Historic Results post 2003 - IRFU Branches v PRW

First topic message reminder :

http://www.cardiffrfcfans.co.uk/analysis/welsh_vs_irish_victories.php

There's a graphical representation of the effect of Roger Lewis. There's a lovely divide from 2003-10 and 2010 onwards. All thanks to the 2009 Participation Agreement.

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:But phill you keep telling us private investment is the best way. So surely the region's shouldnt need any WRU money, especially Cardiff as you informed me they have many millionaires backing them.
And now Cardiff are competing again is it devalued as it's come from WRU investment? Just like you claimed Connaughts victory last year wasn't there own?

Oh dear, dear, dear. I can see why this place is so quiet if I don't post, if that's the level of adult analysis.

How's Gwlad going?

PhilBB wrote:
Sigh. Here we go, for the stupid amongst you all:

1. Private investment is the best way. Ask the biggest Unions in the world. In fact, think of one who doesn't allow private ownership or is considering selling its teams. And then think of another....

What's that really successful team that play in black? No, not Neath, Don't their players come from a league where the Union controls everything from top to bottom, owns the clubs and franchises, happily takes private investment but insists that they still control everything ? It'll come to me in a minute....

2. Clubs receive payments from the Unions for being their supply chain.

You call them payments, I call them subsidies, all I do know is that even in your beloved PRL set up professional rugby would not be sustainable without them.

3. The spend at Cardiff has increased this year. The 'additional' WRU payment is still below the market rate paid elsewhere in the game.

Who sets the market rate - the WRU pay what is agreed between them and the clubs, and surely with all the millionaires in Wales pumping money into the regions the WRU money should be a drop in the ocean as they can raise it privately, of course market rates vary - the market rate is the best price you can get for your product in a given market - why do you think an iPhone costs twice as much in the UK as it does in the US ?

4. Connacht's victory came sole from the IRFU.

Absolutely, the IRFU's decision to treat Connacht as a genuine "forth province" and invest some money into it has turned a historic rugby wasteland into the winners of the PRO12, the crowds and participation are increasing year on year, people always bang on about taking rugby to new places and the IRFU have done that in spades. Also I think the players and coaching staff there may have had something to do with it.

Like you Phil I would like to see a proper British and Irish league in place and maybe with that in place there would be some room for flexibility in the the IRFU ownership model as the extra income would make it more attractive to private investment, or as a millionaires plaything, but the English don't want you (or us) so we have to make the best of it with the hand we're dealt.

PhilBB wrote:The better performances are obviously directly linked to the increase spending on wages.

Money is the difference.

Shame as has been shown to the OP many times the funding is similar

TJ wrote:

PhilBB wrote:The better performances are obviously directly linked to the increase spending on wages.

Money is the difference.

Shame as has been shown to the OP many times the funding is similar

No, it isn't. It's millions of Euros different each year.

Irish Londoner wrote:

PhilBB wrote:
Sigh. Here we go, for the stupid amongst you all:

1. Private investment is the best way. Ask the biggest Unions in the world. In fact, think of one who doesn't allow private ownership or is considering selling its teams. And then think of another....

What's that really successful team that play in black? No, not Neath, Don't their players come from a league where the Union controls everything from top to bottom, owns the clubs and franchises, happily takes private investment but insists that they still control everything ? It'll come to me in a minute....

2. Clubs receive payments from the Unions for being their supply chain.

You call them payments, I call them subsidies, all I do know is that even in your beloved PRL set up professional rugby would not be sustainable without them.

3. The spend at Cardiff has increased this year. The 'additional' WRU payment is still below the market rate paid elsewhere in the game.

Who sets the market rate - the WRU pay what is agreed between them and the clubs, and surely with all the millionaires in Wales pumping money into the regions the WRU money should be a drop in the ocean as they can raise it privately, of course market rates vary - the market rate is the best price you can get for your product in a given market - why do you think an iPhone costs twice as much in the UK as it does in the US ?

4. Connacht's victory came sole from the IRFU.

Absolutely, the IRFU's decision to treat Connacht as a genuine "forth province" and invest some money into it has turned a historic rugby wasteland into the winners of the PRO12, the crowds and participation are increasing year on year, people always bang on about taking rugby to new places and the IRFU have done that in spades. Also I think the players and coaching staff there may have had something to do with it.

