figures).

I believe it to be around 7.8m Euros that the Welsh put in. And I assume they get the same 16m Euro equivalent as Ireland as they have the same number of teams.

The entire system needs re-organising. But the blazers are on too much of a good thing to agree to it.

The Irish don't generate 5M a year. The Irish TV watcher does (roughly) but the IRFU has nothing to do with these people. The IRFU (who are the ones that take the money out) generate however much their home games go for, including the games against the English and French. So the money paid by the English and French TV watchers, to watch English and French teams play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU. The money paid by the Welsh TV watchers, via BBCW, to watch the regions play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU not the WRU.

It seems to be a common misconception (including with Mr Wray)

HammerofThunor wrote:The Irish don't generate 5M a year. The Irish TV watcher does (roughly) but the IRFU has nothing to do with these people. The IRFU (who are the ones that take the money out) generate however much their home games go for, including the games against the English and French.  So the money paid by the English and French TV watchers, to watch English and French teams play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU. The money paid by the Welsh TV watchers, via BBCW, to watch the regions play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU not the WRU.

What on earth are you talking about?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

What's that money (you're talking about) per head of population?

No idea. Why would that be relevant?

Why wouldn't it be?  Head count is always the primary route when deciding what someone can afford to pay.  English and Ffrench rugby moan about having to pay too much, whilst the minnows pay to little.  How much per head of population is not irrelevant..it's central.  And as Sin asked you, what's the Welsh figures given you can quote the Irish ones?

Forget last question...you've answered it. 7.8million? hmmmmm

Chunky Norwich wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The Irish don't generate 5M a year. The Irish TV watcher does (roughly) but the IRFU has nothing to do with these people. The IRFU (who are the ones that take the money out) generate however much their home games go for, including the games against the English and French.  So the money paid by the English and French TV watchers, to watch English and French teams play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU. The money paid by the Welsh TV watchers, via BBCW, to watch the regions play in Ireland is raised by the IRFU not the WRU.

What on earth are you talking about?

If Ospreys play Leinster in Dublin the IRFU own the TV rights to that. Whatever the BBCW pay for that game (so the Welsh TV watchers) is raised by the IRFU and 'belongs' to them. They put that into the pot. That money has nothing to do with the WRU.

You may not like how it works but that's how it works.

SecretFly wrote:
Why wouldn't it be?  Head count is always the primary route when deciding what someone can afford to pay.  English and Ffrench rugby moan about having to pay too much, whilst the minnows pay to little.  How much per head of population is not irrelevant..it's central.

Sop you want to compare a country with 60 million people against a country of 2.9m people and base this as a mechanism for sharing out money?

Italy has 15 times more people then Ireland.

 And as Sin asked you, what's the Welsh figures given you can quote the Irish ones?

Its above

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
Why wouldn't it be?  Head count is always the primary route when deciding what someone can afford to pay.  English and Ffrench rugby moan about having to pay too much, whilst the minnows pay to little.  How much per head of population is not irrelevant..it's central.

Sop you want to compare a country with 60 million people against a country of 2.9m people and base this as a mechanism for sharing out money?

Italy has 15 times more people then Ireland.

 And as Sin asked you, what's the Welsh figures given you can quote the Irish ones?

Its above

So it works sometimes with your reasoning but not others?..... good, any plan will do to suit a argument.

We should have a Eurovision type competition............... TV ariel/satelite density should decide who get's to the play off stages .

HammerofThunor wrote:
If Ospreys play Leinster in Dublin the IRFU own the TV rights to that.  Whatever the BBCW pay for that game (so the Welsh TV watchers) is raised by the IRFU and 'belongs' to them. They put that into the pot.  That money has nothing to do with the WRU.

You may not like how it works but that's how it works.

That is the funniest thing I have ever read.

That money has been negotiated by the WRU for a start. Raised by the IRFU?

I'm genuinely laughing out loud.

SecretFly wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
Why wouldn't it be?  Head count is always the primary route when deciding what someone can afford to pay.  English and Ffrench rugby moan about having to pay too much, whilst the minnows pay to little.  How much per head of population is not irrelevant..it's central.

Sop you want to compare a country with 60 million people against a country of 2.9m people and base this as a mechanism for sharing out money?

Italy has 15 times more people then Ireland.

 And as Sin asked you, what's the Welsh figures given you can quote the Irish ones?

Its above

So it works sometimes with your reasoning but not others?..... good, any plan will do to suit a argument.

No idea what you're talking about.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

How successful you are determines, in part, how much you get.
Irish sides have been very successful in the HC Welsh sides have been very unsuccessful.
That explains some of the difference

No it doesn't. It plays absolutely zero part in determining the money I am talking about.

Your wrong

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Chucky, how much does Welsh rugby contribute and how much do they get out?

