Deloitte State of Unions Report
-
Interesting report.
Just flicked through and pretty poor reading for harbour, especially on the Supporter and Community engagement which to be honest isnt really a suprise. Should really do much better with that population base and improved on field performance. Massive admin costs too but suspect its a classification variance given how low the team and match related costs are.
-
@jk yeah I found this comment telling, and is something i have banged on about for years as a Northland fan, we have fans up here who want to go and support the team, but many are apathetic if the results are not great (I've been at games in our dark years of continuous losses when I reckon I could count the number of people there and it wouldnt take long)
Honourable mentions must go to Auckland (as stated above) for their increase in match related income but also to the Northland union. Northland had a $127,000 increase in >match related income in FY17. This 34.2% increase again shows the importance of performance as in the Taniwha’s case they won four more games than in 2016 and made the Championship semi-final
-
Haven't looked at the report, yet. This has appeared on stuff.
-
While it highlights the increase in younger grades player number, I know in Northland in years gone by and I believe other provinces have had similar drop offs in participation once they get to the U13-U16 grades, for a variety of reasons.
page 22 of the report:
For the under 12 age group which grew
another 1.4%, female player registrations
have increased by 7,157 (up 111.0%) since
2010, and male player registrations also
grew by 5,314 (up 9.8%).
Rugby at the grassroots
Players
The number of rugby players is a key indicator of the health of the game and, similar to many traditional sports in New Zealand, rugby unions face a challenge to grow the number of registered players.For the Mitre 10 Cup unions, collectively the number of player registrations declined
by 178 (0.1%) from 2016 to 2017. The age group that drove the decline was the senior
grades (21 year olds and over) as they decreased by over 2,000 registrations, a
drop of 8.9%. Since 2010, the senior grades have decreased in size by 11.0%, driven by
the drop in males of 13.8%, offset by the positive increase in female in the senior
grades by 63.8% in the same period.The secondary school age group, in the Mitre 10 Cup unions, had an increase of
2.5% in 2017 on the previous year, with both male and female player registrations
growing by 0.7% and 15.5% respectively.2017 saw the first increase in male player numbers in this age group for the past
three years in contrast to the seventh year in a row that the female number have
increased. The growth in females playing rugby in the secondary school age group,
although impressive with a gain of 78.6% since 2010, is outweighed by the decrease
in male participation of 2,264 player registrations since 2010 (down 6.5%).The positive story, on an age group basis, is in the under 12 age group which grew
another 1.4%, its sixth consecutive year of growth. On a gender basis, female
player registrations have increased by 7,157 (up 111.0%) since 2010, and
male player registrations also grew by 5,314 (up 9.8%). In 2017 this age group
makes up 55.5% of all rugby player registrations of the Mitre 10 Cup unions.Two of the Heartland unions’ age groups grew in 2017 (under 12s up 2.3% and
secondary school age group up 6.0%). The senior grade fell 6.7% with the male player
registrations dropping 7.0% being offset by an increase of 7.3% in female players. -
Fyi, the link to the Deloitte report can be found here: https://www2.deloitte.com/nz/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/state-of-the-unions.html#
-
@JK Financially it all seems to be down to Other Revenue which in 2018 was a negative figure. Other Revenue Streams were all up and Operating Costs were down. Which begs the question. An over-accrual in 2017?
In terms of Engagement - no real surprises other than the measurement criteria. Social Media followers and FB likes …...
Poor old Pinetree must be turning in his grave
-
-
https://www2.deloitte.com/nz/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/state-of-the-unions.html
I didn't see this get posted earlier this year - so something for a quiet time.
A good financial year for especially BoP and Ta$man.
Not so good for Taranaki, Canterbury, Wellington and North Harbour.
-
@Chris-B said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
https://www2.deloitte.com/nz/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/state-of-the-unions.html
I didn't see this get posted earlier this year - so something for a quiet time.
A good financial year for especially BoP and Ta$man.
Not so good for Taranaki, Canterbury, Wellington and North Harbour.
It was posted, there just wasn't much talk about it
Merged with the old thread
-
-
@nzzp said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
@Chris-B said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
A good financial year for especially BoP and Ta$man.
Hell, yes. Especially BOP - not sure what they're doing, but doing it really well. Others could emulate that
So Ta$man got a test match, meaning they got a nice surplus, which they then spent on recruitment and stacked their team.
So good on them for managing the situation well but how is that not a huge advantage over other unions that didn't get a test?
-
@Crucial said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
@nzzp said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
@Chris-B said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
A good financial year for especially BoP and Ta$man.
Hell, yes. Especially BOP - not sure what they're doing, but doing it really well. Others could emulate that
So Ta$man got a test match, meaning they got a nice surplus, which they then spent on recruitment and stacked their team.
So good on them for managing the situation well but how is that not a huge advantage over other unions that didn't get a test?
No - the jump in spending in the Team and Match Related Costs will relate to the additional costs of hosting the Test match.
If you look at the same budget line for 2017, Ta$man has the 4th lowest Team and match costs and the key personnel didn't change much. We made the final in 2017 (and 2016).
We built a good team over a long period of time - made up of a combination of Ta$man players and other people's discards.
-
-
And to demonstrate that point - here's the team that played the final - I've bolded the guys who weren't in the (low paid) squad in 2017.
Perry, Makalio, Lomax
Strange, Parkinson
Squire, Taufua, Havili
Christie, Hunt
Nankivell, Aumua
Jordan, Faingaanuku, HaviliSalmon, Roach, Crockett, Cirikidaveta, Norris, Keisuke, O'Malley, Paea.
Lomax is a good pick-up from Australia - but, on the other hand we've lost Hames and Halanukunuku, so I doubt he's more expensive than them.
Havili was not required by Auckland in 2018 and Big Leicester was recruited from Nelson College.
Norris and Paea were promoted from Ta$man club rugby - I think Cirikadveta as well.
Crockett has returned to his hometown and has bought a sports shop.
Which leaves international recruits Roach and Keisuke. I doubt we've broken the bank on the reserves bench.
-
@Chris-B said in Deloitte State of Unions Report:
And to demonstrate that point - here's the team that played the final - I've bolded the guys who weren't in the (low paid) squad in 2017.
Perry, Makalio, Lomax
Strange, Parkinson
Squire, Taufua, Havili
Christie, Hunt
Nankivell, Aumua
Jordan, Faingaanuku, HaviliSalmon, Roach, Crockett, Cirikidaveta, Norris, Keisuke, O'Malley, Paea.
Lomax is a good pick-up from Australia - but, on the other hand we've lost Hames and Halanukunuku, so I doubt he's more expensive than them.
Havili was not required by Auckland in 2018 and Big Leicester was recruited from Nelson College.
Norris and Paea were promoted from Ta$man club rugby - I think Cirikadveta as well.
Crockett has returned to his hometown and has bought a sports shop.
Which leaves international recruits Roach and Keisuke. I doubt we've broken the bank on the reserves bench.
Fair enough. But what was the cost increase 16 to 17? They ran to a very low profit in 17 knowing they had a windfall in the pipeline.
-
@Crucial I think the relevant budget line is the Team and Match-related costs. Ta$man has always had low figures there.
And to check...2016 Ta$man (1.954 million - 11th highest). Lost the final to Canterbury (4.451 million - highest!).
One would hope Canterbury had some significant test match hosting expenses that year!
