Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

All things Rugby
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

Ellafan wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
McKinsey? Or maybe that was a customer defined parameter?
Who’s the customer?
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

Working Class Rugger wrote:
towny wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
towny wrote:Seems like everyone knows the reason why the NRC failed; however I know for a fact that you’re all wrong and I’m right.

“Jobs to be Done” - this is what it boils down to. What “job” in people’s lives did the NRC do? What was the problem it was fixing?

Every answer that does not involve a solution to a majority of rugby supporters is irrelevant. Steve Jobs once said, “start with the customer and work back to the technology” - technology in Apple’s case being the ‘product’. Did the NRC do this? Oh nosiree! It had nothing to do with the supporters (consumers) or our problems that needed solving.

You can all throw around your fantastic theories but they all mean jack and sh*t, unless they start with the rugby supporters’ needs. What was the “job” that the NRC was going to go for us?

I know you’ll come back and say “the job” was to build pathways for the players and Wallabies - which it was - but this is the reason it fails. It will not ever, ever, ever be sustainable until it focuses on the most important factor - the customer. And I’d be shocked if you find me people that after 6 months of rugby (during the international period) say, “I need another tier of rugby to support.”

Dismiss me all you want. I’m a nobody. But I’m throwing my deadly accurate rocks from behind Clay Christensen and Steve Jobs.

This is a short, interesting video from the late, great Clay Christensen explaining “jobs theory” - https://youtu.be/1SfUsSyGWJ8 if anyone can watch this and come back and give a valid explanation of what the “job” of the NRC is, I’ll rim (and webcast) the old Gypsy bloke that is always begging for coin outside my local supermarket. Dismiss CC or Steve Jobs when it comes to marketing, and we will know you’re not serious about anything other than winning an online shitfight. Which you just lost.
On this I actually agree with you. And extend that to the reason why SR has largely failed. Neither took a commercial perspective opting to be mere funnels to the next level. Look at SR Au. It's been great but talking to the guy who was mounting my new TV just this morning when I mentioned I was a Rugby fan he asked whether it was that back on. No marketing. No commercial development. Nothing. In that sense. Building a competition with support. It has been a failure.

But, from a cost perspective of being cost neutral for RA and providing another stage for young players to develop it's been a success. Look at pretty much every SR teams squad list and you'll see examples of players who came through that system.

I'll put this out there. I'm not saying no to clubs being involved in a future structure. In fact I would provide them with the opportunity to do just that. RA should put it out there that they are planning to go with a 6 team SR Au competition forming the spine of the professional game in Australia next season. That's the preliminary plan.

However, they are open to any bid for inclusion regardless of location if they can prove they have the backing to present a viable squad at the level required to be competitive. Not compete. But be competitive. No restrictions on who. If say Randwick organises the pieces. Gets the backing and puts together a squad then they'll be included. If not in 2021 then by 2022.
You agreed with my point, but then went ahead and tried to guess what might work, which is a fantastic way to fail. Cost neutral? I’m tempted but won’t jump into that creative accounting explanation.

If we start from the ‘product’ and then move to justification, we can always frame successful models on paper. When they fail we can spin the reasoning why. Any model, that does not solve a problem of the consumers will fail. Every time. Why don’t we do what the greats suggest, and focus on the customer needs? Just once.
Nothing creative about the accounting. The operations of the competition was paid for by Foxtel. Which means it cost RA nothing to run. I don't know what it cost the respective teams. But then again I wasn't talking about them.

I've got news for you. A club based model won't succeed either. I watched the Shute Shield today and apart from being likely on of only 10k odd that did something that stuck out was the huge difference between what I was watching featuring two of the competitions more fancied team and SR Au.

I also never said I thought what I suggested would work or even possible. I tend to believe none of them would be able to meet those criteria individually and rivalries will prevent them overcoming their grievances to combine forces. I suggested that the opportunity should exist. That's all.
If Foxtel paid the costs, then that is money that needs to counted. Nothing is free, well, other than distribution of digital goods.

You are keen to fire away at issues and challenges but keep avoiding my question - what is the job that rugby does for it’s supporters? I don’t think many would know this, so sorry if I’m picking on you, but unless that is known, any proposed solution is throwing expensive darts.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4646
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ellafan »

towny wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
McKinsey? Or maybe that was a customer defined parameter?
Who’s the customer?
NZR thinks NZR knows best.

