SRU debt free ??

by doctornickolas Thu 15 May 2014, 11:58 am

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2628637/BT-set-land-Murrayfield-naming-rights-20m-deal-write-SRU-debt-offer-boost-Edinburgh-Glasgow-clubs.html

by Scrumpy Thu 15 May 2014, 12:23 pm

Nice deal for SRU, not too sure if its a good deal for BT?

by **Notch** Thu 15 May 2014, 12:29 pm

BT are just throwing money around the place like crazy in Rugby atm. They were reported to be in discussions with all the regions for sponsorship, they already sponsor Edinburgh and Glasgow, the deal they made with the PRL is well known...

by PenfroPete Thu 15 May 2014, 12:37 pm

Ah, but they haven't had the bill for sorting out that pitch yet !!! Wink

by Dorothy_Mantooth Thu 15 May 2014, 12:40 pm

Notch wrote:BT are just throwing money around the place like crazy in Rugby atm. They were reported to be in discussions with all the regions for sponsorship, they already sponsor Edinburgh and Glasgow, the deal they made with the PRL is well known...

Will be sponsoring the National Team strips as well, when the current deal runs out. I would guess that that will be included in the Stadium deal and not on top of, but you never know.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 12:41 pm

Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

by PenfroPete Thu 15 May 2014, 12:42 pm

Anyway think they're referring to the wrong BT. I think THESE are the prospective sponsors

by fa0019 Thu 15 May 2014, 12:54 pm

Perhaps they won't ask the players to pay for non returned kit any more?

I wonder how long the naming rights are for? No doubt the SRU probably sold the rights forever on the back of a paid up slap up meal for them and their WAGs.

by tigertattie Thu 15 May 2014, 12:55 pm

Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

by cakeordeath Thu 15 May 2014, 1:24 pm

tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

Keep up tattie, anyone who has any involvement with BT Sport is directly responsible for the HC fiasco, the downfall of pro rugby and my rather poor line quality*

*Apart from Ulster apparently as they just have the advert on their sleeve so that doesn't count.

by munkian Thu 15 May 2014, 1:36 pm

Are they still going to sponsor the CAP ?

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Thu 15 May 2014, 1:45 pm

I presumed it was Better Together in a flailing attempt to save their dying union! Cool

by **Notch** Thu 15 May 2014, 1:49 pm

Please don't!

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 1:51 pm

cakeordeath wrote:
*Apart from Ulster apparently as they just have the advert on their sleeve so that doesn't count.

by **RDW** Thu 15 May 2014, 1:52 pm

You have got to wonder what's in it for BT Sport - Scottish rugby isn't exactly much of a broad and numerous target market!

I suspect they are more interested in the exposure it will get from hosting large pop and rock concerts. The exposure they will get from the dads taking their kids to see One Direction will probably be worth more than a whole Scotland season alone!

by PenfroPete Thu 15 May 2014, 1:59 pm

RDW - tis but a small part of BT's Masterplan

"''We saw in rugby an opportunity to own a sport exclusively, certainly at club level, and the rights that we've bought give us an opportunity to do that. "

OLD STORY 2012

That statement worries me

by **RDW** Thu 15 May 2014, 2:00 pm

It is worrying - if BT owns everything then there is no competition for them to give more money to the Unions/clubs, and likewise no competition for them to reduce their prices for the punters watching.

by fa0019 Thu 15 May 2014, 2:09 pm

given they're already giving a bumper deal to all, I don't think money is a short term worry.

They can only own it locally.... they won't be able to break into the SA market or the NZ market for instance.

by Cardiff Dave Thu 15 May 2014, 2:12 pm

munkian wrote:Are they still going to sponsor the CAP ?

Aye and your kit too. To be announced next week from what I gather from twitter.

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 2:19 pm

PenfroPete wrote:RDW - tis but a small part of BT's Masterplan

"''We saw in rugby an opportunity to own a sport exclusively, certainly at club level, and the rights that we've bought give us an opportunity to do that. "

OLD STORY 2012

That statement worries me

Unless of course, since they're talking about TV deals, you read that as own the broadcast rights for an English domestic sport. Because nothing else makes sense. Those rights don't give them actual ownership of the Sport. Nor do they give ownership of games outside England. So I wouldn't worry about it.

by Scrumpy Thu 15 May 2014, 2:37 pm

Why are some of you sooooo fearful of BT, they are a god send to the sport compared to Sky sports. Erm

by munkian Thu 15 May 2014, 2:43 pm

Cardiff Dave wrote:
munkian wrote:Are they still going to sponsor the CAP ?

