Rugby World Cup bid 2023

nice_guy80

What do GAA posters think about the use of GAA stadia for the bid?

I'd be most concerned about the timing of the WC and the impact on the All Ireland finals and then club finals across the country. Also the impact on attendances at gaa championship matches as people might save money until the rugby rolls around

Now, if the GAA will get a host of ungraded stadia then I suppose it won't be all bad

But I cannot see how they would be able sell enough tickets for games in regional stadiums to the average gaa fan.

Poor_old_gill

Fantastic move by the GAA and thankfully helps to move us away from the 'us v's you' attitude that exists in Irish sport.

They will make rental income and it will be a boon for the economy as a whole- thank god parochial crap has been sidelined for the greater national good.

nice_guy80

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

Fantastic move by the GAA and thankfully helps to move us away from the 'us v's you' attitude that exists in Irish sport.

They will make rental income and it will be a boon for the economy as a whole- thank god parochial crap has been sidelined for the greater national good.

Ah yes, the greater good...

Rugby is in direct competition for talented young sportspeople across Ireland.
This tournament will give them a giant springboard for that.

Fr Tod Umptious

As a tax payer I think the whole this is going to be a folly, it will cost millions and we tax payers will end up paying for it.

As a GAA fan I don't think a lot of the grounds suggested need major upgrades.

We have a real problem with GAA ego/vanity projects.

Why does Killarney need a big upgrade when Cork is getting a brand new stadium.

Why does Castlebar need an upgrade a decade after 16m being pumped into it and a good stadyan hour away in Galway.

Why does Celtic Park need a huge upgrade when Ulster football is concentrated in Clones and in the future Belfast.

Big GAA grounds get about one or two big games a year, after that they are under utilised, why add to the cost of the under utilisation.

elefant

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Ah yes, the greater good...

Rugby is in direct competition for talented young sportspeople across Ireland.
This tournament will give them a giant springboard for that.

That wouldn't bother me at all.

It's not like gaelic games are suddenly going to die away if more lads and ladies start playing rugby.

elefant

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

As a tax payer I think the whole this is going to be a folly, it will cost millions and we tax payers will end up paying for it.

As a GAA fan I don't think a lot of the grounds suggested need major upgrades.

We have a real problem with GAA ego/vanity projects.

Why does Killarney need a big upgrade when Cork is getting a brand new stadium.

Why does Castlebar need an upgrade a decade after 16m being pumped into it and a good stadyan hour away in Galway.

Why does Celtic Park need a huge upgrade when Ulster football is concentrated in Clones and in the future Belfast.

Big GAA grounds get about one or two big games a year, after that they are under utilised, why add to the cost of the under utilisation.

They might not need them, but why not expand them if it's being offered? They're not like facilities built for cities hosting the olympics that will never be used again.

I believe New Zealand and England made big profits on hosting the previous two rugby world cups (100 million euro plus). Doesn't seem like the taxpayer will need to cover anything.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

nice_guy80

elefant wrote: »

That wouldn't bother me at all.

It's not like gaelic games are suddenly going to die away if more lads and ladies start playing rugby.

It's the creaming off of the elite athletes though that is a huge issue

The likes of Roscommon and the clubs have lost a few very talented young players to rugby contracts in the last few years

Fr Tod Umptious

elefant wrote: »

They might not need them, but why not expand them if it's being offered? They're not like facilities built for cities hosting the olympics that will never be used again.

I believe New Zealand and England made big profits on hosting the previous two rugby world cups (100 million euro plus). Doesn't seem like the taxpayer will need to cover anything.

I have posted on the rugby form how the 100m made by England will not be matched by Ireland.

elefant

nice_guy80 wrote: »

It's the creaming off of the elite athletes though that is a huge issue

The likes of Roscommon have lost a few very talented young players to rugby contracts in the last few years

Other lads will take their places.

Ireland aren't competing with anyone else in Gaelic Games. If we lose a few stars to Aussie Rules, Soccer, Rugby etc. then it isn't really going to affect the game at large. Fair enough if one county in particular is losing lots of top players and others aren't, but I doubt that's the case.

elefant

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I have posted on the rugby form how the 100m made by England will not be matched by Ireland.

New Zealand made a heap off the world cup too: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/international-rugby-board-hails-financial-success-of-rugby-world-cup-2011-in-new-zealand/story-e6frf4pu-1226307883172.

It seems nobody in the rugby forum agrees with pretty much anything you've posted there.

Fr Tod Umptious

elefant wrote: »

New Zealand made a heap off the world cup too: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/international-rugby-board-hails-financial-success-of-rugby-world-cup-2011-in-new-zealand/story-e6frf4pu-1226307883172.

It seems nobody in the rugby forum agrees with pretty much anything you've posted there.

I'm not surprised, they are too caught up in the hype of it to see the bigger picture.

Poor_old_gill

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Ah yes, the greater good...

Rugby is in direct competition for talented young sportspeople across Ireland.
This tournament will give them a giant springboard for that.

