The Future for the PRO12 - Part 3 - The Union Balldance

I stepped out and she stepped in again
I stepped out and she stepped in again
learning to dance for Lanigan's Ball


In thinking about recent goings-on at union level within the PRO12, I was reminded of the lyrics of this old song as unions, corporate interests, private investors, Welsh benefactors, and sundry money-makers make their various moves on the PRO12 dance floor.  Scotland and Ireland seem to be bashfully eyeing up the investor lads on one side of the hall, fluttering their eyelashes, whilst on the other side, the Welsh bennys (as they're affectionately known ) are making tapes and throwing shapes, whilst secretly hoping eagerly that they might get a chance to sign the WRU's card for a dance or two.  Meanwhile, the Italians dither in the middle wondering where they should be but won't tell anyone that they don't know even the music.  

But for now the band has taken a break whilst the visiting Europeans and Anglo heavies make their way onto the floor to start their version of French/Anglo hopscotch involving a number of bulky partners, foreign tap dancers, celtic coaches, and comic millionaires.

It's a good a time as any for a quick cuppa and a chance to talk about where the PRO12 is going with all the plans for expansion to US and Europe suddenly gone quiet, some league quality improvements, big weekend derbies, more neutral officials, and what else is on the horizon for upcoming changes within the PRO12.

The looming spectre of dwindling money and funding ever more expensive teams for the future seems to be the next big issue and where that is all going to come from.   Hopes of improved TV deals, better sponsors and business supporters of the league remain a distant aspiration - although the recent appointment of a commercial director to work alongside Martin Anayi on securing the best deals possible seems to be a step in the right direction.  Some are holding their whisth on that one.

Ownership and financing of the teams themselves is the most urgent and vexing issue facing the four unions operating in the PRO12.  Over the last number of months, the SRU have been making a lot of noise and some news headlines with their plans to bring in private investment to its two Scottish clubs to help meet some of the ongoing costs involved.   The SRU says it can't continue to finance the two teams at current levels of revenue and costs, and they need to bring in private investors/business to meet a substantial portion of the costs in return for a stake in one or both of the two clubs.  How much that stake would be is not clear as the SRU would want to keep their hand in the two clubs responsible for generating its line of test players, but whether that would be a 51% stake or less remains to be seen.   A voting process in late 2016 saw members give the green light to the Scottish Union to pursue this path of identifying and securing potential investment but only time will tell if it will draw in any worthwhile investors.

Italian rugby seems to lurch from one crisis to the next with the FIR having to bail out both Treviso and Zebre in recent times with substantial commitments of money.  After the last crisis, which saw a number of players leave the two clubs, it is Treviso who have fared better with the backing of Bennetton, and it is Zebre who are staring down the barrel of closure at season end once again.  A new franchise, based in Rome, is being rumoured to be on the cards with the FIR willing to put financial support into its development.   For many within the PRO12, and without, the Italian project seems to be a wasted exercise and just amounts to weekly humiliation as opposition teams pile up the points, regularly taking home try bonus points in their victories. For others, the Italian involvement is a long game and one that has to be persevered with.    Yet, the FIR is still not a shareholder in Celtic Rugby, the company which manages the PRO12 - the latest filings with the Companies Registration Office in Dublin shows that the three Celtic unions remain the founding shareholders, and critically, the beneficiaries of any financial dealing that flow through it - particularly in relation to TV broadcasting deals such as Sky Sports.  This current season, it took until Round 6 before an Italian broadcaster could be secured for covering the home matches of Treviso and Zebre, and with crowds often hovering around 1,500-2,000, this didn't raise many eyebrows.  for the foreseeable future, Italian rugby will stay within the PRO12, and the FIR will continue to be a major stakeholder/financier in the teams.

Irish rugby has been dabbling with business support for a number of years now with the provincial teams drawing in sponsorships, player salary top-ups, and increasing financial support for the various provinces through different types of schemes devised by the individual branches.   Jamie Heaslip recently re-signed with Leinster on what's likely to be his final playing contract before retirement (at age 37).  One of Ireland’s most consistent and durable players, he’s also been one of the most consistently highest paid through his IRFU central contract, and a salary top-up through his Leinster club with a business sponsorship deal with Bank of Ireland.  