Like you Phil I would like to see a proper British and Irish league in place and maybe with that in place there would be some room for flexibility in the the IRFU ownership model as the extra income would make it more attractive to private investment, or as a millionaires plaything, but the English don't want you (or us) so we have to make the best of it with the hand we're dealt.

We can all be like the All Blacks if we have no land border with the biggest rugby market in the world. We can all be like New Zealand if we ignore everything to do with how the game is financed, rely on South African TV and earning income in a currency much stronger than we use domestically.

They are payments because, get this, if the service is not received then they money doesn't get paid.

The market rate is what is paid by the Unions to teams that Welsh teams compete against. That's the market rate for rugby.

carpet baboon wrote:I see your trying to goad me I to some sort o angryf response phill, unfortunately for you it won't work.
Continue with you name calling it's fine. Dosent bother me. It just shows you up for the Internet hard man you are.
Enjoy your angry little world

There's no goading. All I've done is highlighted your hypocrisy and lack of self awareness. You treat me as you bemoan me for treating others.

The 6th form debating tactic of double guessing others by your own yardsticks leads to stupid comments like 'internet hard man' and 'angry little world'. Those are the insults that, as noted, you bemoan me for throwing at others.

Let it go.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
That's something I can't quite understand.  The Welsh get more tv money for the pro12 (and keep that extra money).  The regions have less other sports to compete against (soccer, ?) than the provinces have to compete with in Ireland (gaelic football, hurling, soccer, then rugby).  Their stadia can hold as many spectators as any provincial ground.  The WRU host an additional autumn international which increases their coffers, and a sellout at MS has a higher capacity than a sellout at Lansdowne Road.  And there are benefactors behind some clubs who put money into the sides as part of their support of the region.

There should be more cash in welsh rugby, where is it going if not into player development and wages? It's hard to understand.

The Provinces / IRFU (however you want to bundle/group them) spend money to try and keep players.  But they don't spend to a sustained deficit each year. Sure timing of certain repayments may move from time to time but not enough to explain the gap to the Regions?

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PrO'12.

PRW are up against a premier soccer team and one in the Championship, in a soccer country.

There should be more cash in Welsh rugby but its been going to Barclays. That's not hard to understand.

PhilBB wrote:
The market rate is what is paid by the Unions to teams that Welsh teams compete against. That's the market rate for rugby.

A market rate exists in a free market, problem is the Regions and WRU don't exist in a free market its a closed one. If the WRU don't pay the regions theres no competitor so the market rate you harp on about is made up its a comparative rate and as usual with you feels to consider context

PhilBB wrote:

PRW are up against a premier soccer team and one in the Championship, in a soccer country.

There should be more cash in Welsh rugby but its been going to Barclays. That's not hard to understand.

And as you always remind us - an even bigger following of Barclays in Ireland.  How many times do you go to Premiership games?  I know a guy who flies over every weekend - every weekend. And he isn't alone.  That's dedication (and money) for you  So we're all quits again?

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:
The market rate is what is paid by the Unions to teams that Welsh teams compete against. That's the market rate for rugby.

A market rate exists in a free market, problem is the Regions and WRU don't exist in a free market its a closed one. If the WRU don't pay the regions theres no competitor so the market rate you harp on about is made up its a comparative rate and as usual with you feels to consider context

No, the market is cross border. The competitor is the club(s) faced in the PrO'12 and EPCR. Hence its a market rate. The rate paid to the competitors of PRW.

I must learn to feel to consider context.

PhilBB wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
That's something I can't quite understand.  The Welsh get more tv money for the pro12 (and keep that extra money).  The regions have less other sports to compete against (soccer, ?) than the provinces have to compete with in Ireland (gaelic football, hurling, soccer, then rugby).  Their stadia can hold as many spectators as any provincial ground.  The WRU host an additional autumn international which increases their coffers, and a sellout at MS has a higher capacity than a sellout at Lansdowne Road.  And there are benefactors behind some clubs who put money into the sides as part of their support of the region.