Rugby and GAA, in the main, run their seasons at different times of the year.
I think the harbouring of mutual suspicion does little good either- I'm all for it and yes, it is for the greater good so I would view that as a positive.

Kids know rugby exists already and will play whichever they want- main issue is that the GAA need to improve funding to smaller counties and make the provincials more competitive again

Coillte_Bhoy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

As a tax payer I think the whole this is going to be a folly, it will cost millions and we tax payers will end up paying for it.

As a GAA fan I don't think a lot of the grounds suggested need major upgrades.

We have a real problem with GAA ego/vanity projects.

Why does Killarney need a big upgrade when Cork is getting a brand new stadium.

Why does Castlebar need an upgrade a decade after 16m being pumped into it and a good stadyan hour away in Galway.

Why does Celtic Park need a huge upgrade when Ulster football is concentrated in Clones and in the future Belfast.

Big GAA grounds get about one or two big games a year, after that they are under utilised, why add to the cost of the under utilisation.

What upgrade is Castlebar getting? And have you ever made Pearse Stadium in an hour on big match day:pac:

AGC

Can't see how anyone would think us hosting the RWC would be a bad thing or question it in any way for any sporting organisation in the country

AGC

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

How about the unnecessary expenditure on stadia that will not be used nowhere near enough to justify the expense.

The expense which will more than likely be redeemed and boost the local area and infrastructure around stadiums?

A world Cup could be held with 8 venues. Lansdowne, Croke Park, Thomond, Ravenhill all ready to go at present with little investment required.

Work already underway in Cork and work close in RDS and Belfast with funds which will already have been allocated so being worried about 'unnecessary expenditure' is a poor reason not to holed what would be an excellent event.

All those venues are used on a regular basis with the exception at present of casement.

ProudDUB

nice_guy80 wrote: »

It's the creaming off of the elite athletes though that is a huge issue

The likes of Roscommon and the clubs have lost a few very talented young players to rugby contracts in the last few years

There are only about 200 odd professional rugby players in Ireland, who have an actual contract with one of the provincal teams. It's not like the GAA are losing players to rugby in droves. Plus, the club game has been decimated by professionalism. It's one thing to say that the GAA will lose players to rugby, but there is not much of a rugby infrastructure left for them to go to (compared to the GAA,) whereby lads can keep on playing the sport, when they are adults. If you don't get a deal with one of the rugby academies when you leave school, that's pretty much the end of the road for you, if you want to keep on playing the sport at a relatively high level. The players know that. Young lads like Carbery, who was playing for Clontarf this time last year and is an international a year later, are the exception rather than the rule.

If there are lads who are currently torn between rugby or GAA now, or in 2023, I can't really see them picking rugby for no other reason than the rugby world cup roadshow is coming to town. They'll pick rugby because they love it more, or they see an genuine future for themselves in the sport. They aren't going to go with one sport over the other, just because Ireland is hosting a big rugby tournament for 4 weeks. If the rugby powers that be were ploughing loads of world up profits back into reinvesting in the sport at grass roots level, into improving local infrastructures, into better coaching, better faciliites etc etc, then yeah, there may be a problem. But there isn't much sign of that happening, so I wouldn't be too worried.

nice_guy80

ProudDUB wrote: »

There are only about 200 odd professional rugby players in Ireland, who have an actual contract with one of the provincal teams. It's not like the GAA are losing players to rugby in droves. Plus, the club game has been decimated by professionalism. It's one thing to say that the GAA will lose players to rugby, but there is not much of a rugby infrastructure left for them to go to (compared to the GAA,) whereby lads can keep on playing the sport, when they are adults. If you don't get a deal with one of the rugby academies when you leave school, that's pretty much the end of the road for you, if you want to keep on playing the sport at a relatively high level. The players know that. Young lads like Carbery, who was playing for Clontarf this time last year and is an international a year later, are the exception rather than the rule.

If there are lads who are currently torn between rugby or GAA now, or in 2023, I can't really see them picking rugby for no other reason than the rugby world cup roadshow is coming to town. They'll pick rugby because they love it more, or they see an genuine future for themselves in the sport. They aren't going to go with one sport over the other, just because Ireland is hosting a big rugby tournament for 4 weeks. If the rugby powers that be were ploughing loads of world up profits back into reinvesting in the sport at grass roots level, into improving local infrastructures, into better coaching, better faciliites etc etc, then yeah, there may be a problem. But there isn't much sign of that happening, so I wouldn't be too worried.

Losing 3/4 talented 18 year olds in a county the size of Roscommon is very detrimental
Especially when there is no rugby club actually within the.county

The biggest piece of infrastructure needed for this world cup is a rail line to the airport. Any sign of that?

ProudDUB

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Losing 3/4 talented 18 year olds in a county the size of Roscommon is very detrimental
Especially when there is no rugby club actually within the.county

The biggest piece of infrastructure needed for this world cup is a rail line to the airport. Any sign of that?

