Irish provinces and their player costs
+15
LeinsterFan4life
Hound of Harrow
HammerofThunor
Sin é
Portnoy's Complaint
Mickado
Notch
AsLongAsBut100ofUs
profitius
quinsforever
lostinwales
LondonTiger
GunsGerms
Jenifer McLadyboy
Chunky Norwich
19 posters
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Rugby Union :: Club Rugby
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Irish provinces and their player costs
First topic message reminder :
Interesting reading this:
http://gwladrugby.com/?p=1493
Interesting reading this:
Gerry Thornley, 29 April 2014 “That there is likely to be more money for players is overdue and the Irish provinces have a proven culture, sense of identity and loyalty, as well as competitiveness, which their fellow Celts would covet. They’ve defied the odds before.”
On 3 March 2014, Andy Howell, rugby correspondent of the Western Mail, supposedly Wales’ No.1 rugby journalist, claimed that the Leinster Rugby team had a budget of £4.1m, including its academy players. In the quote above, the archetypal Irish rugby journalist, Gerry Thornley, implies that Irish players stay with their provinces due to loyalty, not money. That would be true if Howell’s budget was correct.
But is Howell correct? What did he do to verify the figure given to him, presumably by Leinster.
The first thing is to layout the structure of Irish Rugby at professional level. It is entirely controlled by the Union. The IRFU own the professional teams. Munster, Ulster, Leinster & Connacht Rugby are all entities it seems who are owned 100% by the IRFU. It is those entities that operate the relevant provincial sides. There are limited companies set up that protect those names, but they are dormant. Those businesses appear to be ‘branches’ of the IRFU.
Reason for arriving at those conclusions? The IRFU accounts. These account for the competition monies for those sides, but unlike the WRU, the outgoings do not go to the four teams, but appear to be spent on players wages (of which more later).
Alongside the rugby sides there, provinces also have Branches that are owned, it seems, by their constituent clubs. The accounts of the branches are not made publically available, but are commented on in the press following AGM report. I have also had a copy of the Leinster Branch Accounts sent to me, which help enormously to understand how professional rugby in Ireland works, and crucially how much money they spend on player wages.
In terms of income, the IRFU appear to account for all the competition monies the 4 provinces get. This totals approximately €11m. The other income of the IRFU appears to derive out of the international game only. Then in schedule 3 to the accounts we are told that player and management costs come to €28.5m. This excludes academy players and coaching support staff (such as U20 coach Mike Ruddock) as they appear to be included in the costs laid out in schedule 4.
So the wage bill for pro players in Ireland is €28.5m, less say €1m for the senior side coaching team.
At the moment in Wales, RRW are asking for £10m between the 4 sides. The four Irish provinces, in 2013 (with similar figures for previous years) received approximately €16.5m over and above competition income. This does give the IRFU MORE control than RRW appear to be happy with, but it does indicate the funding difference.
The remainder of the income for the branch accounts that I have seen for Leinster, states that all other income such as provincial income and ticket monies go through the branch accounts. The Leinster turnover, even without competition monies remember, is over €12m. This is in excess of the top welsh pro team, where competition monies are included.
So if the IRFU pay the players, where does this money go? Well, it seems that the Leinster branch also pay the players (senior ones) to the tune of €2.7m. The coaching staff expense is elsewhere in the accounts.
So, if we stay with Leinster at the moment, if we say the split of the €27.5m between the four provinces is that Connacht get half the other 3. That means that Leinster get the wages of 2/7ths of €27.5m. This is approximately €7.85m. Add in the €2.7m, and you get €10.55m. Or £8.75m. Or more than double the RRW salary cap, and significantly more than the PRL clubs.
I even think it is above the French salary cap.
#foodforthought’ndy
Conclusions:
1- The Irish provincial sides are not overperforming. They are performing on par with their funding. Maybe even below it.
2- Where the Irish are performing is income generation. The Munster branch turnover is apparently more like €17m.
3- RRW demands for £10m do not seem unreasonable.
4- RRW need to improve their income streams. The WRU should be helping them with this, not hindering them. Part of this would be to empower regions to build relationships with clubs. In Ireland, the branches award significant grants as well as the Union.
