European rugby, the interest just isn't there

First topic message reminder :

I know I will get a bashing off some quarters on here, but sorry it has to be said, looking at the crowds for the two semi-finals on the weekend, it would seem the interest is not there. The aggregate figure for the two games was a paltry 38,968 people, there was more people than that for the Cardiff Blues V Leicester semi final a few years ago 44,212 turned up that day.

This proves that the greedy club owners have ruined a once prestigious competition, admired by thousands and getting better year on year. Where are all these new massive sponsorship deals ? Where is all this money we are supposed to be swimming in ? 

All I saw on the weekend was empty seats, the future of the European club competition for me looks bleak, dwindling crowds, the same teams ALL the time in the knockout stages, lack of interest, the French already consider their own league a priority, for me something drastic needs to be done as it would seem the writing is on the wall for one of our favourite club competitions, it's sad, as it's been well and truly ruined by the greedy club owners.

Take a read of some of these, you might find them interesting:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/04/25/empty-seats-as-saracens-and-racing-92-won-through-must-be-a-wake/
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/much-better-europe-champions-cup-11238143

quinsforever wrote:No excuses any more. It's an even playing field. Will be even more even (and help pro12 on average a little bit)  if you do decide to not give an Italian champs league spot. But that's completely up to pro12.

I am sad that the Irish fans aren't as engaged but have no doubt they will be back once their teams and coaches transition.

I think its tarnished forever with Irish fans anyway. In that piece in the Irish Times, the ad guy asks what does the league stand for? To me it represents anti-sport - all that is bad about it - greed, full of spivs and chancers.

Craig and McCafferty are keeping a very low profile now.

quinsforever wrote:No excuses any more. It's an even playing field. Will be even more even (and help pro12 on average a little bit)  if you do decide to not give an Italian champs league spot. But that's completely up to pro12.

I am sad that the Irish fans aren't as engaged but have no doubt they will be back once their teams and coaches transition.

There can never be a proper debate on the new European cup because apparently you only dislike it because your team isn't doing well. . That argument really doesn't stack up when you see the lack of fans turn up for the semi's and the last two finals.

I was at the last two finals. They were great. Maybe if the provinces fans hadn't scooped up all the tix then failed to resell them once it was an all french final, it might have been filled to the rafters...but hey ho. Money in the bank for ERC even if some seats weren't occupied

Epcr rather...lol

quinsforever wrote:I was at the last two finals. They were great. Maybe if the provinces fans hadn't scooped up all the tix then failed to resell them once it was an all french final, it might have been filled to the rafters...but hey ho. Money in the bank for ERC even if some seats weren't occupied

You really are living on a different planet if you think there are many provincial fans still buying final tickets for this comp. I don't think you understand the animosity that exists towards the comp over here. Did you manage to get one of those free tickets for the last final?

Irish fans must be really torn based on the posts on this site.
They somehow want to competition to fail but know full well that their own Unions business model can't afford for this to happen as their own league, despite all the current test players employed within the league does not generate enough interest and commercial return.

Leinster will come back, as they are currently the virtual the Irish test side/squad, Glasgow probably too. That they were surprisingly poor this season has to be the result of the RWC fatigue. It is the Pro12's greatest strength and greatest weakness with Union nominated elite sides.

However if the Pro12 management can start to address the perception that the league is the basis for the players - Euro comps and test recognition are a subsequent target and not the other way round- then they will be doing a good job.

As to the changes in euro comps for sides purporting to be clubs, the loss of guaranteed participation and greater financial return has gone. Fans should look forward not back, just like their teams have.

Recwatcher16 wrote:Irish fans must be really torn based on the posts on this site.
They somehow want to competition to fail but know full well that their own Unions business model can't afford for this to happen as their own league, despite all the current test players employed within the league does not generate enough interest and commercial return.

Leinster will come back, as they are currently the virtual the Irish test side/squad, Glasgow probably too. That they were surprisingly poor this season has to be the result of the RWC fatigue. It is the Pro12's greatest strength and greatest weakness with Union nominated elite sides.

