ProRugbyWales not wanted in the PrO12.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37216786

"The difference comes in the very wealthy backers over-funding," Anayi added.

"We don't really want a model that copies [the English and French], because we want to be here in 10 or 20 years time.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending."


So that means that he doesn't want the four Welsh teams in the PrO12. Let's hope that this is good news for all parties.

That isn't what Anayi is saying at all.

You're missing the context. Deliberate?


"The difference comes in the very wealthy backers over-funding," Anayi added.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending.

"We don't see that as the be all and end all of rugby generally. The market forces do not allow for the kind of spend they are spending.

"No matter how much money comes into those clubs they will spend it on higher wages. We don't think that is the right model."

Now, try again....

WTF?

We have the 'wealthy benefactor' model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

PhilBB wrote:We have the 'wealthy benefactor' plus money from the Union model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

FTFY !

Irish Londoner wrote:

PhilBB wrote:We have the 'wealthy benefactor' plus money from the Union model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

FTFY !

No, read the whole thing in context. Try finding out what exactly he is getting at.

It's all there, Phil. In black and white, although 'black and white' is probably your enemy.

Munchkin wrote:
No, read the whole thing in context. Try finding out what exactly he is getting at....

The context is quite clear. The model is what he disagrees with and he spouted complete nonsense about its longevity.

He wants Union controlled teams, he's been clear about that.

Let him have them, I say.

Irish Londoner wrote:

PhilBB wrote:We have the 'wealthy benefactor' plus money from the Union model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

FTFY !

We don't have the Union model in Wales, sorry.

PhilBB wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

PhilBB wrote:We have the 'wealthy benefactor' plus money from the Union model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

FTFY !

We don't have the Union model in Wales, sorry.

That isn't what Anayi is getting at, Phil. I provided the rest of his quotes. It's there in black and white. He's getting at the extravagant overspend on player wages, and an overspend in spite of the wealth provided by big broadcasting deals.

Munchkin wrote:
That isn't what Anayi is getting at, Phil. I provided the rest of his quotes. It's there in black and white. He's getting at the extravagant overspend on player wages, and an overspend in spite of the wealth provided by big broadcasting deals.

We have that overspend in Wales because of the Union underspend. It's the same model. He uses the bloody word: MODEL.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending" is what we have in Wales. Directly.

PhilBB wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

PhilBB wrote:We have the 'wealthy benefactor' plus money from the Union model in Wales. It is exactly the same as England's model.

FTFY !

We don't have the Union model in Wales, sorry.

So the WRU don't give any funding towards the Welsh teams ?

So the Welsh clubs are over funded? Interesting.

Irish Londoner wrote:
So the WRU don't give any funding towards the Welsh teams ?

Jesus wept.

They pay for services provided, just like the RFU and FFR do.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the Welsh clubs are over funded? Interesting.

HTF have you interpreted that?

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
That isn't what Anayi is getting at, Phil. I provided the rest of his quotes. It's there in black and white. He's getting at the extravagant overspend on player wages, and an overspend in spite of the wealth provided by big broadcasting deals.

We have that overspend in Wales because of the Union underspend. It's the same model. He uses the bloody word: MODEL.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending" is what we have in Wales. Directly.

Explain the bit in bold for me.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the Welsh clubs are over funded? Interesting.

HTF have you interpreted that?

No need to swear for a start but you yourself said in the op Anayi was describing the exact same thing which happens in Wales, I assume you'll back peddle on that now?

Munchkin wrote:
Explain the bit in bold for me.

PRW businesses carry debt primarily because the WRU has got away, since 2003, with not paying the market rate for services provided. Deloitte did a study on this called Project Engage in October 2012.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the Welsh clubs are over funded? Interesting.

HTF have you interpreted that?

No need to swear for a start but you yourself said in the op Anayi was describing the exact same thing which happens in Wales, I assume you'll back peddle on that now?

Sorry, none of that makes sense. You'll have to explain this attempted wind up a little better.

PhilBB wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37216786

"The difference comes in the very wealthy backers over-funding," Anayi added.

"We don't really want a model that copies [the English and French], because we want to be here in 10 or 20 years time.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending."


So that means that he doesn't want the four Welsh teams in the PrO12. Let's hope that this is good news for all parties.

First sentence. You agree the Welsh clubs are over funded or you agree thats the difference.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
Explain the bit in bold for me.