5- To make it clear, the Lenister playing wage bill is obviously not £4.1m, Andy. According to official audited accounts.
http://gwladrugby.com/?p=1493
Chunky Norwich- Posts : 4409
Join date : 2011-12-08
Location : Location: Location:
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Ah well...it must have struck a chord for me to remember it (and her work) as I promptly decided not to follow a career in that line...funny how some things stick.
ME-109- Posts : 5258
Join date : 2011-09-01
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
One of the problems in Wales it occurs to me, that there was always a monopolistic market (products in sport being largely differentiated by irrational preference to a decision made as a child).
Fearing market failure, the WRU imposed an oligopolistic market to supply the demand requirements. And seemingly it has never paid a return at club level even though the supply of resources (at one time stalled) recovered and the international team regained its erstwhile marketability.
That's all about the economics of imperfect competition.
Fearing market failure, the WRU imposed an oligopolistic market to supply the demand requirements. And seemingly it has never paid a return at club level even though the supply of resources (at one time stalled) recovered and the international team regained its erstwhile marketability.
That's all about the economics of imperfect competition.
Portnoy's Complaint- Posts : 3498
Join date : 2012-10-03
Age : 74
Location : Felixstowe
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Economics = common sense that various people have tried to turn into a science.
Hound of Harrow- Posts : 1452
Join date : 2013-03-31
Location : Wild, Wild Wealdstone
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Aye it's that all right.
It's just a tool like history, which should be applied by (successive) governments and industry, which offers warnings and opportunities of the likely outcomes various fiscal and monetary strategies.
If only governments had applied the necessary constraints on financial institutions. The simple age-old rules of prudence like cash and liquidity ratios, the overpaid, greedy whizz-kids wouldn't have been able to put the equivalent of toxic horsemeat in their burgers and sold them to other imprudent buyers down the chain, we wouldn't have all later got caught up in the inevitable dysentery epidemic.
It's just a tool like history, which should be applied by (successive) governments and industry, which offers warnings and opportunities of the likely outcomes various fiscal and monetary strategies.
If only governments had applied the necessary constraints on financial institutions. The simple age-old rules of prudence like cash and liquidity ratios, the overpaid, greedy whizz-kids wouldn't have been able to put the equivalent of toxic horsemeat in their burgers and sold them to other imprudent buyers down the chain, we wouldn't have all later got caught up in the inevitable dysentery epidemic.
Portnoy's Complaint- Posts : 3498
Join date : 2012-10-03
Age : 74
Location : Felixstowe
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Is anyone surprised by this?
But no doubt the overseas players have bought into the culture and do a lot for the Community so there for they aren't money grabbing mercenaries.
But no doubt the overseas players have bought into the culture and do a lot for the Community so there for they aren't money grabbing mercenaries.
Scrumpy- Posts : 4217
Join date : 2012-11-26
Location : Aquae Sulis
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Portnoy's Complaint wrote:Digging not dogging, Jen.
AlthoughMickado wrote:It's an interesting piece of digging, there are no references listed in the article so I'll reserve judgement on his accuracy, but the conclusions drawn are a bit fallacious.
How can you be certain they are fallacious?
A fact can't be dismissed as a fallacy without some sort of evidence one way or t'other.
[ed] Well not in the real world.
Except in Ireland where other T&Cs apply...
Any rhetorical statement can be fallacious, regardless of whether it's true or not.
I'm saying that the conclusions drawn are fallacious, the facts presented (true or not) do not prove them.
Mickado- Posts : 7282
Join date : 2011-04-06
Age : 39
Location : Baile Átha Cliath
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Why did they delete a comment that went into great detail showing why the figures they put together are incorrect?There was nothing abusive or nasty in the comment at all merely a counter argument to the articles conclusions,I don't know how right or wrong the comment was but it seems like the author of the article has no confidence in his own writing if he can't allow a debate on it.
asoreleftshoulder- Posts : 3945
Join date : 2011-05-15
Location : Meath,Ireland.
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Yes, they're not fond of challenge. Was it a reply by Thomas Harwood?