There should be more cash in welsh rugby, where is it going if not into player development and wages? It's hard to understand.

The Provinces / IRFU (however you want to bundle/group them) spend money to try and keep players.  But they don't spend to a sustained deficit each year. Sure timing of certain repayments may move from time to time but not enough to explain the gap to the Regions?

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PrO'12.

PRW are up against a premier soccer team and one in the Championship, in a soccer country.

There should be more cash in Welsh rugby but its been going to Barclays. That's not hard to understand.

The bit in bold is interesting. Would you post the relevant information here?

How long before a 'shuffle shuffle, ffs, look it up yourself' Munchkin?

No 7&1/2 wrote:How long before a 'shuffle shuffle, ffs, look it up yourself' Munchkin?

heh, I can only hope

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:
The market rate is what is paid by the Unions to teams that Welsh teams compete against. That's the market rate for rugby.

A market rate exists in a free market, problem is the Regions and WRU don't exist in a free market its a closed one. If the WRU don't pay the regions theres no competitor so the market rate you harp on about is made up its a comparative rate and as usual with you feels to consider context

No, the market is cross border. The competitor is the club(s) faced in the PrO'12 and EPCR. Hence its a market rate. The rate paid to the competitors of PRW.

I must learn to feel to consider context.

Sorry how is the market cross border?

Yes the NDCs are part of the free market but the payments to the regions aren't

And yes context, you how the amounts paid by unions vary due to a number of things ranging from the players in a squad, extent of service available plus available funds

Interesting little snippet from the WRU Annual Report:

"The decrease in net bank debt during the year of £3.2m includes a £1.2m reduction in the term loan, a £6.2m decrease in the RCF, offset by the decrease in cash balances of £2.9m. In addition, a further loan of £1.3m was provided to the Regions during the year to further their ambitions in conjunction with the RSA, taking the total amount advanced to £2.6m. "

So the WRU are the Regions Bank?

Still haven't found anything that confirms the Regions broadcasting revenue is shared equally with their PRO12 partners, with the exception of the Italians.

PhilBB wrote:

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PRO12.

They do..

Any thoughts on the above, Phil?

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

Oh NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now the whole world will know about us!

...on the bright side, at least Trump will be delighted to have finally found a great excuse for his wandering philosophies on political life and tour-bus philandering. "It was the IRFU that forced me to say these things! Believe me, those people are crazy. Crazy M**herf**kers - believe me."

PhilBB wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
That's something I can't quite understand.  The Welsh get more tv money for the pro12 (and keep that extra money).  The regions have less other sports to compete against (soccer, ?) than the provinces have to compete with in Ireland (gaelic football, hurling, soccer, then rugby).  Their stadia can hold as many spectators as any provincial ground.  The WRU host an additional autumn international which increases their coffers, and a sellout at MS has a higher capacity than a sellout at Lansdowne Road.  And there are benefactors behind some clubs who put money into the sides as part of their support of the region.

There should be more cash in welsh rugby, where is it going if not into player development and wages? It's hard to understand.

The Provinces / IRFU (however you want to bundle/group them) spend money to try and keep players.  But they don't spend to a sustained deficit each year. Sure timing of certain repayments may move from time to time but not enough to explain the gap to the Regions?

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PrO'12.

PRW are up against a premier soccer team and one in the Championship, in a soccer country.

There should be more cash in Welsh rugby but its been going to Barclays. That's not hard to understand.

But then even that isn't quite easy to understand, as the MS was built further back in 1999 for £121 million (good value for a 74,500 seater with a closing roof). While Lansdowne Road was €410 million in 2010 (and no roof, 51,700 capacity and ends up looking like a hospital bedpan).

Irish Government funding of €191 million on Lansdowne Road brings it in at €219 million to pay off.  UK Lottery money on Millenium Stadium was £46 million bringing the remaining cost to £75 million.

So less construction costs to pay off and a longer period of time to do it as well as a longer period of time to benefit from the extra capacity (more than an entire RDS stadium capacity as a differential).


And as noted above, they get higher TV revenues.