However if the Pro12 management can start to address the perception that the league is the basis for the players - Euro comps and test recognition are a subsequent target and not the other way round- then they will be doing a good job.

As to the changes in euro comps for sides purporting to be clubs, the loss of guaranteed participation and greater financial return has gone. Fans should look forward not back, just like their teams have.

I'd say it's the exact opposite; I think everyone wants the hype back that was surrounding the comp back in the HC days. First things first is to get it back on SKY alone. Nobody promotes a sporting event like SKY.

Recwatcher16 wrote:Irish fans must be really torn based on the posts on this site.
They somehow want to competition to fail but know full well that their own Unions business model can't afford for this to happen as their own league, despite all the current test players employed within the league does not generate enough interest and commercial return.

Leinster will come back, as they are currently the virtual the Irish test side/squad, Glasgow probably too. That they were surprisingly poor this season has to be the result of the RWC fatigue. It is the Pro12's greatest strength and greatest weakness with Union nominated elite sides.

However if the Pro12 management can start to address the perception that the league is the basis for the players - Euro comps and test recognition are a subsequent target and not the other way round- then they will be doing a good job.

As to the changes in euro comps for sides purporting to be clubs, the loss of guaranteed participation and greater financial return has gone. Fans should look forward not back, just like their teams have.

I can only speak for myself; I have zero respect for the likes of Craig, McCafferty and Wray, but I absolutely want the competition to succeed. Not out of necessity (I believe the Provinces would be ok, post EPCR), but the fact that the HC was a fantastic competition, and I would like it to continue, in some form.

The HC needed shaking up. Big time. But those shakeups aren't why no pro 12 have been in contention.

Blame the changes all you like, but the reality is the finances for pro12 teams are no worse.

And AP and top14 teams get most of their revenue from domestic arrangements.

So why the animosity? Seriously.

Has having to compete in the pro12 drained resources for the euro comp that much? Is that it?

quinsforever wrote:The HC needed shaking up. Big time. But those shakeups aren't why no pro 12 have been in contention.

Blame the changes all you like, but the reality is the finances for pro12 teams are no worse.

And AP and top14 teams get most of their revenue from domestic arrangements.

So why the animosity? Seriously.

who is this even directed at? Who is blaming the new format for the poor performances from the pro 12 teams this year?

SecretFly wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Fans couldn't handle the removal of the disadvantages. As is clear from them leaving 606.

The results however have been due to some teams being better while others aren't as good as they were.

Of course it's impossible to know what the impact of the changes was. But the gulf between the pro12 teams this season and the rest suggests that there still would have been no pro12 teams in the semis. That's just part if the ebb and flow.

Yes...when things ebbed our way...the PRL recalibrated the rules to flow them back their way

It's nature.  It's the cycle of the planet.  It's the gravity of the moon....

But you're right, I do honestly believe the tide will ebb back a bit our way (Provinces, that is) in a year or two when we readjust to the new dimensions, given Pro12 was the only League that had to adapt to new dimensions - - not necessarily wins but more competitive.
So I believe we'll be back.  But I dread (actually quite look forward to   ) hearing what the new excuses will be that can't include 'not trying in Pro12', 'cotton wool cocooned best players', 'foreign mercenaries' etc etc....

Quins thanks for acknowledging that the poor performance of the PRO12 sides may have been influenced by the changes in the competition, even though I accept you think it is cyclical.

SF I cannot share your optimism. If the Irish teams were successful because of key players like BOD and POC, then they cannot expect to be successful again in this lifetime - as they were once in a lifetime players. The AP and T14 don't lose as many players per team to Test rugby, because there are more teams with more ineligible players and many of them have far better squad depth. The changes have made it harder to compete in Europe but also the new competition offers no seeding reward as an incentive for teams out of the competition early so the pragmatic approach for the provinces would be to focus on the League, where they are at least likely to be competitive. The PRO12 is now much harder and it is far easier to empathise with those French sides who see Europe as a distraction and need to focus limited resources on the League.

