Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Should the RFL take some responsibility from the clubs?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
59 replies to this topic

#1 EastLondonMike

EastLondonMike
  • Coach
  • 4,323 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 01:41 PM

Just been having a think on some of the areas a lot of RL clubs seem to be struggling with, namely generating new money and keeping their accounts in a decent condition. So should the RFL take some of that responsibility away from the clubs? what if all club accounts were looked after by the RFL and their accountants?, and monitored and controlled as they do their own accounts? or if the RFL generated its own sponsorship deals (although i know this is an area the RFL don't have a great track record in) and then distributed those sponsors among certain clubs.. RU do it with some of their smaller competitions (ie emirates sponsor a 7's event, and all unsponsored teams in the comp wear the emirates logo on their shirts)

Other things like playing kit and merchandising of apparel, if the RFL could get a deal from someone like Nike or Canterbury, or ISC, to provide kit for all teams in the SL, for one sum, which was then shared equally among the clubs.. (i remember when this was first mentioned some years back, and a couple of clubs objected due to them wanting to cut their own deals for more money, hence it fell down) something like this and the things mentioned above could ease pressure from clubs, and should they be close to going into the red, the RFL would be able to identify problems earlier and work towards correcting them with the clubs..

I know the NFL have a deal with Nike which supplies all teams with their uniforms and supporter apparel. something like this would work well for SL clubs, certainly if it was with a major sportswear brand like Nike or ISC..

In light of the plight of Bradford and the possible situation at Salford and rumours of other clubs.. would this not be a good option?

Newham Dockers - Champions 2013. Rugby League For East London. 100% Cockney Rugby League!

Twitter: @NewhamDockersRL - Get following!

www.newhamdockers.co.uk


#2 Spidey

Spidey
  • Coach
  • 490 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 01:59 PM

Or... just maybe... clubs take responsibility for their own actions and do not spend more than their means, if that means they drop out of the elite competition so be it

#3 Gav Wilson

Gav Wilson
  • Coach
  • 3,311 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 02:01 PM

Or... just maybe... clubs take responsibility for their own actions and do not spend more than their means, if that means they drop out of the elite competition so be it


Pretty much this.
Posted Image

#4 Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy
  • Coach
  • 2,669 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 02:50 PM

Not such a bad idea, the NRL has some sort of central merchandising, thats why every repilca shirt, T-shirt, hat etc. are all the same price regardless of the club (bl***y expensive though at $159 for a replica shirt).

The only drawback though is I wouldn't trust the current bunch of muppets in Red Hall to run a chimps tea party let alone take control of something like this. They'd probably sell the rights to some bargain basemant 'brand' for a pittance and then claim the reduced money was worth it for the 'global marketing presence' the game would receive !!!!

#5 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,832 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:20 PM

I think there is some merit in sharing some of the marketing and commercial resource, but then I suspect this is already being done.

I know it worked out badly in the end, but the Elonex deal was through the RFL.

The Heinz deal is through the RFL and that appears on all the SL club's shirts.

There are all sorts of sponsorship deals (or there have been over the years) that have been brokered centrally.

#6 southstand loiner

southstand loiner
  • Coach
  • 2,658 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:21 PM

all accounts should be avalible to the rfl but as for generating money then thats up to the clubs to get there own houses in order . some clubs spend a lot of time generating sponsorship but would they feel the same way if they had to share it with clubs who seem to coast along happy to pick up scraps there offered .
central sponsorship is just that for the good of the game at all levels if it was split between the super league clubs as it would be if we went to central funding then there would be very little left over for the rest of the game.
any club that can not market themselves enough to genrerate the income needed is doing something wrong and its up to them to put it right
ah a sunday night in front of the telly watching old rugby league games.
does life get any better .

#7 Southstander13

Southstander13
  • Coach
  • 1,295 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:42 PM

Not such a bad idea, the NRL has some sort of central merchandising, thats why every repilca shirt, T-shirt, hat etc. are all the same price regardless of the club (bl***y expensive though at $159 for a replica shirt).

The only drawback though is I wouldn't trust the current bunch of muppets in Red Hall to run a chimps tea party let alone take control of something like this. They'd probably sell the rights to some bargain basemant 'brand' for a pittance and then claim the reduced money was worth it for the 'global marketing presence' the game would receive !!!!


As opposed to many of the directors that run their clubs so well!