But these adhoc business supports and extended sponsorships/player promotions and brand ambassadors do not fill the coffers of the branches sufficiently to grow and expand, it's sufficient only to pay the salaries of 2-3 players to keep them in place against ever higher competing offers from the TV-deal-enriched clubs in England and France.  As the IRFU pointed at the launch of its annual report last June, the IRFU cannot continue to be "the bank of last resort" for the provinces - following a €1 million plus bailout of Munster, and a €250k additional budget for each province to help them compete on player salaries.   A number of the provinces have sought quietly to persuade the IRFU to consider opening up the provinces’ branch company structures to allow private investors to take a stake in each of the provinces in return for continued investment over a period of time.  Until the last year, those overtures have been largely rebuffed with the occasional odd positive murmur about the need to keep control if such a development were to be envisaged.   It is rumoured that alongside the SRU’s current moves, the IRFU is also investigating how the branches’ structures could be altered to allow such investment in the future.  A variant of the NZRU model whereby they allowed private investors to take a stake in each of the five Super Rugby franchises is being considered, but the IRFU would want to maintain a controlling stake that gives them oversight and control in line with the current player management policy and protocols they have in place.  

As the IRFU have stated time and again, the revenues from the test game is what keeps the whole of Irish rugby afloat - interfering with or disabling that in some way is not something they would countenance.  Equally, the union recognises that costs will continue to rise in the PRO12 and wider club game with player salaries being biggest driver.   Their investment policy has switched from paying out large salaries to high-profile capped foreign players to investing in the domestic pathway development (€10m over the last 3 years) - with the emergence of some fine academy players across the provinces proving testament to this approach led by David Nucifora on behalf of the IRFU.

Nonetheless, the club game is getting bigger and more financially competitive so if a methodology can be developed to allow private investment takes its place at the table, it’s likely to happen over the next few years.  

But as two unions move across the dance floor looking for wealthy partners, the Welsh benefactors are being drawn (protestingly for some) from the other side by the WRU who have recently announced that they see the future of the Welsh game involving a marriage of both union and private investment funds.  As two unions prepare to step out, the Welsh union is preparing to step in again.   The Dragons region has been languishing in the shop window for the past year, gathering dust as various investor-type people amble up, take a poke and move off again without buying.   Martin Phillps was pushed recently in an interview to say that the WRU couldn't allow the region to fold, but he wasn't too specific in public as to what kind of support they might bring.  Equally, he was encouraged enough to say that increased union funding for the four regions seemed to be inevitable - but he didn't say what price they might extract for such investment.  Would the benefactors/shareholders be asked to move on, or move around the table to make more room for union faces to sit down?  

Whilst there are those who pine for a future whereby pure private investment and ownership rules the roost like their counterparts in England and France, the likelihood of that model being created and surviving does not seem to be on anyone's dance cards.   More likely, a marriage of convenience may be arrived at, wherein true love may never be expressed, but at least the two parties will be able to pay the mortgage together, and maybe afford a new extension or two in the near future to mix a few metaphors.

But for now, let the European hopscotch begin, and then the merry four-nation dance can begin again.

All together now:

Sixteen long years we spent in Dub-i-lin
Sixteen long years doin' nothing at all
Sixteen long years we spent in Dub-i-lin
Learning to dance at the PRO12 ball.

They stepped out, and they stepped in again......

Good grief man! That's some amount of typing!

tigertattie wrote:Good grief man! That's some amount of typing!

Yes. And????

and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see. And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

I would be curious to know what is the Pro12 long term strategy ?
The SRU approach is interesting with their statement that their two Regions are not going to be affordable. Reading between the lines the famous border clubs have silently had their revenge on being abandoned as the top tier of the game in Scotland. Their vote to sell these teams appears though to fall short of providing a viable business model that would appeal to investors.

For the AP, it would also seem likely that the next BT tv deal, with PRL prompting, will be exponentially larger than the last, purely on the basis that there is simply no way BT will allow Sky to get a look in.

The Wasps business model though is clearly causing some consternation amongst AP clubs with the stadium/conference centre/hotel being the key income driver and despite 25k plus crowds for ordinary league matches in an area of the Midlands that has several famous old clubs and thus a demand for top level rugby. The combination of these two factors will fund the team no matter what success is achieved.
For those AP clubs still struggling to achieve a viable stadium with facilities to draw in crowds, rugby related or otherwise, there is still a way to go.

In my (humble) opinion for all the shaky financial times with advent of the english professional game, I still believe a bottom up approach to the growth of the game is the only sustainable way to achieve a vibrant competition between clubs where no team is considered to big to fail and access is provided to all if there is the desire and demand to do so.

Do the SRU have anyone interested in buying?

It does not seem like a very good deal to me. At least the big egos spending their fortunes on English and French clubs get to run the clubs. Why would anyone want to buy a minority stake in a loss making region?