I have seen reported rumours (actually hearsay reported by Roger Davis) that his NZ counterparts don't agree with the 8 team thing, but that doesn't necessarily mean they don't agree with NZHQ on the prime directive.
Dan54.
Posts: 864
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Dan54. »

towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because they pay the bills. We all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
User avatar
TranceNRG
Posts: 9784
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Sunny London
Contact:

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by TranceNRG »

Working Class Rugger wrote:
shanky wrote:Well, let it all hang out lads

'talent aggregators'

Because grading players is bad now? I thought you were all for 'pathways' a few posts ago

And you are unfair about colts. Randwick may stockpile Aus Schoolboys, but most SS clubs don't. I can vouch for the fact that most Opens players will look forward to playing for their local Colts team.

No one is knocking subbies, by the way. I was referring to building an Australia-wide comp leveraging off existing loyalties, not promoting SS verbatim.
That's my only point. My view is that NRC is a failure from a commercial prospect, not a rugby-pathway one

And forget about Godwin, these threads have the Papworth's Law.
Never actually said that. Did I?

The idea of building a nationwide competition sounds great. But there's many, many obstacles to overcome. Financing is one. Not only to pay talent but provide the required infrastructure many of these clubs would need in order to make the jump. Name on professional level club ground in Australia that is pro ready right now? The investment would be huge with money coming from somewhere or someone with little interest in seeing any kind of return on that invest potentially ever. But we manage that. I'm not going to talk about talent as I think that would be the least of the issues.

The major issues will be

1) the clubs themselves. Try telling one club or another that they don't deserve to be involved. From a commercial perspective there are some very successful clubs that would make poor additions based purely on their lack of wider appeal. Not just to casual fans but other Rugby people. They're not going to just agree to take a back seat. The politicking within these clubs can be bad enough. Imagine what it would be like over this. Crazy. And there's no way many fans of one club that misses out are going to support another. Could you imagine Manly fans turning up to watch Warringah in a National Competition not featuring Manly. Seriously, seriously doubt it. And,

2) These clubs aren't actually that popular among fans. People who push this line tend to quote a very select number of crowds and completely ignore TV ratings in their assertion of the supposed widespread popularity of in this case the Shute Shield. Manly and Warringah get good crowds with a handful of great crowds. Uni does quite nicely in terms of it's facility. Eastwood does okay but probably not as well as 5-10 years ago tbh. But it's not like there's crowds of 10k week in and week out right across these competitions. As for the TV ratings. Last season barely so them crack 10k. Nowhere near strong enough to build a sustainable professional competition from.

But back to my first line. There's nothing wrong with playing grade. In fact, they play a significant role in the development of a player going forward. They are talent aggregators. Like it or not. Players migrate toward them seeking greater competition and opportunity. Again. There's nothing wrong with that. A lot of those players come to form friendships and bonds within that club. But it's not the be all and end all of that pathway.

The NRC has been a commercial failure largely because it's never been treated as a commercial venture. Never proper marketed or promoted among even the Rugby community. Which from a NSW perspectives extends far wider than 11 Sydney based clubs. It's been treated much the same way SR has been throughout its existence. As a development tool for a higher level of competition. Which is has satisfied quite well.

I'm not against the clubs. In fact, I would like them play a key role in not only developing talent but broadening the game in general. I'd like to see them operated as they are designated. District clubs. The central point for a robust playing and supporting community within each of their boundaries. I'd love for RA and the clubs not only here but across the country to get together and hash out workable plans to grow the grassroots participation in the youth game extensively within each district. And by that I mean each club having at least 12 junior clubs running teams u6-18 for boys and at least one girls teams in the U6/7, 8/9, 10/11 etc. grade groups. All while building strong and lasting connection with the larger clubs as a whole. So that in the future the 8-10k the Battle of the Beaches becomes the norm rather than the exception.
Excellent post. Agree with everything you said.

IMO A Trans Tasman comp is still the way best way forward for NZRU and RA. Both countries/union need each other. Together we can achieve more (so FU to the arrogant Keewees in NZRU who thought we would simply just accept their nonsensical terms) and bring more broadcast money.

My ideal scenario is a Trans Tasman compl and somehow Saffers and Argies play in their own comp. And the best teams from the 2 comps play in a Heineken cup style comp at the end.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4646
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ellafan »

Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
User avatar
Working Class Rugger
Posts: 3965
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA plum!!!

