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

First topic message reminder :

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......

marty2086 wrote:

To increase the budget they were sticking to allow them to be more competitive this was explained to you before

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/irfu-paid-an-extra-1m-to-players-last-season-as-french-and-english-clubs-drove-up-wages-410611.html

Could you be a star and tell the Irish examiner then, please? First line of their report, above, states:

"The IRFU contributed an additional unbudgeted €250,000 to each of the four Irish provinces last season to assist with rising player salaries." The word "unbudgeted" seems to contradict the opinion of you pair.

Oh, hang on, it's not the Irish Examiner as, lower down in the article we get:

"A statement from the Union read:

"The Irish Rugby Football Union provided an unbudgeted additional €1m in the 2015/16 season to the provinces (€250,000 each) to assist with the difficulties experienced by all in the player contracting market."

So it is the IRFU noting it was unbudgeted. Maybe you could write to Philip Browne to tell him of his error, Martyn? Or, as is easier and proper, just admitting to getting this wrong (too).

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:https://www.lequipe.fr/Rugby/Actualites/Hans-peter-wild-choisi-pour-reprendre-le-stade-francais/804142

What a xenophobe.

You're not a xenophobe just an idiot, Savare stated he chose the merger opinion because he didn't want the club in foreign hands just because in desperation he sells it o a foreigner doesn't mean he didn't make the previous xenophobic comment. If that's too hard for you to figure out then that's your problem

Where's the quote on "foreign", genius? Put it out there for us to see.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:https://www.lequipe.fr/Rugby/Actualites/Hans-peter-wild-choisi-pour-reprendre-le-stade-francais/804142

What a xenophobe.

You're not a xenophobe just an idiot, Savare stated he chose the merger opinion because he didn't want the club in foreign hands just because in desperation he sells it o a foreigner doesn't mean he didn't make the previous xenophobic comment. If that's too hard for you to figure out then that's your problem

Where's the quote on "foreign", genius? Put it out there for us to see.

Go Google it as you are more than capable of doing or check the thread on the merger which Im sure has it

The IRFU have always had a aim which is to stay competitive with the top English clubs - that is our yardstick when determining salary levels.

That is straight out of the mouth of the Ulster CEO whilst talking to him..

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

To increase the budget they were sticking to allow them to be more competitive this was explained to you before

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/irfu-paid-an-extra-1m-to-players-last-season-as-french-and-english-clubs-drove-up-wages-410611.html

Could you be a star and tell the Irish examiner then, please? First line of their report, above, states:

"The IRFU contributed an additional unbudgeted €250,000 to each of the four Irish provinces last season to assist with rising player salaries." The word "unbudgeted" seems to contradict the opinion of you pair.

Oh, hang on, it's not the Irish Examiner as, lower down in the article we get:

"A statement from the Union read:

"The Irish Rugby Football Union provided an unbudgeted additional €1m in the 2015/16 season to the provinces (€250,000 each) to assist with the difficulties experienced by all in the player contracting market."

So it is the IRFU noting it was unbudgeted. Maybe you could write to Philip Browne to tell him of his error, Martyn? Or, as is easier and proper, just admitting to getting this wrong (too).

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

geoff999rugby wrote:

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.  

Rightio. So what's the payment from the international game income alone?

marty2086 wrote:

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

The Branches must have to send the IRFU their budgets as the IRFU has to make up the loss. Come on, think about. The bloody Chief Executive of the IRFU just directly contradicted you and "sin e". At least man up to admit that.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

The Branches must have to send the IRFU their budgets as the IRFU has to make up the loss. Come on, think about. The bloody Chief Executive of the IRFU just directly contradicted you and "sin e". At least man up to admit that.

So you are saying the provinces spent that money and that was to cover the loss?

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

The Branches must have to send the IRFU their budgets as the IRFU has to make up the loss. Come on, think about. The bloody Chief Executive of the IRFU just directly contradicted you and "sin e". At least man up to admit that.

So you are saying the provinces spent that money and that was to cover the loss?

Sigh.

Read Browne's words. The IRFU pumped in a further €1m UNBUDGETED thus proving "sin e" was, yet again, writing nonsense.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

The Branches must have to send the IRFU their budgets as the IRFU has to make up the loss. Come on, think about. The bloody Chief Executive of the IRFU just directly contradicted you and "sin e". At least man up to admit that.