Metro North? Yeah, we'll be getting that just as soon as Mayo win the All Ireland.

3/4 talented 18 year olds may seem like a lot. But I'd say you lose multiples of that to soccer, the girl friend, college life etc etc. Don't think its enough reason to deny the entire country the opportunity to host an event that will bring in massive amounts of revenue into the country, as well as result in lots of newly updated stadia.

Fr Tod Umptious

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

What upgrade is Castlebar getting? And have you ever made Pearse Stadium in an hour on big match day:pac:

You said it yourself in the Mayo thread, terraces at either end and full seats along McHale Rd, no note concrete benches.
They you have to add corporate, media etc etc.

And yes Galway is a pain to get to but look at it from a high level.
You have two 35k+ stadiums, recently redeveloped, within an hour and a half of each other serving a total population of approx 390,000.
And they get capacity crowds once every two years perhaps, most of the time they are well below 50% capacity.

And no doubt the rossies will go and add to the problem in the next few years.

So in my opinion places like Castlebar and Galway could do without upgrades right now.

Xenophile

Thules is no place for one of the venues. Small rural town with very few hotel beds.

Better if we fail in the bid.

The cost of beds in Dublin is now prohibitive and in many cases many people in rural Ireland cannot afford a couple of nights there. Fine for Dublin people with such a good public transport system and no accomodation costs.

One thing I am sure about is that not one cent of tax payers money should go to subside this event.

Spending money on the bid already which in my opinion will come in third place, no wonder our public finances are in such a mess!

AGC

Xenophile wrote: »

Thules is no place for one of the venues. Small rural town with very few hotel beds.

Better if we fail in the bid.

The cost of beds in Dublin is now prohibitive and in many cases many people in rural Ireland cannot afford a couple of nights there. Fine for Dublin people with such a good public transport system and no accomodation costs.

One thing I am sure about is that not one cent of tax payers money should go to subside this event.

Spending money on the bid already which in my opinion will come in third place, no wonder our public finances are in such a mess!

It is also fine for the people of Cork, Limerick etc... with no accommodation costs. If you are not in a position to afford an overnight for a game travel up and down in the 1 day like people do for many events in Dublin or use the train or bus if available to you the same people would have to do travelling to the other venues.

The cost of hotel rooms is escalated in every city the world over when any major event is on.

All the venues listed have direct train routes from Dublin which would be the likely arrival port for any long haul visitors, Belfast and Cork have direct flight to UK. I am sure the IRFU and organiser would have an excellent logistical plan in place for people looking to get around the country.

nice_guy80

Air BnB will make a killing for the few weeks of the tournament

I'd say a lot of people will be looking to rent out their houses and apartments for overseas visitors.

Again, the entire midlands will lose out on any benefit from the tournament. Forgotten part of Ireland for tourism

ProudDUB

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Air BnB will make a killing for the few weeks of the tournament

I'd say a lot of people will be looking to rent out their houses and apartments for overseas visitors.

Again, the entire midlands will lose out on any benefit from the tournament. Forgotten part of Ireland for tourism

Does the K Club count as the Midlands? I have heard of some truly eyewateringly big sums of money that were hoovered up by the homeowners of Kildare, when the Solheim & Ryder Cups were held at the K Club....like 5-10 grand a week.

bmwguy

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Losing 3/4 talented 18 year olds in a county the size of Roscommon is very detrimental
Especially when there is no rugby club actually within the.county

The biggest piece of infrastructure needed for this world cup is a rail line to the airport. Any sign of that?

But if Roscommon and other counties don't offer them anything as good as rugby can offer them why is this a problem? Its about the individuals and what they want to do, not about Roscommon GAA. Or Kildare GAA, or any other organisation.

Boom__Boom

The big thing for me is that the government have underwritten the whole thing for €320 million which is a hell of a lot of money. [15% of this is coming from Northern Ireland]

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/government-to-underwrite-320m-in-bid-for-2023-rugby-world-cup-414609.html

The fee to World Rugby will be the biggest expense and it will be interesting to see if it increases or stays the same. It has really increased a lot over the last few tournaments

It was £66m to New Zealand in 2011, it was £80m for England in 2015 and it was £96m to Japan in 2019.

£96 million works out to about €110 million so even if it stays the same that's a hell of a lot of money.

The fact that World Rugby are getting this and they get to keep the television rights seems like a ridiculously good deal for them. They would seem to be the big winners out of this.

In terms of the GAA, this article suggests it could be worth about €30 million to the GAA, between work on the stadiums and rental fees.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaas-30m-bonanza-if-2023-rugby-world-cup-bid-is-successful-35219165.html

It's estimated that total redevelopment work could cost over €20m, with a further €10m to accrue from rent money for use of the grounds.
The GAA charged around €1m per game for the use of Croke Park when it hosted Ireland's rugby and soccer games during the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road in 2007-2010. It yielded a total take of €36m.