Recwatcher16 wrote:I would be curious to know what is the Pro12 long term strategy ?
The SRU approach is interesting with their statement that their two Regions are not going to be affordable. Reading between the lines the famous border clubs have silently had their revenge on being abandoned as the top tier of the game in Scotland. Their vote to sell these teams appears though to fall short of providing a viable business model that would appeal to investors.

For the AP, it would also seem likely that the next BT tv deal, with PRL prompting, will be exponentially larger than the last, purely on the basis that there is simply no way BT will allow Sky to get a look in.

The Wasps business model though is clearly causing some consternation amongst AP clubs with the stadium/conference centre/hotel being the key income driver and despite 25k plus crowds for ordinary league matches in an area of the Midlands that has several famous old clubs and thus a demand for top level rugby. The combination of these two factors will fund the team no matter what success is achieved.
For those AP clubs still struggling to achieve a viable stadium with facilities to draw in crowds, rugby related or otherwise, there is still a way to go.

In my (humble) opinion for all the shaky financial times with advent of the english professional game, I still believe a bottom up approach to the growth of the game is the only sustainable way to achieve a vibrant competition between clubs where no team is considered to big to fail and access is provided to all if there is the desire and demand to do so.

The Wasps business model is Richardson writ large. In short, rugby clubs on their own are not sustainable if you want to plan any kind of growth amid the rapidly rising player costs. The most sensible thing that French and English clubs could do right now is control this element before it becomes a runaway train. I note that Leicester have decided to invest in hotel/conference facilities to provide income streams beyond the rugby stream.

The BT deal has already been renewed/upgraded for the AP so plans for next five years are based on that. And much of it is going back out the door on salaries, new contracts, etc.

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Yes I'm aware of the Munster Patrons Programme which you have mentioned once or twice, or ten times previously.....

Right now though, the branches are not set up corporately to allow for external investors - that's why the work is being done - at IRFU level - on seeing how their structure could be changed to facilitate that. Similar to what SRU are doing.

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Yes I'm aware of the Munster Patrons Programme which you have mentioned once or twice, or ten times previously.....  

Right now though, the branches are not set up corporately to allow for external investors - that's why the work is being done - at IRFU level - on seeing how their structure could be changed to facilitate that.  Similar to what SRU are doing.

So why did you ignore it if you knew about it. The people on Munster's Commerical Board are those who would be likely to have the funds to invest in a Province and they are not jumping about ready to do it and have gone down a different route.

Whatever about Leinster & Ulster, I just don't see Munster selling its sole to some sugar daddy.

A British/Irish league is probably the future. I don't want it either.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Yes I'm aware of the Munster Patrons Programme which you have mentioned once or twice, or ten times previously.....  

Right now though, the branches are not set up corporately to allow for external investors - that's why the work is being done - at IRFU level - on seeing how their structure could be changed to facilitate that.  Similar to what SRU are doing.

So why did you ignore it if you knew about it. The people on Munster's Commerical Board are those who would be likely to have the funds to invest in a Province and they are not jumping about ready to do it and have gone down a different route.

Whatever about Leinster & Ulster, I just don't see Munster selling its sole to some sugar daddy.

I didn't ignore it. I made reference to "increasing financial support for the various provinces through different types of schemes devised by the individual branches". They are not sufficient though, in my view.

I respect your point of view. I have a different one.

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Yes I'm aware of the Munster Patrons Programme which you have mentioned once or twice, or ten times previously.....  

Right now though, the branches are not set up corporately to allow for external investors - that's why the work is being done - at IRFU level - on seeing how their structure could be changed to facilitate that.  Similar to what SRU are doing.

So why did you ignore it if you knew about it. The people on Munster's Commerical Board are those who would be likely to have the funds to invest in a Province and they are not jumping about ready to do it and have gone down a different route.

Whatever about Leinster & Ulster, I just don't see Munster selling its sole to some sugar daddy.

I didn't ignore it. I made reference to "increasing financial support for the various provinces through different types of schemes devised by the individual branches".   They are not sufficient though, in my view.

I respect your point of view.  I have a different one.

What is sufficient in your view?

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:and ... I don't see the IRFU entering any franchising/partership deal with sugar daddies or big business. If Denis O'Brien hasn't bought Leinster at this stage (to annoy Tony O'Reilly), it will never happen.

We'll see.  And Denis O'Brien couldn't afford it at the moment anyway......

Which is a relevant point to consider about these sugar daddies - what happens when they hit a financial bump? I just can't see Tom Grace allowing the IRFU to go down that road.

When you look at the actions of the Munster Commerical Board (some heavy financial heavy hitters), they don't seem to have gone down that route either - and have set up a Patrons Programme instead (where individuals commit to between 30 and 100,000 for 3 years).