The irony of the changes is that they have widened the gap between the top teams and the bottom qualifiers (with fewer teams), hence why I think the competition is far less competitive and therefore less interesting. If Ireland are to have a province in the later stages of the ERCC with a chance of winning the thing then the IRFU will have to engineer more of the best players to be at one province (at the expense of the others). Maybe that is really what Nucifora and Schmidt are trying to do already and that is truly something to dread.

Two words.

Pool three.

That never happened with the old HC format.

Still think the new format lacks competition?

I meant pool two

Can understand if u missed it aukster as there were no Irish teams in it.

Most exciting last POOL round of a euro comp EVER

Whilst there are a few optimists around who think the Champions cup is better than the H Cup and is doing the business, you have to question whether that enthusiasm is shared by fans from all of the participating countries.

My sense is not that t's not just the PRO 12 fans have become disenchanted, but that there is a general malaise overall around the cup.   

And I think that is largely due to the growing success and engagement with the three leagues.  People are more interested with what's happening domestically with their teams, than with how they're faring on the European stage - and that's showing up in the falling attendances.

You also have to question how much proportionally the competition is providing financially to the participating clubs?   As I understand it, the PRO 12 receives one-third set at €20m minimum (or is that in pounds?).     And no one has been shouting that this has increased substantially, so I assume it hasn't.

The most recent IRFU annual accounts note that income from PRO 12 and European competitions has decreased. "The decrease year on year of €0.6m is largely attributable to the presence of a significant amount of prize-money in 2013/14 which is significantly reduced in 2014/15 due to changes in the competition distribution model and to team performances."

 The total is about €9.71m for both.   So assuming the IRFU gets 25% of the €20m monies (based on having four teams in PRO 12), that means it gets €5m for Euro comp and €4.7m for PRO 12.  Set against overall income of €74m plus and near parity with PRO12 income, the Euro income is not massive. The IRFU made a better than normal surplus last year and it was reported that the four provinces and clubs would get increased funding to the tune of €4.4m as a result - all of it derived from test level success, not provincial success. The four provinces between them received about €24m from the union - after deductions for national team management costs, plus fees and playing bonuses for the national squad.

All in all, it would seem that continued promotion and development of the PRO12 as a league with potential to attract in further investment/sponsorship/broadcast monies is at least as attractive, if not more financially attractive, to both the IRFU and to the provinces. The Champions Cup does not look likely to deliver the massive increase in income that was talked about at the time of change, and if the way forward - in England and France particularly - is to invest more, and place greater value on leagues, the European Cup may become less and less important in the greater scheme of things - from an Irish point of view anyway.

Good. The league should be the bread and butter always.

Interesting points hale.

I thought the IRFU champs cup money was more like 9mil. It's written about in one of the IRFU letters in the accounts iirc.

Also, ticket sales for the three home pool games are an additional good source of income for the province...500k-1m per game presumably depending on the ground and avg prices?

Domestic leagues should be the bread and butter. And the champs cup should be the ice cream.

As a Scotsman and a Glasgow supporter (living in London) - I think i can add a little opinion in without it being see as just because our team is not getting to the latter stages - as we never do - so that has not changed

I certainly feel the magic has gone from the Cup

The HC was almost as exciting as the 6 nations (almost) - even when no Scottish team got through

There is something missing and something that needs to be changed.

Maybe is it not being promoted enough
Maybe it is on too (two) many channels
Maybe there is a hangover from the perceived 'blackmail' to change the competition (Perception is reality in people minds - so even if there wasn't, the feeling needs to be addressed)
Maybe it is the perceived 'cheating' of ignoring (or not having) the rules about salary caps (See perception about)
Maybe it is not having a strong sponsor that we can easily say in the pub - HC
Maybe it is a stupid name that does not inspire anything
Maybe the World Cup has drained our need for rugby this year


I want it to be great - I want it to be something I talk about at work (Even if Glasgow are out again) with excitement - but at the moment that is not happening (No-one mentioned the Semi finals in my office (I work in London, with massive rugby fans)), there is no feeling of magic about it

people who bury their heads in the sand and throw mud at each other leagues are just missing the point#