Rugby World Cup games would be even more lucrative, especially the semi-finals and final, and since the bid could not go ahead without the GAA agreeing to the use of its grounds, it is in a good position to drive a hard bargain.

I kinda agree that some of the proposed work on stadiums seems like it will fall into the somewhat unnecessary category.
.

"All of the required overlay has been planned, it has already been costed and we'll get into more detail, drawings and imagery in the coming months. With the remedial work, you're talking about things like floodlighting, big screens, media centres, hospitality, putting in additional seating at some of the stadia.

"We want to have at least a certain minimum mix of seating in all of the stadia. We're also looking at covering some of the terracing."

Taking the instance of Killarney, there has been talk of adding floodlight for a while and that was next on the to-do list for Kerry GAA once the Currans centre of excellence was completed. However any of the rest of the stuff described falls into the category of not really needed and funds would likely be better off spent elsewhere - I really can't imagine Kerry GAA would have been looking at completing these sorts of works on the stadium. From what I've read it looks like the IRFU will be picking up the cost directly - the quote above was from IRFU chief operating officer Kevin Potts. The GAA seem to be adopting a shure there's free money going, might as well take it approach, which to be honest I can't really blame them for all that much.

The big issue for me is the ticket sales. England sold 2.5 million tickets for their games in 2015. I remember having a look at those ticket prices when they first came out and thinking the cost of tickets was exorbitant. I did hear they had some cheap tickets for a lot of games but the number of these was fairly low. Now there will obviously be a lot of tourists flying into the country for the world cup but even still I can't see those sorts of ticket sales being generated in Ireland

For me as a casual enough rugby watcher, the thing about the World Cup is the length of it - for the group stages it's a case of watching the Irish games, seeing if they get out of the groups and things only really get going properly when the knockout stages begin. I would imagine this is the case for the vast majority of Irish rugby fans (if there is a game between 2 of the big names in the group stages I'd probably watch that) However for a lot of the group games, interest would be fairly low. Given the length of the tournament (7 weeks) and the nature of the group stages (games against smaller nations) that I would imagine that a lot of those coming into the country would be more likely to come for the knock-out stages. As such I can see demand for tickets for a whole lot of the group stages being fairly low, especially if the prices aren't seriously competitive.

I'm really struggling to see how the IRFU don't come out of it making a major loss, which is where I see the government underwriting it for €320 million being a massive factor. I think the IRFU and the government know well the tournament itself is likely to make a loss but are banking on stuff like increased tourism and a feel-good factor to wave this away. However I'm not so sure that while there won't be a serious chunk of folk coming over for the World Cup I can see it causing a whole different bunch of tourists from staying away while it's on.

Overall I think the GAA will do grand from it. I would love to see how exactly the figure of €320 million being underwritten was agreed to. The fact that the IRFU can pay the tournament fee of around €120 million and can spend another €200 million on the actual hosting costs and are guaranteed to walk about without losing a penny seems like a terrible deal for the tax payer and very dubious to me. I wonder will any of the media be question this - it would be interesting to hear what some of the various economic commentators make of this deal?

Boom__Boom

Was just thinking about the underwriting thing and was wondering if the Japanese, English or New Zealand underwrote those tournaments. Did some very quick and dirty googling.

The English government underwrote the bid for £25 million [€29 million at today's rates]

The New Zealand government seemed to underwrite all of the bid fee for 2011 £66 million. [€77 million at today's rates] Apparently it took a year and a half to get the New Zealand government to agree to this and there was some political back and forth about the whole issue.

I couldn't find anything about how much the Japanese government were underwriting if at all. The Japanese bid was definitely helped by the fact that the 2020 Olympics are on there. However the big national stadium that was supposed to be ready for 2019 and the Rugby World Cup, has been delayed because of financing issues and won't be ready in time for the Rugby World Cup which World Rugby aren't too happy about.

When you look at those figures the amount of €320 million seems nuts altogether.

The fact that Northern Ireland's 15% of the €320 million which is €48 million, is so much greater than the whole amount the English government underwrote really emphasises what a terrible deal this is for the Irish taxpayer.

Really seems like the tax-payer is being taken for a ride.

Fr Tod Umptious

Great couple of posts there Boom_Boom.

The stadium upgrades would be good, but I'd prefer they not be done at the expense of the country overall, they can be done in their own good time when required.

I have posted a good bit on the rugby board about how the visitor numbers are exaggerated and how these things rarely provide a boom for the exchequer.

Go and post your findings on the Rugby board.

You will be meet with plenty of abuse, they don't do negativity or facts very well over there.

PARlance

Boom__Boom wrote: »

Was just thinking about the underwriting thing and was wondering if the Japanese, English or New Zealand underwrote those tournaments. Did some very quick and dirty googling.

The English government underwrote the bid for £25 million [€29 million at today's rates]

The New Zealand government seemed to underwrite all of the bid fee for 2011 £66 million. [€77 million at today's rates] Apparently it took a year and a half to get the New Zealand government to agree to this and there was some political back and forth about the whole issue.