Yes I'm aware of the Munster Patrons Programme which you have mentioned once or twice, or ten times previously.....  

Right now though, the branches are not set up corporately to allow for external investors - that's why the work is being done - at IRFU level - on seeing how their structure could be changed to facilitate that.  Similar to what SRU are doing.

So why did you ignore it if you knew about it. The people on Munster's Commerical Board are those who would be likely to have the funds to invest in a Province and they are not jumping about ready to do it and have gone down a different route.

Whatever about Leinster & Ulster, I just don't see Munster selling its sole to some sugar daddy.

I didn't ignore it. I made reference to "increasing financial support for the various provinces through different types of schemes devised by the individual branches".   They are not sufficient though, in my view.

I respect your point of view.  I have a different one.

What is sufficient in your view?

I don't have a specific figure but sufficient that they don't depend on having a Patrons Programme, (instead it's a value add benefit). Enough so that they can meet repayments on the stadium debt and clear it so that it becomes a genuine revenue earner for the Branch and IRFU and or allow them to exercise the buy back clause and benefit from it outright. Enough to build and develop their squad further.

I'm sure that Garret Fitzgerald might come up with some other things. And maybe Munster might prefer not to and can manage as they are.

Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

It's up to Munster and the other provinces to put together the best business case of how they should operate and be financed in the future. Private investment/stake holdings may be part of that picture.

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

It's up to Munster and the other provinces to put together the best business case of how they should operate and be financed in the future. Private investment/stake holdings may be part of that picture.  

You claimed in your opening post that:

Pot Hale wrote:But these adhoc business supports and extended sponsorships/player promotions and brand ambassadors do not fill the coffers of the branches sufficiently to grow and expand, it's sufficient only to pay the salaries of 2-3 players to keep them in place against ever higher competing offers from the TV-deal-enriched clubs in England and France.

So why is it up to the Provinces now if you don't think what they are doing now is good enough?

The key surely has to be better TV deals and better marketing. Inviting sugar daddies to throw money at teams is not a sustainable model. Money and power needs to be fairly distributed amongst the unions. who can then use the money as they see fit.

Longer term Italy needs to show its worthy of entrants and to get on a secure stable footing. I would also like to see and expansion to maybe 20 teams once finances allow with two ten team divisions with promotion and relegation

I don't see a need to privatise the provinces at the moment. They're being run very efficiently anyway and are fairly competitive in Europe. The Welsh regions should be a lesson. They've been having a power struggle there since the regions started.


The Pro12 is trying to expand the league. Thats a good move in my opinion. They have to look long term. Also the TV deals are not close to what the league could be getting. Hopefully a bit of new competition (Eir Sport) will drive that revenue upwards.

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

Isn't that down to the FAI? To be honest I'm not sure how that whole New Stadium Ltd thing works.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

It's up to Munster and the other provinces to put together the best business case of how they should operate and be financed in the future. Private investment/stake holdings may be part of that picture.  

You claimed in your opening post that:

Pot Hale wrote:But these adhoc business supports and extended sponsorships/player promotions and brand ambassadors do not fill the coffers of the branches sufficiently to grow and expand, it's sufficient only to pay the salaries of 2-3 players to keep them in place against ever higher competing offers from the TV-deal-enriched clubs in England and France.

So why is it up to the Provinces now if you don't think what they are doing now is good enough?

What is up to the Provinces now?

profitius wrote:I don't see a need to privatise the provinces at the moment. They're being run very efficiently anyway and are fairly competitive in Europe. The Welsh regions should be a lesson. They've been having a power struggle there since the regions started.


The Pro12 is trying to expand the league. Thats a good move in my opinion. They have to look long term. Also the TV deals are not close to what the league could be getting. Hopefully a bit of new competition (Eir Sport) will drive that revenue upwards.

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

Isn't that down to the FAI? To be honest I'm not sure how that whole New Stadium Ltd thing works.

No, its not down the FAI. Its operating costs of the Aviva Stadium (3m last year) - even more than the Munster Operating losses. Yet we hear nothing about that.

IRFU also bailed the FAI out (by buying some of their share in the Aviva for about 33m).

So you see, the IRFU has loads of money to throw around the place.

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:Munster owe the IRFU something like 9m for Thomond Park. You want to sell off Munster for 9m to some investor so that the IRFU gets its money back?

Surely the better idea would be for the IRFU to sell off its interest in Thomond Park to a developer and Munster just rent it like Leinster does with RDS or Connacht with the Dog Track?