It's a cute 'hospital bedpan' but I get your point, bandwagon - in Ireland we always seem to love paying big money for little or nothing.
I think it must be our latent warped sense of inferiority.
If someone says "You can have that for this bargain price", we think: "Is that guy trying to insult us and say we can't pay? Tell him we want what he has but we're insisting we pay twice what he's asking."

Finally, finally, finally I've learned something from these inane tête-à-têtes - his full moniker is Philly Big Balls.

Now look I've had enough of this kind of thing.

No more slagging.

Yes indeed

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

Or hound him on Gwlad

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PRO12.

They do..

Really? Please prove it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:How long before a 'shuffle shuffle, ffs, look it up yourself' Munchkin?

Sorry for the late reply.

Look it up yourself, Munchkin.

marty2086 wrote:

Sorry how is the market cross border?

Yes the NDCs are part of the free market but the payments to the regions aren't

And yes context, you how the amounts paid by unions vary due to a number of things ranging from the players in a squad, extent of service available plus available funds

In a thread about the results of Irish teams v Welsh teams you ask me 'how is the market cross border'. Wow.

Your final two sentences don't make any sense.

Munchkin wrote:Interesting little snippet from the WRU Annual Report:

"The decrease in net bank debt during the year of £3.2m includes a £1.2m reduction in the term loan, a £6.2m decrease in the RCF, offset by the decrease in cash balances of £2.9m. In addition, a further loan of £1.3m was provided to the Regions during the year to further their ambitions in conjunction with the RSA, taking the total amount advanced to £2.6m. "

So the WRU are the Regions Bank?

Still haven't found anything that confirms the Regions broadcasting revenue is shared equally with their PRO12 partners, with the exception of the Italians.

Part of the loan was due to the WRU withholding money from PRW because of the closure of ERC. It will be interesting to see if that will ever be paid back or if the loan will be written off now that the banking covenants will allow it to be. In other words, it was only 'loaned' to meet the covenant, as the restrictions prevented what was owed actually being paid.

All you have to do is look at the competition income and work out how much of it comes from where.

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

Damn me for 'hiding' in full public view. What a scoundrel I am.

Dear Christ alive, you truly are thick.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

But then even that isn't quite easy to understand, as the MS was built further back in 1999 for £121 million (good value for a 74,500 seater with a closing roof). While Lansdowne Road was €410 million in 2010 (and no roof, 51,700 capacity and ends up looking like a hospital bedpan).

Irish Government funding of €191 million on Lansdowne Road brings it in at €219 million to pay off.  UK Lottery money on Millenium Stadium was £46 million bringing the remaining cost to £75 million.

So less construction costs to pay off and a longer period of time to do it as well as a longer period of time to benefit from the extra capacity (more than an entire RDS stadium capacity as a differential).

And as noted above, they get higher TV revenues.

You've forgotten to count in the value of the Aviva sponsorship deal as the £46m was basically a sponsorship from the Millennium Commission.

Remind me again of the IRFU bank debt...

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PRO12.

They do..

Really? Please prove it.

Is that necessary?

You say they don't, I say they do. Why not just leave it at that?

Where's your post about the wru accounts gone Pot Hale? I was half way though reading that while cooking, "and then there is was....gone" (one of my favourite Welshisms, btw).

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

Damn me for 'hiding' in full public view. What a scoundrel I am.

Dear Christ alive, you truly are thick.

And the bully returns

Griff wrote:Where's your post about the wru accounts gone Pot Hale? I was half way though reading that while cooking, "and then there is was....gone" (one of my favourite Welshisms, btw).

Thought it might be too long for people to read.

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:Where's your post about the wru accounts gone Pot Hale? I was half way though reading that while cooking, "and then there is was....gone" (one of my favourite Welshisms, btw).

Thought it might be too long for people to read.  

...or second thoughts on your analysis?!

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:Where's your post about the wru accounts gone Pot Hale? I was half way though reading that while cooking, "and then there is was....gone" (one of my favourite Welshisms, btw).

Thought it might be too long for people to read.  

...or second thoughts on your analysis?!

Lol - Nope not at all, Griff. I'll post it again if you like.