I couldn't find anything about how much the Japanese government were underwriting if at all. The Japanese bid was definitely helped by the fact that the 2020 Olympics are on there. However the big national stadium that was supposed to be ready for 2019 and the Rugby World Cup, has been delayed because of financing issues and won't be ready in time for the Rugby World Cup which World Rugby aren't too happy about.

When you look at those figures the amount of €320 million seems nuts altogether.

The fact that Northern Ireland's 15% of the €320 million which is €48 million, is so much greater than the whole amount the English government underwrote really emphasises what a terrible deal this is for the Irish taxpayer.

Really seems like the tax-payer is being taken for a ride.

From the article:
"Money being guaranteed for the bid includes €120m to host the tournament, while another €200m will be underwritten for operational costs, including redeveloping stadiums and policing."

I don't think you're comparing like with like when you're using the 320m figure and saying we're being taken for a ride. It's €120m to host it and the figures you've used above are the other hosting figures AFAIK. The figure is increasing but it seems to be a trend which reflects the growth of the RWC itself.

We don't have the facilities nor the infrastructure of those other hosts... the other €200m is needed to be spent to get up to standard of hosting a world event. The €200m planned to be spent within the country which in itself will give a direct boost to the economy.

I'm fully behind it, I'm also fairly skeptical about figures that get thrown about when talking about similar world events but €120m or €320 million isn't a massive amount of money. It wouldn't keep the the public sector open for a week... what we will get is to host a major world event, it will bring in people, it will showcase the country, it will give a boost to the people and it will also upgrade GAA facilities.

The GAA facilities need to be updated at some stage, I know they're not critical but why not move away from concrete seats while the opportunity presents itself.

This isn't an Olympics, we won't be building a 50m pool in Bohola or a Velodrome in Tuam. It's a relatively small investment in what will be a huge event for Ireland.

Poor_old_gill

Is this not essentially a 200 mill stimulus?

Added to that you will have the large increase in VAT intake/additional employment created - all of which will provide revenue for the Gov.

I do appreciate your looking into the bid and maybe you could end up being right on this- I think at the moment that people are too swept away in the idea of hosting it and few have applied the level of critical analysis that you have- but it is a discussion/debate that will need to be had.

Is there anything to be said for installing those railed seating/safe standing areas that the German teams have and that Celtic have just opened? Giving stadiums the option of providing seating at low attendance games and terracing at high attendance matches.

Boom__Boom

In terms of the underwriting, the Irish and Northern Irish government agreed a figure of €320 million - this is massively out-of-line with what the English and the New Zealand rugby unions got from their governments, which to me is a massive massive red flag. Where did the IRFU and the Irish government come up with such a figure? Why is the Irish figure so out of whack compared to the previous years? What does it say about the economic viability of the whole thing that the 2 parties who have looked at the likely figures the closest came up with such a massive safety net ?

At a guess it looks like the Irish and NI government agreed to guarantee the total cost of the thing, which seems madness - this is essentially saying to the IRFU, yeah go ahead and host the thing and you can spend up to €320 million and if things are a total disaster you can walk away without making any loss. This is terrible governance. The odds of it being a total disaster with the government having to stump up the entire €320 million figure are fairly small (if not tiny) to my mind, but even still the government should not be operating like this with public money. It's just an awful awful way to operate as a government. I'm not saying that the governments shouldn't have underwritten the bid to some extent, but to underwrite it to such an extent is lunacy.

I'm not sure if holding big sporting events makes economic sense - a quick google seems to suggest that the evidence is fairly mixed. My own feeling is that if holding these events made so much economic sense, then there would be a lot more competition to hold them. If a government stimulus project like this made such great sense, should the government not be doing it anyway even if the bid fails? In terms of viewing it as a stimulus project for the economy, the general feeling in economics seems to be that government stimulus projects generally are a poor use of resources.

Overall I'm just afraid this was something that the lads in cabinet and lads in the civil service agreed to, safe in the knowledge that they will be long gone when the time to settle the bills comes.

nice_guy80

€320 million is a big bill if the economy goes tits up and ticket sales are poor

Poor_old_gill

How much would the Gov be giving to the GAA and IRFU for stadium upgrades/grants in the next 10 years anyway?

My feeling is that the direct benefits of the 200 mill investment by the Gov will not outweigh the cost but the indirect benefits/income streams probably will.
It will be bringing a lot of tourists to the country in what is essentially an off peak time of the year- I think it has the potential to be profitable overall for the economy

PARlance

Boom__Boom wrote: »

I'm not sure if holding big sporting events makes economic sense - a quick google seems to suggest that the evidence is fairly mixed. My own feeling is that if holding these events made so much economic sense, then there would be a lot more competition to hold them.

A quick Google once told me I had AIDS...

You can't just compare this to "Big Sporting Events" when looking for a cost / benefit answer. If you're looking to events such as the Olympics and comparing it to this, then stop. It's commonly accepted these days that the Olympics offers a poor return on money, the Football World Cup too, if the host country has to build the Stadia to accommodate it (like South Africa) rather than a country where it's practically good to go (Germany).