So you are saying the provinces spent that money and that was to cover the loss?

Sigh.

Read Browne's words. The IRFU pumped in a further €1m UNBUDGETED thus proving "sin e" was, yet again, writing nonsense.

No it doesn't this is a bit like you claiming WalesOnline backed up what you had written when they contradicted but Ill just leave you to play with yourself and your twitter fanboys

I must remember that when people are talking about their accounts and say unbudgeted they aren't talking about their own budgets

geoff999rugby wrote:The IRFU have always had a aim which is to stay competitive with the top English clubs - that is our yardstick when determining salary levels.

That is straight out of the mouth of the Ulster CEO whilst talking to him..

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.  

Look, you are making me agree with Phil, please stop. Because you are basically strengthening his point. The Provinces in Ireland would not stand a chance of competing with the English and French clubs if they were stand alone. They need extra funds from the IRFU to keep up with them, which is basically what Phil is saying.

LordDowlais wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:The IRFU have always had a aim which is to stay competitive with the top English clubs - that is our yardstick when determining salary levels.

That is straight out of the mouth of the Ulster CEO whilst talking to him..

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.  

Look, you are making me agree with Phil, please stop. Because you are basically strengthening his point. The Provinces in Ireland would not stand a chance of competing with the English and French clubs if they were stand alone. They need extra funds from the IRFU to keep up with them, which is basically what Phil is saying.

No actually that's not true, most clubs couldn't survive without someone putting money in like Sarries, Cardiff, Racing and so on and so on

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

It wasn't budgeted for by the IRFU who set their budgets years in advance

The Branches must have to send the IRFU their budgets as the IRFU has to make up the loss. Come on, think about. The bloody Chief Executive of the IRFU just directly contradicted you and "sin e". At least man up to admit that.

Nope the budgets are not distinct.

There is money earned by the Provinces that goes directly to the IRFU.
There is money spent in the Provinces that comes directly from the IRFU
There is money spent in the Provinces, outside the Professional game, that goes via the Provincial branches.

The bottomline is the Provinces are not distinct legal and financial entities and therefore they are not required, and do not, retain accounts pertaining only to the professional teams
showing their profit and loss.
They are required to work within budgets and are held accountable for those budgets by the IRFU.

You cannot draw a direct comparison with the Welsh Regions as to viability

marty2086 wrote:

No it doesn't this is a bit like you claiming WalesOnline backed up what you had written when they contradicted but Ill just leave you to play with yourself and your twitter fanboys

How on earth did they contradict me?!?!?

Martyn, I wish somebody would teach you some self awareness. You get your arse handed to you each time you choose this stupid approach with me.

LordDowlais wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:The IRFU have always had a aim which is to stay competitive with the top English clubs - that is our yardstick when determining salary levels.

That is straight out of the mouth of the Ulster CEO whilst talking to him..

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.  

Look, you are making me agree with Phil, please stop. Because you are basically strengthening his point. The Provinces in Ireland would not stand a chance of competing with the English and French clubs if they were stand alone. They need extra funds from the IRFU to keep up with them, which is basically what Phil is saying.

We never have claimed to compete with the French and never have.
Like Phil you fail to understand how Irish finances work

LordDowlais wrote:

Look, you are making me agree with Phil, please stop. Because you are basically strengthening his point. The Provinces in Ireland would not stand a chance of competing with the English and French clubs if they were stand alone. They need extra funds from the IRFU to keep up with them, which is basically what Phil is saying.

Eh? The branches are the IRFU.

The IRFU uses its money to wisely keep them competitive.

geoff999rugby wrote:
We never have claimed to compete with the French and never have.
Like Phil you fail to understand how Irish finances work

Utter drivel.

When Leinster and Munster were winning in Europe they were constantly spending at or above the French salary cap.

geoff999rugby wrote:

Nope the budgets are not distinct.

There is money earned by the Provinces that goes directly to the IRFU.
There is money spent in the Provinces that comes directly from the IRFU
There is money spent in the Provinces, outside the Professional game, that goes via the Provincial branches.

The bottomline is the Provinces are not distinct legal and financial entities and therefore they are not required, and do not, retain accounts pertaining only to the professional teams
showing their profit and loss.
They are required to work within budgets and are held accountable for those budgets by the IRFU.

You cannot draw a direct comparison with the Welsh Regions as to viability

Thanks for the lesson in the bleeding obvious that I've known for a couple of decades.