(No need to include all those finals in the Millennium Stadium in those figures).

I believe it to be around 7.8m Euros that the Welsh put in. And I assume they get the same 16m Euro equivalent as Ireland as they have the same number of teams.

The entire system needs re-organising. But the blazers are on too much of a good thing to agree to it.

You could also include the tax exemption in the Irish contribution for being based in Ireland.

The turnover for the Heineken Cup is about 55m per annum. Costs are fairly low (being generous, say 20m between hiring stadia, staff, discipline etc). If based in the UK (corporate tax rate of 21%) that would mean that European rugby is better off to the tune of at least 6m. Looks like Ireland are contributing more than Wales in the overall pot.

Then you have Heineken - can't benefit from promotion in France. How much would you deduct from them for that?

geoff998rugby wrote:

Your wrong

Walk me through, how a team gets paid more through tv money, by reaching the final of the HCup than a team who loses every match.

Sin é wrote:

You could also include the tax exemption in the Irish contribution for being based in Ireland.

The turnover for the Heineken Cup is about 55m per annum. Costs are fairly low (being generous, say 20m between hiring stadia, staff, discipline etc). If based in the UK (corporate tax rate of 21%) that would mean that European rugby is better off to the tune of at least 6m. Looks like Ireland are contributing more than Wales in the overall pot.

Then you have Heineken - can't benefit from promotion in France. How much would you deduct from them for that?

Why are you going on about tax, and stadiums.

I am talking about money raised by television rights. I think you are extremely confused.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:
If Ospreys play Leinster in Dublin the IRFU own the TV rights to that.  Whatever the BBCW pay for that game (so the Welsh TV watchers) is raised by the IRFU and 'belongs' to them. They put that into the pot.  That money has nothing to do with the WRU.

You may not like how it works but that's how it works.

That is the funniest thing I have ever read.

That money has been negotiated by the WRU for a start. Raised by the IRFU?

I'm genuinely laughing out loud.

If it was negotiated by the WRU it was on behalf of the IRFU (wasn't it negotiated by Lewis as part of Celtic Rugby not the WRU). Your issue seems to be able the pooled TV money being split up. If each union kept what they owned then the IRFU would get all the money paid out to televise all the games in Ireland. So the money paid by RTE, BBCNI, BBCAlba, BBCW, Sky, ESPN, BT, whoever.

That may well make you laugh but it's true.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

Your wrong

Walk me through, how a team gets paid more through tv money, by reaching the final of the HCup than a team who loses every match.

The TV money is pooled along with everything else. Then each union gets a certain amount of that (I think it's 85% of the total). The remaining 15% (if it is that much) is given out based on performance.

HammerofThunor wrote:
If it was negotiated by the WRU it was on behalf of the IRFU (wasn't it negotiated by Lewis as part of Celtic Rugby not the WRU).

 Your issue seems to be able the pooled TV money being split up. If each union kept what they owned then the IRFU would get all the money paid out to televise all the games in Ireland. So the money paid by RTE, BBCNI, BBCAlba, BBCW, Sky, ESPN, BT, whoever.

That may well make you laugh but it's true.

You're insane.

 

Chunky Norwich wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:
If it was negotiated by the WRU it was on behalf of the IRFU (wasn't it negotiated by Lewis as part of Celtic Rugby not the WRU).

 Your issue seems to be able the pooled TV money being split up. If each union kept what they owned then the IRFU would get all the money paid out to televise all the games in Ireland. So the money paid by RTE, BBCNI, BBCAlba, BBCW, Sky, ESPN, BT, whoever.

That may well make you laugh but it's true.

You're insane.

I suggest you read the IRB regulations on Broadcasting rights. Either that or come up with an actual argument.

What Hammer says - 15% rings a bell with me as well

The Irish contribute £2.54m in tv money to the HCup and the Celtic League combined.

The Welsh contribute £3.2m to the Celtic League alone.

Leeches.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

You could also include the tax exemption in the Irish contribution for being based in Ireland.

The turnover for the Heineken Cup is about 55m per annum. Costs are fairly low (being generous, say 20m between hiring stadia, staff, discipline etc). If based in the UK (corporate tax rate of 21%) that would mean that European rugby is better off to the tune of at least 6m. Looks like Ireland are contributing more than Wales in the overall pot.

Then you have Heineken - can't benefit from promotion in France. How much would you deduct from them for that?

Why are you going on about tax, and stadiums.

I am talking about money raised by television rights. I think you are extremely confused.

I'm talking about who contributes what to the various competitions. Since tv rights for the Heineken Cup is sold off as a combined UK & Ireland, you have no idea what Wales' contribution to the pot is.