We're not building white elephant's for this bid. We're updating a few grounds that need updated, albeit non critical. (Some may say a County Ground is somewhat of a white elephant as it stands but that's another discussion.)

Boom__Boom wrote: »

If a government stimulus project like this made such great sense, should the government not be doing it anyway even if the bid fails?

Can't believe you're even asking that question or making that statement.
The payback is tourists / fans coming here for the RWC, spending money from outside while they are here. Then going home and hopefully telling friends and family to go to Ireland for years to come. Now, I'll be the first to admit that the Government et al will overstate this benefit but it's plain as day that there will be one.

But to answer your question, putting plastic seats around McHale Park won't have much of a benefit if there isn't a RWC fan sitting on them.

Fr Tod Umptious

PARlance wrote: »

From the article:
"Money being guaranteed for the bid includes €120m to host the tournament, while another €200m will be underwritten for operational costs, including redeveloping stadiums and policing."

I don't think you're comparing like with like when you're using the 320m figure and saying we're being taken for a ride. It's €120m to host it and the figures you've used above are the other hosting figures AFAIK. The figure is increasing but it seems to be a trend which reflects the growth of the RWC itself.

We don't have the facilities nor the infrastructure of those other hosts... the other €200m is needed to be spent to get up to standard of hosting a world event. The €200m planned to be spent within the country which in itself will give a direct boost to the economy.

I'm fully behind it, I'm also fairly skeptical about figures that get thrown about when talking about similar world events but €120m or €320 million isn't a massive amount of money. It wouldn't keep the the public sector open for a week... what we will get is to host a major world event, it will bring in people, it will showcase the country, it will give a boost to the people and it will also upgrade GAA facilities.

The GAA facilities need to be updated at some stage, I know they're not critical but why not move away from concrete seats while the opportunity presents itself.

This isn't an Olympics, we won't be building a 50m pool in Bohola or a Velodrome in Tuam. It's a relatively small investment in what will be a huge event for Ireland.

The 120m million has to be paid to World Rugby by the winning bid.
That and the TV rights is World Rugby's take.

It's then up to the hosts to claw that make and try make a profit

According to the articles posted by Boom_Boom the redevelopment of GAA grounds could cost €60m, and the rent to the GAA could be €30m, so that's €90m, lets call it spent €100m, straight away.
I don't know what the other costs for the IRFU might be, but I'm sure they exist

Ticket pricing will be a balancing act in the this case.
They have to be low enough for the non glamour games to get bums on seats and high enough for the big games to milk every penny out of them.

The 2011 event had a 87% attendance figure, Ireland would need to be hitting that and more I'd imagine.
And I thing attendance comparisons are tough between Ireland and NZ
They are further away but have a much bigger core rugby following than us.

NZRFU made a loss for the 2011 even of $31.1m, two thirds of which was paid for by the taxpayer
I do believe that NZ had bigger stadium re-building costs than Ireland expects.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10809571


And just as I am about to wrap this all up with a link to the excellent Economics of Sport site, I see that they have a very interesting piece on it just posted today

It's well worth looking at this site over the next few years.

http://www.sportseconomics.org/sports-economics/archives/11-2016

threeball

elefant wrote: »

They might not need them, but why not expand them if it's being offered? They're not like facilities built for cities hosting the olympics that will never be used again.

I believe New Zealand and England made big profits on hosting the previous two rugby world cups (100 million euro plus). Doesn't seem like the taxpayer will need to cover anything.

Expanded stadiums cost much more to maintain and long after the rugby lads have their day in the sun the Gaa will be servicing the costs of stadia they don't need for a tournament which doesn't benefit the association at all. It will actually hurt the Gaa badly.
I'm not anti rugby as I like the game and watch it regularly but the IRFU are cute enough not to really invest anything in this bid at all. Where else in the world would competing sport provide 70% of the infrastructure to a tournament bid

Bonniedog

threeball wrote: »

Expanded stadiums cost much more to maintain and long after the rugby lads have their day in the sun the Gaa will be servicing the costs of stadia they don't need for a tournament which doesn't benefit the association at all. It will actually hurt the Gaa badly.
I'm not anti rugby as I like the game and watch it regularly but the IRFU are cute enough not to really invest anything in this bid at all. Where else in the world would competing sport provide 70% of the infrastructure to a tournament bid

GAA benefitted financially from rugby and soccer internationals in CP.

Don't see how they can lose on this.


It is in close season inter county wise - finals will have been moved forward as proposed and narrowly beaten this year at Congress- so using stadiums that would otherwise be empty.

Can't see what problem is to be honest.

threeball

Bonniedog wrote: »

GAA benefitted financially from rugby and soccer internationals in CP.

Don't see how they can lose on this.


It is in close season inter county wise - finals will have been moved forward as proposed and narrowly beaten this year at Congress- so using stadiums that would otherwise be empty.