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Working Class Rugger »

towny wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
towny wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
towny wrote:Seems like everyone knows the reason why the NRC failed; however I know for a fact that you’re all wrong and I’m right.

“Jobs to be Done” - this is what it boils down to. What “job” in people’s lives did the NRC do? What was the problem it was fixing?

Every answer that does not involve a solution to a majority of rugby supporters is irrelevant. Steve Jobs once said, “start with the customer and work back to the technology” - technology in Apple’s case being the ‘product’. Did the NRC do this? Oh nosiree! It had nothing to do with the supporters (consumers) or our problems that needed solving.

You can all throw around your fantastic theories but they all mean jack and sh*t, unless they start with the rugby supporters’ needs. What was the “job” that the NRC was going to go for us?

I know you’ll come back and say “the job” was to build pathways for the players and Wallabies - which it was - but this is the reason it fails. It will not ever, ever, ever be sustainable until it focuses on the most important factor - the customer. And I’d be shocked if you find me people that after 6 months of rugby (during the international period) say, “I need another tier of rugby to support.”

Dismiss me all you want. I’m a nobody. But I’m throwing my deadly accurate rocks from behind Clay Christensen and Steve Jobs.

This is a short, interesting video from the late, great Clay Christensen explaining “jobs theory” - https://youtu.be/1SfUsSyGWJ8 if anyone can watch this and come back and give a valid explanation of what the “job” of the NRC is, I’ll rim (and webcast) the old Gypsy bloke that is always begging for coin outside my local supermarket. Dismiss CC or Steve Jobs when it comes to marketing, and we will know you’re not serious about anything other than winning an online shitfight. Which you just lost.
On this I actually agree with you. And extend that to the reason why SR has largely failed. Neither took a commercial perspective opting to be mere funnels to the next level. Look at SR Au. It's been great but talking to the guy who was mounting my new TV just this morning when I mentioned I was a Rugby fan he asked whether it was that back on. No marketing. No commercial development. Nothing. In that sense. Building a competition with support. It has been a failure.

But, from a cost perspective of being cost neutral for RA and providing another stage for young players to develop it's been a success. Look at pretty much every SR teams squad list and you'll see examples of players who came through that system.

I'll put this out there. I'm not saying no to clubs being involved in a future structure. In fact I would provide them with the opportunity to do just that. RA should put it out there that they are planning to go with a 6 team SR Au competition forming the spine of the professional game in Australia next season. That's the preliminary plan.

However, they are open to any bid for inclusion regardless of location if they can prove they have the backing to present a viable squad at the level required to be competitive. Not compete. But be competitive. No restrictions on who. If say Randwick organises the pieces. Gets the backing and puts together a squad then they'll be included. If not in 2021 then by 2022.
You agreed with my point, but then went ahead and tried to guess what might work, which is a fantastic way to fail. Cost neutral? I’m tempted but won’t jump into that creative accounting explanation.

If we start from the ‘product’ and then move to justification, we can always frame successful models on paper. When they fail we can spin the reasoning why. Any model, that does not solve a problem of the consumers will fail. Every time. Why don’t we do what the greats suggest, and focus on the customer needs? Just once.
Nothing creative about the accounting. The operations of the competition was paid for by Foxtel. Which means it cost RA nothing to run. I don't know what it cost the respective teams. But then again I wasn't talking about them.

I've got news for you. A club based model won't succeed either. I watched the Shute Shield today and apart from being likely on of only 10k odd that did something that stuck out was the huge difference between what I was watching featuring two of the competitions more fancied team and SR Au.

I also never said I thought what I suggested would work or even possible. I tend to believe none of them would be able to meet those criteria individually and rivalries will prevent them overcoming their grievances to combine forces. I suggested that the opportunity should exist. That's all.
If Foxtel paid the costs, then that is money that needs to counted. Nothing is free, well, other than distribution of digital goods.