Aye and your kit too. To be announced next week from what I gather from twitter.

Just the Dragons or all the Regions ? I miss the yellow disc*nt dildo Crying or Very sad

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Thu 15 May 2014, 2:44 pm

Notch wrote:Please don't!

Well its the closest they'll be getting to a genuine 'grassroots' campaign! (see what I did there?!)

by Cardiff Dave Thu 15 May 2014, 2:57 pm

munkian wrote:
Cardiff Dave wrote:
munkian wrote:Are they still going to sponsor the CAP ?

Aye and your kit too. To be announced next week from what I gather from twitter.

Just the Dragons or all the Regions ? I miss the yellow disc*nt dildo

Not shewer. Can you get iron-on knobs in your shop?

by PenfroPete Thu 15 May 2014, 2:59 pm

Scrumpy wrote:Why are some of you sooooo fearful of BT, they are a god send to the sport compared to Sky sports.

Scrumpy - the old saying "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind. Ask any number of football supporters who welcomed money men with open arms and then lost the 'soul' of their club - Cardiff City being but one

by Scrumpy Thu 15 May 2014, 3:35 pm

I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

by **Notch** Thu 15 May 2014, 3:35 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Notch wrote:Please don't!

Well its the closest they'll be getting to a genuine 'grassroots' campaign! (see what I did there?!)

Boom boom

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 4:50 pm

tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

They withdrew their support for the Heineken Cup/ERC and went with the new McCaffs Cup (on the advice of the non-executive commerical directors of SRU - according to Paul Rees in the Guardian a while back.

The rest of Pro12 Unions were sticking together up to then.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 4:55 pm

Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 5:16 pm

Sin é wrote:
tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

They withdrew their support for the Heineken Cup/ERC and went with the new McCaffs Cup (on the advice of the non-executive commerical directors of SRU - according to Paul Rees in the Guardian a while back.

The rest of Pro12 Unions were sticking together up to then.

I love it when you quote Rees and take what he says as fact. It makes me all tingly inside. I mean that's got to be close to the definition of hypocrisy right? How many times did you deride him as not to be trusted, making stuff up, etc? But says something you want to get on board with...bam...you're in there.

So thank you for the good feeling.

by whocares Thu 15 May 2014, 5:24 pm

Sin é wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

who would that be Sin é ? (seems I lost track a bit)

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 5:34 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

They withdrew their support for the Heineken Cup/ERC and went with the new McCaffs Cup (on the advice of the non-executive commerical directors of SRU - according to Paul Rees in the Guardian a while back.

The rest of Pro12 Unions were sticking together up to then.

I love it when you quote Rees and take what he says as fact. It makes me all tingly inside. I mean that's got to be close to the definition of hypocrisy right? How many times did you deride him as not to be trusted, making stuff up, etc? But says something you want to get on board with...bam...you're in there.

So thank you for the good feeling.

I was using a source that you seem to find believable. Thornley was saying the same thing and if I said it was him, most would say 'we would say that.'

It was common knowledge that BT were prepared to throw any money at any Pro12 Union/Team to get them to go with their new cup.

by nathan Thu 15 May 2014, 5:36 pm

So we effectively had just sky, now BT have come along and people are worried there will be no competition?

Hows that work then?

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 5:40 pm

whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

who would that be Sin é ? (seems I lost track a bit)

In Thornley's article in Irish Times on Tuesday (can't find a link to it now), he said that the Director General of the new organisation in Switzerland was going to be this 70 year old French bloke (can't remember his name) who is presently Deputy Director General of Clermont Auvergne.

edit: Found the link http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/here-s-hoping-pivotal-epcr-meeting-comes-up-with-some-answers-1.1792680

He also said that the Commerical Board consists of Bruce Craig (PRL), Paul McNaughton (Pro12) & another ex-Clermont Chairman (can't remember his name either). The interesting appointment will be the Independent Chairman of this committee.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 5:42 pm

nathan wrote:So we effectively had just sky, now BT have come along and people are worried there will be no competition?

Hows that work then?

Not great actually. If you want to watch this new competition next season, you will need to take out two subscriptions Erm

by nathan Thu 15 May 2014, 5:46 pm

Sin é wrote:
nathan wrote:So we effectively had just sky, now BT have come along and people are worried there will be no competition?

Hows that work then?