There IS an issue with this cup - and without some form of focus and change, it will not inspire

maybe next year it will be better - but to assume without trying to help it - is a dangerous precedent

It's a hard slog back now. It takes your last point to get close to any actual rugby point, and even that is more about saturation rather than this comp. Working through:

Maybe is it not being promoted enough - possible but would surely affect casual fans more than anyone actually following closely.
Maybe it is on too (two) many channels - yup, some poeple will miss games if they don't have both channels here. Affected me growing up witht eh Champs league (good ol' Jim Rosenthal).
Maybe there is a hangover from the perceived 'blackmail' to change the competition (Perception is reality in people minds - so even if there wasn't, the feeling needs to be addressed) - fair enough but it was skewed to the Pro 12, they had to do something.
Maybe it is the perceived 'cheating' of ignoring (or not having) the rules about salary caps (See perception about) - doesn't really affect Europe bar increasing the quality assume you're talking Bath and Saracens
Maybe it is not having a strong sponsor that we can easily say in the pub - HC - Scraping the barrell though it does kill me the Coca Cola Cup is no more in footy.
Maybe it is a stupid name that does not inspire anything - Scraping barrell
Maybe the World Cup has drained our need for rugby this year - yup.

Riskysports wrote:As a Scotsman and a Glasgow supporter (living in London) - I think i can add a little opinion in without it being see as just because our team is not getting to the latter stages - as we never do - so that has not changed

I certainly feel the magic has gone from the Cup

The HC was almost as exciting as the 6 nations (almost) - even when no Scottish team got through

There is something missing and something that needs to be changed.

Maybe is it not being promoted enough
Maybe it is on too (two) many channels
Maybe there is a hangover from the perceived 'blackmail' to change the competition (Perception is reality in people minds - so even if there wasn't, the feeling needs to be addressed)
Maybe it is the perceived 'cheating' of ignoring (or not having) the rules about salary caps (See perception about)
Maybe it is not having a strong sponsor that we can easily say in the pub - HC
Maybe it is a stupid name that does not inspire anything
Maybe the World Cup has drained our need for rugby this year


I want it to be great - I want it to be something I talk about at work (Even if Glasgow are out again) with excitement - but at the moment that is not happening (No-one mentioned the Semi finals in my office (I work in London, with massive rugby fans)), there is no feeling of magic about it

people who bury their heads in the sand and throw mud at each other leagues are just missing the point

There IS an issue with this cup - and without some form of focus and change, it will not inspire

maybe next year it will be better - but to assume without trying to help it - is a dangerous precedent

Whilst you make good points, the bit in bold is coming from just one direction. Not a Welsh, Irish or Scottish direction, and certainly not an Italian or French one - and it's very sad. Nobody is begrudging English teams, they've done very well this year. Saracens, Wasps, Exeter, Tigers, Saints, and yes, Harlequins are among the best in Europe. Questioning the league on the back of some disparity and poor crowds does not make the Irish jealous or bitter.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
Maybe there is a hangover from the perceived 'blackmail' to change the competition (Perception is reality in people minds - so even if there wasn't, the feeling needs to be addressed) - fair enough but it was skewed to the Pro 12, they had to do something.
Maybe it is not having a strong sponsor that we can easily say in the pub - HC - Scraping the barrell though it does kill me the Coca Cola Cup is no more in footy.
Maybe it is a stupid name that does not inspire anything - Scraping barrell

The HC was not skewed towards the Pro12 considering the Italians never made it out of the groups and the Welsh and Scottish doing so was seen as an achievement, Ulster only started doing it regularly from 2010/11 and made it past the QFs once

Its not scrapping the barrel to say a strong sponsor is needed, having a main sponsor is huge for an event is a big thing. They help promote it, plan events around it, campaigns etc, the Pro 12 were helped by Rabos efforts as their main sponsor

The name also affects the marketing and perception, the name is not engrained in the psyche. You just have to look at different news outlets using different variations, if there was a core name that people could get behind and the organisers marketed it, it would. It may sound silly but its an important element of the marketing mix

Was skewed marty. Don't think anyone can seriosuly deny that, the explanation is normally that per nation it was skewed to English and french teams.