You are keen to fire away at issues and challenges but keep avoiding my question - what is the job that rugby does for it’s supporters? I don’t think many would know this, so sorry if I’m picking on you, but unless that is known, any proposed solution is throwing expensive darts.
At what level. There's no one blanket answer to that question. As has been on display on this very thread. From my perspective. The professional level's job is to provide a compelling product that engages its core and draws in casuals with professional level promotion backing up an on field product of the expected quality. Which is well beyond that of club Rugby. Which has a completely different job for its fans.
User avatar
koroke hangareka
Posts: 2889
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by koroke hangareka »

Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
Bowens
Posts: 11040
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Bowens »

grievous wrote:
Bowens wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Zakar wrote:
grievous wrote:Yes a local comp doesn't include PI teams, not like thousands of local Fijians attended the NRC when they played.
Get the core teams settled and working.
The Fijians got great crowds?
They've consistently pulled the best crowds in the NRC since their inception.
Yep. About double the league average.
Yes but how many? Enough to support a club financially?
They aren’t going to have any problems with crowds. The Drua outdrew the Force in the NRC and when Super Rugby has been played in Suva it has been a 20k full house. WR would back them financially.
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because they pay the bills. We all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Oh, right. Is this a common philosophy? What other sports share this philosophy?
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

koroke hangareka wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
I haven’t. Is it suited to rugby or digital content? I saw the blurb and noticed it was about China - is this actually relevant? As digital goods have zero marginal costs and zero distribution costs, 400 million seems like a fraction of the total addressable market, which must be in the many billions. The big catch though is customer acquisition costs - does the book discuss how to capture this market at reasonable costs per customer acquired, and if so, should China somehow be different than the rest of the planet? Lastly, as China has traditionally used its commercial power to export its values, which is anti-liberalism (most of the values the west believes are basic human rights), what is the price we are willing to pay if we did crack it? Would we support that sacking of a coach that tweets something about Hong Kong? Would we endure that Taiwan doesn’t have the word ‘Taiwan’ on its national jersey? Because this is the buy-in price to getting into bed with a totalitarian dictatorship that cares not for our little game, but wants us to be their puppets for a few shackles.

Keen to know more!!
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4646
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ellafan »

koroke hangareka wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote: Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
No, but I think Twiggy has.
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

Ellafan wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote: Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
No, but I think Twiggy has.
Iron ore has marginal costs of production and distribution, so it’s probably very relevant, unlike digital goods, which do not. Selling rocks or sneakers is very different to selling bytes.
tubbyj
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by tubbyj »

Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Why stop with the 25 million figure? If you are going to indulge in fantasy the worlds population is just under 8 billion for your future audience.
Dan54.
Posts: 864
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Dan54. »

Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
You can change anything in my posts you want, the bottom line is a successful Wallaby team is needed to pay the bills. Have a look at the market in Britain Europe etc they got a huge tv audience, it is still the International teams that pay the bills, anyone who thinks otherwise has got their head buried in the sand. Why do you think there are so many tests played each year?
Last edited by Dan54. on Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Salient
Posts: 3410
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland!

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Salient »

Ellafan wrote:
Dan54. wrote:
towny wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
towny wrote:Rennie can get farked. His priority is a strong Wallaby team. Mine is pissing of f*ckhead kiwis.

And I’m willing to burn my own house down to do it.
Exactly and he thinks a TT comp is the best way to do that.

Burn muthfucka burn
Anyone that believes that a rugby union’s top priority is the success of the top team is a moron and/or doesn’t really love the game.
Unfortunately New Zealand rugby's priority has to be a successful top team because the All Blacks pay the bills. We NZrs all want club rugby to be top priority, bit then will all moan like bitches because noone will be able to afford to play it but the rich.
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Damn straight, despite declining viewership and two other major football codes getting the punters in in droves.

There's some delusion coming down in this thread to be honest, rugby is on it's arse and the media aren't exactly falling over themselves to sign on to any competition.
User avatar
Working Class Rugger
Posts: 3965
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA plum!!!

