But isn’t that indicative of the way the game is viewed by the general public and more important to the TV companies, advertisers providing revenue. If there had been a larger bid surely Premiership rugby would have accepted that.Hot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:48 pmArguably Premiership Rugby failed when it renewed the TV deal too, when BT paid less annually for the rights than they had been previously. That opens up huge questions.Wayne Richardson Fan Club wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:24 pm How much of the CVC money is bending the profitability lines? That is a finite amount.
You can't have a Pro sport that relies on Sugar Daddies it isn't sustainable.
As for the game it isn't (a lot of the time) a great advert for itself on the pitch.
Worcester’s woes
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7675
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Worcester’s woes
Re: Worcester’s woes
I am not sure that they had much choice. Currently club rugby is not going to rack up the subscribers, the money is in international TV rights. On another thread I suggested that part of the next player release deal is that international rights are auctioned off as a bundle with club rugby to secure a better deal and I still feel that.Hot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:48 pmArguably Premiership Rugby failed when it renewed the TV deal too, when BT paid less annually for the rights than they had been previously. That opens up huge questions.Wayne Richardson Fan Club wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:24 pm How much of the CVC money is bending the profitability lines? That is a finite amount.
You can't have a Pro sport that relies on Sugar Daddies it isn't sustainable.
As for the game it isn't (a lot of the time) a great advert for itself on the pitch.
Sadly, the suspicious part of me thinks that the streaming of matches by Premiership Rugby is an emergency plan B in place in case there is very little offered for the next TV Deal. I can see companies increasing their bids for the European matches and reducing their interest in club matches. Again, the international players have an impact on this as it is not as if the club sides are able to put out a full team with star names most weeks. At least the European games tend to have a full sqaud and the bigger names to market the games around.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 2109
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:37 am
Re: Worcester’s woes
Worcester's problems are down to the pandemic, having to pay players and coaches when ther are no matches followed by the expense of matches with no spectators and like ourselves relying on functions to hire their facilities on non match days but being prevented from doing so due to covid creates cash flow problems. Warriors need time and matches to get their finances sorted out whether with current owners or a new Board. Hopefully HMRC will be patient and work with them. Wasps have a different history and different problems, personally I think their move to the Midlands to leach off the strong Rugby support generated over the years by other clubs was always doomed to fail and deserved to do so.
Re: Worcester’s woes
From the Rugbypass link:Tigerbeat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:17 pmhttps://www.rugbypass.com/news/premiers ... vc-buy-in/ourla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:12 pm Looking through the League most of the clubs are in good health. Not necessarily profitable - although I am not sure what the criteria is here.
Wasps seems to me to be a unique case. Their move to Coventry always carried some risks.
Worcester, Falcons and in the past Irish always seemed to be on the margins a bit but Irish at least have a real home in the capital now.
But aren't the rest all generally fine. Or am I being over optimistic?
This was pre-covid and am not sure that it has changed significantly.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby ... -100m.html
The salary cap report crucially noted, though, that many of the Premiership club owners claimed not to be overly bothered by their loss-making businesses as owning a rugby club was something they were generally doing in search of glory rather than to make ends meet.
From the Daily Mail article:
Emerging from Covid, there is a sense that the clubs are more streamlined, collaborating more, and are better equipped for the post-pandemic future of rugby — as long as fans really do return in force.
‘We’re coming out of Covid comfortable and confident in our own skin,’ said McDonald.
Bradley added: ‘We’re through the difficult bit. As long as it is a normal season we’re back on track.’
Not saying everything is totally hunky dory but at the same time not all bad.
Re: Worcester’s woes
It would be if they were all in trouble at the same time but I don't believe that is the case. And what I mean by at the margins is that they have some intrinsic issues that others don't have. Wasps is identity/home, Newcastle is geographic/domination of football in the City, Irish I think are settled now, Worcester don't have the history/longetivity. But they all have survived up to now so let's see.
Well, it clearly has been so far. As per my last post many owners don't see a profit as necessary.
Again, to reiterate you always need to be thinking about the health of the sport and making thinks better. Growth is not going to be easy because of a number of factors.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4082
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: Worcester’s woes
Oh, I agree entirely. BT Sport were still the highest bidder and it maybe indicates a larger strategic failure to "grow" the product that BT were essentially able to offer a cut in what they were paying.GB72 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:22 pmI am not sure that they had much choice. Currently club rugby is not going to rack up the subscribers, the money is in international TV rights.Hot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:48 pmArguably Premiership Rugby failed when it renewed the TV deal too, when BT paid less annually for the rights than they had been previously. That opens up huge questions.Wayne Richardson Fan Club wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:24 pm How much of the CVC money is bending the profitability lines? That is a finite amount.