Nice to see its only Ulster who (part) publish independent figures via their own website.

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:Hey Phil, Munster are selling 2,000 x 10 & 5 year tickets at the moment at just under 5K and 3K a pop.

Just thought I'd let you know in case you are interested.

Great news. Could you tell Erasmus, as he's moaning about not having enough money.

Regardless of how much money anyone has, the Provinces stick to their budget.

Really? So why did the IRFU have to pump in that extra €1m?

Less earnings from gate receipts (by not reaching knockouts in either competition). The difference for Munster this year is that it has had 3 extra games that sold well - Munster v Maori, Champs Cup Semi & Pro 12 semi. Thats the guts of 2m euro this season when you take into account sponsor bonus etc which it didn't earn over the last few years.

Sin é wrote:
Less earnings from gate receipts (by not reaching knockouts in either competition). The difference for Munster this year is that it has had 3 extra games that sold well - Munster v Maori, Champs Cup Semi & Pro 12 semi. Thats the guts of 2m euro this season when you take into account sponsor bonus etc which it didn't earn over the last few years.

So they didn't keep to their budget!!?!?!? You've just bloody well contradicted what you wrote not so long ago.

Hopefully that €2m will go on debt repayment and not to emergency South African player signings.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I used to think the mismanagement of the SRU was bad, just what are the WRU playing at?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40030690

How is that in anyway the WRUs fault?

Quite. Other than them, in effect, turning down the opportunity.

You mean other than contradicting this?

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I used to think the mismanagement of the SRU was bad, just what are the WRU playing at?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/40030690

How is that in anyway the WRUs fault?

Quite. Other than them, in effect, turning down the opportunity.

You mean other than contradicting this?

How dumb are you? They turned down the opportunity as they couldn't agree to the financial terms, which is exactly as I wrote.

You are painfully stupid. I'd forgotten just how stupid you are. You make Robins look like Stephen Hawking.

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:
We never have claimed to compete with the French and never have.
Like Phil you fail to understand how Irish finances work

Utter drivel.

When Leinster and Munster were winning in Europe they were constantly spending at or above the French salary cap.

They were also earning by winning games which resulted in extra income for the IRFU. All competition earnings go into the IRFU's central pot. The Provinces get to keep gate receipts up to QFs/Semis where the IRFU take a cut from the gates. The 3 big Irish Provinces have decent gates.

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:
Less earnings from gate receipts (by not reaching knockouts in either competition). The difference for Munster this year is that it has had 3 extra games that sold well - Munster v Maori, Champs Cup Semi & Pro 12 semi. Thats the guts of 2m euro this season when you take into account sponsor bonus etc which it didn't earn over the last few years.

So they didn't keep to their budget!!?!?!? You've just bloody well contradicted what you wrote not so long ago.

Hopefully that €2m will go on debt repayment and not to emergency South African player signings.

No, they didn't reach their target of making knock-outs in Pro12 & Champs Cup (which they have mainly done for previous 20 years).

edit: and there was the opening of the new state-of-the-art training centre in Limerick - I'm sure that required some financing.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:The IRFU have always had a aim which is to stay competitive with the top English clubs - that is our yardstick when determining salary levels.

That is straight out of the mouth of the Ulster CEO whilst talking to him..

Also of the money from the IRFU to the provinces much of it is money generated by the Provinces, which is pooled centrally, so it is merely giving back what the Provinces would earn if the were independent.  

Look, you are making me agree with Phil, please stop. Because you are basically strengthening his point. The Provinces in Ireland would not stand a chance of competing with the English and French clubs if they were stand alone. They need extra funds from the IRFU to keep up with them, which is basically what Phil is saying.

No actually that's not true, most clubs couldn't survive without someone putting money in like Sarries, Cardiff, Racing and so on and so on

Yeah, we all know this, these clubs are all in debt because of it, the IRFU are to the four provinces, what the rich owners are to the clubs they own. The thing is, there is no FFP in rugby like there is in football, because if there was, a lot of clubs would be in trouble.

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:
We never have claimed to compete with the French and never have.
Like Phil you fail to understand how Irish finances work

Utter drivel.

When Leinster and Munster were winning in Europe they were constantly spending at or above the French salary cap.

To clarify since the mega money has gone into France we have not competed with the French - about 2008.