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Working Class Rugger »

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...h ... your-court

Talks not going well. Want to build a TT competition but not going to compromise on 5 teams. RA prepared to put a domestic structure to broadcasters. They want a competition geared toward investment. A RWC pool in 2027 increasingly becoming unlikely for NZ.
RandomNavigat0r
Posts: 632
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:32 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by RandomNavigat0r »

Working Class Rugger wrote:https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...h ... your-court

Talks not going well. Want to build a TT competition but not going to compromise on 5 teams. RA prepared to put a domestic structure to broadcasters. They want a competition geared toward investment. A RWC pool in 2027 increasingly becoming unlikely for NZ.
So much for those positive negotiations happening behind the scenes according to Ali, btw that link is broken, you now have to go to the main page to read it.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/sup ... your-court
grievous
Posts: 12018
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Tahstown

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by grievous »

Working Class Rugger wrote:https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...h ... your-court

Talks not going well. Want to build a TT competition but not going to compromise on 5 teams. RA prepared to put a domestic structure to broadcasters. They want a competition geared toward investment. A RWC pool in 2027 increasingly becoming unlikely for NZ.
Link didn't work, appears to be this. Now I know where Paul Cully went, SMH must of cut him and stuck with Robo only.
Hes a good writer.
Rugby Australia chairman Hamish McLennan tells NZ: The ball is in your court
Paul Cully
05:00, Aug 09 2020

Rugby Australia chairman Hamish McLennan says a trans-Tasman Super Rugby competition is only a 50-50’ proposition at the moment.

Rugby Australia chairman Hamish McLennan says a trans-Tasman Super Rugby competition is only a 50-50’ proposition at the moment.
Australian rugby boss Hamish McLennan is adamant that keeping five Australian teams in a future Super Rugby competition is a “blood red” negotiating line that Rugby Australia simply will not cross, making it likely that New Zealand Rugby will either have to soften its stance or risk going without an international partner in 2021.

In an extensive interview with Stuff, McLennan also outlined his own vision for the tournament, said the chances of New Zealand being offered some hosting rights at the 2027 Rugby World Cup were diminishing, and put the ball firmly in New Zealand's court as Rugby Australia prepares to test the broadcast market for its own domestic competition.

NZ Rugby CEO Mark Robinson has been handling most of the discussions with Rugby Australia, but progress has been difficult.
“There are no resolutions anywhere,” McLennan told Stuff about the ongoing trans-Tasman talks.

“[Rugby Australia] CEO Rob Clarke is chatting with [NZ Rugby CEO] Mark Robinson, and we’ll hopefully see where it lands in the next couple of weeks.

“We have an opportunity to create a world-class competition, but I’m not going to cut my way to greatness.”

New Zealand Rugby announced plans in July to establish a new 8-10 team Super Rugby competition, a plan that would have required Australia to cut at least two teams to participate.

While that was seen as a preferable high-performance outcome on this side of the ditch, the frequently divided Australian rugby community was galvanised in opposition, with several Australian sources telling Stuff the viewed New Zealand's approach as either naive or arrogant.

As a result, McLennan has been open to Australia going its own way, and said discussions about Rugby Australia's next broadcast deal were imminent.

Japan is opening its borders for those with working visas but Kiwi rugby players face some difficult decisions.
“We will go to the market very soon for our broadcast negotiations for next year and beyond, and we will present a domestic only competition and a cross-Tasman one,” he said.

“We need to get an indication from New Zealand very soon about what they want to do, otherwise we’ll be forced to go the domestic route.

“I think it's 50-50 at the moment. It's in the balance.

“I would dearly like to do something with New Zealand, with a bigger concept that is better for our collective Super Rugby teams, but I can't control what New Zealand think or do, so we're forced to go down the domestic route.

“And, I’m pragmatic about that.”

The Waratahs are in a rebuilding phase, and Australian rugby is open to the idea of importing more foreign players in the near-term.

The Waratahs are in a rebuilding phase, and Australian rugby is open to the idea of importing more foreign players in the near-term.
It's understood NZ Rugby holds justifiable fears about playing depth in Australia, and the desire to include Pacific Islands team puts further pressure on Australia.

However, McLennan said New Zealand should take a longer-term view, pointing to a strong year for the Junior Wallabies in 2019, and Australia's determination to improve the Wallabies under Dave Rennie.

“We're not as good as we would like to be, but we’re not as bad in terms of where the game’s going to be in the long term,” he said.

“We’ve got a proud and long history of rugby, and we’re going to dig in and fix it.”

McLennan also appealed to NZ Rugby to embrace fresh thinking, and to take this chance to bring new supporters to the game with a 10-12 team Super Rugby competition, run by its own commission and management structure, that would be a magnet for private equity money.

Wallabies coach Dave Rennie has work to do across the ditch, and has been vocal in his support of a trans-Tasman competition.