If you are talking about the PRO 12, the main sponsor Rabo had only an interest in Ireland (doesn't trade in any of the other countries involved). Thats a minus in the Welsh column.

By the way, its good to know that the PRO12 have 6 sponsors bidding for it. Obviously none of them want to do business in Wales because you can say nothing good about the PRO12.

Chunky Norwich wrote:The Irish contribute £2.54m in tv money to the HCup and the Celtic League combined.

The Welsh contribute £3.2m to the Celtic League alone.

Leeches.

Sky buy the media rights for UK & Ireland.

Any figure for Heineken Cup would be secondary rights (highlights shown on TG4).

Chunky Norwich wrote:The Irish contribute £2.54m in tv money to the HCup and the Celtic League combined.

The Welsh contribute £3.2m to the Celtic League alone.

Leeches.

Your are forgetting the money from the BBC that comes from NI.
Ireland are not just a 26 counties team.

Plus of course many a viewer in England is Irish and to a lesser degree Welsh and Scottish.
You cannot divide the contribution of TV on strict territorial lines

geoff998rugby wrote:
Your are forgetting the money from the BBC that comes from NI.

How much is that then?

£1.99

No idea never been made public to my knowledge but they do pay for it.

The point is the figures often banded about concerning Pro12 are incomplete and confuse primary and secondary rights such that they are untrustworthy.

Sin é wrote:

Sky buy the media rights for UK & Ireland.

Any figure for Heineken Cup would be secondary rights (highlights shown on TG4).

The Irish tv market contributes 9% of Heineken Cup broadcasting revenue.

Yet they (Irish rugby) take 25% of the shared boadcasting moneys.

As Sin says Sky buys broadcasting rights for Britain and Ireland - you cannot assume that is all GB.

A % of that is for Ireland - I doubt it is even split in the contract.

As stated before the money received includes performance - Ireland and Wales get the same flat rate

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Sky buy the media rights for UK & Ireland.

Any figure for Heineken Cup would be secondary rights (highlights shown on TG4).

The Irish tv market contributes 9% of Heineken Cup broadcasting revenue.

Yet they (Irish rugby) take 25% of the shared boadcasting moneys.

But the Irish teams play more games to be televised   And QFs, Semis & Finals would get more viewers!

Have you a link to that - I just can't imagine Sky telling anyone how they have broken down the market?

Sin é wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Sky buy the media rights for UK & Ireland.

Any figure for Heineken Cup would be secondary rights (highlights shown on TG4).

The Irish tv market contributes 9% of Heineken Cup broadcasting revenue.

Yet they (Irish rugby) take 25% of the shared boadcasting moneys.

But the Irish teams play more games to be televised   And QFs, Semis & Finals would get more viewers!

Have you a link to that - I just can't imagine Sky telling anyone how they have broken down the market?

It's all here. It makes for some very interesting / infuriating reading:

http://www.irishrugby.ie/save/the_facts.php

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Sky buy the media rights for UK & Ireland.

Any figure for Heineken Cup would be secondary rights (highlights shown on TG4).

The Irish tv market contributes 9% of Heineken Cup broadcasting revenue.

Yet they (Irish rugby) take 25% of the shared boadcasting moneys.

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

SecretFly wrote:

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

That's a lovely notion. In isolation. The thing is, that other less affluent nations like Italy, Scotland and Wales are propping up the competition financially. Therefore it is costing them. And this generates more Irish success, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But hey, as long as the Irish are ok.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

That's a lovely notion. In isolation. The thing is, that other less affluent nations like Italy, Scotland and Wales are propping up the competition financially. Therefore it is costing them. And this generates more Irish success, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But hey, as long as the Irish are ok.

Twaddle.

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

That's a lovely notion. In isolation. The thing is, that other less affluent nations like Italy, Scotland and Wales are propping up the competition financially. Therefore it is costing them. And this generates more Irish success, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But hey, as long as the Irish are ok.

Twaddle.

The link above proves not.

The Welsh are as rich, if not richer, than the Irish.
Their problems are internal - you cant blame others for that.

The Italians are on the up from a low base and the potential is enormous.

Scotland only have 2 Regions to support not 4 as in Wales and Ireland.
So per head of population and given population concentrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh they have the potentail to succeed.
Again part of the problem is they managed to screw up their natural base in the Borders

To be honest I dont think the Irish need to apologise for getting Pro rugby right at the club/region/provincial level

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

That's a lovely notion. In isolation. The thing is, that other less affluent nations like Italy, Scotland and Wales are propping up the competition financially. Therefore it is costing them. And this generates more Irish success, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But hey, as long as the Irish are ok.

No.  What were Munster before they cracked Europe?  Creaming it with a massive selection of superstars?  No.  Just hungry to win and hungrier not to be laughed at, sneered at, humiliated or scorned.  

