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:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So lets clear this up, the FIR no longer pay the membership fee?

Without checking I am sure that they were allowed to not pay this fee anymore in order for them to keep playing without the extra costs, and use this saved money to improve their own teams.

So when they were told a few years ago they would be kicked out if they didn't cough up that was them being excused it?

I disagree, the Championship doesn't really help English clubs develop or the Rugby Europe International Championships help Georgia or Romania. Equal funding from the TV deals to all teams, and playing against top competition will help them.

While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

While I would agree that 2 Italian sides would be preferable, it is pretty obvious that currently the Italian setup just can't afford that.

The Italian sides are generating very little income on their own and the Italian Federation just cannot subsidise them to an acceptable level. There were stories last year of players not getting paid and they really struggle with the back up staff that a proper professional team needs. Nor is there anything much in the way of TV money or other sponsorship coming in.

So realistically, while two teams makes a lot more sense from a selection point of view, financially, it would seem it is currently untenable. Until they get a better base in place, they will have to accept that they will have to export some of their players, as they have always done and as the other smaller countries, Scotland in particular, also have to do.

Be best for the Italians if they have 1 good team rather than 2 bad teams. They'd have half the running costs and a competitive side would attract bigger crowds, tv viewership etc. After a few years they can add another team but first, get one competitive.

One team is a bad idea, the Italians have got a good batch of young players coming through. If you lose one team, you create a bottleneck and it decreases opportunities for them.

Their problem isn't money, its structures and administration.

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

Increases participation and revenue while decreasing the workload of the players

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

Increases participation and revenue while decreasing the workload of the players

I see, thanks. How does the revenue bit get increased?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

Increases participation and revenue while decreasing the workload of the players

I see, thanks. How does the revenue bit get increased?

The conference system itself wont do that but if teams from other countries are coming in that should bring in extra tv revenue

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

Increases participation and revenue while decreasing the workload of the players

I see, thanks. How does the revenue bit get increased?

The conference system itself wont do that but if teams from other countries are coming in that should bring in extra tv revenue

Ah right. Are the South Africans rich then?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:
While I don't like conferences, I see it as a necessary evil fo rth ePro 12 to compete with the English and French leagues.

Why would a conference system enable the pro12 to compete with the English and French leagues?

Increases participation and revenue while decreasing the workload of the players

I see, thanks. How does the revenue bit get increased?

The conference system itself wont do that but if teams from other countries are coming in that should bring in extra tv revenue

Ah right. Are the South Africans rich then?

They have money to contribute to the pot if that's what you mean

Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Or maybe some people don't know how to make one

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Or maybe some people don't know how to make one

OK. I'll dumb it down a shade or three:

England and France: Rolling in Cash Money
Us lot plus the NGD of South Africa: Skint. And f7cked.

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Or maybe some people don't know how to make one

OK. I'll dumb it down a shade or three:

England and France: Rolling in Cash Money
Us lot plus the NGD of South Africa: Skint. And f7cked.

Nope the Irish are doing quite well thanks

The money most of the French and English have is from tv, SA has a valuable tv market that generate more for the league so seems you over simplified things for yourself

How does it work though, two excluded SA teams playing with us? Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome them with open arms, but how? What do they get from it? Where are they when we're playing in the European cup? I always thought they'd bring a bit more money as for years they've generated more TV revenue and NZ and SA combined.

mikey_dragon wrote:How does it work though, two excluded SA teams playing with us? Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome them with open arms, but how? What do they get from it? Where are they when we're playing in the European cup? I always thought they'd bring a bit more money as for years they've generated more TV revenue and NZ and SA combined.

They have to drop 2 teams from super rugby. If they joined the pro12 that would mean keeping those teams professional.


If those teams join the pro12 they'll be on tv regularly during the SA summer months when there's no other rugby on. So they'll potentially have all the rugby fans in SA watching them which will be worth a lot of money from tv and sponsorships.


The uncertainty for me is the value of the rand. It's dropping like a stone.


From our point of view, 2 SA sides should add a lot more competition to the league and add some more varity so sponsors, tv etc would like that and bid more money for the contract.


I'd say they'd also be welcomed into the champions Cup for the same reasons.

It will cost too much money for the Celtic teams to have to travel to both Italy and South Africa multiple times throughout the season. It can only be one or the other, or neither.

profitius wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:How does it work though, two excluded SA teams playing with us? Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome them with open arms, but how? What do they get from it? Where are they when we're playing in the European cup? I always thought they'd bring a bit more money as for years they've generated more TV revenue and NZ and SA combined.

They have to drop 2 teams from super rugby. If they joined the pro12 that would mean keeping those teams professional.


If those teams join the pro12 they'll be on tv regularly during the SA summer months when there's no other rugby on. So they'll potentially have all the rugby fans in SA watching them which will be worth a lot of money from tv and sponsorships.