Wallabies coach Dave Rennie has work to do across the ditch, and has been vocal in his support of a trans-Tasman competition.
As a former executive of Australian TV network Channel 10, McLennan was an architect of the successful Big Bash cricket competition, and he sees some similarities with rugby.

“We put a lot of money, over $100 million, when I was at Channel 10 into Big Bash,” he said.

“Most people in the conservative element in the game said, 'that's a dumb idea, you’re going to ruin test cricket, it's not going to work’.

“So while it’s not a direct comparison with what we’re trying to do with rugby, rugby needs to innovate and do things differently.

The chances of New Zealand hosting part of the 2027 Rugby World Cup as part of Australia's bid appear to be decreasing.

The chances of New Zealand hosting part of the 2027 Rugby World Cup as part of Australia's bid appear to be decreasing.
“What it did was bring young kids and women, and people who are sitting on the fringes of cricket, back into the game.”

However, one possible sweetener that Australia could have offered New Zealand – some co-hosting rights should it win the bid to hold the 2027 Rugby World Cup – appears to be slipping off the table.

“I have been open to it, but it is predicated on genuine cooperation, and the current mood doesn't fill me with a whole lot of hope,” McLennan said.

“And we’re hearing from World Rugby that they would prefer a single host nation, so we’ll see.

“There's a little bit to think about."
Macca isn't saying anything unreasonable there, door is open but we will not compromise ourselves or the game here.
Again Covid is probably going to be the intimate decider.
Im not sure why NZRU can just make a call although its probably because they are in a panic because RA didn't roll over for them and they have no plan B.

And keep the WC whole Australian.
User avatar
sonic_attack
Posts: 4111
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Contact:

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by sonic_attack »

You wonder what the guy is waiting for with his 25 million potential viewers, untold millions of investment from private equity, and an entire rwc pool worth of profit to collect.
User avatar
koroke hangareka
Posts: 2889
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by koroke hangareka »

towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
I haven’t. Is it suited to rugby or digital content? I saw the blurb and noticed it was about China - is this actually relevant? As digital goods have zero marginal costs and zero distribution costs, 400 million seems like a fraction of the total addressable market, which must be in the many billions. The big catch though is customer acquisition costs - does the book discuss how to capture this market at reasonable costs per customer acquired, and if so, should China somehow be different than the rest of the planet? Lastly, as China has traditionally used its commercial power to export its values, which is anti-liberalism (most of the values the west believes are basic human rights), what is the price we are willing to pay if we did crack it? Would we support that sacking of a coach that tweets something about Hong Kong? Would we endure that Taiwan doesn’t have the word ‘Taiwan’ on its national jersey? Because this is the buy-in price to getting into bed with a totalitarian dictatorship that cares not for our little game, but wants us to be their puppets for a few shackles.

Keen to know more!!
Well, in a nutshell, Americans tended to be mesmerised by the size of the potential market, but endlessly stymied by the fact that the buggers just weren't buying.
It's not directly relevant, I cited it for illustrative purposes only.
RandomNavigat0r
Posts: 632
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:32 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by RandomNavigat0r »

sonic_attack wrote:You wonder what the guy is waiting for with his 25 million potential viewers, untold millions of investment from private equity, and an entire rwc pool worth of profit to collect.
He is waiting for NZL but time is running out because he needs to take his format to the broadcasters. Read the article
User avatar
sonic_attack
Posts: 4111
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Contact:

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by sonic_attack »

He's waiting for a tiny pacific island nation with a small population and nothing to offer to decide what to do before he rescues Australian Rugby from ruin with a massive deal involving hugely increased income from private investors and broadcasters, while his players are on ration wages?
User avatar
Ali's Choice
Posts: 28806
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ali's Choice »

sonic_attack wrote:He's waiting for a tiny pacific island nation with a small population and nothing to offer to decide what to do before he rescues Australian Rugby from ruin with a massive deal involving hugely increased income from private investors and broadcasters, while his players are on ration wages?
:lol: It doesn't stack up, does it?
User avatar
naki
Posts: 14209
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by naki »