'Originally Posted by Thomas Harwood
Carlos,
A brave effort to work through the labyrinth of IRFU finances, and I admire somebody for picking up the challenge, but ultimately a flawed analysis:
(1) The problem with these comparisons is that they always downplay the fundamental systemic difference. The IRFU are funding part of the IRFU, just as they do their member clubs. Wales “adopted” the Anglo-French model, where the professional club game is privately owned and these external service suppliers are partially funded by the WRU member clubs under arms length commercial contracts for services provided. The risk and reward has been transferred from the union to the private owners, even if it was more by inertia in 1995 than by any grand design, and even if one might not currently appreciate that.
(2) The IRFU have repeatedly told 1 leading London rugby journalist in 2014 that their professional player budget, centrally and for the 4 branches, is €25m (not €27.5m or €28.5m, and which clearly has non-remuneration elements). That does not mean that the provincial branches are not diverting other allocated IRFU funds, or that playing success is not locally being used to increase player budgets, let alone that rich provincial fans are not topping up provincial budgets, just that €25m is the IRFU’s annual playing budget.
(3) People should also not forget that Eire has a favourable tax regime, which rewards players later in their careers. Both the IRFU and their players are aware of this, when contracts are negotiated.
(4) As the IRFU retains all non-merit competition platform income, and nearly all provincial branch funding comes via the IRFU’s ownership of all player contracts, we have the IRFU spending £20.5M on its provincial branches whilst the WRU pays nearly £17M (competition platform income, plus direct funding) to the 4 independently owned private Welsh clubs under the terms of the current participation agreement.
(5) The private owners of the Welsh professional clubs have eliminated the substantial losses of the past, partially by appointing more competent professional managers and partially by imposing an artificially low £3.5m per club salary cap, and the private owners are looking to the WRU member clubs to “bridge the funding gap” with the IRFU by increasing their direct funding from £6.7m to £10.7m. We do not know if there are or will be any commitments to partially or wholly match any increased WRU member club direct funding of the professional game, and matters are complicated by the WRU’s stance that any additional payment will not be coming in cash.
I think the real questions are:
(a) Would the IRFU system be better for Wales, with the WRU taking over the Ospreys, the Scarlets, the Cardiff Blues and the Newport Gwent Dragons and operating them on the Irish model and in parallel with the union’s revenue goals rather than as a 3rd party supplier cost to be minimised? The IRFU has avoided all of the club v country conflict that has blighted the game in Wales, England and France since 1995.
(b) Is there any point in still having private owners, “benefactors” that have ceased to benefact, if they are primarily looking to the WRU member clubs to increase their direct funding? What do they still bring to the party?
(c) The IRFU’s player budget for Leinster is likely to be in the region of £5-6m, depending upon how Connacht is funded, and certainly more than £4.1m. The extent to which that is topped up by Leinster and/or wealthy fans is unknown.'
'Originally Posted by Thomas Harwood
Carlos,
A brave effort to work through the labyrinth of IRFU finances, and I admire somebody for picking up the challenge, but ultimately a flawed analysis:
(1) The problem with these comparisons is that they always downplay the fundamental systemic difference. The IRFU are funding part of the IRFU, just as they do their member clubs. Wales “adopted” the Anglo-French model, where the professional club game is privately owned and these external service suppliers are partially funded by the WRU member clubs under arms length commercial contracts for services provided. The risk and reward has been transferred from the union to the private owners, even if it was more by inertia in 1995 than by any grand design, and even if one might not currently appreciate that.
(2) The IRFU have repeatedly told 1 leading London rugby journalist in 2014 that their professional player budget, centrally and for the 4 branches, is €25m (not €27.5m or €28.5m, and which clearly has non-remuneration elements). That does not mean that the provincial branches are not diverting other allocated IRFU funds, or that playing success is not locally being used to increase player budgets, let alone that rich provincial fans are not topping up provincial budgets, just that €25m is the IRFU’s annual playing budget.
(3) People should also not forget that Eire has a favourable tax regime, which rewards players later in their careers. Both the IRFU and their players are aware of this, when contracts are negotiated.
(4) As the IRFU retains all non-merit competition platform income, and nearly all provincial branch funding comes via the IRFU’s ownership of all player contracts, we have the IRFU spending £20.5M on its provincial branches whilst the WRU pays nearly £17M (competition platform income, plus direct funding) to the 4 independently owned private Welsh clubs under the terms of the current participation agreement.