So possibly when Munster won but in that case the French were spending a lot less.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:End of season figures on attendances for the PRO!2 - up 26,000 net overall on last season.

How have you calculated Judgement Day in those figures?

50/50 was the only way that I could think of.

Getting back to The Future for the PRO12 - what this topic is about (rather than how much the IRFU assist the provinces etc)

Super Rugby is due to be reduced from 18 to 15 teams once more next season, South Africa will lose two sides.

It's the Port Elizabeth-based Kings and the Cheetahs of Bloemfontein, however, who one leading administrator wishes to see turn the PRO12 into the PRO14.

Former Southern Spears chief executive Tony McKeever has revealed that he has already pitched the idea of an interhemispheric link-up to PRO12 officials.

https://www.balls.ie/rugby/super-rugby-teams-in-pro12-363483

Former Southern Spears chief executive Tony McKeever
also said
“With the size of the current Currie Cup and Super Rugby squads, both the Cheetahs and EP Rugby could easily accommodate this schedule and start playing in September 2017.”

Could it really work?

The teams are set up already so would be easy to add, would th ecalander work, would they be able to play in the C-Cup?
Rumors are that US and Canada are getting closer to adding teams as well?

The more teams they add the more of a clusterphuck this league is.

I'm just glad they got rid of the 'every union must be represented in europe' balls. Should have been done at the outset instead of embarrassing the Italians on a yearly basis.

gc has hit on one of the issues of adding none European teams, would they be eligible for the ERCC? If not do the Pro12 forfeit places if they finish in the qualifying spots?

Also if it moves to a conference system how does that affect qualification?

Kingshu wrote:Getting back to The Future for the PRO12 - what this topic is about (rather than how much the IRFU assist the provinces etc)

Super Rugby is due to be reduced from 18 to 15 teams once more next season, South Africa will lose two sides.

It's the Port Elizabeth-based Kings and the Cheetahs of Bloemfontein, however, who one leading administrator wishes to see turn the PRO12 into the PRO14.

Former Southern Spears chief executive Tony McKeever has revealed that he has already pitched the idea of an interhemispheric link-up to PRO12 officials.

https://www.balls.ie/rugby/super-rugby-teams-in-pro12-363483

Former Southern Spears chief executive Tony McKeever
also said
“With the size of the current Currie Cup and Super Rugby squads, both the Cheetahs and EP Rugby could easily accommodate this schedule and start playing in September 2017.”

Could it really work?

The teams are set up already so would be easy to add, would th ecalander work, would they be able to play in the C-Cup?
Rumors are that US and Canada are getting closer to adding teams as well?

I'd say the Yanks will be entering teams. The South Africans left it too late imo and only showed interest when they got the boot from super rugby.

I agree 2017-18 seems too early for the Saffers

Having said that there are rumours in the Provinces of bigger changes on the way but not this year.
I think I am right in saying the current World agreement on fixtures finishes at the next World Cup.

I would not dismiss the 2 saffers teams joining.
There was talk of 2 Big City teams - Houston and Rome perhaps ? (with the 2 failing/flailing Italian teams going under)
That would make a league of 14.

European qualification is not a problem - just the first 7 placed European Team qualify.
Very straight forward

geoff, it could well be a case of easier said than done

Would it be a stretch for teams outside Europe though to play in a European competition? It could generate extra revenue and grow brands

I though the talk was that Italy were removing Zebre and entering a Rome based team.

2 SA and 2 US/Can, would make 16 teams, two conferences of 8?

it would certainly add new markets, the important thing with SA teams is that they are already developed teams with a Fanbase and there is a TV Market already there.

With Italy and the US these have to be grown/grow but have potential.

So adding SA would generate extra revenue while these markets grow.

If teams are joining I hope that we have rules in place that sponsorship isn't allowed on names so we play the Cheetahs rather than the Toyota Cheetahs, and Ulster do not become Kingspan Ulster etc.

I would also like to see rules on shirt sponsorship come in like Football, so only a certain area can have sponsorship, some nice tops have been ruined by the amount of sponsors plastered everywhere.

I agree with you on shirt sponsors.

Going to Cape Town in February and was going to buy a Stormers shirt.
Having seen them on tele with the ugliest DHL logo, on the front, I'll not bother

Butt ugly doesn't even come close - absolute uck

How the various clubs are financed and by whom is very much part of what this thread is about - that's why I wrote it.