The "offer" of hosting rights for the RWC is transparent bullshit, WR have clearly stated that they only want single nation hosting bids from now on and including NZ was never been part of the original Australian bid. They made an exception for the 2015 tournament games held in Wales because, well, it's all still one host nation. All of the 2023 bids were from sole-host nations, as are the current 2027 bidders.
Dan54.
Posts: 864
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:23 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Dan54. »

naki wrote:The "offer" of hosting rights for the RWC is transparent bullshit, WR have clearly stated that they only want single nation hosting bids from now on and including NZ was never been part of the original Australian bid. They made an exception for the 2015 tournament games held in Wales because, well, it's all still one host nation. All of the 2023 bids were from sole-host nations, as are the current 2027 bidders.
Yep that was only ever said by McLennan on breakdown when Goldie asked halfheartedly if NZ would share it and McLennan said possibly, papers heard it and took it as gospel. McLennan also said on same programme he wasn't sure Aus had the depth for 4-5 teams in Super without buying in players.
grievous
Posts: 12018
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Tahstown

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by grievous »

sonic_attack wrote:You wonder what the guy is waiting for with his 25 million potential viewers, untold millions of investment from private equity, and an entire rwc pool worth of profit to collect.
He is trying to work with an arrogant small minded organisation. I suppose hes giving them enough time to snap out of it. However this is limited as was reported.
grievous
Posts: 12018
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Tahstown

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by grievous »

Dan54. wrote:
naki wrote:The "offer" of hosting rights for the RWC is transparent bullshit, WR have clearly stated that they only want single nation hosting bids from now on and including NZ was never been part of the original Australian bid. They made an exception for the 2015 tournament games held in Wales because, well, it's all still one host nation. All of the 2023 bids were from sole-host nations, as are the current 2027 bidders.
Yep that was only ever said by McLennan on breakdown when Goldie asked halfheartedly if NZ would share it and McLennan said possibly, papers heard it and took it as gospel. McLennan also said on same programme he wasn't sure Aus had the depth for 4-5 teams in Super without buying in players.
Buying in players would also be a short term proposition due the good junior depth coming thorough, that was also in the article. But nothing wrong with having spots for the usual rugby journeymen.
User avatar
sonic_attack
Posts: 4111
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Contact:

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by sonic_attack »

Why would he? With all the riches just waiting to flow into Australian rugby why would he be waiting ?
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4646
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ellafan »

There are smells I like - coffee in the morning. The soil releasing carbons as the first raindrops hit.The scent of a woman.

Reading the last dozen posts or so I see a litany of the usual Kiwi posting warriors flailing around and telling us that rugby in our country is a shit standard, and we have shit crowds and no-one watches it, yada yada yada, and we should roll over and let them help us out... and they'll let a couple of our teams join their competition, run by them, where they control the broadcast funding, that is part of a structure design with the primary purpose of making their national team strong, because it pays the bills in a 1980's Reaganesque 'trickle-down' model. An argument that is as outmoded, from our point of view, as a foreign policy based on the 1980's conditions of bipolar nuclear coldwar stand-off. Which is an apt comparison, because you want us to have only two state teams like we did in the 1980's. Kiwi posters who repeatedly denigrate and insult Australian rugby, rather similarly to the way RL supporting bogans in this country so do. All because RA turned around and said sorry, that doesn't work for us.

And I like the smell of that. It smells like Kiwi fear.
User avatar
Enzedder
Posts: 20026
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Enzedder »

That's fine. You have your comp and we'll have ours. I'm happy that your players are not diluting our product to be frank.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4646
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ellafan »

Enzedder wrote:That's fine. You have your comp and we'll have ours. I'm happy that your players are not diluting our product to be frank.
At least you remember the 1980s.
User avatar
Murdoch
Posts: 2491
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Murdoch »

The more I watch the quality of the respective competitions the more I'm convinced a bledisloe series right now would be a bloodbath.
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 19802
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by CrazyIslander »

Murdoch wrote:The more I watch the quality of the respective competitions the more I'm convinced a bledisloe series right now would be a bloodbath.
No it won't be, maybe a little blood. However, we'll get a decent team on.
User avatar
Ali's Choice
Posts: 28806
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ali's Choice »

Murdoch wrote:The more I watch the quality of the respective competitions the more I'm convinced a bledisloe series right now would be a bloodbath.
The fact that the Wallabies are coached by Rennie and the AB's are coached by Foster will even things up markedly.
GotheCanes
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:26 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by GotheCanes »

Ellafan wrote:There are smells I like - coffee in the morning. The soil releasing carbons as the first raindrops hit.The scent of a woman.

