Heineken Cup talks "have now ended"

[McTallshort]

You bothered to check the accounts of any of the clubs in the "biggest selling product in world sport" lately?



So the rest of the world would have implemented it and the RFU stood still?

Pull the other one man.

Yes! thats exactly what was happening if you care to think back to those days in 1995. The RFU under the influence of Dudley Wright was refusing to even discuss professionalism and although all the other unions were planning ahead and preparing for the big day the RFU thought it would all go away and the status quo would continue. It was the clubs and their greedy megalomaniac owners and investors that made it possible for a professional league in England and those same nasty power grabbing people invested their own money and time in promoting Rugby Union and now because of these nasty horrible people clubs like Worcester, Exeter, Northampton and Saracens have their own grounds and training facilities so you pull the other one man.

 

[McTallshort]

It's not that people love having private owners - it's that they love their clubs.
I would love the RFU to have direct control of their players (central contracts etc.) but I don't believe it's possible.

With the greatest of respect rats the RFU has not got the best track record when it comes to doing the right things by its players, Jonno and co had to strike over the RFU money grabbing.

 

[Amiga500]

Yes! thats exactly what was happening if you care to think back to those days in 1995. The RFU under the influence of Dudley Wright was refusing to even discuss professionalism and although all the other unions were planning ahead and preparing for the big day the RFU thought it would all go away and the status quo would continue. It was the clubs and their greedy megalomaniac owners and investors that made it possible for a professional league in England and those same nasty power grabbing people invested their own money and time in promoting Rugby Union and now because of these nasty horrible people clubs like Worcester, Exeter, Northampton and Saracens have their own grounds and training facilities so you pull the other one man.

I'm in work so don't have time to respond to this in full - but just quickly...

Is that the same Franklin's Gardens Northampton have owned since the 70s?

 

[McTallshort]

Which was redeveloped in the 90s

 

[coolbawn]

Interesting to see here:
http://www.espn.co.uk/premiership/rugby/player/79580.html
"McCafferty also serves as commercial chairman of the ERC, the body that governs the Heineken Cup and European Challenge Cup."

If the AP clubs are so upset about the lack of commercial nous and revenues at ERC (one of their key grouses), why don't they replace their man McCafferty in this important role at ERC ?!

I'm sure we'd all like to see the minutes of the ERC board meetings since or even before the English and French clubs served notice a year ago. Did the Franglais club reps really present their costed vision of an adjusted Euro competition, bigger TV pot (with the Franglais clubs esp commercial chairman McCafferty helping negotiate a bigger pot to share out) and resultant money to each club ? Did they ask each meeting for negotiations before and at the next meeting ? Did they press for progress each meeting, based on a sharing of detail ? Normally that's what you do when trying to influence a board to do better.

Or did they give their notice, give minimal detail, refrain from pressing for progress and wait eagerly for the clock to run down to give themselves an "excuse" to run away ?

I always suspected the latter. Now I see that McCafferty was the commercial chairman of ERC, I suspect so even more.

 

[McTallshort]

Interesting to see here:
http://www.espn.co.uk/premiership/rugby/player/79580.html
"McCafferty also serves as commercial chairman of the ERC, the body that governs the Heineken Cup and European Challenge Cup."

If the AP clubs are so upset about the lack of commercial nous and revenues at ERC (one of their key grouses), why don't they replace their man McCafferty in this important role at ERC ?!

I'm sure we'd all like to see the minutes of the ERC board meetings since or even before the English and French clubs served notice a year ago. Did the Franglais club reps really present their costed vision of an adjusted Euro competition, bigger TV pot (with the Franglais clubs esp commercial chairman McCafferty helping negotiate a bigger pot to share out) and resultant money to each club ? Did they ask each meeting for negotiations before and at the next meeting ? Did they press for progress each meeting, based on a sharing of detail ? Normally that's what you do when trying to influence a board to do better.

Or did they give their notice, give minimal detail, refrain from pressing for progress and wait eagerly for the clock to run down to give themselves an "excuse" to run away ?

I always suspected the latter. Now I see that McCafferty was the commercial chairman of ERC, I suspect so even more.

So its up to the Franglais clubs to resolve this? They gave notice 15 months ago but they had to press for progress? The ERC had to just sit and wait because it was not their problem?

FFS......

 

[smartcooky]

This appears to be game over for the so-called Rugby Champions Cup before it even begins

http://www.lyoncapitale.fr/Journal/...esprit-de-guerilla-pour-le-president-de-l-ERC

The website is in French.