The IRFU have a 50% stake in the loss making* Aviva Stadium company (New Stadium Ltd) where it has invested approx. 110m for that stake and won't get its money back. They invested 15m in Thomond Park 8 years ago, so far has got 6m back, so for 9m the IRFU own 50% of Thomond for a stake of 9m.


*Last time I looked it was losing 3m per annum and not a word is said about that.

It's up to Munster and the other provinces to put together the best business case of how they should operate and be financed in the future. Private investment/stake holdings may be part of that picture.  

You claimed in your opening post that:

Pot Hale wrote:But these adhoc business supports and extended sponsorships/player promotions and brand ambassadors do not fill the coffers of the branches sufficiently to grow and expand, it's sufficient only to pay the salaries of 2-3 players to keep them in place against ever higher competing offers from the TV-deal-enriched clubs in England and France.

So why is it up to the Provinces now if you don't think what they are doing now is good enough?

What is up to the Provinces now?  

This:

Pot Hale wrote:It's up to Munster and the other provinces to put together the best business case of how they should operate and be financed in the future. Private investment/stake holdings may be part of that picture.

Yes it is up to them to build their best business case for the future. That's part of what the CEO and management team do.

Pot Hale wrote:Yes it is up to them to build their best business case for the future.  That's part of what the CEO and management team do.  

So why scoff at the plan that the Munster Commercial Board has come up with?


(as an aside, I see Doug Howlett was at Michael Flatley's mother's funeral! Flatly is a bit Munster fan). Doug Howlett is Munster's Corporate Ambassador.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Yes it is up to them to build their best business case for the future.  That's part of what the CEO and management team do.  

So why scoff at the plan that the Munster Commercial Board has come up with?


(as an aside, I see Doug Howlett was at Michael Flatley's mother's funeral! Flatly is a bit Munster fan). Doug Howlett is Munster's Corporate Ambassador.

I think you might be overreacting slightly.  I haven't scoffed at any plan.  Have you seen this plan? How do you know if it is sufficient?

Pot Hale wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Yes it is up to them to build their best business case for the future.  That's part of what the CEO and management team do.  

So why scoff at the plan that the Munster Commercial Board has come up with?


(as an aside, I see Doug Howlett was at Michael Flatley's mother's funeral! Flatly is a bit Munster fan). Doug Howlett is Munster's Corporate Ambassador.

I think you might be overreacting slightly.  I haven't scoffed at any plan.  Have you seen this plan?  How do you know if it is sufficient?  

The plan is expandable.

------
Chairman of the Munster Rugby Commercial Board, Niall FitzGerald KBE April 2015

"Just in pure revenue terms we have generated and additional €2m for Munster and specifically that comes through our Patrons Programme. Our patrons are people who are prepare to commit sums of up to €30,000 over three years to fund initiatives and activities and therefore take them off the books of Munster. This has been the most significant impact of the Commercial Board to date.

Our Patrons Programme has sponsored the Munster Rugby Academy through the combination of Greencore as the corporate partner and a further twenty individual patrons. Also, the Community Programme is now on the way to being fully sponsored with a core sponsor in Marks & Spencer (corporate partner) along with individual patrons and that will be completed in the next few months.

"We also have several other programmes that will be sponsored by patrons including the Talent Identification Programme, and the High Performance Programmes for forwards and backs.

"Other achievements include the sponsoring of what is now known as Irish Independent Park in Cork - the former Musgrave Park, assistance in the funding of the Single Training Centre at the University of Limerick campus and the starting of the Diaspora Programme which in my view is of upmost importance for the future sustainability of funding for Munster.

"Our Diaspora Programme sees us tie in with Munster fans all around the world, starting with our closest neighbour, the UK. We had the first London Diaspora Dinner last September and will have another this September and that allows us to build up a network of people who, while they don't live in Munster or indeed Ireland, are still very committed to the success of Munster and its ideals and are prepared to support that in very tangible ways, particularly financially."

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/20311.php#.WHU9o5LCPMV

"Working with Doug is an absolute delight, not only is he a great player, but a great personality and a very fine human being. He is a great ambassador for Munster, people respond to him very well. He has an easy way about him and is incredibly humble. When travelling with Doug people recognise him very often, so you could say I have a new role as the photographer for Doug and the fans who wish to have their picture taken with him."

Niall also discusses the immediate initiatives that the Board will focus on in the coming months.

"We want to extend the Patrons Programme. There are currently two large corporate patrons and about thirty individual patrons. My view is that, if we do it properly, there's no reason why we can't expand it to at least two hundred or even three hundred patrons over time. Our Diaspora Programme can be widened to become a worldwide programme.