PRW businesses carry debt primarily because the WRU has got away, since 2003, with not paying the market rate for services provided. Deloitte did a study on this called Project Engage in October 2012.

But that isn't what is happening in England or France. The point you seem to overlook is that even though AP/T14 teams are attracting big broadcasting money some owners are investing huge sums of money over and above that.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

First sentence. You agree the Welsh clubs are over funded or you agree thats the difference.

No, I think that Anayi is speaking complete nonsense. I thought I'd made that clear.

Is this board really at the level where we have to distinguish between the fact of the piece (Anayi false criticising the benefactor model) and the opinion of the piece (Anayi claiming drivel about over funding)? Really? Is that where you want to take this?

Because that's Key Stage 2 comprehension.

Munchkin wrote:

But that isn't what is happening in England or France. The point you seem to overlook is that even though AP/T14 teams are attracting big broadcasting money some owners are investing huge sums of money over and above that.

But not in wages as they are capped in both countries.

Of course, our wonderful PrO'12 MD forgot to mention that there's no cap in Ireland and that the IRFU allow 'overspend' at its branches that would see foreclosure in France (and asset sales in England).

It's inaccurate, hypocritical, nonsense based on prejudice over fact.

To be honest I have not read it as the regions are not wanted in the Pro12, I read it more as the Pro12 is setup as a union ran competition for union ran teams. Whilst the regions are not union ran sides, they do enjoy some of the perks that union ran sides would like NDCs and the fact that there are no other regions able to replace them (we have four regions, and that is it. They are safe in their existence).

I then also remember that with the story I had read earlier today about the Blues ( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/cardiff-blues-ask-wru-temporary-11812406 ) "Cardiff Blues ask WRU for 'temporary babysitting support' but flatly deny governing body are to take over region", which I thought seems an odd headline at the time. Putting two and two together (and coming up with 5 hopefully), maybe there are plans to make the regions fit in?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

First sentence. You agree the Welsh clubs are over funded or you agree thats the difference.

No, I think that Anayi is speaking complete nonsense. I thought I'd made that clear.

Is this board really at the level where we have to distinguish between the fact of the piece (Anayi false criticising the benefactor model) and the opinion of the piece (Anayi claiming drivel about over funding)? Really? Is that where you want to take this?

Because that's Key Stage 2 comprehension.

You're never clear as you always seem to change your mind when questioned. So you disagree that a club like Saracens are being funded above the level they could spend without their owner and investors?

I think the Pro12 would be screwed without the Welsh teams.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

But that isn't what is happening in England or France. The point you seem to overlook is that even though AP/T14 teams are attracting big broadcasting money some owners are investing huge sums of money over and above that.

But not in wages as they are capped in both countries.

Of course, our wonderful PrO'12 MD forgot to mention that there's no cap in Ireland and that the IRFU allow 'overspend' at its branches that would see foreclosure in France (and asset sales in England).

It's inaccurate, hypocritical, nonsense based on prejudice over fact.

The wages are capped, but you're on very shaky ground there. We know that the caps are broken by getting around the rules, and we know that is only as effective as its ceiling. The cap is being pushed up, although there are signs that FFR are trying to get to grips with overspending teams, and impose measures that will encourage development of French national players.

Anayi had no need to mention the fact that there is no cap in Ireland. It is irrelevant to the point he is making, and the NIQ quota itself acts to limit spending more effectively than what we have witnessed in France and England. Otherwise Ulster would not be facing an issue with depth in the backrow, and Williams would still be with us. Not something I'm complaining about. It's the right thing to do.

LordDowlais wrote:I think the Pro12 would be screwed without the Welsh teams.

We would. Anayi is very aware of this, and that's why Phils claim is nonsensical.

Munchkin wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I think the Pro12 would be screwed without the Welsh teams.

We would. Anayi is very aware of this, and that's why Phils claim is nonsensical.

That is why, along with most things Phil comes out with, this thread is nonsense.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
Explain the bit in bold for me.

PRW businesses carry debt primarily because the WRU has got away, since 2003, with not paying the market rate for services provided. Deloitte did a study on this called Project Engage in October 2012.

But the WRU are plainly paying the market rate, because that's what they pay after negotiations with RRW, that's how business works isn't it ? If the clubs are not happy shouldn't they be looking to change the deal ?

LordDowlais wrote:I think the Pro12 would be screwed without the Welsh teams.

