Revenue Sharing
-
@rugger-quizzes said in Revenue Sharing:
Frankly the RFU seems to have very little desire to grow the game globally.
Since England toured North America in 2001 (Presumably during the Lions tour that year) they have not played a single game outside the 6 Nations countries or the Rugby Championship Countries.
Which is pretty shameful. In that time NZ have played Samoa in Apia once and other than that, zip. Unless of course you want to count playing Ireland in Chicago as growing the game? Aus have (bizarrely) played away in Spain and that's it. So whilst England's record is pretty damn poor, it's no outlier.
-
The Hutt is an absolute Mecca. @Catogrande
-
@bones Over here, Mecca is a bingo hall. So that sort of fits with my impression.
-
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
@rugger-quizzes said in Revenue Sharing:
Frankly the RFU seems to have very little desire to grow the game globally.
Since England toured North America in 2001 (Presumably during the Lions tour that year) they have not played a single game outside the 6 Nations countries or the Rugby Championship Countries.
Which is pretty shameful. In that time NZ have played Samoa in Apia once and other than that, zip. Unless of course you want to count playing Ireland in Chicago as growing the game? Aus have (bizarrely) played away in Spain and that's it. So whilst England's record is pretty damn poor, it's no outlier.
NZ have also played USA in Chicago & Japan in Tokyo in that time (Aus also played USA in Chicago) in that time. Aus are playing Japan next week. NZ playing Japan next year. All of these though outside IRB windows and for a (revenue sharing) price.
-
@catogrande A very, very popular bingo hall.
-
@rapido I got the info from Wiki so wouldn't be totally surprised if not accurate. Went back a double checked and see I did miss the Japan game, still couldn't see the US game. Nonetheless, happy to take your word for it. Point still stands though, 3 games in 17 years is not much better than 1 game in 17 years.
Worth noting also that since 2006 the England Saxons have played away in Canada, Russia, USA, Belgium and Portugal.
-
The latest IRB schedules (I think it's a 4 year cycle), agreed recently after the global season / revenue sharing stoush.
It sees way more tier 1 v tier 2 games.
I think it is mostly 6N teams that will play those T1 v T2 games. As there are 6 of them and only 4 Sanzar unions. Plus the Lions year.Will be able to crow about 'your' zeal to play in far flung corners of the tier 2 globe.
-
@rapido If you listen carefully you can hear my crowing right now. Or maybe not. Have you got a link to that info at all?
-
Latest News | World Rugby
The latest World Rugby news, including about the World Rankings, Tournaments, Player Welfare and the Laws of the Game
- 39 per cent increase in tier one v tier two fixtures with emerging nations integrated on merit
- Tier one tours to Pacific Islands, Japan, Canada, USA, Georgia and Romania
-
That's why I put the the quotes around 'your'. I agree it's clumsily written.
-
@rapido said in Revenue Sharing:
Latest News | World Rugby
The latest World Rugby news, including about the World Rankings, Tournaments, Player Welfare and the Laws of the Game
- 39 per cent increase in tier one v tier two fixtures with emerging nations integrated on merit
- Tier one tours to Pacific Islands, Japan, Canada, USA, Georgia and Romania
Looks like a step in the right direction.
-
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
@rugger-quizzes said in Revenue Sharing:
Frankly the RFU seems to have very little desire to grow the game globally.
Since England toured North America in 2001 (Presumably during the Lions tour that year) they have not played a single game outside the 6 Nations countries or the Rugby Championship Countries.
Which is pretty shameful. In that time NZ have played Samoa in Apia once and other than that, zip. Unless of course you want to count playing Ireland in Chicago as growing the game? Aus have (bizarrely) played away in Spain and that's it. So whilst England's record is pretty damn poor, it's no outlier.
2015 Samoa
2014 USA
2013 Japan
2012 Scotland
2011 Fiji (in NZ but from memory Fiji were invited and received a gate share as a pre RWC hitout)Also the NZ v Samoa game this year was wrapped with the moved Tonga v Wales to reduce costs to Tonga and help provide a bigger take for them.
-
-
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
They're less minnowy than Wales, France and Argentina at the moment
-
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
Worth noting also that since 2006 the England Saxons have played away in Canada, Russia, USA, Belgium and Portugal.
Not really relevant. Have a look at Maori and NZ A tours. The 'B" teams don't count in this discussion that's just development for all unions involved. How is the revenue shared there? I honestly don't know.
-
@snowy said in Revenue Sharing:
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
Worth noting also that since 2006 the England Saxons have played away in Canada, Russia, USA, Belgium and Portugal.
