DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 128271--------------------------------------------------
Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: DOK
Date: September 30, 2024, 5:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Brian Moore 30 September 2024 7:17am
HTML https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2024/09/30/rugbys-future-is-at-stake-the-game-needs-action/
Rugby’s future is at stake – the game needs action, not empty
words like James Haskell’s
Forget the platitudes, unpopular decisions need to be made on
issues such as player salaries and broadcast deals to ensure
sport’s survival
Bristol Bears' Ratu Naulago goes on the attack against
Gloucester during last Friday's thrilling Gallagher Premiership
Rugby match at Ashton Gate - Rugby's future is at stake - the
game needs action, not empty words like James Haskell's
Last Friday’s try-fest between Bristol Bears and Gloucester
showcased the best of the Premiership, but rugby is struggling
to attract viewers and faces huge financial challenges Getty
Images/Bob Bradford
Last Friday, a crowd of nearly 18,000 watched a thrilling,
11-try match between Bristol and Gloucester, that the visitors
won 44-41. It was very good entertainment; the sort of spectacle
that can satisfy rugby’s faithful and might persuade a few
casual watchers to become regular viewers.
Juxtaposition the above with a report that was produced last
week by a firm of insolvency practitioners that concluded only
three clubs – Leicester Tigers, Northampton Saints and
Gloucester, are solvent. Add to that the portentous words of
James Haskell, who provided the foreword to the report, who
stated: “I hope this report wakes rugby up.” He went on to
criticise what he termed “old-school values, amateur ethos and
poor business acumen” and called for drastic changes and the
game to be “correctly run and sold properly”.
As three clubs have recently gone from the Premiership, Haskell
is right not to dismiss balance-sheet insolvency, even though it
is widespread in many sports and many professional football
clubs would technically not pass this test. What rugby needs is
a route to profit and at least neutral balance sheets. All
commenters, from Haskell to rugby writers and anyone else, must
stop simply shouting “DO SOMETHING” and issuing ill-defined
platitudes. Start debating specific options, so we can make
specific conclusions.
There is not much about the product that can be easily changed
to make it more watchable, unless you make the sort of drastic
law changes that almost nobody in the game has suggested. If you
disagree, tell us what you want. In the meantime, World Rugby
must continue to minimise stoppages with stop clocks for scrums,
line-outs and reduce time allowed for kicks at goal (NFL kickers
manage this in a few seconds from the snap to kick).
Critics must stop saying it is the RFU’s fault
In traditional business, nobody argues with the fact that
reducing costs or increasing income, or a combination thereof,
is the only way to long-term viability. Reducing the wage bill
must be by salary cuts or culling squads. The former will be
unpopular with players; the latter impossible without changing
the laws on the number of replacements allowed and still
complying with player-safety workloads. Are you prepared to back
either of these?
I have previously outlined many different approaches to the
lower tiers of English rugby, including the strict demarcation
of professional and non-professional leagues – but neither the
clubs nor the Rugby Football Union are willing to introduce
this. You could move to a university and draft system to replace
the Championship and academy structure, but this would require
extreme vision and the non-Premiership clubs accepting a role
which they do not want to countenance.
Increased income will not come quickly through attendances.
Although they are growing, they are not keeping pace with costs
and the same goes for merchandising. You are therefore left with
broadcast or other digital-media rights and here the picture is
nowhere near as rosy as claimed. Without new sporting rights to
market there is only incremental gains in existing rights on the
table. The number of potential broadcasters has increased but
they are now mature businesses and have worked out what they
want to pay for and this is down to their granular knowledge of
their consumers. You can no longer, with any credibility, just
trot out Amazon, Sky, TNT and Netflix as possible sources of
income without explaining why they will suddenly start bidding
against each other with significantly more cash.
If you want new broadcast rights, do you suggest an Anglo-Welsh
league, a British (and possibly Irish) league or a European-wide
model to include France? If you want any of these, will the
increased revenue, split between more clubs, be voted through?
If you want to get more money from subscription-based
broadcasters, are you prepared to wear the reduced visibility to
traditional supporters and the possible knock-on effects in
participation?
When it comes to the mind-bendingly dull, but absolutely
crucial, topic of governance, critics must stop saying it is the
RFU’s fault and it needs root-and-branch reform. What changes:
board and/or executive? Council: smaller, larger, younger, and
differently qualified? Yes, no, yes and yes for me – and with a
more restricted role.
Though every bit of me resists this, it is also time to consider
an open-market option. At least one of rugby’s biggest financial
club backers advocates removing the salary cap and other
qualifying restrictions. They argue this would remove current
limitations on return that presently confront rich potential
investors; large returns could mean large investments, as with
football’s Premier League and Championship. This strategy is
high-return and high-risk. Are you prepared to lock in
advantages enjoyed by the richer clubs over the poorer? If it
all goes wrong and owners remove their backing, the Premiership
could end immediately.