Below is the Google translation (corrections from French speaking posters would be appreciated) , its a bit rough but good enough to to get the gist that the FFR is absolutely not going to allow French Clubs to be involved, end of story

[TEXTAREA]Jean -Pierre Lux , president of the organizing company of the European Cup ( ERC) , lamented Monday to AFP "the spirit of guerrilla " breathed by the English and French while reforms competitions clubs are developed death.

French clubs (NRL ) and English ( Premiership ) require such a change in the formula of competition and income distribution . That the Celts ( Irish , Welsh , Scottish ) and Italian challenge , seeing a desire to weaken .

Q: Do you think the English and French clubs will they put their threat to create an alternative competition for next season ?

A: "It is not possible I attended a meeting last week the chief executive of the English Federation Ian Ritchie and President Bill Beaumont clearly said they had told their clubs that n. ' would not be a new competition. Pierre Camou ( President of the French rugby Federation ) in France has long been clear that there never would be an Anglo-French competition , he would oppose . All Unions want competitions continue under the auspices of the ERC. "

Q: The President of the LNR ( League National de Rugby) Paul Goze said he, there is no obstacle ...

A: "I think it is wrong of me I say official echoes to mount a competition like this , it will need the agreement of the Federations in first, then the IRB ( . International Rugby Board ) . Available Paul Goze to think he may have such agreements. "

Q: Are negotiations stalled ?

A: " There have been meetings until early June since everyone is waiting for someone to make the first step towards the resumption of negotiations there has letters for several weeks we have received by the League. . English and French Ligue denoting a spirit of guerrillas. When I hear the English League and French League denounce the intransigence of the Celts could also respond that these two leagues do not want to change their positions. going to have find compromise to move forward. "

Q: The format of the competition seems to be the first stumbling block ...

A: " Change from 24 to 20 clubs in the European Cup , Scotland and Italy would be the losers in this case for me, I was told that this is to improve the level of the European Challenge Cup , but I remain skeptical. . because it requires that at least four clubs ( European Cup , donated by Challenge) are only from the Celtic League . I prefer that all leagues make an effort . But they are also arguments used to justify move to a third french - third English - Celtic and Italian a third ( 25 % against 25% -50 % about current , ed) in the financial breakdown and the governance of the ERC . "

Q: This is primarily a question of money?

A: " The French League has always said she wanted to change the financial breakdown without causing any decrease in revenues from the Celts and Celts would agree to an increase in the share of meritocracy , in particular . Challenge level , which would benefit French and English . I think everyone is ready to accept it as bringing forward a little European Cup final to allow more space in May for domestic championships. "

Q: There is also the issue of television rights agreement signed between the English League and British Telecom ...

A: "Nobody knows what there is in this contract, not even the English Federation global ( financial ) of the contract , which is also not extraordinary contrary to what has been said are known . it remains in that the ERC now . Creating a new competition is the only way to save the English league contract with BT . And the English, who are currently discussing with the LNR are trying to persuade the French that it would be useful to sign the same kind of TV contract in France , also including the European rights . But imagine that the English sign their contract, the French their contract, what about other countries? Welsh is with 300,000 euros ( TVs of rights) they will live It is very selfish to do that. "

Q: In 2007, a similar conflict was resolved on the day of the final in May. Will he really urgent to reach an agreement ?

R : . . " Yes, tiered For problems qualifying for next season It's always annoying to start a championship without knowing how many clubs will qualify for the following This is a budgetary problem for the clubs. . this year, the ERC has donated 12.5 million euros in the NRL . There are also home games . If there are more such payments and as there will be no alternative competition it will fill the shortfall. larger clubs have already started recruiting for next year and it is important for them to know . But I think what worries me most is the lack sports if competition disappeared . It would be very damaging to rugby. "[/TEXTAREA]

 

[coolbawn]

[So its up to the Franglais clubs to resolve this? They gave notice 15 months ago but they had to press for progress? The ERC had to just sit and wait because it was not their problem? FFS......]

No but in the world of successful business, a director who is specifically responsible for area X of a company (eg commercial chairman of ERC) and who is unhappy about the performance of his area X, either sorts it out with his own team (eg with ERC full-time execs) or gets other directors involved to help him sort it out or resigns and finds an easier job. He doesn't suggest that his area of responsibility is performing so useless that all other directors should fold the company and join him in a new company he's planning to head up !!