Can't see what problem is to be honest.

I already outlined how they lose. Do you have any idea how much it costs to maintain a stadium, especially ones that are more than concrete benches and terraces. Why do you think the IRFU aren't putting a Rex into this? Wouldn't this be the perfect opportunity to upgrade the sports ground or build connaught rugby a new home, but no, they'll use the Gah and let them gomies pick up the lifetime bill.
We'll end up with half the money generated every year going towards keeping these white elephants from falling asunder.

ProudDUB

threeball wrote: »

Expanded stadiums cost much more to maintain and long after the rugby lads have their day in the sun the Gaa will be servicing the costs of stadia they don't need for a tournament which doesn't benefit the association at all. It will actually hurt the Gaa badly.
I'm not anti rugby as I like the game and watch it regularly but the IRFU are cute enough not to really invest anything in this bid at all. Where else in the world would competing sport provide 70% of the infrastructure to a tournament bid

Jesus, they're hardly going to be turning McHale Park and Nowlan Park into the San Siro and the Bernabeau. Come on now. :rolleyes:

threeball

ProudDUB wrote: »

Jesus, they're hardly going to be turning McHale Park and Nowlan Park into the San Siro and the Bernabeau. Come on now. :rolleyes:

McHale is a white elephant as it stands. Last thing it needs is more money invested in it. I see you didn't bother explaining why the IRFU aren't investing in their own infrastructure for their tournament. Very philanthropic of them to be putting money in to Gaa stadiums. No such thing as a free lunch

ProudDUB

threeball wrote: »

McHale is a white elephant as it stands. Last thing it needs is more money invested in it. I see you didn't bother explaining why the IRFU aren't investing in their own infrastructure for their tournament. Very philanthropic of them to be putting money in to Gaa stadiums. No such thing as a free lunch

The Aviva and Thomond Park are fine as they are. It's not like massive amounts of money hasn't been spent on them fairly recently. Ravenhill was recently renovated. Improvements are being made to the RDS, which is a facility owned by the Royal Dublin Society, not Leinster Rugby, so they don't have any rights to do a thing to it. What do you think the IRFU should do, with so many large GAA stadia already there and the GAA ready willing and able to share them ....build 32 purpose built rugby stadiums in every county in the country, purely for the heck of it?

threeball

ProudDUB wrote: »

The Aviva and Thomond Park are fine as they are. It's not like massive amounts of money hasn't been spent on them fairly recently. Ravenhill was recently renovated. Improvements are being made to the RDS, which is a facility owned by the Royal Dublin Society, not Leinster Rugby, so they don't have any rights to do a thing to it. What do you think the IRFU should do, with so many large GAA stadia already there and the GAA ready willing and able to share them ....build 32 purpose built rugby stadiums in every county in the country, purely for the heck of it?

Wow great counter argument. Build 32 stadiums eh. How about they build one for the current Pro12 champions. You know, the team that is part of their organisation and actually show some financial commitment to this thing. But no, they're too cute and the government and gaa will end up carrying the bid and the ongoing expenses.

ProudDUB

The current Pro 12 champions were the poor relation of Irish Rugby up to last year. They still are financially. Massive amounts of money has been poured into the organisation, just to keep them afloat. Keeping their home grown players within the province, is a much more pressing financial need, than a new stadium. The government may very well be on the financial hook for the Rugby World Cup far more than either you or I are happy with. But the GAA will be laughing all the way to the bank.

PARlance

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The 120m million has to be paid to World Rugby by the winning bid.
That and the TV rights is World Rugby's take.

It's then up to the hosts to claw that make and try make a profit

According to the articles posted by Boom_Boom the redevelopment of GAA grounds could cost €60m, and the rent to the GAA could be €30m, so that's €90m, lets call it spent €100m, straight away.
I don't know what the other costs for the IRFU might be, but I'm sure they exist

Ticket pricing will be a balancing act in the this case.
They have to be low enough for the non glamour games to get bums on seats and high enough for the big games to milk every penny out of them.

The 2011 event had a 87% attendance figure, Ireland would need to be hitting that and more I'd imagine.
And I thing attendance comparisons are tough between Ireland and NZ
They are further away but have a much bigger core rugby following than us.

NZRFU made a loss for the 2011 even of $31.1m, two thirds of which was paid for by the taxpayer
I do believe that NZ had bigger stadium re-building costs than Ireland expects.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10809571


And just as I am about to wrap this all up with a link to the excellent Economics of Sport site, I see that they have a very interesting piece on it just posted today

It's well worth looking at this site over the next few years.

http://www.sportseconomics.org/sports-economics/archives/11-2016

It's a good article. As I said earlier, I'm very skeptical when the government et al start saying it will bring in figures like €800 million. It was the same crap with The Gathering. There is a substitution effect, while a few hundred thousand may come for the RWC, most of them are just replacing normal tourists who would have came anyway and so you should only look to the net increase.

