Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Phonehead · 25-09-2013 02:54PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No they wanted a change in the way the comepetition is governed as well. Which they have said publically since last September. So whoever told you they want that is either incorrect or you have mistaken what they've said.

So then can you plese stop banging on about fairness in qualification and team numbers and just focus now on the debate in hand! The control issue

This is the very issue I have tried to debate with you but you are the one who retreats back to numbers and qualification

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 03:07PM

Phonehead wrote: »

So then can you plese stop banging on about fairness in qualification and team numbers and just focus now on the debate in hand! The control issue

This is the very issue I have tried to debate with you but you are the one who retreats back to numbers and qualification

OK then, what is it they are asking for, re: governance and why exactly should they remain in the status quo?

By they, I mean the 26 clubs from England and France.

25-09-2013 03:54PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8941026,00.html
So they are ruining the Heineken Cup for our own good

The ignorance, arrogance and double standards of this quote is almost mystifying.

"In terms of sustainability and the future of the game, this is an opportunity for us to increase revenues into the English and French club game which gives it more viability. The unions should be approving that so there is continuity in English, French and Celtic rugby, because if there isn't there would be financial oblivion for the Celtic countries."

'This is a way for us to improve the profitability of the English and French club game and if the Celtic countries don't agree then they are out of business'.

Kindly go **** yourself sir.

Phonehead · 25-09-2013 04:04PM

The intersting thing and I stand by this view, is that no European Rugby means financial turmoil for the Businesses in the English Premiership. The BT deal is 100% around both European and Domestic league games, if thes businesses in the premiership do not have the European product to sell then BT will not pay much for the premiership alone.

The French don't need BT money, hell they don't really need ERC money to maintain their growing domestic product. The Pro12 teams are not businesses with Shareholders demanding a return, they are run to maintain a professional rugby game in their countries. No Europe probably means the Pro12 teams need to reduce their wage bills but that just means our Top earners moving to France and guys being fast tracked from academies and that cycle continuing.

The Premiership needs this BT deal and this BT deal needs a European competition. I say no surrender and let the Premiership slip further behind the TOP 14.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:07PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The ignorance, arrogance and double standards of this quote is almost mystifying.

'This is a way for us to improve the profitability of the English and French club game and if the Celtic countries don't agree then they are out of business'.

Kindly go **** yourself sir.

Of course you omit the part where their clubs are making up to £800,000 versus up to £3,000,000 from Europe thanks to the uneven participation. Nice selective quoting there!

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:08PM

Phonehead wrote: »

The intersting thing and I stand by this view, is that no European Rugby means financial turmoil for the Businesses in the English Premiership. The BT deal is 100% around both European and Domestic league games, if thes businesses in the premiership do not have the European product to sell then BT will not pay much for the premiership alone.

Sorry, but BT are showing domestic rugby this season. They have a full valuation for that. If 80% of their revenue comes from the domestic game they are clearly much more sustainable.

25-09-2013 04:12PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Of course you omit the part where their clubs are making up to £800,000 versus up to £3,000,000 from Europe thanks to the uneven participation. Nice selective quoting there!

Tell him to take it up with the RFU.

again.

And where is this quote I have apparently selected to not quote?
http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8941026,00.html

McCBrian · 25-09-2013 04:13PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Of course you omit the part where their clubs are making up to £800,000 versus up to £3,000,000 from Europe thanks to the uneven participation. Nice selective quoting there!

Why would he quote something that is patently untrue. No Rabo team gets £3M from Europe

Phonehead · 25-09-2013 04:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Sorry, but BT are showing domestic rugby this season. They have a full valuation for that. If 80% of their revenue comes from the domestic game they are clearly much more sustainable.

But what you fail to see is that the Top 14 is raising the game, they are soon going to price the Premiership teams out of even attracting semi decent players. This is all about business.... all about the English owners wanting to get a slice of the Naming, Marketing etc of some new European Cup type competition.