Welsh teams have the players but, for whatever reason, that hunger to prove worth in Europe just isn't there to the same level (perhaps International hunger controls that Regional one)
But on many occasions some Welsh regions had the players but lacked that desire to prove it in Europe.  So don't go blaming Irish sides either for being relatively successful in Europe or for taking what comes with it - a better financial deal, as winning Does matter.

It's why sport exists and it has real economic benefits.  But Munster won as a backwater joke in European terms (both financially and in the considered relative quality of their players)  - and they just said they weren't going to be an also-rans anymore.

No Europe doesn't subsidise Irish provinces, Irish provinces have been busy playing their sizeable part in making the product attractive to investors over the last half decade or so - and Welsh, Italian and Scottish sides have benefitted form that in kind.

And again, this is all missing the point over the actual ownership of the TV rights. The WRU do not own the rights of everything the Welsh public watch. The WRU don't own the rights to the S15 games shown on Sky. The 3N unions get that because the games take place in their region.

The WRU only own the TV rights for games that take place in Wales.  You're not comparing the value of what a union owns with what they take home.

A - The IRFU 'contribute' the entire value of their home games (for broadcasting).  
B - The Irish public 'contribute' a certain amount in terms of what TV companies are willing to pay for the entire Pro12 broadcast rights.

A does not equal B. They're different things and can't be compared.  In terms of how much the IRFU take out compared with what they put in, we don't know as generally the TV deals aren't split up like that. They're for the entire competition.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

More proof that winning matters.  You add to the spectacle more, you get paid your reward.  There is no secret about the sides that have made Europe so alluring for the parties that wanted in (namely BT).  Irish sides have been selling this European product now fo the guts of six or seven years.  You put on a circus, your clowns get paid

That's a lovely notion. In isolation. The thing is, that other less affluent nations like Italy, Scotland and Wales are propping up the competition financially. Therefore it is costing them. And this generates more Irish success, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But hey, as long as the Irish are ok.

Twaddle.

The link above proves not.

Where in the link does it prove that Italy, Scotland, and Wales are propping up the 6 Nations, and HEC?, and how this somehow translates into Irish success?
The regions have been a disaster in Rabo, and HEC. That is hardly the fault of the IRFU, or specifically the Provinces. Get your own house in order, and stop looking to blame others for your failures. RRW jumping into bed with the PRL doesn't help your cause, as PRL would just a quick boot you out when it suits them. Just as LNR did with PRL.
What value have the regions added to the Rabo in all this? If anything they have devalued it as the likes of Peter Thomas, and their supporters, do all to tarnish the brand.

geoff998rugby wrote:The Welsh are as rich, if not richer, than the Irish.
Their problems are internal - you cant blame others for that

Of course he can. Poor fecker hasn't a clue god bless him. The Irish have wrecked Welsh regional rugby. Destroyed it completely. Everything the regions have done has been excellent. Those pesky Irish have just spoiled it all.

I haven't worked out how we managed it yet, or why we wanted to. But I'm sure he is right.

After all he/she/it seems to be a Welsh poster with an English username who gets the horn at any remote possibility of being allowed to play with his perceived betters across the Severn.

Munchkin wrote:

Where in the link does it prove that Italy, Scotland, and Wales are propping up the 6 Nations, and HEC?, and how this somehow translates into Irish success?
The regions have been a disaster in Rabo, and HEC..

Well this bit for a start:

Thus, although the Irish TV market contributes only €5 million pa to the central pot (c.€3m to the Six Nations pot and c.€2 million to the ERC pot), the other TV markets contribute much more, and the IRFU therefore receives €16 million each year from the central pot (c.€11m from Six Nations and c.€5m from ERC). This constitutes about 24% of the IRFU’s total annual turnover.

IRFU statement

That is hardly the fault of the IRFU, or specifically the Provinces. Get your own house in order, and stop looking to blame others for your failures. RRW jumping into bed with the PRL doesn't help your cause, as PRL would just a quick boot you out when it suits them. Just as LNR did with PRL.
What value have the regions added to the Rabo in all this? If anything they have devalued it as the likes of Peter Thomas, and their supporters, do all to tarnish the brand

You have a complete an utter unwillingness to look at the facts.

Believe me, the regions have their failings. They are trying to get their houses in order, but when you have such stale, toxic individuals supposedly doing what is best or the game, it's a mammoth, uphill task.

St John The Enforcer wrote:

After all he/she/it seems to be a Welsh poster with an English username who gets the horn at any remote possibility of being allowed to play with his perceived betters across the Severn.

It's an Alan Partridge reference you dolt.

i can smell racism against usernames here .

I think SAINT JOHN needs to stop  feeding his chickens beef burgers.