So, no, in answer to your question, it wasn't the Franglais clubs' prime responsibility to resolve what McCafferty complains was a lack of commercial success. It was HIS responsibility ! There's a clue in his ***le "Commercial Chairman". He should have succeeded in this responsibility BEFORE the Franglais gave notice. As he says that he failed to make ERC commercial enough to make the trough big enough for the snouts, he should have gone off to run a corner shop. Why would any clubs want to join a load of debt-ridden clubs in a grouping run by someone who complains about ERC lack of commercial success when he was commercial chairman ?!! Only as a very last resort, I suspect, which is hardly the way to create success.

Initially I assumed that the 12 (?) members of the ERC board were guilty of sitting back and doing nothing, but it's quite hard to believe that all 12 are like that. 3 seem to have had a vested interest in doing nothing to hasten the demise of ERC. Maybe the other 9 thought that the Franglais clubs had dug themselves into such a legal and commercial corner that the other 9 would get stronger the longer the 3 didn't sort it out? Maybe that's their only intelligent way of dealing with perceived bullies and maybe it will work. Nobody likes bullies but what people hate even more are incompetent bullies and maybe some parties reckon that they are being bullied by incompetent people who have already overreached themselves financially and appear to have overreached themselves contractually too.

It's all a big shame. We all like the game. This season - as in every season - you can see good games and bad games in all leagues. Typically the more you know about a club, the more interesting it is to watch it, so why not learn about the other clubs instead of trying to murder them ? I have my favourite clubs in every European country and like some aspect of every club in every country. The 2 tournaments need tweaking and if all clubs get together, they can negotiate a bigger pot. My hope is that Ian Ritchie and Bill Beaumont are arranging things behind the scenes; they are in pivotal positions, seem to have the right characters and look the most likely to succeed in a very tricky rescue of European rugby in general and Premiership Rugby in particular.

 

[smartcooky]

Premier Rugby rather like a rotten pumpkin. It looks great on the outside, but as soon as you look inside, it is rotten right to the core. Its has all the dress-up of the Emperor's New Clothes; you don't have to look very hard to see that it is, in fact, naked.

Most of the 12 clubs run at a loss, and require large infusions of cash from their Sugar Daddy owners just to keep the books balanced, and all 12 of them would probably be losing propositions were it not for the handouts from the RFU.

Those handouts would be better spent buying off a few of the bottom end clubs, the ones in the biggest financial bind, and then encouraging anyone wo had ideas of playing for England to play for those clubs.

 

[Draggs]

Rumours that two Welsh teams want in on the PRL thing. Welsh clubs would be better off in an English league, much easier to get to Kingsholm than Murrayfield or Sportsground.

 

[profitius]

Rumours that two Welsh teams want in on the PRL thing. Welsh clubs would be better off in an English league, much easier to get to Kingsholm than Murrayfield or Sportsground.

Maybe they the fans should go to their home matches first... If you're talking about the teams travelling, well they're professional sportsmen and Galway or Edinburgh are not exactly in different time zones.


Can't see it happening btw.

 

[Peat]

Rumours of the financial instability of the Premiership are somewhat exaggerated. By and large, every club with its own ground makes a profit. A weekly crowd of around 10k and using the stadium for non-matchday activities is widely regarded as creating enough profit to make the game sustainable by itself. Not every club has that yet, but it is in reach of all of them, and a great many do. Looking at the accounts available for 2010/11 - I apologise for having nothing more up to date - while the majority of clubs did not make a profit, most losses were under 3pc. Since then, Quins' revenue has gone up and I think they're making a profit, Sarries now have their own ground which should point them towards profit at some point... London Irish and Bath are probably showing greater losses, but LI are investing heavily in training facilities, and Bath have a rich dude throwing money around. Hmm. Not sure about the others.

Plus, of course, there is all that extra TV money around. I don't know how much Sky/ESPN were paying, but it wasn't £2m each a season. Which, incidentally, will probably be dwarfed by whatever deal the French clubs get.

I do not wish to decry the private owners - who, for whatever reasons, have done a lot for pro rugby in England - nor begrudge them the chance to lessen the amount of money they put in. I'd rather English rugby was under union control, but the RFU didn't, and there's a lot of guys who've stepped in and done good works. They won't see their money back, we all know this, but in a lot of places they've taken English rugby to a currently sustainable(ish) model. But I don't think we in English rugby are so hurting for the money we need to kick the crap out of celtic/italian rugby to get it.