Winters · 25-09-2013 04:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Of course you omit the part where their clubs are making up to £800,000 versus up to £3,000,000 from Europe thanks to the uneven participation. Nice selective quoting there!

I've tried to examine these figures but I still can't see how they add up. Why does PRL split up their £10m pa ERC revenue over 12 teams in that way?

Even the BBC is reporting the €3m figure which is simply incorrect.

25-09-2013 04:16PM

McCBrian wrote: »

Why would he quote something that is patently untrue. No Rabo team gets £3M from Europe

It is also not available for quotation as far as I can see?

I'm not breaking Seán Sherlock's rules by copying and pasting the entire article, but at no stage does any figure other than the following

"The reality though is that if there was to be a blockage there are obvious questions around restraint of trade. This new Champions Cup would generate in the region of 60 to 70 million Euros minimum, which would actually cut out a big percentage of the English and the French clubs' losses."

appear on that link.

McCBrian · 25-09-2013 04:19PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It is also not available for quotation as far as I can see?

I'm not breaking Seán Sherlock's rules by copying and pasting the entire article, but at no stage does any figure other than the following

appear on that link.

Think I saw it on the BBC site

molloyjh · 25-09-2013 04:32PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8941026,00.html

So they are ruining the Heineken Cup for our own good

My favourite is the quote:

Bruce Craig wrote:

People say the English and French clubs are greedy. The fact is we are losing money.

As though greedy people can't lose money, or you can't be greedy and be losing money at the same time.

They are losing money because of the way that the game is run in the country. There is far more money in their domestic game than in our domestic game and they aren't getting so much less than the Irish provinces that this is causing the shortfall. If they are losing money in that situation then how can they possibly be trusted to run the European game?

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:33PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Tell him to take it up with the RFU.

again.

And where is this quote I have apparently selected to not quote?
http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8941026,00.html

Hang on, wasn't he pointing to the BBC article? Did someone post the BBC article above?

He said it to BBCm which is where planetrugby lifted the interview from.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:35PM

molloyjh wrote: »

They are losing money because of the way that the game is run in the country. There is far more money in their domestic game than in our domestic game and they aren't getting so much less than the Irish provinces that this is causing the shortfall. If they are losing money in that situation then how can they possibly be trusted to run the European game?

You've said yourself that the participation in Europe is uneven. Have you changed your mind since?

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:37PM

Winters wrote: »

I've tried to examine these figures but I still can't see how they add up. Why does PRL split up their £10m pa ERC revenue over 12 teams in that way?

Even the BBC is reporting the €3m figure which is simply incorrect.

I don't know where he got the figures from. I have never heard the 3 million figure before, I'm interested to hear how they've got that.

Regardless of slight alterations in what the figures are, they are clearly imbalanced.

And actually it's £3m according to the BBC, not euro.

25-09-2013 04:47PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't know where he got the figures from. I have never heard the 3 million figure before, I'm interested to hear how they've got that.

Regardless of slight alterations in what the figures are, they are clearly imbalanced.

And actually it's £3m according to the BBC, not euro.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:53PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It eould be easy for people here to just completely refuse to see the other side of the argument that way I guess!

25-09-2013 04:55PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It eould be easy for people here to just completely refuse to see the other side of the argument that way I guess!

True, but why give creedence to clear hyperbole and propaganda?

You've seen the numbers plenty of times, any Pro12 team get £3m? Conor O'Shea said Quinns got £800k, reckon he was doubling the numbers for the craic?

As I said to you a long time ago on this, stop reading press releases and think.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 04:59PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

True, but why give creedence to clear hyperbole and propaganda?

You've seen the numbers plenty of times, any Pro12 team get £3m? Conor O'Shea said Quinns got £800k, reckon he was doubling the numbers for the craic?

As I said to you a long time ago on this, stop reading press releases and think.

Bruce Craig said 800k

Why do you think PRL and LNR should stay in the ERC? Or rather return to it

molloyjh · 25-09-2013 05:02PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You've said yourself that the participation in Europe is uneven. Have you changed your mind since?