The uncertainty for me is the value of the rand. It's dropping like a stone.


From our point of view, 2 SA sides should add a lot more competition to the league and add some more varity so sponsors, tv etc would like that and bid more money for the contract.


I'd say they'd also be welcomed into the champions Cup for the same reasons.

Thanks - I'm all for it, but just further emphasizes the need for a global season.

Another negative is that these two franchises will have all their players nicked by clubs Britain, Ireland and France.

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Or maybe some people don't know how to make one

OK. I'll dumb it down a shade or three:

England and France: Rolling in Cash Money
Us lot plus the NGD of South Africa: Skint. And f7cked.

Nope the Irish are doing quite well thanks

The money most of the French and English have is from tv, SA has a valuable tv market that generate more for the league so seems you over simplified things for yourself

Not for long, Marty. You will never be able to compete forever. The last Celtic nation to go bust thinking you might I grant you, but we're going the way of football now. If you think a semi-pro standard team from a country will change that then feck it, I've got some magic beans I'll donate to the save the PrO'12 fund as well. This TV market you are banging on about is a nonsense, everyone who wants to watch rugby in SA will continue watching the teams and competitions they always have, not some regurgitated bunch of journeymen taking on the equally turgid crud from Newport, Swansea, Galway, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Treviso

mikey_dragon wrote:

profitius wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:How does it work though, two excluded SA teams playing with us? Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome them with open arms, but how? What do they get from it? Where are they when we're playing in the European cup? I always thought they'd bring a bit more money as for years they've generated more TV revenue and NZ and SA combined.

They have to drop 2 teams from super rugby. If they joined the pro12 that would mean keeping those teams professional.


If those teams join the pro12 they'll be on tv regularly during the SA summer months when there's no other rugby on. So they'll potentially have all the rugby fans in SA watching them which will be worth a lot of money from tv and sponsorships.


The uncertainty for me is the value of the rand. It's dropping like a stone.


From our point of view, 2 SA sides should add a lot more competition to the league and add some more varity so sponsors, tv etc would like that and bid more money for the contract.


I'd say they'd also be welcomed into the champions Cup for the same reasons.

Thanks - I'm all for it, but just further emphasizes the need for a global season.

Another negative is that these two franchises will have all their players nicked by clubs Britain, Ireland and France.

Or as is even more likely, SA

Stone Motif wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

profitius wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:How does it work though, two excluded SA teams playing with us? Don't get me wrong, I'd welcome them with open arms, but how? What do they get from it? Where are they when we're playing in the European cup? I always thought they'd bring a bit more money as for years they've generated more TV revenue and NZ and SA combined.

They have to drop 2 teams from super rugby. If they joined the pro12 that would mean keeping those teams professional.


If those teams join the pro12 they'll be on tv regularly during the SA summer months when there's no other rugby on. So they'll potentially have all the rugby fans in SA watching them which will be worth a lot of money from tv and sponsorships.


The uncertainty for me is the value of the rand. It's dropping like a stone.


From our point of view, 2 SA sides should add a lot more competition to the league and add some more varity so sponsors, tv etc would like that and bid more money for the contract.


I'd say they'd also be welcomed into the champions Cup for the same reasons.

Thanks - I'm all for it, but just further emphasizes the need for a global season.

Another negative is that these two franchises will have all their players nicked by clubs Britain, Ireland and France.

Or as is even more likely, SA

Thats the main question I'd have. Are they going to be breeding grounds for the super rugby teams. However after reading a SA site, they think it might be the other way around ie the Cheetahs taking players from super rugby sides.

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:Relative to England/France it will be about 2 Rand and a conker

Some people will just dump on everything

Some people wilfully miss the point.

Or maybe some people don't know how to make one

OK. I'll dumb it down a shade or three:

England and France: Rolling in Cash Money
Us lot plus the NGD of South Africa: Skint. And f7cked.

Nope the Irish are doing quite well thanks

The money most of the French and English have is from tv, SA has a valuable tv market that generate more for the league so seems you over simplified things for yourself

Not for long, Marty. You will never be able to compete forever. The last Celtic nation to go bust thinking you might I grant you, but we're going the way of football now. If you think a semi-pro standard team from a country will change that then feck it, I've got some magic beans I'll donate to the save the PrO'12 fund as well. This TV market you are banging on about is a nonsense, everyone who wants to watch rugby in SA will continue watching the teams and competitions they always have, not some regurgitated bunch of journeymen taking on the equally turgid crud from Newport, Swansea, Galway, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Treviso

As I said some people dump on everything

Martyn wrote: Sunshine, lollipops and...rainbows

If you gotta dump, may as well do it on the sh7t tip

It is inevitable the franchises that enter the pro 12 if any do will be the scrubs. The big teams in Cape Town Pretoria Joburg and Durban would not consider it

Fiddler wrote:It is inevitable the franchises that enter the pro 12 if any do will be the scrubs. The big teams in Cape Town Pretoria Joburg and Durban would not consider it

It will be the that are being cut from the super 18 when it reduces to 15
Cheetahs, and Southern Kings most likely.