"We also want to introduce what will be known as the Friends Programme for the diaspora, not only for the funding of ongoing activities but for capital commitments such as the Single Training Centre in UL.

"We are also developing a High Performance Institute as part of a joint venture with an American company which specialises in running programmes for corporates around the whole area of physical and mental fitness, nutrition, etc. Munster are currently finishing negotiations with them to be the licensee holder for this programme in Europe and it's a very logical fit with the club. When up and running, companies will be able to bring their staff on team building courses that are much deeper and broader than more conventional approaches - getting staff to understand what they need to do to enhance their physical fitness, emotional wellbeing, nutritional profile and more. The courses will be run over the course of three days at the new Single Training Centre and the expertise will be provided by Munster staff in the areas of fitness, nutrition, high performance, etc.

"Elsewhere, we will continually strive to improve in the areas of ticketing and customer retention, maximising the potential of stadia through events other than matches, and having a state of the art digital face to the world through our website and social media channels, allowing us to connect and interact with every current and potential Munster fan around the world."

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/20316.php#.WHVExpLCPMV

That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

IRFU contributed nothing except the cash for the redevelopment you mean?

Also dont the IRFU get a bigger sure of the revenues from the Aviva now?

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

The same IRFU that has dug Munster out of a rather deep hole, very recently? As a Munster fan, you should be very, very, grateful to them.

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

The same IRFU that has dug Munster out of a rather deep hole, very recently? As a Munster fan, you should be very, very, grateful to them.

The same IRFU that dug the FAI out with 33m because they were unable to service their part of the Aviva debt? I just hope Munster told the IRFU to do one.

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

IRFU contributed nothing except the cash for the redevelopment you mean?

Also dont the IRFU get a bigger sure of the revenues from the Aviva now?

No they didn't. They contributed a loan of 15m, got 6m back while Munster raised about 32m. I wonder would any other Province have been able to raise 32m to build their own stadium?

Sin é wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

The same IRFU that has dug Munster out of a rather deep hole, very recently? As a Munster fan, you should be very, very, grateful to them.

The same IRFU that dug the FAI out with 33m because they were unable to service their part of the Aviva debt? I just hope Munster told the IRFU to do one.

The whataboutery isn't relevant. What is relevant is that the IRFU dug Munster out of a hole. Something you don't seem to appreciate at all.

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

The same IRFU that has dug Munster out of a rather deep hole, very recently? As a Munster fan, you should be very, very, grateful to them.

The same IRFU that dug the FAI out with 33m because they were unable to service their part of the Aviva debt? I just hope Munster told the IRFU to do one.

The whataboutery isn't relevant. What is relevant is that the IRFU dug Munster out of a hole. Something you don't seem to appreciate at all.

No, I don't. Anything Munster have received from the IRFU, it has paid back 10-fold.

Sin é wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:That all sounds lovely.

€2m in 2015?!

With that kind of income rolling in each year, how on earth did they persuade the IRFU to bail them out for over a million last year, as well as not pay the principal on the stadium loan for the second year running?

They're a smart bunch of hooers.  

Ok - you've persuaded me - Munster don't need any financial support.

I reckon the Munster Commerical Board told the IRFU to f off! Tom Grace is notoriously tight. I think its an absolute disgrace that the IRFU has contributed nothing to the redevelopment of Thomond Park and yet can throw money at the Aviva on behalf of the FAI.

The same IRFU that has dug Munster out of a rather deep hole, very recently? As a Munster fan, you should be very, very, grateful to them.

The same IRFU that dug the FAI out with 33m because they were unable to service their part of the Aviva debt? I just hope Munster told the IRFU to do one.

The whataboutery isn't relevant. What is relevant is that the IRFU dug Munster out of a hole. Something you don't seem to appreciate at all.

No, I don't. Anything Munster have received from the IRFU, it has paid back 10-fold.

 

Munster didn't raise the 32m either. You're dreaming again in la-la land.

A good chunk of it came from Lottery funding that the IRFU pitched for and secured.

Pot Hale wrote:Munster didn't raise the 32m either.  You're dreaming again in la-la land.

A good chunk of it came from Lottery funding that the IRFU pitched for and secured.

Who in the IRFU pitched for it? Pa Whelan? I think they got 8m lottery funds.

Money came from Limerick City Council, Shannon Development, Sale of 10 year tickets (10m approx), JP McManus, Buy a Brick etc.

I presume you know that the 10 year tickets are for sale this year. Last time they sold about 1800 at 5,500 each.

Cyril wrote:A British/Irish league is probably the future. I don't want it either.