As Scottish and Irish move away from less dependency on union funding to finding more private finance, some if not all Welsh regions are having to get more financial support from their union, because private finance is not enough.

The two sets of annual reports from WRU and IRFU in the coming month will be interesting reading to see how finances have flowed in the respective unions.

Total professional game costs in the IRFU increased substantially (€5m approx) last year due in part to Munster's budget being in deficit due to overruns in spending and a sharp decrease in match-day income as well as the €1m additional IRFU-unbudgeted monies referred to above. Munster's gates have improved substantially this season and the improvement of both it and Leinster's performance in the PRO12 and European Cup have improved gates and competition income for the IRFU.

Competition Income for both unions comes from PRO12 and EPRC is returned to the clubs and forms part of the contribution they receive from their unions. Welsh regions would appear to receive more competition income pro rata than their Irish counterparts as I outlined in another thread previously. In addition, the Welsh regions receive monies separately for their appearance in the Anglo-Welsh Cup and Singha Sevens - competitions organised by PRL and RFU which the WRU does not have control over and since they are not stated in the WRU Annual Report, presumably flow to RRW for distribution to the regions.

IRFU contributions to the provinces (including central contract monies of €5m approx) have risen from approx €22m to €29m last season in the last 5-6 years. A further €5m is spent on the National Game total coaching team costs and match fees/bonuses for test players, bringing what they call Professional Game Costs to €34m approx. The provinces generate approx €10.5m in competition income. Welsh regions generate £9.7m. I would estimate that last year the IRFU spent over twice on central contracts (€5m) to what the WRU spent on dual contracts (£2.1m). That picture may have changed this year.

Welsh regions received a WRU contribution of approx £19.3m (€23.3m) made up of competition income from P12 and Euro, as well as agreed amounts under their participation agreement relating to dual contracts and direct funding. Test match fees and coaching team salaries are accounted for separately.

Sin é wrote:

They were also earning by winning games which resulted in extra income for the IRFU. All competition earnings go into the IRFU's central pot. The Provinces get to keep gate receipts up to QFs/Semis where the IRFU take a cut from the gates. The 3 big Irish Provinces have decent gates.

Erm, their competition was also "earning by winning games" but the IRFU Branches still had additional Union largesse.

Sin é wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:
Less earnings from gate receipts (by not reaching knockouts in either competition). The difference for Munster this year is that it has had 3 extra games that sold well - Munster v Maori, Champs Cup Semi & Pro 12 semi. Thats the guts of 2m euro this season when you take into account sponsor bonus etc which it didn't earn over the last few years.

So they didn't keep to their budget!!?!?!? You've just bloody well contradicted what you wrote not so long ago.

Hopefully that €2m will go on debt repayment and not to emergency South African player signings.

No, they didn't reach their target of making knock-outs in Pro12 & Champs Cup (which they have mainly done for previous 20 years).

edit: and there was the opening of the new state-of-the-art training centre in Limerick - I'm sure that required some financing.

So first you write how the Branches stick to their budgets and then, when proven otherwise, you backtrack.

Excellent. Thanks.

LordDowlais wrote:
Yeah, we all know this, these clubs are all in debt because of it, the IRFU are to the four provinces, what the rich owners are to the clubs they own. The thing is, there is no FFP in rugby like there is in football, because if there was, a lot of clubs would be in trouble.

If we had FFP then we couldn't have the present set up in Ireland and Scotland.

So bring it on.

geoff999rugby wrote:
To clarify since the mega money has gone into France we have not competed with the French - about 2008.

So possibly when Munster won but in that case the French were spending a lot less.

To clarify, when Leinster and Munster were winning HECs they were spending above the caps of England and France.

Pot Hale wrote:How the various clubs are financed and by whom is very much part of what this thread is about - that's why I wrote it.

As Scottish and Irish move away from less dependency on union funding to finding more private finance, some if not all Welsh regions are having to get more financial support from their union, because private finance is not enough.

The two sets of annual reports from WRU and IRFU in the coming month will be interesting reading to see how finances have flowed in the respective unions.  

Total professional game costs in the IRFU increased substantially (€5m approx) last year due in part to Munster's budget being in deficit due to overruns in spending and a sharp decrease in match-day income as well as the €1m additional IRFU-unbudgeted monies referred to above.    Munster's gates have improved substantially this season and the improvement of both it and Leinster's performance in the PRO12 and European Cup have improved gates and competition income for the IRFU.