Competition income (incl TV revenues under the new Sky deal and terrestrial monies) for the Welsh regions from PRO12 and European Cups has varied somewhat over the last three years:

* (2013/14) £8.886m (€10.8587m) (rate: 50% @1.195+50%@1.249)
* (2014/15) £8.129m (€10.9254m) (rate: 1.279+1.409)
* (2015/16) £9.7m (€12.3869m) (rate: 1.358+1.196)
* Total   £26.715m (€34.171m)

(Sterling/euro calculated on 50/50 basis using mid-market rates on 30 December and 30 June in each year.)

The flow of monies goes from the competition organisers - EPCR and Celtic Rugby Limited - to the relevant unions i.e. the WRU in the case of Wales.   Under the Regional Services Agreement with WRU, all competition income must be given to the regions after any costs incurred by Group (the Union).

In comparison, competition income for the IRFU from the same comps in the same years was:
* (2013/14) €10.335m
* (2014/15) € 9.707m
* (2015/16) €10.585m.  
* Total €30.627m

Thus, it would seem that in each of the last three years, the WRU has received more competition income than the IRFU has received.   A difference of €3.544m approx for the period using the exchange rates indicated.  Let's assume that you wouldn't get actual mid-market rates, and use a lower exchange rate average across the 3 years of 1.23.  That would make a difference of €2.1m approx.

At first glance, given that Irish provinces have been generally more successful than Welsh regions in the last 3 years in both PRO12 and the European competitions, this would suggest something other than competition participation and success must be at play.  Currency exchange rates are a possible contributor, and I've allowed for these.   In addition, since the Annual Report for IRFU is end April and WRU is end June, this might create a potential mismatch year to year in comparing incomes.  However, looking at it cumulatively over three years gives a more rounded, accurate picture.  

Would the WRU receiving a greater proportion of TV revenues from terrestrial Tv deals be the reason for the difference?  Various media reports suggested that the TV deals values for Ireland are worth €1.12m approx, and the BBC Wales deal €3.85m approx.  That's €2.7m difference over four years - about €680k per year or 2.04m approx. over 3 years.

Thoughts?

Not that post, the other one! With the circa €2m difference and the £4m paid by the WRU to the regions for international player 'rent'.

Griff wrote:Not that post, the other one! With the circa €2m difference and the £4m paid by the WRU to the regions for international player 'rent'.

Oops sorry.

Exclusively For Griff

I was idly wondering about how much money the WRU gave to the regions and its players in comparison to the IRFU.

It’s difficult to do an absolute comparison since different ownership systems are in place. Nonetheless, the Annual Reports do provide some details to give a sense of the picture in both unions.

Looking at this year's recently published WRU accounts,(Y/E June 2016),  I noticed that total National Dual Contract costs came to £3.2m (to which the Regions contribute £1.2m).  According to the Annual Report, the WRU is obliged to pay £2.1m towards NDCs, so any surplus is returned to the Regions (£100k in this year).

The accounts also say that the Direct Costs section in their accounts contain an additional £4.4m that is paid by the WRU towards player costs for test matches.  These monies are separate from the allocations made to affiliated organisations which includes the Regions.  

The Regions were allocated £19.3m (this includes competition income of £9.7m).  Together with the £4.4m for test players, this would give a total of £23.7m (€30.336m at end April 2016 rates).
This total does not include test management/coaching costs, which look like they are included under Direct Costs for Test Matches, but no specific figure is provided.  

In comparison, IRFU accounts have Professional Game Costs schedule with a single sum for player and management costs. which include test match fees and allocations to provinces. This comes to €34.965m. This is an increase of €5m on the previous year to cover once-off Munster financial difficulties and giving each province an unbudgeted 250k each to cope with rising salary costs.  

I'm not sure if the NDC costs paid by WRU of £2.1m (€2.667m) are included in the Regions allocation of £19.3m.   If not, then the comparable figure for WRU contribution to player costs and regions costs would be €32.757m, not including management/coaching costs for Team Wales.

In summary, a possible overall difference of €2.143m - much of which may be covered in salaries for Wales’ Head Coach and his assistants.

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Judging by the WRU Annual Report released yesterday, PRW do not keep more of the money they earn via TV for the PRO12.