I think it's the only way that the Pro12 teams will catch up with the others but why would the English want it? I can't see it happenning as they would have to give up quite alot.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Cyril wrote:A British/Irish league is probably the future. I don't want it either.

I think it's the only way that the Pro12 teams will catch up with the others but why would the English want it? I can't see it happenning as they would have to give up quite alot.

They won't want it, and I don't want it.

I'm not yet convinced it's the only way for PRO12 to catch up, though. Different ways are being explored, and hopefully any new broadcasting deals will go some way in helping to close the gap. Not that it will ever be as lucrative as the current AP/T14 deals, it simply won't.

The Provinces are not too far behind those of the AP. The Scots are making ground, and are looking at changing their model to encourage more funds. The Welsh Regions are a bit behind, but are in talks with the WRU about increased funding (possible change to current model), and in 2 years the stadium debt should be paid off. The Italians are a basket case, but there is talk of setting up a side in Rome.

Munchkin wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Cyril wrote:A British/Irish league is probably the future. I don't want it either.

I think it's the only way that the Pro12 teams will catch up with the others but why would the English want it? I can't see it happenning as they would have to give up quite alot.

They won't want it, and I don't want it.

I'm not yet convinced it's the only way for PRO12 to catch up, though. Different ways are being explored, and hopefully any new broadcasting deals will go some way in helping to close the gap. Not that it will ever be as lucrative as the current AP/T14 deals, it simply won't.

The Provinces are not too far behind those of the AP. The Scots are making ground, and are looking at changing their model to encourage more funds. The Welsh Regions are a bit behind, but are in talks with the WRU about increased funding (possible change to current model), and in 2 years the stadium debt should be paid off. The Italians are a basket case, but there is talk of setting up a side in Rome.

When is the new pro12 tv deal announced?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Cyril wrote:A British/Irish league is probably the future. I don't want it either.

I think it's the only way that the Pro12 teams will catch up with the others but why would the English want it? I can't see it happenning as they would have to give up quite alot.

They won't want it, and I don't want it.

I'm not yet convinced it's the only way for PRO12 to catch up, though. Different ways are being explored, and hopefully any new broadcasting deals will go some way in helping to close the gap. Not that it will ever be as lucrative as the current AP/T14 deals, it simply won't.

The Provinces are not too far behind those of the AP. The Scots are making ground, and are looking at changing their model to encourage more funds. The Welsh Regions are a bit behind, but are in talks with the WRU about increased funding (possible change to current model), and in 2 years the stadium debt should be paid off. The Italians are a basket case, but there is talk of setting up a side in Rome.

When is the new pro12 tv deal announced?

Not sure. I think it will be next year before we hear. The present 4 year SKY deal, which started in 2014/15 season, was announced around may of the 2013. So I would expect any announcement for a new deal, starting the 2019/20 season, to be made sometime before the start of the 2018/19 season.

How much do you think the new deal has to be, for the gap between the English and French to be significantly closed?

I'm not sure the broadcasters are there for it. Sky have a product which is not in demand and for which there won't be a huge bidding process for, and the other terrestrial broadcasters aren't exactly renowned for being big players in sports tv deals. I'd love to think it would be for £25million - which I think would go some way in catching up with the rest. But I just can't see it.

RugbyFan100 wrote:How much do you think the new deal has to be, for the gap between the English and French to be significantly closed?

I'm not sure the broadcasters are there for it. Sky have a product which is not in demand and for which there won't be a huge bidding process for, and the other terrestrial broadcasters aren't exactly renowned for being big players in sports tv deals. I'd love to think it would be for £25million - which I think would go some way in catching up with the rest. But I just can't see it.

I would settle for just getting closer, right now. I don't think we will get close to £25m. Somewhere close to £17m would be more realistic (and I did just pull that from thin air), but much does depend on competing bids, and increased viewership.

Sin é wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Munster didn't raise the 32m either.  You're dreaming again in la-la land.

A good chunk of it came from Lottery funding that the IRFU pitched for and secured.

Who in the IRFU pitched for it? Pa Whelan? I think they got 8m lottery funds.

Money came from Limerick City Council, Shannon Development, Sale of 10 year tickets (10m approx), JP McManus, Buy a Brick etc.

I presume you know that the 10 year tickets are for sale this year. Last time they sold about 1800 at 5,500 each.

Yes - I am aware and you've stated all of the above a number of times previously.

Munster may well be able to demonstrate that their business is healthy and doesn't require further support. If so, well and good.

Munchkin wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:How much do you think the new deal has to be, for the gap between the English and French to be significantly closed?