Reading the last dozen posts or so I see a litany of the usual Kiwi posting warriors flailing around and telling us that rugby in our country is a shit standard, and we have shit crowds and no-one watches it, yada yada yada, and we should roll over and let them help us out... and they'll let a couple of our teams join their competition, run by them, where they control the broadcast funding, that is part of a structure design with the primary purpose of making their national team strong, because it pays the bills in a 1980's Reaganesque 'trickle-down' model. An argument that is as outmoded, from our point of view, as a foreign policy based on the 1980's conditions of bipolar nuclear coldwar stand-off. Which is an apt comparison, because you want us to have only two state teams like we did in the 1980's. Kiwi posters who repeatedly denigrate and insult Australian rugby, rather similarly to the way RL supporting bogans in this country so do. All because RA turned around and said sorry, that doesn't work for us.

And I like the smell of that. It smells like Kiwi fear.
What fear? I'd rather have a TT but if we went with Aotearoa then great. Have you been watching any of these games? What's not to like about them?

Take your 25 million viewers and billions in TV money you'll be offered next week or whenever and good luck.
User avatar
Ali's Choice
Posts: 28806
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ali's Choice »

If NZ goes it alone, I reckon we are a team short. I reckon 6 teams is the minimum to run a comp, and even that is quite small. Would lead to a 12 round home-and-away regular season (10 matches plus 2 byes) and then you'd probably want a semi final weekend and a final. Come to think of it that's probably an ideal length for a season. But what would the 6th team be? And anyone that mentions 'Hawaii' is going straight onto my foe list.
GotheCanes
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:26 am

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by GotheCanes »

Ali's Choice wrote:If NZ goes it alone, I reckon we are a team short. I reckon 6 teams is the minimum to run a comp, and even that is quite small. Would lead to a 12 round home-and-away regular season (10 matches plus 2 byes) and then you'd probably want a semi final weekend and a final. Come to think of it that's probably an ideal length for a season. But what would the 6th team be? And anyone that mentions 'Hawaii' is going straight onto my foe list.
Agree I'd like to see the PI team based in AKL like they're suggesting. I think they'd get loads of support like Tonga did in the league
User avatar
Ali's Choice
Posts: 28806
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by Ali's Choice »

GotheCanes wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:If NZ goes it alone, I reckon we are a team short. I reckon 6 teams is the minimum to run a comp, and even that is quite small. Would lead to a 12 round home-and-away regular season (10 matches plus 2 byes) and then you'd probably want a semi final weekend and a final. Come to think of it that's probably an ideal length for a season. But what would the 6th team be? And anyone that mentions 'Hawaii' is going straight onto my foe list.
Agree I'd like to see the PI team based in AKL like they're suggesting. I think they'd get loads of support like Tonga did in the league
When you say PI, what do you mean? Would it be a team that only picked PI players? Not sure how that wouldn't constitute discrimination.
towny
Posts: 18732
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Trans-Tasman comp to replace Super Rugby in 2021

Post by towny »

koroke hangareka wrote:
towny wrote:
koroke hangareka wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Just fixed that for you. The situation in Oz is different - with 25 million possible viewers in a larger market, a successful domestic competition can be achieved.
Have you ever read a book called 400 Million Customers?
I haven’t. Is it suited to rugby or digital content? I saw the blurb and noticed it was about China - is this actually relevant? As digital goods have zero marginal costs and zero distribution costs, 400 million seems like a fraction of the total addressable market, which must be in the many billions. The big catch though is customer acquisition costs - does the book discuss how to capture this market at reasonable costs per customer acquired, and if so, should China somehow be different than the rest of the planet? Lastly, as China has traditionally used its commercial power to export its values, which is anti-liberalism (most of the values the west believes are basic human rights), what is the price we are willing to pay if we did crack it? Would we support that sacking of a coach that tweets something about Hong Kong? Would we endure that Taiwan doesn’t have the word ‘Taiwan’ on its national jersey? Because this is the buy-in price to getting into bed with a totalitarian dictatorship that cares not for our little game, but wants us to be their puppets for a few shackles.

Keen to know more!!
Well, in a nutshell, Americans tended to be mesmerised by the size of the potential market, but endlessly stymied by the fact that the buggers just weren't buying.
It's not directly relevant, I cited it for illustrative purposes only.
:thumbup:
Post Reply