I cant see many of these things happening, commercialism just wont allow it. Clubs like Leeds and Wigan may be better off sorting their own arrangements rather than pooling everything together. Plus, even if some clubs could generate more money by pooling resources, if those clubs are still run badly then it wont make a difference.

Did the Australian Super League arrange a deal with Nike for the shirts in 97? Seem to recall all the teams had pretty much the same shirt in different colours. Was a bit rubbish how it worked there.

#8 Manx RL

Manx RL
  • Coach
  • 1,370 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 05:34 PM

Just been having a think on some of the areas a lot of RL clubs seem to be struggling with, namely generating new money and keeping their accounts in a decent condition. So should the RFL take some of that responsibility away from the clubs? what if all club accounts were looked after by the RFL and their accountants?, and monitored and controlled as they do their own accounts? or if the RFL generated its own sponsorship deals (although i know this is an area the RFL don't have a great track record in) and then distributed those sponsors among certain clubs.. RU do it with some of their smaller competitions (ie emirates sponsor a 7's event, and all unsponsored teams in the comp wear the emirates logo on their shirts)

Other things like playing kit and merchandising of apparel, if the RFL could get a deal from someone like Nike or Canterbury, or ISC, to provide kit for all teams in the SL, for one sum, which was then shared equally among the clubs.. (i remember when this was first mentioned some years back, and a couple of clubs objected due to them wanting to cut their own deals for more money, hence it fell down) something like this and the things mentioned above could ease pressure from clubs, and should they be close to going into the red, the RFL would be able to identify problems earlier and work towards correcting them with the clubs..

I know the NFL have a deal with Nike which supplies all teams with their uniforms and supporter apparel. something like this would work well for SL clubs, certainly if it was with a major sportswear brand like Nike or ISC..

In light of the plight of Bradford and the possible situation at Salford and rumours of other clubs.. would this not be a good option?


Are Canterbury out of administration or been taken over yet?
- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

#9 EastLondonMike

EastLondonMike
  • Coach
  • 4,323 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 08:00 PM

Canterbury have been taken over..

Newham Dockers - Champions 2013. Rugby League For East London. 100% Cockney Rugby League!

Twitter: @NewhamDockersRL - Get following!

www.newhamdockers.co.uk


#10 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,068 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 03:44 AM

all accounts should be avalible to the rfl but as for generating money then thats up to the clubs to get there own houses in order . some clubs spend a lot of time generating sponsorship but would they feel the same way if they had to share it with clubs who seem to coast along happy to pick up scraps there offered .
central sponsorship is just that for the good of the game at all levels if it was split between the super league clubs as it would be if we went to central funding then there would be very little left over for the rest of the game.
any club that can not market themselves enough to genrerate the income needed is doing something wrong and its up to them to put it right

You wouldn't happen to support Leeds, would you?, a big team who would have to give up a bit of profit for the greater good if there were central revenue sharing.

#11 Cake Tiger

Cake Tiger
  • Coach
  • 736 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 04:32 AM

Clubs like Leeds and Wigan may be better off sorting their own arrangements rather than pooling everything together. Plus, even if some clubs could generate more money by pooling resources, if those clubs are still run badly then it wont make a difference.


But how will Wigan and Leeds like it when there are only 8 clubs that can survive in SL?

#12 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,721 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 07:40 AM

Just been having a think on some of the areas a lot of RL clubs seem to be struggling with, namely generating new money and keeping their accounts in a decent condition. So should the RFL take some of that responsibility away from the clubs? what if all club accounts were looked after by the RFL and their accountants?, and monitored and controlled as they do their own accounts?


Not for me. Clubs have to make their own decisions and fund them. The minute the RFL agree to one clubs investment proposal and not another club's is the moment big big trouble will occur. The RFL of course need to set a framework which is minimum standards and salary cap so they already control the SL clubs collectively to a point. I also think it's not on for the much maligned Nigel Wood and whatever accounts people he uses to dictate to people like Moran, Davey, Glover, McManus, Caddick, Lenegan, Hughes, Pearson, how they should run a business. It's almost insulting.

If superleague is in a bit of a mess then remember it was the RFL that pushed for 14 clubs.

Also I suspect that over the last few months it's been Hetherington, Lenegan, Moran, McManus and pearson who have been sorting it out more so that the RFL. Don't forget how "SLE" put in to buy Bradford which resulted in Mr. Khan being brought in to manage the club. I think you'll find that the mess will get sorted out by those who are really running the game now.