The rest, yes well, I've never been bothered by the names. Fair enough if some need the Heineken Cup rather than the European Cup.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Was skewed marty. Don't think anyone can seriosuly deny that, the explanation is normally that per nation it was skewed to English and french teams.

So it isn't skewed towards the pro12, like you said? The pro12 contains teams from 4 nations - that they should have the most teams in a European league for me is a no brainer. I think the only change that I personally would make is guarantee entry for 8 Pro12 teams, drop the one team per nation malarkey. The Italians have gone backwards and will take years to recover, but they can win games in the ECC (or whatever it's called now, I don't even know). Whilst on the subject of that, allow the winner of the ECC to gain entry into the RCC. It's unlikely a team outside the top 6/8 of their league would win it, but stranger things have happened. I think it would also entice some of the lower Franglo teams to take it more seriously.

If the current Pro12 teams sitting in the top 8 had been in the RCC this year I still don't think they would have made the KO stages, the English teams were too good. I expect a stronger showing next year from teams like Ulster and Leinster though, and would love to see Connacht go up another notch.

Where did I say it is skewed mikey? Was talking about before the forced through changes. We're moving beyond the image that this should be a 6 Nations tournament; it's very much a Club cup.

The winners of the 2nd comp is an interesting one, the argument is that it can create more interest but it also reinforces the view that the comp itself is worthless.

I very much see a resurgance of the teams from the Pro 12 next season and expect that the cup will be seen to be regaining it's former prominance.

The Challenge Cup winner qualifies for the top-tier comp next season, then it reverts back to play-offs.

From Wikipedia

To facilitate Rugby World Cup 2015, there will be no play-offs for the 2016–17 Champions Cup with the 20th place going to the winner of the 2016 Challenge Cup if not already qualified.

For the 2017–18 season and beyond, the play-off format will include four clubs with a second PRO12 club competing. If not already qualified, the winner of the Challenge Cup will take the place in the play-offs of the 7th-ranked club in the Aviva Premiership and Top 14, and will also take the place of the second Pro12 club if applicable

No 7&1/2 wrote:Was skewed marty. Don't think anyone can seriosuly deny that, the explanation is normally that per nation it was skewed to English and french teams.

The rest, yes well, I've never been bothered by the names. Fair enough if some need the Heineken Cup rather than the European Cup.

Skewed how? In terms of qualification? They weren't qualifying as members of the Pro 12 they were qualifying as Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams.

And if they qualification was imbalanced from a league perspective the competition itself wasn't as results show. Going by your argument its now skewed towards the French and English as they have more money to spend so can have bigger squads on two fronts

Its also not just the European Cup, its the Champions Cup, European Rugby Champions Cup, ERCC and god knows what else. Do you know many other brands that go by more than one name?

Cyril wrote:The Challenge Cup winner qualifies for the top-tier comp next season, then it reverts back to play-offs.

From Wikipedia

To facilitate Rugby World Cup 2015, there will be no play-offs for the 2016–17 Champions Cup with the 20th place going to the winner of the 2016 Challenge Cup if not already qualified.

For the 2017–18 season and beyond, the play-off format will include four clubs with a second PRO12 club competing. If not already qualified, the winner of the Challenge Cup will take the place in the play-offs of the 7th-ranked club in the Aviva Premiership and Top 14, and will also take the place of the second Pro12 club if applicable

Don't see the point of all that, make them play and win a big match then make them play two more games before they can get into the RCC?

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Was skewed marty. Don't think anyone can seriosuly deny that, the explanation is normally that per nation it was skewed to English and french teams.

The rest, yes well, I've never been bothered by the names. Fair enough if some need the Heineken Cup rather than the European Cup.

Skewed how? In terms of qualification? They weren't qualifying as members of the Pro 12 they were qualifying as Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams.

And if they qualification was imbalanced from a league perspective the competition itself wasn't as results show. Going by your argument its now skewed towards the French and English as they have more money to spend so can have bigger squads on two fronts

Exactly, 3 leagues, skewed to 1. Could never go on as it was. As for the final point, not the French or English's problem. The only thing you can do is make the combined comp fair.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Was skewed marty. Don't think anyone can seriosuly deny that, the explanation is normally that per nation it was skewed to English and french teams.