If a Saffer team joins, does it become a Pr013? Or will one (or both) Italian teams be dumped?

The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

It is going to be a difficult balancing act
With 3 less games (2 home one year and one home the next) the extra TV revenue generated and increased sponsor ship will have to cover this and the additional travel, increasing attendance for the other home games will also help.

Derbies generate the most interest but they may need to be broken up.
having one group of 4 provinces, 2 scots and one SA, wouldn't be fair compared to 4 Welsh, 2 Italians 1 SA, and even that model breaks up the SA teams.

I also hope that that it breaks up to play for a cup, plate and shield, so that at teh end of season there is something for most teams to play for.

Good point

Maybe need a few extra teams then or maybe rid of some of the regions, sure all they do is b*tch and moan anyway

Kingshu wrote:It is going to be a difficult balancing act
With 3 less games (2 home one year and one home the next) the extra TV revenue generated and increased sponsor ship will have to cover this and the additional travel, increasing attendance for the other home games will also help.

Derbies generate the most interest but they may need to be broken up.
having one group of 4 provinces, 2 scots and one SA, wouldn't be fair compared to 4 Welsh, 2 Italians 1 SA, and even that model breaks up the SA teams.

I also hope that that it breaks up to play for a cup, plate and shield, so that at teh end of season there is something for most teams to play for.

I know the PrO'12 isn't that bothered about TV money, but can we not add insult to injury by wittering on about how our deal is that garbage that you actually could mitigate the loss of TV money on a few games by bringing in a few extra punters?

marty2086 wrote:Good point

Maybe need a few extra teams then or maybe rid of some of the regions, sure all they do is b*tch and moan anyway

Sure, the inability of this moribund farce to stay in the same stratosphere as its main competitors in terms of broadcasting revenues will do that job for you.

marty2086 wrote:The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

Less games mean less income. Isn't that just basic arithmetic?

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

Less games mean less income. Isn't that just basic arithmetic?

No it's less match day income, revenue is derived from numerous sources, sponsorship, tv etc

If the league grows to the US and SA it increases a sponsors reach and the value of any deal, especially in the US. That not to mention the potential the game has in the US

marty2086 wrote:

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

Less games mean less income. Isn't that just basic arithmetic?

No it's less match day income, revenue is derived from numerous sources, sponsorship, tv etc

If the league grows to the US and SA it increases a sponsors reach and the value of any deal, especially in the US. That not to mention the potential the game has in the US

It would also mean having to retain a smaller playing squad which would save cost but the big issue is going to be travel costs.

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

Less games mean less income. Isn't that just basic arithmetic?

No it's less match day income, revenue is derived from numerous sources, sponsorship, tv etc

If the league grows to the US and SA it increases a sponsors reach and the value of any deal, especially in the US. That not to mention the potential the game has in the US

It would also mean having to retain a smaller playing squad which would save cost but the big issue is going to be travel costs.

Why would a smaller squad be needed?

marty2086 wrote:

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Fiddler wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The current participation agreement and tv deal has another year to run, so there will likely be another team to join to take it to 14

That'll probably lead to two conferences of 7, playing everyone in your conference home and away and everyone in the other conference alternating every year between home and away

The powers that be were wanting less games and that'll lose 3 a year for everyone

Less games mean less income. Isn't that just basic arithmetic?

No it's less match day income, revenue is derived from numerous sources, sponsorship, tv etc

If the league grows to the US and SA it increases a sponsors reach and the value of any deal, especially in the US. That not to mention the potential the game has in the US

It would also mean having to retain a smaller playing squad which would save cost but the big issue is going to be travel costs.

Why would a smaller squad be needed?

Because the reduction in games would mean no need to play in international Windows when large parts of thee squad are not available to play

It would only be a few players if that

Can someone have a go at posting what the 2 different conferences would look like. I'm having trouble coming to a fair system that would maximise income for all teams.

RugbyFan100 wrote:Can someone have a go at posting what the 2 different conferences would look like. I'm having trouble coming to a fair system that would maximise income for all teams.

If you believe that local derbies and old rivalries are the best income generators then its :

Conference 1 - Ulster, Leinster, Munster, Connacht, Glasgow, Edinburgh
Conference 2 - Ospreys, Scarlets, Dragons, Cardiff, [Italians], Cheetahs.

It gets interesting if you try to expand it further of course.

Anyone think that would work?

demosthenes wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:Can someone have a go at posting what the 2 different conferences would look like. I'm having trouble coming to a fair system that would maximise income for all teams.