THIS !
Sink or swim, we all need each other to have meaningful games and a competitive league. We can all (and do !) argue about the finer points but the short answer is that we are in the league it's the only way that we can sustain high level professional club and international rugby in Wales, Scotland, Italy and Ireland.

LordDowlais wrote:I think the Pro12 would be screwed without the Welsh teams.

Who thinks otherwise?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Who thinks otherwise?

Well, according to Phil, Martin Anayi.

LordDowlais wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Who thinks otherwise?

Well, according to Phil, Martin Anayi.

Yes, but in reality, who thinks otherwise?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Yes, but in reality, who thinks otherwise?

Nobody hopefully. I tend to agree with Irish Londoner above, we all need each other, yes we can all moan about the finer things, but if any of us splintered off, then that would mean the demise of Celtic and Italian rugby.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

But that isn't what is happening in England or France. The point you seem to overlook is that even though AP/T14 teams are attracting big broadcasting money some owners are investing huge sums of money over and above that.

But not in wages as they are capped in both countries.

Of course, our wonderful PrO'12 MD forgot to mention that there's no cap in Ireland and that the IRFU allow 'overspend' at its branches that would see foreclosure in France (and asset sales in England).

It's inaccurate, hypocritical, nonsense based on prejudice over fact.

What assets have Saracens sold recently?

Curious, the majority appear to believe that a Union controlled club system is the best way forward for the Pro12 but also appear to concede that it cannot compete financially with a diversified ownership and bottom up larger meritocratic club structure.

Presumably the belielf is also that creating elite clubs owned by Unions reduces the risks of not being competitive but the strategic long term financial risks of creating a small number of elite teams, are now through the roof.

The long term investment of clubs in stadia ownership (and players) is now starting to pay off in the AP. That has never been an issue with the T14 as the stadia are mainly municipally owned and consequently funds have been invested in global players. Their current issue is a turgid playing style but that will evolve.

Anayi is just moving the deck chairs around for a few years on a nice remuneration package. Introducing a US team to the Pro12 will have the same impact, short to medium term, as a Japanese team into the S18 - ie. very little.

The Pro12 needs a major capital injection across the board in probably the next three years but has the chance already been lost ?

The IRFU as a sporting body could always apply to the Irish govt's. new tax windfall fund derived from Apple back taxes of €14Bn, as recently decided by the EU from sales transactions in the UK and elsewhere, with the profits sat in brass plate company in Dublin !!!

Recwatcher16 wrote:Anayi is just moving the deck chairs around for a few years on a nice remuneration package. Introducing a US team to the Pro12 will have the same impact, short to medium term, as a Japanese team into the S18 - ie. very little.

That is my view as well. Union funded teams are not the way forward. New Zealand and Australia are struggling financially, surely this is proof enough ?

Recwatcher16 wrote:Curious, the majority appear to believe that a Union controlled club system is the best way forward for the Pro12 but also appear to concede that it cannot compete financially with a diversified ownership and bottom up larger meritocratic club structure.

Presumably the belielf is also that creating elite clubs owned by Unions reduces the risks of not being competitive but the strategic long term financial risks of creating a small number of elite teams, are now through the roof.

The long term investment of clubs in stadia ownership  (and players) is now starting to pay off in the AP. That has never been an issue with the T14 as the stadia are mainly municipally owned and consequently funds have been invested in global players. Their current issue is a turgid playing style but that will evolve.

Anayi is just moving the deck chairs around for a few years on a nice remuneration package. Introducing a US team to the Pro12 will have the same impact, short to medium term, as a Japanese team into the S18 - ie. very little.

The Pro12 needs a major capital injection across the board in probably the next three years but has the chance already been lost ?

The IRFU as a sporting body could always apply to the Irish govt's. new tax windfall fund derived from Apple back taxes of €14Bn, as recently decided by the EU from sales transactions in the UK and elsewhere, with the profits sat in brass plate company in Dublin  !!!  

Wrong. We can't compete with the AP/T14 market that allows you big broadcasting deals. We don't have the chimney pots, as Anayi made clear.

How much debt have these successful, privately owned, big spenders accrued? Is it sustainable? Ultimately, I don't think so.

I think most people believe different models suit different setups, there is more income needed in the Pro12 no one disputes that though now I've said it Phil may try.

The SRU have talked about selling off parts of their clubs, the IRFU may have to bite the bullet and take a similar approach. Finding someone who is willing to commit huge sums with little return and stick around for a long time may not be easy to find though.

