Financial Times on Rugby

[mc mong]

Just a heads up for anyone who reads the FT:

There's a glossy magazine supplement in today's edition (March 10) called "The Business of Rugby Union"

Looks like some nice articles in there.

[MajorRage]

Really? I got mine today, but didn't see the glossy? SHAFTED!!

[Plastic Patrick]

I read it all in hospital, very little on SH stuff apart from a positive article about RWC 2011. Interesting stat was about 33% of revenue from the Six Nations is from TV and about 25% of European club rugby. TV is the largest single revenue source. It shows that the game is in rude health with diversified income streams which is good news.

[Sambo]

thats funny. I ain't seen the article but on PR they are having babies about it saying the WC is a financial train wreck. Yes you said positive article about the WC tad confused

[Plastic Patrick]

thats funny. I ain't seen the article but on PR they are having babies about it saying the WC is a financial train wreck. Yes you said positive article about the WC tad confused

They said financially it wouldn’t make any money but the atmosphere and passion would make it a great world cup.

[mc mong]

thats funny. I ain't seen the article but on PR they are having babies about it saying the WC is a financial train wreck. Yes you said positive article about the WC tad confused

yeah that article about nz did heavily state that 2011 wont make much $$ - dues to time zones/less tourists/less sponsor interest/recession etc - but overall the whole tone wasn't too negative either imo. seemed to play up the fact that its good for the spirit of rugby and this is likely the last time nz will ever be able to stage it.

anyways lots of positive articles about the future of the game. lots to look forward to:
argentina in the trinations and possibly the super15 down the road, 7s in the olympics, growth of the game in asia

edit: and PR is probably not the best site for intelligent discussion and an accurate assessment

[Bones]

So it won't make much money for NZ, rather than the IRB? Why would that effect rugby?

[mc mong]

The argument is that staging the WC in NZ will generate less revenue for the IRB. To help this, they are trying to tie sponsors up to both the 2011 and the 2015 WC in England. 2015 is obvioulsy more attractive for sponsors than a tournament in NZ.

interesting quotes: "2015 in England is about funding the game, 2019 in Japan is about growing the game. Where this leaves small countries like new zeland... is open to question."

on the other hand: "new zeland is small but its collective interest in rugby is greater than anywhere else."

[Bones]

I'm sure I've heard on here before about the NZRFU guaranteeing X amount of dosh for the IRB? I guess probably not as much as they may have made in the NH, but hey, it's a profit..

[Sambo]

yep that is my understanding. NZRFU makes fuck all or a loss, NZ govt bleeds money but makes it back via the cash boom from tourism. IRB makes shitloads still via TV rights etc but maybe not as much as a UK or Jpn tournament. So what they are still making a heap.

[Plastic Patrick]

Here's the article

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b5be6884-2...44feabdc0.html