Not great actually. If you want to watch this new competition next season, you will need to take out two subscriptions

You disagreed with me then gave an explanation for something completely different. I wanted to know why competition would be effected now there is another broadcaster involved, not just mainly Sky?

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 5:51 pm

nathan wrote:
Sin é wrote:
nathan wrote:So we effectively had just sky, now BT have come along and people are worried there will be no competition?

Hows that work then?

Not great actually. If you want to watch this new competition next season, you will need to take out two subscriptions

You disagreed with me then gave an explanation for something completely different. I wanted to know why competition would be effected now there is another broadcaster involved, not just mainly Sky?

They are not in competition.Its just a carve up of games which means that if you want to watch your team playing in the competition, you need two tv subscriptions. It will be of no benefit to European Rugby for the next 4 years.

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 6:32 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

They withdrew their support for the Heineken Cup/ERC and went with the new McCaffs Cup (on the advice of the non-executive commerical directors of SRU - according to Paul Rees in the Guardian a while back.

The rest of Pro12 Unions were sticking together up to then.

I love it when you quote Rees and take what he says as fact. It makes me all tingly inside. I mean that's got to be close to the definition of hypocrisy right? How many times did you deride him as not to be trusted, making stuff up, etc? But says something you want to get on board with...bam...you're in there.

So thank you for the good feeling.

I was using a source that you seem to find believable. Thornley was saying the same thing and if I said it was him, most would say 'we would say that.'

It was common knowledge that BT were prepared to throw any money at any Pro12 Union/Team to get them to go with their new cup.

Since when do I find him believable? I don't believe anything I read in the press other than actual words quoted were actually said, although they may be taken out of context.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 6:40 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
tigertattie wrote:
Sin é wrote:Hope it was worth selling out their Pro12 Union partners for.

They withdrew their support for the Heineken Cup/ERC and went with the new McCaffs Cup (on the advice of the non-executive commerical directors of SRU - according to Paul Rees in the Guardian a while back.

The rest of Pro12 Unions were sticking together up to then.

I love it when you quote Rees and take what he says as fact. It makes me all tingly inside. I mean that's got to be close to the definition of hypocrisy right? How many times did you deride him as not to be trusted, making stuff up, etc? But says something you want to get on board with...bam...you're in there.

So thank you for the good feeling.

I was using a source that you seem to find believable. Thornley was saying the same thing and if I said it was him, most would say 'we would say that.'

It was common knowledge that BT were prepared to throw any money at any Pro12 Union/Team to get them to go with their new cup.

Since when do I find him believable? I don't believe anything I read in the press other than actual words quoted were actually said, although they may be taken out of context.

Apologies to you. I'll take note now that you don't rate Rees or any press, but some people seem to rate his opinion on this site.

Why would anyone want to make stuff up like that if it wasn't true? And now, BT are throwing loads of money at Scottish Rugby which supports the opinion that it was worth their while to split from their Pro12 Union colleagues. Fair play to them as well - they got a bigger bite of the cherry than the Italians as well. Lets hope they do something positive for Scottish Rugby now with all that extra cash.

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 7:04 pm

Most of Rees' article were quoted by Irish fans saying "look at the crap the PRL puppet is saying now".

Why make it up? Why indeed. Because it happens all the time in the press. You'd have to ask them (remember it might not be made up, just from dodgy sources and printed as fact). Must admit I'm kind of surprised this needs saying as you come across as clued up.

SRU got a bigger slice because the WRU, IRFU, SRU and FIR agreed, right? BT are throwing a lot of money at sport in general, not just rugby and not just SRU. The money for the champions league dwarfs all the money put into rugby.

by **Notch** Thu 15 May 2014, 7:32 pm

BT have also approached the provinces about sponsorship opportunities, and I would be supremely unsurprised if they go on to outbid other sponsors for shirt deals or even look at naming rights for Ravenhill or Thomond Park if the provinces choose to go down that road.

I'm against that for practical reasons. If every stadium is called the BT Stadium it will become very confusing.

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 7:53 pm

They're just trying to get the name out there by ramming it down people's throats. Sky is so tied up with sports it's immediately what people think of when it comes to pay sports channels (in UK anyway). It won't last that long.