If you believe that local derbies and old rivalries are the best income generators then its :

Conference 1 - Ulster, Leinster, Munster, Connacht, Glasgow, Edinburgh
Conference 2 - Ospreys, Scarlets, Dragons, Cardiff, [Italians], Cheetahs.

It gets interesting if you try to expand it further of course.

Anyone think that would work?

So you play all teams in your conference home and away and the others once?

If that's right, then there is a shortage of 6 games per season compared to what we have now.

I'm not sure this will see a rise in season ticket sales.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

demosthenes wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:Can someone have a go at posting what the 2 different conferences would look like. I'm having trouble coming to a fair system that would maximise income for all teams.

If you believe that local derbies and old rivalries are the best income generators then its :

Conference 1 - Ulster, Leinster, Munster, Connacht, Glasgow, Edinburgh
Conference 2 - Ospreys, Scarlets, Dragons, Cardiff, [Italians], Cheetahs.

It gets interesting if you try to expand it further of course.

Anyone think that would work?

So you play all teams in your conference home and away and the others once?

If that's right, then there is a shortage of 6 games per season compared to what we have now.

I'm not sure this will see a rise in season ticket sales.

If the big names are available for the most games then it probably will but the price will likely have to go down

The travel part is an interesting piece. You'd want to limit the longer distances, so if there were to be 2 SA sides, then your team would be most travel efficient playing both SA sides away in back to back rounds.

You could also choose to buddy sides together also. So say the scots buddy up, both sides do their SA travel at the same time, round (4) Glasgow @ Cheetahs & Edinburgh @ Kings, then round (5) Edinburgh @ Cheetahs & Glasgow @ Kings.

With the games saved in the fixtures overall, a bye week could be introduced for after the SA trip to rest players.

It could work the other way also, let the SA sides cover off the Italians back to back rounds, the Scots in back to back rounds, etc.

Derbies an be intermingled across the schedule or placed over Christmas to reduce the cost of travel.

On the European comps front, after the first season, I'd assume the pro12/14, still with the same number of Euro place, would award those spots on a merit basis and remove the obligation of each nation getting a spot. The Cheetahs in the HCup... that's when the scheduling gets interesting.

I think the only fair way to do it is take the final table and all even numbers are in conference one and all odd numbers are in conference two.
The conferences are then set up at the end of each season. It does mean all 4 provinces could be in the one conference but thats just the way it goes. Its fair mixes thing up each year and means that finishing higher effects where you sit in a conference the next year adding to the competition.

Kingshu wrote:I think the only fair way to do it is take the final table and all even numbers are in conference one and all odd numbers are in conference two.
The conferences are then set up at the end of each season. It does mean all 4 provinces could be in the one conference but thats just the way it goes. Its fair mixes thing up each year and means that finishing higher effects where you sit in a conference the next year adding to the competition.

Not maximizing the local rivalries by playing home and away would be a disaster. Income and crowds need to be maximised surely?

Very strong rumour doing the rounds that 3 not 2 Saffer teams are to join - not sure which year though but sounds like this coming year.


Airline sponsors will cover cost of flights

This is a rumour within the IRFU NOT fans on twitter etc

Whatever transpires what is abundantly clear is we are on the cusp of seeing a absolute revolution in the structure of the league.
This involves, potentially, multiple nations

I suspect there will some casualties on the way

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Kingshu wrote:I think the only fair way to do it is take the final table and all even numbers are in conference one and all odd numbers are in conference two.
The conferences are then set up at the end of each season. It does mean all 4 provinces could be in the one conference but thats just the way it goes. Its fair mixes thing up each year and means that finishing higher effects where you sit in a conference the next year adding to the competition.

Not maximizing the local rivalries by playing home and away would be a disaster. Income and crowds need to be maximised surely?

Each team would still have at least one derby, just not guaranteed two, if split on this years table it would be
Conference 1      
1 Munster      
3 Scarlets        
5 Ulster          
7 Cardiff Blues
9 Edinburgh    
11 Dragons      
(Southern Kings)    

 Conference 2
2 Leinster
4 Ospreys
6 Glasgow Warriors
8 Connacht
10 Treviso
12 Zebre
(Cheetahs)

I know that people will say conference two is easier with two Italians, but Treviso finished above Dragons, earning there place in conference 2 (in truth there are 3 weak teams so one conference will always have 2 of them)

Osprey may only get one home derby, but its about the league as a whole not local derbies.

While there will be less derbies, I think that setting up the conferences the fairest way possible on merit, is more integral than having a non merit system to facilitate derbies.

geoff999rugby wrote:Very strong rumour doing the rounds that 3 not 2 Saffer teams are to join - not sure which year though but sounds like this coming year.


Airline sponsors will cover cost of flights

This is a rumour within the IRFU NOT fans on twitter etc

In the press today