They do..

Really? Please prove it.

Is that necessary?

You say they don't, I say they do.  Why not just leave it at that?

Oh, right. I thought that you might have had some reasoning but no worries if you were just being contrary.

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Maybe you should hit him up on Twitter he seems to be hiding on there

Damn me for 'hiding' in full public view. What a scoundrel I am.

Dear Christ alive, you truly are thick.

And the bully returns

The bully? I'm not a bully for responding to your snide stupidity by showing it for what it is.

Pot Hale wrote:Competition income (incl TV revenues under the new Sky deal and terrestrial monies) for the Welsh regions from PRO12 and European Cups has varied somewhat over the last three years:

   * (2013/14) £8.886m (€10.8587m) (rate: 50% @1.195+50%@1.249)
   * (2014/15) £8.129m (€10.9254m) (rate: 1.279+1.409)
   * (2015/16) £9.7m (€12.3869m) (rate: 1.358+1.196)
   * Total    £26.715m (€34.171m)

(Sterling/euro calculated on 50/50 basis using mid-market rates on 30 December and 30 June in each year.)

The flow of monies goes from the competition organisers - EPCR and Celtic Rugby Limited - to the relevant unions i.e. the WRU in the case of Wales.   Under the Regional Services Agreement with WRU, all competition income must be given to the regions after any costs incurred by Group (the Union).

In comparison, competition income for the IRFU from the same comps in the same years was:
   * (2013/14) €10.335m
   * (2014/15) € 9.707m
   * (2015/16) €10.585m.  
   * Total    €30.627m

Thus, it would seem that in each of the last three years, the WRU has received more competition income than the IRFU has received.   A difference of €3.544m approx for the period using the exchange rates indicated.  Let's assume that you wouldn't get actual mid-market rates, and use a lower exchange rate average across the 3 years of 1.23.  That would make a difference of €2.1m approx.

At first glance, given that Irish provinces have been generally more successful than Welsh regions in the last 3 years in both PRO12 and the European competitions, this would suggest something other than competition participation and success must be at play.  Currency exchange rates are a possible contributor, and I've allowed for these.   In addition, since the Annual Report for IRFU is end April and WRU is end June, this might create a potential mismatch year to year in comparing incomes.  However, looking at it cumulatively over three years gives a more rounded, accurate picture.  

Would the WRU receiving a greater proportion of TV revenues from terrestrial Tv deals be the reason for the difference?  Various media reports suggested that the TV deals values for Ireland are worth €1.12m approx, and the BBC Wales deal €3.85m approx.  That's €2.7m difference over four years - about €680k per year or 2.04m approx. over 3 years.

Thoughts?

The most obvious thought is that you've compared two different European competitions to come to your conclusion. That's a glaring error.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Competition income (incl TV revenues under the new Sky deal and terrestrial monies) for the Welsh regions from PRO12 and European Cups has varied somewhat over the last three years:

   * (2013/14) £8.886m (€10.8587m) (rate: 50% @1.195+50%@1.249)
   * (2014/15) £8.129m (€10.9254m) (rate: 1.279+1.409)
   * (2015/16) £9.7m (€12.3869m) (rate: 1.358+1.196)
   * Total    £26.715m (€34.171m)

(Sterling/euro calculated on 50/50 basis using mid-market rates on 30 December and 30 June in each year.)

The flow of monies goes from the competition organisers - EPCR and Celtic Rugby Limited - to the relevant unions i.e. the WRU in the case of Wales.   Under the Regional Services Agreement with WRU, all competition income must be given to the regions after any costs incurred by Group (the Union).

In comparison, competition income for the IRFU from the same comps in the same years was:
   * (2013/14) €10.335m
   * (2014/15) € 9.707m
   * (2015/16) €10.585m.  
   * Total    €30.627m

Thus, it would seem that in each of the last three years, the WRU has received more competition income than the IRFU has received.   A difference of €3.544m approx for the period using the exchange rates indicated.  Let's assume that you wouldn't get actual mid-market rates, and use a lower exchange rate average across the 3 years of 1.23.  That would make a difference of €2.1m approx.