Recwatcher16 wrote:The IRFU as a sporting body could always apply to the Irish govt's. new tax windfall fund derived from Apple back taxes of €14Bn, as recently decided by the EU from sales transactions in the UK and elsewhere, with the profits sat in brass plate company in Dublin  !!!  

Amazingly the company that makes the profit is not located in Dublin or indeed anywhere. It is a company with no location and therefore no tax to pay. It has no employees and undertakes no activity but it manages to make billions. Clever stuff or crooked as hell depending on your viewpoint.

Exiledinborders wrote:

Recwatcher16 wrote:The IRFU as a sporting body could always apply to the Irish govt's. new tax windfall fund derived from Apple back taxes of €14Bn, as recently decided by the EU from sales transactions in the UK and elsewhere, with the profits sat in brass plate company in Dublin  !!!  

Amazingly the company that makes the profit is not located in Dublin or indeed anywhere. It is a company with no location and therefore no tax to pay. It has no employees and undertakes no activity but it manages to make billions. Clever stuff or crooked as hell depending on your viewpoint.

Welcome to the "free world". Are there any major companies out there that pay the tax they are are supposed to, or even any tax at all?

marty2086 wrote:I think most people believe different models suit different setups, there is more income needed in the Pro12 no one disputes that though now I've said it Phil may try.

The SRU have talked about selling off parts of their clubs, the IRFU may have to bite the bullet and take a similar approach. Finding someone who is willing to commit huge sums with little return and stick around for a long time may not be easy to find though.

Isn't that the exact opposite of what was said by Anayi though? He said that these people coming in and throwing cash in is not the route to take.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I think most people believe different models suit different setups, there is more income needed in the Pro12 no one disputes that though now I've said it Phil may try.

The SRU have talked about selling off parts of their clubs, the IRFU may have to bite the bullet and take a similar approach. Finding someone who is willing to commit huge sums with little return and stick around for a long time may not be easy to find though.

Isn't that the exact opposite of what was said by Anayi though?  He said that these people coming in and throwing cash in is not the route to take.

Yes and no, this model would be more akin to the NZ approach but there would be a reliance on a wealthy backer.

Whats needed in rugby is a football type approach of milking every penny they can get from any source. I was surprised that during Ulsters YouTube stream of the Saints friendly on Friday they had an ad ready to go, it won't bring in big bucks but its money they now have they wouldn't have before. Manchester United have an official noddle partner, yes an official noodle partner. Now there aren't many in rugby who have the global recognition of Man Utd but it should act as a guide for some.

USA Rugby have set up a separate company to find revenue from different sources yet many of the more established unions and clubs are scratching their heads wondering what will be in a few years time.

PhilBB wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37216786

"The difference comes in the very wealthy backers over-funding," Anayi added.

"We don't really want a model that copies [the English and French], because we want to be here in 10 or 20 years time.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending."


So that means that he doesn't want the four Welsh teams in the PrO12. Let's hope that this is good news for all parties.

I see your friend Chunky has posted the same thing on another site. You two working in tandem? Chunky disappears, you appear.

He is here he is there he is everywhere.

At times a very dangerous poster

Munchkin wrote:

Recwatcher16 wrote:Curious, the majority appear to believe that a Union controlled club system is the best way forward for the Pro12 but also appear to concede that it cannot compete financially with a diversified ownership and bottom up larger meritocratic club structure.

Presumably the belielf is also that creating elite clubs owned by Unions reduces the risks of not being competitive but the strategic long term financial risks of creating a small number of elite teams, are now through the roof.

The long term investment of clubs in stadia ownership  (and players) is now starting to pay off in the AP. That has never been an issue with the T14 as the stadia are mainly municipally owned and consequently funds have been invested in global players. Their current issue is a turgid playing style but that will evolve.

Anayi is just moving the deck chairs around for a few years on a nice remuneration package. Introducing a US team to the Pro12 will have the same impact, short to medium term, as a Japanese team into the S18 - ie. very little.

The Pro12 needs a major capital injection across the board in probably the next three years but has the chance already been lost ?

The IRFU as a sporting body could always apply to the Irish govt's. new tax windfall fund derived from Apple back taxes of €14Bn, as recently decided by the EU from sales transactions in the UK and elsewhere, with the profits sat in brass plate company in Dublin  !!!  

Wrong. We can't compete with the AP/T14 market that allows you big broadcasting deals. We don't have the chimney pots, as Anayi made clear.