I'm not sure the broadcasters are there for it. Sky have a product which is not in demand and for which there won't be a huge bidding process for, and the other terrestrial broadcasters aren't exactly renowned for being big players in sports tv deals. I'd love to think it would be for £25million - which I think would go some way in catching up with the rest. But I just can't see it.

I would settle for just getting closer, right now. I don't think we will get close to £25m. Somewhere close to £17m would be more realistic (and I did just pull that from thin air), but much does depend on competing bids, and increased viewership.

What is it now, €11m? I think it could get close to €20m the next time. Still a long way behind the other leagues but its a start. It all depends on competition. Sky had no competition last time so they could offer a small fee for it. Eir Sport could be the key. They might see getting the pro12 as a coup. The current deal runs on at the end of the 17/18 season.

As for the future. I think expansion is the way to go. The long term aim should be for a Super Euro league and to make that the teams' number 1 priority. The potential of that would be massive.

Its also interesting to see a new Netflix like service for sports is up and running in Germany. The Germans can now see the pro12 as well as other leagues with German commentary. My ideal scenario would be a TV channel or Netflix like internet service that shows only the pro12 and maybe other rugby. That way as a rugby fan it would be cheaper to subscribe to and all the money would be going to rugby rather than paying the wages of soccer players.

The problem for bidders such as the incumbent, Sky, or any possible competitor such as EirSport is what are they going to be offered vs what do they want?

Terrestrial still delivers better viewing figures, and that's true of BT Sport too for the AP.

Will a similar number of matches to the current primary broadcaster deal be sufficient or will there need to be more?  What are secondary broadcasters likely to offer if the number of matches reduces?  BBC Wales has the next best deal since its TV territory has four teams in it.  NI is market on its own with only BBC NI in the mix, ROI will possibly have Eirsport, RTE, TG4 and TV3 bidding for it.   RTE have lost the Six Nations to Eirsport and the RWC to Tv3, so they may feel it's worthwhile putting in a bid.   However, a more attractive offer may be to have an ITV Network terrestrial platform come together that would work in ROI through TV3, UTV in NI, and ITV regional stations in the UK.  And then there's the options for what can be delivered on digital platforms which is becoming an increasing part of the mix in how people view programmes individually, although less so for pubs/hotels.  That would be a substantial broadcasting investment to ensure that all three/four countries rugby viewer needs were met.

Currently the Welsh regions get the lions share of the approx £4.5m paid by BBC Wales plus about £2m as their share from the Sky deal of £5m per annum.  The Sky deal is split by number of teams between Irl/Wal/Sco as the 3 shareholders in Celtic Rugby.   So it's not as lucrative for the Welsh.   You'd figure that in any new deal with a primary broadcaster and secondary terrestrial stations, the WRU and PRW would want to see their existing share of TV monies be the minimum they would receive under any new deal plus whatever increase can be negotiated on top. That would put it into the £18-20m bracket if greater equity of revenues was achieved next time around for the teams involved.

Pot Hale wrote:

Currently the Welsh regions get the lions share of the approx £4.5m paid by BBC Wales plus about £2m as their share from the Sky deal of £5m per annum.

BBC Wales pay nearly the same as Sky do? I'm quite shocked by that. Do BBC Northern Ireland also pay £4.5m? I'm guessing not as the deal is only £11m. How much do BBCNI pay?

 

The Sky deal is split by number of teams between Irl/Wal/Sco as the 3 shareholders in Celtic Rugby.   So it's not as lucrative for the Welsh.   You'd figure that in any new deal with a primary broadcaster and secondary terrestrial stations, the WRU and PRW would want to see their existing share of TV monies be the minimum they would receive under any new deal plus whatever increase can be negotiated on top. That would put it into the £18-20m bracket if greater equity of revenues was achieved next time around for the teams involved.

That's double what the deal is currently worth. Has the Pro12 has really kicked on enough to double the tv deal?

Pot, just interested to know, what is going to happen to all these extra funds? Spunked on keeping Welsh players in Wales? This could be a race to the bottom.

[quote="RugbyFan100"]

Pot Hale wrote:
 

The Sky deal is split by number of teams between Irl/Wal/Sco as the 3 shareholders in Celtic Rugby.   So it's not as lucrative for the Welsh.   You'd figure that in any new deal with a primary broadcaster and secondary terrestrial stations, the WRU and PRW would want to see their existing share of TV monies be the minimum they would receive under any new deal plus whatever increase can be negotiated on top. That would put it into the £18-20m bracket if greater equity of revenues was achieved next time around for the teams involved.

That's double what the deal is currently worth. Has the Pro12 has really kicked on enough to double the tv deal?

Pro12 get bigger ratings than the AP and they get over £50m a year