Not really relevant. Have a look at Maori and NZ A tours. The 'B" teams don't count in this discussion that's just development for all unions involved. How is the revenue shared there? I honestly don't know.
I'm not so sure it's not relevant. For the Tier 2 nations and below it is not just about the money but also about opportunity to play at a higher level, in that the tours of the Saxons, Maori etc are very important. I have no idea about how any revenue is shared or how costs are covered.
-
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
I have no idea about how any revenue is shared or how costs are covered.
Anyone know how that works for Saxons, Maori, NZ A?
As for relevance can we compare an England match v Samoa for example, to a Saxons v Canada for revenue and how it is distributed? I guess that is just scale of funds. I thought the point was that the cash should be shared whomever the host nation is?
-
@snowy said in Revenue Sharing:
@catogrande said in Revenue Sharing:
I have no idea about how any revenue is shared or how costs are covered.
Anyone know how that works for Saxons, Maori, NZ A?
As for relevance can we compare an England match v Samoa for example, to a Saxons v Canada for revenue and how it is distributed? I guess that is just scale of funds. I thought the point was that the cash should be shared whomever the host nation is?
I don't know, but I believe it works on the traditional host keeps all method.
But.
Often these teams are piggy backing on tournaments (Churchill Cup, Pacific Cup) that have IRB funding.
I'd say it's fluid.
No tier 2 team are going to invite a tier 1 nation's A team on a loss making tour.
I think the MABs have enough brand power to generate profits for the hosting nation. Where as NZ A (re-branded as the JABs) are little bit less sexy.
-
For everyone's info, the IRB do directly fund T2 nations, via tournaments and the June and November tour windows.
file:///C:/Users/758313/Downloads/World_Rugby_Investment_Programmes_brochure.pdf
Funded Competition: 15s • RWC 2015/2019 and qualification • RWC Women’s 2017 and qualification • World Rugby Pacific Nations Cup, World Rugby Nations Cup, World Rugby Tbilisi Cup (HPT2 teams) • June and November Tours (HPT2 teams) • World Rugby Pacific Challenge, World Rugby Americas Cup (HPT2 “A” teams) • World Rugby U20 Championship, World Rugby U20 Trophy • Regional 15s Tournaments Sevens • RWC Sevens 2018 and qualification • HSBC Sevens World Series and qualification • World Rugby Women’s Sevens Series and qualification • Olympic Games 2016/2020 qualifiers • Regional Sevens Tournamentsand from;
Home | Women's and Men's Rugby World Cup
The official site of Rugby World Cup, with ticketing and event information, live streaming, news, videos, fixtures and results.
RWC 2015 and the four-year RWC cycle ending in December 2015 In this cycle World Rugby will have invested directly and indirectly approximately: £85m in tier one high performance unions or £8.5m each £50m or £5m each in tier two performance unions £28m in the remaining member unions and regional associations The tier two figure includes a new specific allocation of £5m directly focused on the costs of preparation for RWC 2015. In addition to the above investments, every participating union in RWC 2015 receives a participation fee of £150,000 [a further £75,000 if they reach the quarter-finals and a further £100,000 if they reach the semi-finals]. In percentage terms, this amounts to investments of approximately 52 per cent in tier one and 48 per cent in tier two/other unions. This represents a significant redistribution of wealth as more than 85 per cent of the revenues for RWC 2015 are sourced from the high performance markets. The investments in the next tier of performance unions and elsewhere are starting to yield enhanced returns on and off the pitch in a number of those markets.http://www.rugbycanada.ca/media/leagues/3817/graphics/170327_jf_rwc_2019_press_pack_usa.pdf
In total, between 2012-15, World Rugby invested £50m for the benefit of the 10 tier two unions participating in RWC 2015 – **£34m in direct grant funding** and a further £16m indirectly via provision of competitions.So on average, a union like Samoa diretly receive £3.4m form the IRB over 4 years. Which in post brexit world is about $7m NZD, BTW, why do the IRB report in pounds? They are in Dublin? Plus have about £1.6m of their costs covered via IRB competions
I've looked for Samoa's annual reports but can't find online.
So Samoa average $1.75m NZD a year in IRB funding. I'd say Samoa lose money hosting games, unless it is a funded tournament like RWC qualifying, and they must get a bit for jersey sponsorship and kit supplier. TV RIghts? for 1 game in the calendar year (which i watched on Sky and it looked like it was recorded on an analogue handycam) ... not much.
Asking for $200k USD (300K NZD) from the RFU would be approx 20% of their annual income.