#Post#: 128272--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: September 30, 2024, 5:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's fascinating that no one wants to mention the exorbitant
costs of running a club. The focus is all on marketing and the
product and not whether paying multiple hundreds of thousands of
pounds to decent athletes in a niche sport makes sense
#Post#: 128273--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: Nico Wilson
Date: September 30, 2024, 6:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JammyGit link ---
>
> <snip>
> whether paying multiple hundreds of thousands of pounds to
decent athletes in a niche sport makes sense
>
--- End Quote ---
Spot on.
#Post#: 128274--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: poorfour
Date: September 30, 2024, 6:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
He has a point, though it's a bit ironic that in suggesting
people need to get specific he doesn't suggest many specifics
himself.
I think the bit about NFL kickers is a bit disingenuous, though
- yes, the kick itself only takes a couple of seconds but the
total time from the end of the previous play to the kick getting
taken is longer than in rugby because they have to take an ad
break, change the team and set the snap before anything happens.
That said, I've advocated before for each team to have a
timewasting clock that runs down until they are ready for a
restart, with a sanction (free kick or even pen to the other
side) if the total time is exceeded.
#Post#: 128275--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: poorfour
Date: September 30, 2024, 6:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JammyGit link ---
>
> It's fascinating that no one wants to mention the exorbitant
costs of running a club. The focus is all on marketing and the
product and not whether paying multiple hundreds of thousands of
pounds to decent athletes in a niche sport makes sense
>
--- End Quote ---
The cost of the athletes is a fairly small part of running the
club, though - even if you spend up to the salary cap, it's only
about 20-25% of the total cost base of the larger clubs (with
the total wage bill for coaches, admin staff, management being
around 60% for Quins IIRC). Or in other terms, about 3
Premiership soccer players, or half an IPL cricket team.
#Post#: 128276--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: never sleep
Date: September 30, 2024, 6:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: poorfour link ---
>
> The cost of the athletes is a fairly small part of running the
club, though - even if you spend up to the salary cap, it's only
about 20-25% of the total cost base of the larger clubs (with
the total wage bill for coaches, admin staff, management being
around 60% for Quins IIRC). Or in other terms, about 3
Premiership soccer players, or half an IPL cricket team.
>
--- End Quote ---
Wage bill for Quins is 57%
Average for the league is 72%
Quins wage bill is £15,177,000
The salary cap is £6,400,000 + medical jokers + marquee - so, we
can probably guess that for players, it is closer to £7.4
million.
Therefore, players wages are less than 50% of the total wage
bill - or, probably assume it is around 27% of the income.
(source
HTML https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/64bd55318b46daf89b6c9e4e/66f3e16b31ad585626beab36_Leonard%20Curtis%20-%20Rugby%20Finance%20Report%202024.pdf)
#Post#: 128278--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: poorfour
Date: September 30, 2024, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And the report is looking at the 22/23 season (the latest for
which results are available) where the salary cap was
(nominally) £5.0m, albeit with a lot of players on pre-COVID
deals that didn't count fully.
#Post#: 128279--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: Rigger
Date: September 30, 2024, 9:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hampshire CCC have just sold a majority interest in the club to
an Indian conglomerate (owners of Delhi Capitals IPL franchise).
And that won’t be the last….The future for rugby clubs too?
#Post#: 128281--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: Camquin
Date: September 30, 2024, 11:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
According to the accounts, Harlequins employ 129 players and
coaches and 125 administrative and other staff.
I make it 41 men, 53 women 29 academy and 14 coaches, so more
than when the accounts were drawn up.
Some of the 125 will be match day staff. So it is not a bloated
as it appears.
And given how many times there are suggestions on here to call
the box office, there is obviously need for some people to man
the phones.
And the rest presumably are involved in getting the £10m of
commercial income.
#Post#: 128282--------------------------------------------------
Re: Brian Moore: Rugby’s future is at stake
DIR By: poorfour
Date: September 30, 2024, 12:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure how many actually are matchday staff - the bar
staff are employed through a contractor IIRC, and aren't most of
the stewards honorary?
129 staff to cover management, finance, HR, company secretariat,
marketing, ticketing, commercial partnerships, ground staff on a
£27m turnover business doesn't seem outrageous to me.
But even if all 129 staff are permanent, it would make average
revenue per employee c£100k, which seems to be a better than the
London Arts & Entertainment average of c£45k or the overall
London average of £60k (source: ONS)
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page