And, if TV audience size is the be all and end all, we should be super nice to the Pro 12 as their viewing base is potentially the largest of all. We're the smallest. Maybe we shouldn't pursue this argument too far. Maybe we should realise that for a long of rugby fans, its the competition they tune in for, and the competition is made up of all elements.

Which in fairness, the English clubs do realise, they just think they can redirect a lot of money to themselves and France. And... apparently not. Or so I hope, as I do think this is genuinely for the good of all.

 

[LittleGuy]

Rumours of the financial instability of the Premiership are somewhat exaggerated. By and large, every club with its own ground makes a profit. A weekly crowd of around 10k and using the stadium for non-matchday activities is widely regarded as creating enough profit to make the game sustainable by itself. Not every club has that yet, but it is in reach of all of them, and a great many do. Looking at the accounts available for 2010/11 - I apologise for having nothing more up to date - while the majority of clubs did not make a profit, most losses were under 3pc. Since then, Quins' revenue has gone up and I think they're making a profit, Sarries now have their own ground which should point them towards profit at some point... London Irish and Bath are probably showing greater losses, but LI are investing heavily in training facilities, and Bath have a rich dude throwing money around. Hmm. Not sure about the others.

Plus, of course, there is all that extra TV money around. I don't know how much Sky/ESPN were paying, but it wasn't £2m each a season. Which, incidentally, will probably be dwarfed by whatever deal the French clubs get.

I do not wish to decry the private owners - who, for whatever reasons, have done a lot for pro rugby in England - nor begrudge them the chance to lessen the amount of money they put in. I'd rather English rugby was under union control, but the RFU didn't, and there's a lot of guys who've stepped in and done good works. They won't see their money back, we all know this, but in a lot of places they've taken English rugby to a currently sustainable(ish) model. But I don't think we in English rugby are so hurting for the money we need to kick the crap out of celtic/italian rugby to get it.

And, if TV audience size is the be all and end all, we should be super nice to the Pro 12 as their viewing base is potentially the largest of all. We're the smallest. Maybe we shouldn't pursue this argument too far. Maybe we should realise that for a long of rugby fans, its the competition they tune in for, and the competition is made up of all elements.

Which in fairness, the English clubs do realise, they just think they can redirect a lot of money to themselves and France. And... apparently not. Or so I hope, as I do think this is genuinely for the good of all.

Well only if you take Italy into account, otherwise England has a much larger viewing base than the other consitituent areas of the Pro 12, and while I think the game is steadily growing in Italy and Treviso are competitive lets face it Italy is a long way behind England, Wales and Ireland in how the game is followed.

 

[Peat]

Well only if you take Italy into account, otherwise England has a much larger viewing base than the other consitituent areas of the Pro 12, and while I think the game is steadily growing in Italy and Treviso are competitive lets face it Italy is a long way behind England, Wales and Ireland in how the game is followed.

I did say potentially for a reason. But yeah, Italy's in there, and not counting them would be weird. You only have to engage a bit over half of Italy to the same extent that England is engaged to get a viewing block the same size as England.

 

[erwanseb]

You bothered to check the accounts of any of the clubs in the "biggest selling product in world sport" lately?
5. It is sustainable as it has been a long-term structure within the game. If that structure changes, then the model will have to be re-examined for sustainability. The HEC money is mainly generated from TV income, not from any individual club or league. The <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">UK</st1lace></st1:country-region> broadcaster, Sky, obviously feels the presence of teams from multiple countries is worth more than the domestic league of the English clubs you mention; otherwise they would not have been outbid by BT for AP coverage but retained HEC coverage. [A further point of note is that the coverage of a European competition are very likely be what the big-headline-grabbing money figures of McCafferty's BT contract is predicated upon - which is why he needs to sink ERC to regain legal authority to negotiate those rights for European games.]

The idea that the economic model of the Irish province is sustainable is entirely wrong, because this model is subsidized. The simple fact that the Rabo 12 is not viable on its own should be sufficient proof.
The French and English clubs are generating an estimated 80% of the TV revenues of the H cup while receiving only 48% (24% each for the PRL and top 14), 52% going to the Rabo 12. You can dress this fact the way you want, but it is a form of subsidized economy as the viability depends on the goodwill of a third party benefactor.
Surely, the top 14 and the PRL will take a financial hit from withdrawing from the H cup but it will not kill them, especially as the clubs struggling financially are usually found at the bottom of the table and thus do not get any significant amount of money from the HC.
They will be able to compensate the shortfall by adding some play off games at the end of the season and organizing some show piece events such as an all star game, for which they do not need approval from the union if these games are part of the domestic competition.
As for the unions refusing to back up their new proposal, this is pure posturing. They just can't for multiple reasons including financial ones.
The FFR wants to build its new stadium and needs the cash from the H cup or its future replacement. In addition, the union is negotiating with the top 14 the release program of international players. The purpose of this agreement under negotiation is a greater availability of international players outside of official IRB windows. Obviously, the negotiations will go nowhere if the FFR vetoes the new european competition.
The top 14 will call the bluff and obtain the backing of the FFR for the new competition.