The article could have looked at the costs for more balance. Because while they benefits are often overstated, people also fail to realise that the costs aren't are bad either. The costs work there way back into the economy too, you get an immediate positive before the RWC itself.

For instance, the fee to the GAA will get filtered down to clubs who will in turn spend it. Spending is good for the local economy.

And the expenditure on Capital Projects gives a return straight away. Let's assume that the Government spend €100 million on upgrading Stadia and a few roads. And for simplicity, let's assume €50 million of that is on materials and €50 million on labour.
The Government will get the VAT on the materials. That's €10 of the €50 million. They'll also get anything around 50% of the labour costs back between the employers and employees taxes, so that's €25 of that €50 million working it's way back to them very fast.

So if you see a headline figure of €100 million being spent on infrastructure, it's misleading in the sense that a very nice chunk of it (€35 million in my simple example) comes back to the exchequer straight away in direct taxation.

Fr Tod Umptious

threeball wrote: »

McHale is a white elephant as it stands. Last thing it needs is more money invested in it. I see you didn't bother explaining why the IRFU aren't investing in their own infrastructure for their tournament. Very philanthropic of them to be putting money in to Gaa stadiums. No such thing as a free lunch

Your dead right, it is a white elephant.

Last year was an outlier as Mayo got home qulaifiogames and there was a Connacht final replay.
So it had 4 championship games.

But it had none in 2015
One in 2014 etc etc.

So a place like McHale park is shockingly under utilised from a capacity point of view.

Why have millions spent on upgrading it when those upgrades will be used once every couple of years.

Look at Galway, a fine stadium (poor location I know) but for a dual sport county it even gets less use than McHale park.

I got lots of push back on the Rugby form for suggesting that Killarney does not need floodlights because Tralee already has them, that's probably because they don't understand how the GAA operates.
But you don't need floodlights in Killarney when you have a perfect ground in Tralee to host the capacity of games that are played under lights.

And the point that the IRFU is not puttoa penny into this is interesting alright, they will get all the plaudits without any of the risk.

Fr Tod Umptious

PARlance wrote: »

It's a good article. As I said earlier, I'm very skeptical when the government et al start saying it will bring in figures like €800 million. It was the same crap with The Gathering. There is a substitution effect, while a few hundred thousand may come for the RWC, most of them are just replacing normal tourists who would have came anyway and so you should only look to the net increase.

The article could have looked at the costs for more balance. Because while they benefits are often overstated, people also fail to realise that the costs aren't are bad either. The costs work there way back into the economy too, you get an immediate positive before the RWC itself.

For instance, the fee to the GAA will get filtered down to clubs who will in turn spend it. Spending is good for the local economy.

And the expenditure on Capital Projects gives a return straight away. Let's assume that the Government spend €100 million on upgrading Stadia and a few roads. And for simplicity, let's assume €50 million of that is on materials and €50 million on labour.
The Government will get the VAT on the materials. That's €10 of the €50 million. They'll also get anything around 50% of the labour costs back between the employers and employees taxes, so that's €25 of that €50 million working it's way back to them very fast.

So if you see a headline figure of €100 million being spent on infrastructure, it's misleading in the sense that a very nice chunk of it (€35 million in my simple example) comes back to the exchequer straight away in direct taxation.

But that money that will be spent on upgrading grounds is money that could and should be spent elsewhere in the economy.

Its not coming from the IRFU, its come from the tax payer.

How many other capital projects could use the money being spent on GAA grounds ?

nice_guy80

I wonder will the GAA now argue that more county championship games will need to be played in these re-developed grounds?
They are already going that way with the football championship proposals

Fr Tod Umptious

nice_guy80 wrote: »

I wonder will the GAA now argue that more county championship games will need to be played in these re-developed grounds?
They are already going that way with the football championship proposals

It would make a lot of sense if they did.

Bonniedog

threeball wrote: »

Wow great counter argument. Build 32 stadiums eh. How about they build one for the current Pro12 champions. You know, the team that is part of their organisation and actually show some financial commitment to this thing. But no, they're too cute and the government and gaa will end up carrying the bid and the ongoing expenses.

GAA made a fortune out of the rugby and soccer internationals in CP.

We are talking about using pitches that would be idle for 6 months apart from some club games with GAA getting substantial whack of the gate. And host towns bringing in millions in tourist revenue.

I really don't see what there is to lose.


All they have to do is cut the grass and move the posts!

Fr Tod Umptious

Bonniedog wrote: »

GAA made a fortune out of the rugby and soccer internationals in CP.

We are talking about using pitches that would be idle for 6 months apart from some club games with GAA getting substantial whack of the gate. And host towns bringing in millions in tourist revenue.

I really don't see what there is to lose.


All they have to do is cut the grass and move the posts!

Towns hosting Namibia v Fiji are not going to get millions in tourist revenue.

High profile games ate going to be in high profile locations, Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Limerick.

nice_guy80

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It would make a lot of sense if they did.

GAA attendances are already falling
County scene already has too many games