What has that got to do with the fact that the English and French clubs are currently losing money when the IRFU are not? As I said the difference in revenue split isn't enough to cause that.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 05:08PM

molloyjh wrote: »

What has that got to do with the fact that the English and French clubs are currently losing money when the IRFU are not? As I said the difference in revenue split isn't enough to cause that.

Well English and French clubs aren't funded by the 6 Nations, the provinces partially are.

But whether or not the English or French clubs are profitable is irrelevant to the ERC, it's only relevant to them as individuals. But if participation was even it would certainly even out the figures and Walkinshaw says it would move over half the English sides into the black. But of course they could just end up spending more

Its not the point of ERC to babysit the clubs into the black. But participation IS in their remit. And is that right at the moment?

Phonehead · 25-09-2013 05:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well English and French clubs aren't funded by the 6 Nations, the provinces partially are.

But whether or not the English or French clubs are profitable is irrelevant to the ERC, it's only relevant to them as individuals. But if participation was even it would certainly even out the figures and Walkinshaw says it would move over half the English sides into the black. But of course they could just end up spending more

Its not the point of ERC to babysit the clubs into the black. But participation IS in their remit. And is that right at the moment?

And once again he flips to the participation argument when we already established that the ERC will likely agree to a reduced tournament :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

molloyjh · 25-09-2013 05:17PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well English and French clubs aren't funded by the 6 Nations, the provinces partially are.

Irrelevant in terms of this debate as that is a choice made internally that has nothing to do with anyone or anything else.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But whether or not the English or French clubs are profitable is irrelevant to the ERC, it's only relevant to them as individuals. But if participation was even it would certainly even out the figures and Walkinshaw says it would move over half the English sides into the black. But of course they could just end up spending more

Its not the point of ERC to babysit the clubs into the black. But participation IS in their remit. And is that right at the moment?

We can continue to go around this track, but you know my opinion there. As you have said it is not up to the ERC, and therefore not up to the HEC or this new tournament, to ensure profitability within English clubs. If they need to revisit how they divide up their revenues that's their business, let them off and do that. I genuinely do want to see a healthy and profitable domestic game in all countries. But that should come from a sensible business model with sensible and financially prudent management of their own affairs. They have the revenue available in England to ensure that happens. If they can't find a way to manage that they shouldn't be looking externally for some sort of crutch.

And what happens if they continue to lose money in this new tournament? Are they going to look to reform that to ensure profitability? And surely that is absolutely not what should be driving the European game, i.e. English clubs profitability or lack there-of.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 05:21PM

Phonehead wrote: »

And once again he flips to the participation argument when we already established that the ERC will likely agree to a reduced tournament :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

No, they didn't agree. They had 15 months to agree and they didn't. They only managed 3 meetings this year. They will agree to negotiate on it now according to Jean-Pierre Lux but it's too late because the English and French clubs have ended negotiations.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 05:23PM

molloyjh wrote: »

Irrelevant in terms of this debate as that is a choice made internally that has nothing to do with anyone or anything else.

You asked why those clubs are losing money while the IRFU are not. I said it was nothing to do with the ERC

We can continue to go around this track, but you know my opinion there. As you have said it is not up to the ERC, and therefore not up to the HEC or this new tournament, to ensure profitability within English clubs. If they need to revisit how they divide up their revenues that's their business, let them off and do that. I genuinely do want to see a healthy and profitable domestic game in all countries. But that should come from a sensible business model with sensible and financially prudent management of their own affairs. They have the revenue available in England to ensure that happens. If they can't find a way to manage that they shouldn't be looking externally for some sort of crutch.

And what happens if they continue to lose money in this new tournament? Are they going to look to reform that to ensure profitability? And surely that is absolutely not what should be driving the European game, i.e. English clubs profitability or lack there-of.