(5) The private owners of the Welsh professional clubs have eliminated the substantial losses of the past, partially by appointing more competent professional managers and partially by imposing an artificially low £3.5m per club salary cap, and the private owners are looking to the WRU member clubs to “bridge the funding gap” with the IRFU by increasing their direct funding from £6.7m to £10.7m. We do not know if there are or will be any commitments to partially or wholly match any increased WRU member club direct funding of the professional game, and matters are complicated by the WRU’s stance that any additional payment will not be coming in cash.
I think the real questions are:
(a) Would the IRFU system be better for Wales, with the WRU taking over the Ospreys, the Scarlets, the Cardiff Blues and the Newport Gwent Dragons and operating them on the Irish model and in parallel with the union’s revenue goals rather than as a 3rd party supplier cost to be minimised? The IRFU has avoided all of the club v country conflict that has blighted the game in Wales, England and France since 1995.
(b) Is there any point in still having private owners, “benefactors” that have ceased to benefact, if they are primarily looking to the WRU member clubs to increase their direct funding? What do they still bring to the party?
(c) The IRFU’s player budget for Leinster is likely to be in the region of £5-6m, depending upon how Connacht is funded, and certainly more than £4.1m. The extent to which that is topped up by Leinster and/or wealthy fans is unknown.'
Guest- Guest
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
So Leinster's playing budget is almost certainly more than the current English salary cap and is probably larger than the increased cap due to the extra money from Europe next year? And that is probably the same for Munster and Ulster?
Edit: that assuming those £ are £ and not €
Edit: that assuming those £ are £ and not €
HammerofThunor- Posts : 10471
Join date : 2011-01-29
Location : Hull, England - Originally Potteries
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
HammerofThunor wrote:So Leinster's playing budget is almost certainly more than the current English salary cap and is probably larger than the increased cap due to the extra money from Europe next year? And that is probably the same for Munster and Ulster?
Edit: that assuming those £ are £ and not €
Plus the beneficial tax laws...
But then buying success is a terrible thing, apparently.
lostinwales- lostinwales
- Posts : 13350
Join date : 2011-06-09
Location : Out of Wales :)
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
How do 'the beneficial tax laws' benefit three of the four provinces?
Guest- Guest
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
IRFU also had an advantage in the early days of the game going pro. They were able to take note of what the SRU were doing and then in most cases did the complete opposite.
Dorothy_Mantooth- Posts : 1197
Join date : 2011-04-13
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Dorothy_Mantooth wrote:IRFU also had an advantage in the early days of the game going pro. They were able to take note of what the SRU were doing and then in most cases did the complete opposite.
you guys really do seem to have fluffed that up. It can change though, it can change.
HammerofThunor- Posts : 10471
Join date : 2011-01-29
Location : Hull, England - Originally Potteries
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Dorothy_Mantooth wrote:IRFU also had an advantage in the early days of the game going pro. They were able to take note of what the SRU were doing and then in most cases did the complete opposite.
A cunning plan, methinks
Guest- Guest
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Munchkin wrote:How do 'the beneficial tax laws' benefit three of the four provinces?
In fairness, Ireland's Sporting Tax Exemption benefits everyone involved in competition that are HQed in Dublin!
The Welsh keep moaning about subsidising the rest of the Pro12 teams because of their tv deal with the BBC.
Of course they never mention the worth of not having to pay any tax on that (or any other income) because the PRO12 is based in Dublin to avail of the Sporting Tax Exemption.
It was worth about 3m per annum for the ERC Heineken Cup and worth double that to the Six Nations countries (then there is the Lions)!
Sin é- Posts : 13725
Join date : 2011-04-01
Location : Dublin
Re: Irish provinces and their player costs
Merged the identical thread in the General Rugby Union section with this
Notch- Moderator
- Posts : 25635
Join date : 2011-02-10
Age : 36
Location : Belfast
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics
» IRFU cut Player & Management Costs by €27m from 2021
» Irish Player Rating
» Best UK & Irish player of the last 11 years?
» Irish Player Ratings.Marks out of 10.
» Irish Analysis and player ratings against S.Africa
» Irish Player Rating
» Best UK & Irish player of the last 11 years?
» Irish Player Ratings.Marks out of 10.
» Irish Analysis and player ratings against S.Africa
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Rugby Union :: Club Rugby
Page 2 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|