At first glance, given that Irish provinces have been generally more successful than Welsh regions in the last 3 years in both PRO12 and the European competitions, this would suggest something other than competition participation and success must be at play.  Currency exchange rates are a possible contributor, and I've allowed for these.   In addition, since the Annual Report for IRFU is end April and WRU is end June, this might create a potential mismatch year to year in comparing incomes.  However, looking at it cumulatively over three years gives a more rounded, accurate picture.  

Would the WRU receiving a greater proportion of TV revenues from terrestrial Tv deals be the reason for the difference?  Various media reports suggested that the TV deals values for Ireland are worth €1.12m approx, and the BBC Wales deal €3.85m approx.  That's €2.7m difference over four years - about €680k per year or 2.04m approx. over 3 years.

Thoughts?

The most obvious thought is that you've compared two different European competitions to come to your conclusion. That's a glaring error.

Can you explain what you mean by that, please? What two different European competitions?

Pot Hale wrote:Exclusively For Griff

I was idly wondering about how much money the WRU gave to the regions and its players in comparison to the IRFU.

It’s difficult to do an absolute comparison since different ownership systems are in place.  Nonetheless, the Annual Reports do provide some details to give a sense of the picture in both unions.

Looking at this year's recently published WRU accounts,(Y/E June 2016),  I noticed that total National Dual Contract costs came to £3.2m (to which the Regions contribute £1.2m).  According to the Annual Report, the WRU is obliged to pay £2.1m towards NDCs, so any surplus is returned to the Regions (£100k in this year).

The accounts also say that the Direct Costs section in their accounts contain an additional £4.4m that is paid by the WRU towards player costs for test matches.  These monies are separate from the allocations made to affiliated organisations which includes the Regions.  

The Regions were allocated £19.3m (this includes competition income of £9.7m).  Together with the £4.4m for test players, this would give a total of £23.7m (€30.336m at end April 2016 rates).
This total does not include test management/coaching costs, which look like they are included under Direct Costs for Test Matches, but no specific figure is provided.  

In comparison, IRFU accounts have Professional Game Costs schedule with a single sum for player and management costs. which include test match fees and allocations to provinces. This comes to €34.965m.  This is an increase of €5m on the previous year to cover once-off Munster financial difficulties and giving each province an unbudgeted 250k each to cope with rising salary costs.  

I'm not sure if the NDC costs paid by WRU of £2.1m (€2.667m) are included in the Regions allocation of £19.3m.   If not, then the comparable figure for WRU contribution to player costs and regions costs would be €32.757m, not including management/coaching costs for Team Wales.

In summary, a possible overall difference of €2.143m - much of which may be covered in salaries for Wales’ Head Coach and his assistants.

You've excluded 'National Match Costs' of €2.5m from this analysis. You're ahead of me here, but why have you done that?

Note 2(d) of the WRU annual report clearly answers your question of whether the NDC contribution is within the £19.3m.

In short, you're comparing £19.3m with €37.6m and trying to make it equal. Why?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:How long before a 'shuffle shuffle, ffs, look it up yourself' Munchkin?

Sorry for the late reply.

Look it up yourself, Munchkin.

You're the one spouting that there's evidence the Broadcasting revenue is equally split. So it's really up to you to prove it. Maybe you can't, and you're just talking horse dung. I did look myself, and nothing obvious.

I see the WRU hand out loans to the Regions as well. Isn't that nice of them?

Pot Hale wrote:
Can you explain what you mean by that, please?  What two different European competitions?

ERC and EPRC.

Professional Competition Income for the IRFU was €10.5m. PRW income to the WRU was worth £9.7m.

Both get the same from Europe.

What currency conversion rate are you using?

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:How long before a 'shuffle shuffle, ffs, look it up yourself' Munchkin?

Sorry for the late reply.

Look it up yourself, Munchkin.

You're the one spouting that there's evidence the Broadcasting revenue is equally split. So it's really up to you to prove it. Maybe you can't, and you're just talking horse dung. I did l look myself, and nothing obvious.

I see the WRU hand out loans to the Regions as well. Isn't that nice of them?

Already answered above, Munchie.