The rest, yes well, I've never been bothered by the names. Fair enough if some need the Heineken Cup rather than the European Cup.

Skewed how? In terms of qualification? They weren't qualifying as members of the Pro 12 they were qualifying as Irish, Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams.

And if they qualification was imbalanced from a league perspective the competition itself wasn't as results show. Going by your argument its now skewed towards the French and English as they have more money to spend so can have bigger squads on two fronts

Exactly, 3 leagues, skewed to 1. Could never go on as it was. As for the final point, not the French or English's problem. The only thing you can do is make the combined comp fair.

The other issues weren't the Pro12s problem but the Franglo alliance decided to make it theirs

The new system is just a watered down version of went before, when they are happy that the 4th placed team from the French and English second tiers could qualify for the Challenge Cup meritocracy isn't a big thing for them

marty2086 wrote:

Cyril wrote:The Challenge Cup winner qualifies for the top-tier comp next season, then it reverts back to play-offs.

From Wikipedia

To facilitate Rugby World Cup 2015, there will be no play-offs for the 2016–17 Champions Cup with the 20th place going to the winner of the 2016 Challenge Cup if not already qualified.

For the 2017–18 season and beyond, the play-off format will include four clubs with a second PRO12 club competing. If not already qualified, the winner of the Challenge Cup will take the place in the play-offs of the 7th-ranked club in the Aviva Premiership and Top 14, and will also take the place of the second Pro12 club if applicable

Don't see the point of all that, make them play and win a big match then make them play two more games before they can get into the RCC?

I'd have to agree with that. You either qualify as a winner of the 2nd-tier comp or it's taken from league placings (however you decide that). Not a big fan of play-offs in general.

Other issues such as who makes up the Euro comp do impact directly. I hate drop downs, trying to mirror the Champions League.

Talking about sponsors, I was watching the football last night, and what adverts did I see ? Heineken, they were plastered all over it. It made me quite sad to see this, as a good sponsor does not just plough money into the event, a good sponsor will use that event to sell it's own product, thus putting the event in the main stream, and getting people seeing it more.

Heineken used to have rugby adverts, they do not anymore, they are having football one's. I used to walk into ASDA, Tesco, Sainsbury and I would see Heineken advertisements with the rugby smattered all over it. They would use the HC weekends as a tool to sell their product. It was in our face.

SKY Sports used to advertise the rugby as some sort of Armageddon weekend. Where you should put everything else on hold and stay in and watch it. 

Like many others, as a Welshman I did not have any teams in the knockouts most times, but I still made a concerted effort to get the beers in, or go to the club and watch the games. Myself, my brother and my father would on most occasions all congregate at one house and make a day of it. Not now though, I will watch it on my own in the house, the pzazz is gone.

It has nothing to do with the Pro12 or the Aviva, or the french league, it has everything to do with the organisers, they are not doing enough, they have fallen short of their promises from the outset and they are resting on the laurels that is the BT money. For me they are killing the competition, slowly and painfully. I fear for the time the next round of negotiations come, as I very much doubt they will get the same money from BT as they have this time around, as the product will have been broken.

Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

How are the fans to care about it when they don't know about it? Can you tell me what channel the final will be on without looking it up? Did you know what channels each QF and SF game would be on?

Do you know what date the final is?

The marketing of it all points us towards it and makes it easier to be a part of it, if you don't understanding the importance of marketing then this is all just over your head

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

It's not just a beer company though is it ? It is a sponsor that put's the event in the main stream. The CC does not have these big sponsors that we were promised, in fact the CC is trundling along almost unnoticed outside of the rugby circles, this never used to be the case. I bet half the people in Leicester did not even know their rugby team was in a semi final, due to the football team doing so well, there is nothing on tele to advertise it.

But it's easy to be sarcastic when a decent opinion is given to you I suppose.