How much debt have these successful, privately owned, big spenders accrued? Is it sustainable? Ultimately, I don't think so.

I realise you would wish to be proved right on club sustainability (you will have a long wait) and of course demographics plays a significant factor but cast your mind back twenty years.
If you have comparable assets and revenue, then debt is easily managed.
The RFU wanted the English top tier to be four teams playing in a euro competition - North/Midlands/South West/ London & South East but of course did not want the liabilities as they were unsure what the revenue and ultimate assets would be. So a club system was by default adopted for the professional era and to take the financial risks, a euro competition subsequently became financially viable as the French and English provided the critical mass for the competition. The other Unions saw a (short term) opportunity to make a financial gain (revenue)with minimal input in terms of teams ( assets) but either did not know or took a guess on any potential future liabilties. Those Unions have been blighted by that decision to take an elitist route ever since.

The big TV money has only arrived very recently on the back of a competitive league with old historic clubs taking part and although there have been casualties the risk is spread out over many more entities. The Pro12 Unions have now missed that boat.

The Pro12 will fail (and is failing) because of the diverse nature of ownership. Nobody is happy. Nobody feels it's a level playing field and everyone wants different things.

In the same way, the Champions Cup should not have a mish-mash of sides who qualify in different ways.

A more complete reading of the article published by the BBC would show the OP omitted two paragraphs which would have put some context on what Anayi was talking about:

"There is not the same level of private investment [in the PRO12] compared to the English Premiership and French Top 14, who also benefit from more lucrative TV deals.

This has led to a gap in wealth and resources between the leagues, which was reflected in the 2015-16 Champions Cup, when no Pro12 side reached the quarter-finals.

"The difference [between the PRO12 and Premiership/Top14] comes in the very wealthy backers over-funding," Anayi added.

"We don't really want a model that copies [the English and French], because we want to be here in 10 or 20 years time.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending.

It's a comparison between the funding structures of the PRO12 and the English/French leagues.

Leicester's Richard Cockerill made similar comments a few weeks ago about where the increased revenues were going - on higher salaries, and that little remained for capital investment in grounds and facilities. Anayi is not alone in making a critical assessment of the current financial model for English clubs.

If the Welsh regions and their bennys decide to start spending (never mind over-spending) to the same levels as their English and French counterparts on salary bills, then we can start to be worried. Until then....

Cyril wrote:The Pro12 will fail (and is failing) because of the diverse nature of ownership. Nobody is happy. Nobody feels it's a level playing field and everyone wants different things.

In the same way, the Champions Cup should not have a mish-mash of sides who qualify in different ways.

???? Who are the mish-mash of sides that qualify in different ways?  

The mish-mash of PRO12 teams in the Cup this season are:
1 Leinster
2 Connacht (Ch)
3 Glasgow
4 Ulster
5 Scarlets
6 Munster
11 Zebre


"Nobody feels it's a level playing field"?? Any quotes or interviews to illustrate that nobody thinks it's a level playing field?

No 7&1/2 wrote:

You're never clear as you always seem to change your mind when questioned. So you disagree that a club like Saracens are being funded above the level they could spend without their owner and investors?

You mean just like Munster are?

Hopefully you'll now begin to understand the point. I've not changed my mind, it's just you're struggling to understand the point.

Munchkin wrote:
The wages are capped, but you're on very shaky ground there. We know that the caps are broken by getting around the rules, and we know that is only as effective as its ceiling. The cap is being pushed up, although there are signs that FFR are trying to get to grips with overspending teams, and impose measures that will encourage development of French national players.

Anayi had no need to mention the fact that there is no cap in Ireland. It is irrelevant to the point he is making, and the NIQ quota itself acts to limit spending more effectively than what we have witnessed in France and England. Otherwise Ulster would not be facing an issue with depth in the backrow, and Williams would still be with us. Not something I'm complaining about. It's the right thing to do.

We know that two teams in one season found a loophole. We know that the other teams stuck to the cap. We know that the French teams stuck to the cap. You have two, or possibly three, clubs out of 26 that may not have stuck to the cap.

To claim me being on dodgy ground when 23/26 stuck to the caps is a ludicrous statements.

FFR have ALWAYS had grips on overspending teams since the DNACG was set up. There are no 'signs', as in it is something new.

Anayi should not have mentioned the benefactor model when HALF of the teams in his league have that model. He is playing to the Blazer audience of Ireland.