Edit: Notch, it could be like travel lodge or premier inn. BT stadium Belfast, BT stadium Edinbugh, BT stadium Cardiff, BT Sports Worcester, etc. Could have a "find the nearest BT stadium" website.

by whocares Thu 15 May 2014, 8:03 pm

Sin é wrote:
whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

who would that be Sin é ? (seems I lost track a bit)

In Thornley's article in Irish Times on Tuesday (can't find a link to it now), he said that the Director General of the new organisation in Switzerland was going to be this 70 year old French bloke (can't remember his name) who is presently Deputy Director General of Clermont Auvergne.

edit: Found the link http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/here-s-hoping-pivotal-epcr-meeting-comes-up-with-some-answers-1.1792680

He also said that the Commerical Board consists of Bruce Craig (PRL), Paul McNaughton (Pro12) & another ex-Clermont Chairman (can't remember his name either). The interesting appointment will be the Independent Chairman of this committee.

I see thanks. Both former deputy director (Pineau) and former president (fontes) of clermont then. 2 retired blokes from the same club, weird although I always saw Fontes as a balanced kind of guy.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 9:17 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Most of Rees' article were quoted by Irish fans saying "look at the crap the PRL puppet is saying now".

Why make it up? Why indeed. Because it happens all the time in the press. You'd have to ask them (remember it might not be made up, just from dodgy sources and printed as fact). Must admit I'm kind of surprised this needs saying as you come across as clued up.

SRU got a bigger slice because the WRU, IRFU, SRU and FIR agreed, right? BT are throwing a lot of money at sport in general, not just rugby and not just SRU. The money for the champions league dwarfs all the money put into rugby.

Rees did spew some bile at the ERC which was rather objectionable to. However, saying that the SRU decided to change tack and support the McCaff Cup can be backed up, particularly when some SRU executives were quoted as saying they were advised to do so by their commerical directors (my spin on that would be that they were trying to deflect blame from themselves for letting doing the dirty on the other Pro12 Unions).

The Italians were unhappy about it (and you recall they delayed signing the new agreement for the cup), but the Irish and Welsh took it on the chin and in their pockets.

by Scrumpy Thu 15 May 2014, 9:56 pm

Sin é wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

Surely hats better than having it based in a country that seemed to be benefitting the most out of the HC!

Very fishy! Whistle

by Dubbelyew L Overate Thu 15 May 2014, 10:41 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:Most of Rees' article were quoted by Irish fans saying "look at the crap the PRL puppet is saying now".

Why make it up? Why indeed. Because it happens all the time in the press. You'd have to ask them (remember it might not be made up, just from dodgy sources and printed as fact). Must admit I'm kind of surprised this needs saying as you come across as clued up.

SRU got a bigger slice because the WRU, IRFU, SRU and FIR agreed, right? BT are throwing a lot of money at sport in general, not just rugby and not just SRU. The money for the champions league dwarfs all the money put into rugby.

Rees did spew some bile at the ERC which was rather objectionable to. However, saying that the SRU decided to change tack and support the McCaff Cup can be backed up, particularly when some SRU executives were quoted as saying they were advised to do so by their commerical directors (my spin on that would be that they were trying to deflect blame from themselves for letting doing the dirty on the other Pro12 Unions).

The Italians were unhappy about it (and you recall they delayed signing the new agreement for the cup), but the Irish and Welsh took it on the chin and in their pockets.

Isn't the idea of Pro12 solidarity a bit of a myth? SRU quite early on were showing signs of pragmatism. WRU and RRW were always more concerned with their civil war. FIR turned out to be most concerned about the bounty that their Pro12 "partners" required of them.

The mystery is why so many temporarily signed up to Camou's Cup. Could it be the bullying tactics of the IRFU so effectively demomstrated in previous negotiations by Syd Millar?

by HammerofThunor Thu 15 May 2014, 11:05 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:Most of Rees' article were quoted by Irish fans saying "look at the crap the PRL puppet is saying now".

Why make it up? Why indeed. Because it happens all the time in the press. You'd have to ask them (remember it might not be made up, just from dodgy sources and printed as fact). Must admit I'm kind of surprised this needs saying as you come across as clued up.

SRU got a bigger slice because the WRU, IRFU, SRU and FIR agreed, right? BT are throwing a lot of money at sport in general, not just rugby and not just SRU. The money for the champions league dwarfs all the money put into rugby.

Rees did spew some bile at the ERC which was rather objectionable to. However, saying that the SRU decided to change tack and support the McCaff Cup can be backed up, particularly when some SRU executives were quoted as saying they were advised to do so by their commerical directors (my spin on that would be that they were trying to deflect blame from themselves for letting doing the dirty on the other Pro12 Unions).