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

How are the fans to care about it when they don't know about it? Can you tell me what channel the final will be on without looking it up? Did you know what channels each QF and SF game would be on?

Do you know what date the final is?

The marketing of it all points us towards it and makes it easier to be a part of it, if you don't understanding the importance of marketing then this is all just over your head

I assume the final will be on both. I don't care though as I am capable of looking it up. Honestly if those are reasons why people don't like the 'new' comp deary me.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

It's not just a beer company though is it ? It is a sponsor that put's the event in the main stream. The CC does not have these big sponsors that we were promised, in fact the CC is trundling along almost unnoticed outside of the rugby circles, this never used to be the case. I bet half the people in Leicester did not even know their rugby team was in a semi final, due to the football team doing so well, there is nothing on tele to advertise it.

But it's easy to be sarcastic when a decent opinion is given to you I suppose.

Like I said, if it's about who sponsors the event, the event is dead. Just enjoy the rugby.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

How are the fans to care about it when they don't know about it? Can you tell me what channel the final will be on without looking it up? Did you know what channels each QF and SF game would be on?

Do you know what date the final is?

The marketing of it all points us towards it and makes it easier to be a part of it, if you don't understanding the importance of marketing then this is all just over your head

I assume the final will be on both. I don't care though as I am capable of looking it up. Honestly if those are reasons why people don't like the 'new' comp deary me.

Well considering the games are split between two subscription broadcasters it all matters, not everyone has or can afford the two services

As for the rest, as I said it all seems over your head

Who has said they do not like it ? We are all still watching it. What we are saying is, that the competition is fading as the fans are not turning out to make it a big event. Which you cannot deny. This is due to the people who are running the show. Surely you can see this ?

It's not over my head, I just don't place the importance on it you do. We're really talking here about people who are rugby fans not casual.

I haven't dug into all the attendances to be honest LD. I've seen the semis and commented previously a big Irish team making the semi would help. Saracens aren't going to contribute much unless it's the family fun day at Twickenham with massively cheap tickets and the Leicester game for a number of reasons was low, looking at it from the outside probably due to Leicester City.

Getting the balance right. There would be a lot more people (like me) who would watch more games if they were on the BBC (or even ITV). But if they can raise more money through BT/Sky then financially the game stays healthy

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

It's not just a beer company though is it ? It is a sponsor that put's the event in the main stream. The CC does not have these big sponsors that we were promised, in fact the CC is trundling along almost unnoticed outside of the rugby circles, this never used to be the case. I bet half the people in Leicester did not even know their rugby team was in a semi final, due to the football team doing so well, there is nothing on tele to advertise it.

But it's easy to be sarcastic when a decent opinion is given to you I suppose.

Like I said, if it's about who sponsors the event, the event is dead. Just enjoy the rugby.

I think you are being a little naive

There is a reason that companies spend millions and millions on their brand - as it is hugely important in attracting and maintaining customers

Apple is one of the biggest brands around, has a huge customer base, but still spend millions on branding - same for Coke, BA etc

Not advertising / branding has a massive impact on sales, perception and customers

And what about the people who didn't have sky but have BT? Could say splitting coverage is actually better overall.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's not over my head, I just don't place the importance on it you do. We're really talking here about people who are rugby fans not casual.

I haven't dug into all the attendances to be honest LD. I've seen the semis and commented previously a big Irish team making the semi would help. Saracens aren't going to contribute much unless it's the family fun day at Twickenham with massively cheap tickets and the Leicester game for a number of reasons was low, looking at it from the outside probably due to Leicester City.

Its not just me who places importance on it, why do you think the leagues all have sponsors etc? The reasons we are stating are why, they are needed to build brands, grow audiences and raise awareness and generate attention towards the competitions and events

No 7&1/2 wrote:And what about the people who didn't have sky but have BT? Could say splitting coverage is actually better overall.

Have you seen how many watch BT? Even the most popular sports competition in Europe can't draw the audiences to it

Riskysports wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

It's not just a beer company though is it ? It is a sponsor that put's the event in the main stream. The CC does not have these big sponsors that we were promised, in fact the CC is trundling along almost unnoticed outside of the rugby circles, this never used to be the case. I bet half the people in Leicester did not even know their rugby team was in a semi final, due to the football team doing so well, there is nothing on tele to advertise it.