Again, have you changed your mind on participation now? Because that is the only change they're looking for financially. I don't see why you keep implying they want some sort of massive financial restructuring?

molloyjh · 25-09-2013 05:34PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You asked why those clubs are losing money while the IRFU are not. I said it was nothing to do with the ERC

I wasn't asking why, I was stating that Craig had said they were losing money and as a result needed more money from the European game. I don't feel that's a valid answer to the issues they are facing, and that if the IRFU can manage the game in Ireland with vastly inferior money in the domestic game then surely the RFU should be able to manage the game effectively in England.

If they can't then that issue needs to be addressed and they shouldn't be coming to the European game to try and make up the shortfall.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Again, have you changed your mind on participation now? Because that is the only change they're looking for financially. I don't see why you keep implying they want some sort of massive financial restructuring?

I'm not implying any kind of financial restructuring at all. To quote Craig:

Bruce Craig wrote:

People say the English and French clubs are greedy. The fact is we are losing money. In terms of sustainability and the future of the game, this is an opportunity for us to increase revenues into the English and French club game which gives it more viability.

He is saying that this new competition is a way to address the fact that they are losing money: yes or no?

It is also worth bearing in mind what he said earlier in the interview:

Bruce Craig wrote:

The amounts of money that is generated in the English and French games through our domestic leagues accounts for approximately 80 percent of our revenues, so the implication of not playing in a Heineken Cup is much less serious for French and English clubs as it is for the Celtic nations.

He seems to be saying in this interview that (a) they can take the hit of not getting HEC money more than the Pro12 side and (b) they need the additional money because they are currently losing money. It seems to me that the English clubs are the ones in desperate need of additional revenue and they will do whatever it takes to get that and ensure their profitability. That's fine in a way, they are a private organisations. However to threaten others with "financial oblivion" if we don't bend to their will is just not on, no matter how true it may be. Additional those 2 statements most certainly appear to me to be contradictory.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 05:46PM

molloyjh wrote: »

I wasn't asking why, I was stating that Craig had said they were losing money and as a result needed more money from the European game. I don't feel that's a valid answer to the issues they are facing, and that if the IRFU can manage the game in Ireland with vastly inferior money in the domestic game then surely the RFU should be able to manage the game effectively in England.

The RFU made a mess of professional rugby in England. Same as the FFR. Ask fans there and they'll tell you they were delighted to see the back of them.

He was not using the English clubs finances as a reason to make the changes, he was replying to accusations of the English being greedy. The point is not that they're being greedy, they believe the setup is unfair and they are trying to run businesses.

If they can't then that issue needs to be addressed and they shouldn't be coming to the European game to try and make up the shortfall.

Bollocks, they are not coming to European rugby to make up the shortfall. They are coming to European rugby for meritocratic equality The French and English leagues represent 26 of 44 European participants. They are outvoted by the other participants 2 to 1. The Pro 12 meanwhile divide more than 50% of the revenue in Europe between a quarter of the teams. They don't have to qualify those teams, and they dominate any vote at the Union controlled ERC.

So why should they remain in the competition?

molloyjh · 25-09-2013 06:29PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He was not using the English clubs finances as a reason to make the changes, he was replying to accusations of the English being greedy. The point is not that they're being greedy, they believe the setup is unfair and they are trying to run businesses.

If that was the point then he would/should have said that. He didn't. He said that they were losing money and that this new competition would give them "more viability". So it's pretty clear from this that they see all of this as an opportunity to deal with their losses.

You continue to cherry pick the quotes, articles and interpretations in a way that suits your point even if they contradict the content you refer to in some cases. It makes it almost impossible to discuss this topic in a meaningful way.

irishbucsfan · 25-09-2013 06:31PM

molloyjh wrote: »

If that was the point then he would/should have said that. He didn't. He said that they were losing money and that this new competition would give them "more viability". So it's pretty clear from this that they see all of this as an opportunity to deal with their losses.

You continue to cherry pick the quotes, articles and interpretations in a way that suits your point even if they contradict the content you refer to in some cases. It makes it almost impossible to discuss this topic in a meaningful way.

He clearly was replying to the accusations of them being greedy, and he said that in the full quote.

Anyway, you didn't reply to full post!

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Comments