Competition Income for both unions comes from PRO12 and EPRC is returned to the clubs  and forms part of the contribution they receive from their unions.   Welsh regions would appear to receive more competition income pro rata than their Irish counterparts as I outlined in another thread previously.  In addition, the Welsh regions receive monies separately for their appearance in the Anglo-Welsh Cup and Singha Sevens - competitions organised by PRL and RFU which the WRU does not have control over and since they are not stated in the WRU Annual Report, presumably flow to RRW for distribution to the regions.  

IRFU contributions to the provinces (including central contract monies of €5m approx) have risen from approx €22m to €29m last season in the last 5-6 years.   A further €5m is spent on the National Game total coaching team costs and match fees/bonuses for test players, bringing what they call Professional Game Costs to €34m approx.  The provinces generate approx €10.5m in competition income.  Welsh regions generate £9.7m.  I would estimate that last year the IRFU spent over twice on central contracts (€5m) to what the WRU spent on dual contracts (£2.1m).  That picture may have changed this year.

Welsh regions received a WRU contribution of approx £19.3m (€23.3m) made up of competition income from P12 and Euro, as well as agreed amounts under their participation agreement relating to dual contracts and direct funding.   Test match fees and coaching team salaries are accounted for separately.  

Also worth noting the the Competition Income belongs to PRW teams in Wales. It washes through the WRU accounts for them to meet their Barclays covenant requirements.

The WRU pay £9.6m for the services they receive. Included in that figure is PRW teams running and paying for their own Academy structure.

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:
To clarify since the mega money has gone into France we have not competed with the French - about 2008.

So possibly when Munster won but in that case the French were spending a lot less.

To clarify, when Leinster and Munster were winning HECs they were spending above the caps of England and France.

As I said cut off is 2008 up to then we were up their with the other leading European teams
After 2008 there was a parting of the ways as French expenditure went through the roof.
From that point we used as our bench mark the English and kept pace with them.

So Munster success was when our expenditure was similar to the French and English but Leinster were winning when the French were spending far more.
As I said before this has been stated in meetings.
Leinster won because they were a good team well coached but also , I suspect, Toulouse apart, none of the big spenders in France prioritised the European Cup

geoff999rugby wrote:

As I said cut off is 2008 up to then we were up their with the other leading European teams
After 2008 there was a parting of the ways as French expenditure went through the roof.
From that point we used as our bench mark the English and kept pace with them.

So Munster success was when our expenditure was similar to the French and English but Leinster were winning when the French were spending far more.
As I said before this has been stated in meetings.
Leinster won because they were a good team well coached but also , I suspect, Toulouse apart, none of the big spenders in France prioritised the European Cup

French salary cap in 2010/11 was €8m, so it simply not accurate to claim "French expenditure went through the roof". Leinster were comfortably spending that when they won their titles.

Prove it I don't agree

geoff999rugby wrote:Prove it I don't agree

Look at the IRFU Annual Report vs the French salary cap.

Assumes that the salary cap was met surely? Wasn't there talk of at least bending the rules or not playing to the spirit of it?

Doesn't prove it not least because every man and his dog knows that the French get round the salary cap by paying players vast sums of money for 'promotional' and 'endorsement' activites

Anyone who believes Toulon, Montpellier etc don't pay their players more than the salary cap is delusional

PhilBB wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:
Yeah, we all know this, these clubs are all in debt because of it, the IRFU are to the four provinces, what the rich owners are to the clubs they own. The thing is, there is no FFP in rugby like there is in football, because if there was, a lot of clubs would be in trouble.

If we had FFP then we couldn't have the present set up in Ireland and Scotland.

So bring it on.

Not true at all but not like you be wrong

geoff999rugby wrote:Doesn't prove it not least because every man and his dog knows that the French get round the salary cap by paying players vast sums of money for 'promotional' and 'endorsement' activites

Anyone who believes Toulon, Montpellier etc don't pay their players more than the salary cap is delusional

The image rights were enjoyed by all teams across Europe and the French didn't have the benefit of the McCreevy tax, so there's no moral high ground there.

And then we have the top ups for Sexton and Heaslip etc. that mirror some of the deals in France.

Of course, the cap in France is strictly policed by the DNACG so claiming "delusion" would indicate a lack of comprehension of DNACG.