But it's easy to be sarcastic when a decent opinion is given to you I suppose.

Like I said, if it's about who sponsors the event, the event is dead. Just enjoy the rugby.

I think you are being a little naive

There is a reason that companies spend millions and millions on their brand - as it is hugely important in attracting and maintaining customers

Apple is one of the biggest brands around, has a huge customer base, but still spend millions on branding - same for Coke, BA etc

Not advertising / branding has a massive impact on sales, perception and customers

As a fan of rugby I don't overly care about the sponsors so perhaps I am being naive but that argument is about money.

Was the product over-priced?  As Lord says - the money is so good from BT that there is no urgent hunger to push the 'sell, sell, sell' button on the marketing side.  The money is virtually made before the competition ends.... or starts

Anyway, let's be honest.  The controlling mechanism for this contest is the stock-market, of all places.  That's the field where the real game is being played between the 'connections' owning/attached to many of the top clubs in Europe and those companies that rove around rugby that want a piece of the action.

Like I said back in the European debate, I'd like to see where stocks were being bought and sold in the lead up to the revolution, and who was buying and selling them
.... put money on your chosen horse and then produce the demand that no other horse can run in the race?....  

- a demand for 'exclusivity' for one company over all others even before a bidding competition could be produced?

- the offer was good enough from day one even before it was known what other offers might be?

A possible scenario?

- I'm not much into the rules and regulations of business and/or the stock market.... but I think I've heard that similar kinds of activities would be regarded as illegal??

But legal or otherwise, that's where this new rugby game is being played - FT index.  I wish I had a player in that game but the IRFU won't give enough to buy one.

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's not over my head, I just don't place the importance on it you do. We're really talking here about people who are rugby fans not casual.

I haven't dug into all the attendances to be honest LD. I've seen the semis and commented previously a big Irish team making the semi would help. Saracens aren't going to contribute much unless it's the family fun day at Twickenham with massively cheap tickets and the Leicester game for a number of reasons was low, looking at it from the outside probably due to Leicester City.

Its not just me who places importance on it, why do you think the leagues all have sponsors etc? The reasons we are stating are why, they are needed to build brands, grow audiences and raise awareness and generate attention towards the competitions and events

That's about biulding the brand rather than about maintaining interest though.

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:And what about the people who didn't have sky but have BT? Could say splitting coverage is actually better overall.

Have you seen how many watch BT? Even the most popular sports competition in Europe can't draw the audiences to it

So you still have the core audience of sky members and the additional (pitiful) audience of BT. Extra it still is.

Riskysports wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh well. If it dies it'll be because fans don't care about Euro rugby, not because of a beer company.

It's not just a beer company though is it ? It is a sponsor that put's the event in the main stream. The CC does not have these big sponsors that we were promised, in fact the CC is trundling along almost unnoticed outside of the rugby circles, this never used to be the case. I bet half the people in Leicester did not even know their rugby team was in a semi final, due to the football team doing so well, there is nothing on tele to advertise it.

But it's easy to be sarcastic when a decent opinion is given to you I suppose.

Like I said, if it's about who sponsors the event, the event is dead. Just enjoy the rugby.

I think you are being a little naive

There is a reason that companies spend millions and millions on their brand - as it is hugely important in attracting and maintaining customers

Apple is one of the biggest brands around, has a huge customer base, but still spend millions on branding - same for Coke, BA etc

Not advertising / branding has a massive impact on sales, perception and customers

Exactly, look what the likes of Samsung have done for Chelsea FC. Look what the likes of Standard Chartered, Chevrolet have done for the teams they sponsor. Looks at what companies like Pirelli tyres and Amstel have done for the Champions League. Every time they advertise, they use the product they sponsor as a tool to advertise their own products thus putting them in the public eye. The Rugby Champions Cup does not have this, I bet if you asked somebody what the RCC was they would look at you stupid, but if you asked them what the HC was they would give you an answer.