The Italians were unhappy about it (and you recall they delayed signing the new agreement for the cup), but the Irish and Welsh took it on the chin and in their pockets.

Were SRU guys quoted as saying that? Rees (him again) made the point their board includes these guys but no quotes from them. Perhaps it was Thornley?

Edit: wasn't the Italian delay down to them sorting out the pro12 stuff? Or is that Rees stuff that should be ignored.

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 11:52 pm

Scrumpy wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:I think the money men in Rugby are a different bread compared to the football money men, lets not forget Bruce played rugby for Racing Metro.

You can't compare these guys with the likes of Mr Tan.

Why are they advocating that rugby ape football then? They are trying to copy the champions league with the ERC cup (even to moving the organisation to switzerland where no one has a clue about rugby not to mention their dodgy financial set-up).

Now it seems they are appointing their very own Sepp Blatter (a 70 year old French man to run the organisation).

Surely hats better than having it based in a country that seemed to be benefitting the most out of the HC!

Very fishy!

How? You do realise that 9 of Munster's 11 semi finals were away! Two finals in Dublin in 20 years! Yea right. Then the Sporting Tax exemption which will not be available from Switzerland which was worth approx. 3m every year to the ERC partners (and why all rugby business is based in Ireland). Far more likely that the reason is that there were no Directors fees available from the ERC (a condition to get the sporting tax exemption - the directors cannot benefit from the company).

by Sin é Thu 15 May 2014, 11:54 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:Most of Rees' article were quoted by Irish fans saying "look at the crap the PRL puppet is saying now".

Why make it up? Why indeed. Because it happens all the time in the press. You'd have to ask them (remember it might not be made up, just from dodgy sources and printed as fact). Must admit I'm kind of surprised this needs saying as you come across as clued up.

SRU got a bigger slice because the WRU, IRFU, SRU and FIR agreed, right? BT are throwing a lot of money at sport in general, not just rugby and not just SRU. The money for the champions league dwarfs all the money put into rugby.

Rees did spew some bile at the ERC which was rather objectionable to. However, saying that the SRU decided to change tack and support the McCaff Cup can be backed up, particularly when some SRU executives were quoted as saying they were advised to do so by their commerical directors (my spin on that would be that they were trying to deflect blame from themselves for letting doing the dirty on the other Pro12 Unions).

The Italians were unhappy about it (and you recall they delayed signing the new agreement for the cup), but the Irish and Welsh took it on the chin and in their pockets.

Were SRU guys quoted as saying that? Rees (him again) made the point their board includes these guys but no quotes from them. Perhaps it was Thornley?

Edit: wasn't the Italian delay down to them sorting out the pro12 stuff? Or is that Rees stuff that should be ignored.

That was PRO12 stuff - dividing up the money from the ERC Cup. The Italians were unhappy about not getting the same amount as Scotland who had the same number of teams.

From the Irish Times:

With “a guaranteed minimum distribution for the clubs from the Pro12 in years 1-5”, hence the Welsh and Scottish Unions will also receive €5.1 million, with the Italians receiving €4.7 million. The Italian Federation had been last to sign the heads of agreement until a meeting of the Pro12 today and an ensuing meeting between all the stakeholders in the new Champions Cup (the same as the stakeholders in the ERC), namely representatives of the respective six nations along with Ligue Nationale De Rugby (LNR), Premiership Rugby Ltd (PRL) and Regional Rugby Wales Ltd (RRW).

They relented

The Italians had wanted either an equal split of €5 million apiece with the celts, or for them and the Scottish to each receive €4.9 million, but in the end they relented after a meeting of the Pro12 in the morning. The meeting between the stakeholders commenced at 2pm today in London and continued until after 6pm, with the announcement confirming the new competition coming at 6.30pm, thereby ending a protracted and often bitter dispute which has raged since the LNR and PRL signalled their intent to leave the Heineken Cup on June 1st 2012.

by HammerofThunor Fri 16 May 2014, 7:43 am

Sin é wrote:How? You do realise that 9 of Munster's 11 semi finals were away! Two finals in Dublin in 20 years! Yea right. Then the Sporting Tax exemption which will not be available from Switzerland which was worth approx. 3m every year to the ERC partners (and why all rugby business is based in Ireland). Far more likely that the reason is that there were no Directors fees available from the ERC (a condition to get the sporting tax exemption - the directors cannot benefit from the company).

So working for a company that get's millions from said company doesn't count? Only direct payments? That's a nice loophole.

by Sponsored content