You can't have a Pro sport that relies on Sugar Daddies it isn't sustainable.
As for the game it isn't (a lot of the time) a great advert for itself on the pitch.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4082
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: Worcester’s woes
I think with the merry-go-round of owners, the lack of progress/success, it runs a little deeper. COVID has just brought it to a head I think.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4082
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: Worcester’s woes
And again it depends on the club. Tigers, Saints and Chiefs seem to have been the closest to either being profitable or breaking even pre-Covid, and even then losses were probably at manageable levels. Gloucester probably also fit to the same model with a solid support base.
Then you have the Bath and Sarries (and Bristol, although they've not be up long enough really to tell) who have had owners willing to subsidise. I hadn't realised this is/was also the case at Quins (Guardian 2018 article has them owing their owners almost as much as Sarries did Nigel Wray in loans!).
The rest, Worcester, LI, Sale are they ones without consistent ownership (although Sale have had more stability in this respect recently). Newcastle lose a lot, but similarly down turnover much either, and Wasps, well, they're Wasps!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7675
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Worcester’s woes
Naive to put it just down to the pandemic. All clubs experienced the same difficulties through this time, though on different scales. I would hope HMRC would say yo Worcester none of the other 12 clubs have delayed giving returns so why have you and deal with them accordinglyHot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:52 pmI think with the merry-go-round of owners, the lack of progress/success, it runs a little deeper. COVID has just brought it to a head I think.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4082
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: Worcester’s woes
If they've got cash flow problems I suspect Wuss are just letting it take its course to then pay the bill as late as possible.Rugbygramps wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 4:20 pmNaive to put it just down to the pandemic. All clubs experienced the same difficulties through this time, though on different scales. I would hope HMRC would say yo Worcester none of the other 12 clubs have delayed giving returns so why have you and deal with them accordinglyHot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:52 pmI think with the merry-go-round of owners, the lack of progress/success, it runs a little deeper. COVID has just brought it to a head I think.
Re: Worcester’s woes
I think is telling that, with potentially 2 clubs going bust, the story has hardly had the mainstream media in a frenzy. Imagine if it were 2 top- or even near top-flight soccer clubs.
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7675
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Worcester’s woes
Absolutely it was all over the news when Derby County went into administration
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4082
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
Re: Worcester’s woes
Yes, to a point. It shows how much they don't value the product if they think it's worth the same as the paid before.Rugbygramps wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:58 pmBut isn’t that indicative of the way the game is viewed by the general public and more important to the TV companies, advertisers providing revenue.Hot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:48 pmArguably Premiership Rugby failed when it renewed the TV deal too, when BT paid less annually for the rights than they had been previously. That opens up huge questions.Wayne Richardson Fan Club wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:24 pm How much of the CVC money is bending the profitability lines? That is a finite amount.
You can't have a Pro sport that relies on Sugar Daddies it isn't sustainable.
As for the game it isn't (a lot of the time) a great advert for itself on the pitch.
Well yes, obviously. But that's the problem; there wasn't. That really doesn't reflect well on the product, or those selling it.If there had been a larger bid surely Premiership rugby would have accepted that.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7675
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Worcester’s woes
So we are saying the same thing, BT didn’t need to bid any higher to get the rights, premiership either accepted that bid or nothingHot_Charlie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 9:15 amYes, to a point. It shows how much they don't value the product if they think it's worth the same as the paid before.Rugbygramps wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:58 pmBut isn’t that indicative of the way the game is viewed by the general public and more important to the TV companies, advertisers providing revenue.Hot_Charlie wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:48 pm
Arguably Premiership Rugby failed when it renewed the TV deal too, when BT paid less annually for the rights than they had been previously. That opens up huge questions.
Well yes, obviously. But that's the problem; there wasn't. That really doesn't reflect well on the product, or those selling it.If there had been a larger bid surely Premiership rugby would have accepted that.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 13588
- Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:54 pm
Re: Worcester’s woes
Talk is now administration
Hmm wonder who has cap left to scoop up some good players (Not to sound like a vulture)
Ollie Lawreance would be very good
Hmm wonder who has cap left to scoop up some good players (Not to sound like a vulture)
Ollie Lawreance would be very good