 

[smartcooky]

The idea that the economic model of the Irish province is sustainable is entirely wrong, because this model is subsidized. The simple fact that the Rabo 12 is not viable on its own should be sufficient proof.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Question: What is the difference between the IRFU (as an umbrella organisation) owning its four rugby teams, and 12 private individuals (under the umbrella organisation of the PRL) owning the 12 Aviva Premiership teams, and 14 private individuals (under the umbrella organisation of the LNR) owning the the 14 Top 14 teams?

Answer: Absolutely, categorically, NOTHING!!!

You have clubs/team, owners and boards of directors for all three. You have player payments for all three.

The AP and Top 14 owners put in money to keep their competition and their teams afloat, the WRU, IRFU, SRU and the owners of Zebre and Treviso put money in too. The internal structures might be different in the minor details, but they are essentially organised the same may, and the result is the same.

NONE of the Rugby competitions are self sustaining, otherwise the club owners and the RFU/FFR would not have to keep handing out ££££ and €€€€

 

[Amiga500]

]The French and English clubs are generating an estimated 80% of the TV revenues of the H cup while receiving only 48% (24% each for the PRL and top 14), 52% going to the Rabo 12[/COLOR]

Given that it is a centralised negotiation of TV contract, and that the rights to the entire UK & Ireland [which encompasses the English clubs and 3 of the 4 Rabo nations] are owned by one broadcaster (Sky), I will be fascinated as to how you prove this.

Particularly given Leinster v Ulster had the highest TV viewing figure of any HEC final to date.

You can dress this fact the way you want, but it is a form of subsidized economy as the viability depends on the goodwill of a third party benefactor.

So using your own yardstick, what does that make the Aviva Premiership with its much vaunted BT Sport deal? [ever heard of ITV Digital?]

Surely, the top 14 and the PRL will take a financial hit from withdrawing from the H cup but it will not kill them, especially as the clubs struggling financially are usually found at the bottom of the table and thus do not get any significant amount of money from the HC.

The PRL divides its HEC money equally amongst all teams. Not sure on the T14.

As for the unions refusing to back up their new proposal, this is pure posturing. They just can't for multiple reasons including financial ones.

You have no idea. No idea whatsoever of the long term consequences to the game of the unions not facing this down. Yet, in your following lines you allude to the difficulties already faced in getting players released for international duty.

 

[smartcooky]

You have no idea. No idea whatsoever of the long term consequences to the game of the unions not facing this down.[/FONT][/COLOR] Yet, in your following lines you allude to the difficulties already faced in getting players released for international duty.

I agree with you mate. If LNR and the PRL are allowed to get away with this, it could set rugby back a decade or more, and the longer term consequences could be catastrophic.

You only have to look at what club domination has done to the international aspects of Wendyball and Rugby League to see what those consequences could be!

 

[ratsapprentice]

http://www.espn.co.uk/blogs/rugby/story/199507.html

Gloucester have recorded a profit for the third-year running.
The club's latest set of accounts reveal a pre-tax profit of £305,336 and a turnover of £11.6m

 

[erwanseb]

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Question: What is the difference between the IRFU (as an umbrella organisation) owning its four rugby teams, and 12 private individuals (under the umbrella organisation of the PRL) owning the 12 Aviva Premiership teams, and 14 private individuals (under the umbrella organisation of the LNR) owning the the 14 Top 14 teams?

The same difference as between a centralized soviet type economy where all competitors on a given market belonged to the same entity, ie the state and a capitalist economy where competitors are independent.
In the capitalist system , economic actors will come and go, some will go bankrupt and die and will be replaced by new ones more often than not, they have to adjust constantly to the market environment or face oblivion (kodak, Blackberry)
In the communist system, there is no real competition, as markets participants have no real incentive to develop their market share and their product relatively to the others because they ultimately belong to the same owner. And when the owner fails, it takes down the whole system with him (USSR).
</SPAN>