Edited by The Parksider, 24 October 2012 - 07:42 AM.


#13 The Future is League

The Future is League
  • Coach
  • 6,072 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:36 PM

The first rule of business is that you cant have more money going out than coming in. Some Rugby League clubs need to wake up to this fact.

#14 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,759 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 06:48 PM

The first rule of business is that you cant have more money going out than coming in. Some Rugby League clubs need to wake up to this fact.


Well you can actually, but let's not spoil a simple assumption.

The clubs are businesses and are ultimately responsible for their own success or failure. Anything that dilutes that is wrong.

What should happen, in an ideal world, is that the franchises should be issued according to very strict rules and codes of conduct; any franchisee that broke them would automatically lose their franchise. This assumes a line of people queuing up to take over said franchises and could possibly be where the theory falls down.
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#15 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,832 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 07:31 PM

The first rule of business is that you cant have more money going out than coming in. Some Rugby League clubs need to wake up to this fact.

That doesn't really mean anything unless you add a time period to it. Clubs (businesses) may go with a program of investment which will see them repay loans over a decade or similar.

It is the reason why people who state that profit each year should be the measure of financial success are wrong.

Plenty of teams could post a profit, but could then deliver a poor team, poor facilities and a lack of investment in infrastructure.

Investment is important for clubs to grow.

#16 southstand loiner

southstand loiner
  • Coach
  • 2,658 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 09:00 PM

You wouldn't happen to support Leeds, would you?, a big team who would have to give up a bit of profit for the greater good if there were central revenue sharing.


you know im a leeds supporter but thats nothing to do with it . leeds intoduced leeds carnigie to the rfl and suggested the sponsorship of the challengecup to them so there hardly keeping everything for themselves but some sponsors want to be assosiated with there local club only such as leeds buliding society and of course the double glazing company that sponsors wakefield and huggells law firm at hull kr . would those sponsorships have to be pooled for central funding as i think if thats the case the game could end up with losing more money than they gain . also the record of recent sponsorship deals the rfl has come up with hardly inspires any faith in central funding or will we just have to put up with bigger adverts on lorries instead of a decent income.
i have no problem with central sharing of national sponsorship deals but clubs have to be allowed to use there own commercial departments to bring in extra income as happens at all clubs now the problem is some clubs refuse to grasp the fact that its a market place and they need to sell themselves out there instead of just going to the same supporters all the time to try prise a few extra quid out of them. have a look around at the commerical depts at various clubs and you will see its the ones who put more into them that get most out of them . if you have a team of 12-15 people you generate more than a team of 3-4 people can manage .
ah a sunday night in front of the telly watching old rugby league games.
does life get any better .

#17 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,545 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:16 PM

The only drawback though is I wouldn't trust the current bunch of muppets in Red Hall to run a chimps tea party let alone take control of something like this. They'd probably sell the rights to some bargain basemant 'brand' for a pittance and then claim the reduced money was worth it for the 'global marketing presence' the game would receive !!!!


Do you think it is easy selling a small time sport like RL in the current climate?
What would you do to ensure packed houses at every game?

I don't know the answers but clearly you do. Why aren't you doing the job?

#18 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,068 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 02:44 AM

you know im a leeds supporter but thats nothing to do with it . leeds intoduced leeds carnigie to the rfl and suggested the sponsorship of the challengecup to them so there hardly keeping everything for themselves but some sponsors want to be assosiated with there local club only such as leeds buliding society and of course the double glazing company that sponsors wakefield and huggells law firm at hull kr . would those sponsorships have to be pooled for central funding as i think if thats the case the game could end up with losing more money than they gain . also the record of recent sponsorship deals the rfl has come up with hardly inspires any faith in central funding or will we just have to put up with bigger adverts on lorries instead of a decent income.
i have no problem with central sharing of national sponsorship deals but clubs have to be allowed to use there own commercial departments to bring in extra income as happens at all clubs now the problem is some clubs refuse to grasp the fact that its a market place and they need to sell themselves out there instead of just going to the same supporters all the time to try prise a few extra quid out of them. have a look around at the commerical depts at various clubs and you will see its the ones who put more into them that get most out of them . if you have a team of 12-15 people you generate more than a team of 3-4 people can manage .


Your last sentence is precisely the reason for revenue sharing. Does it work? Maybe not in the UK but in the NFL it is wildly siuccessful.

#19 Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy
  • Coach
  • 2,669 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 07:15 AM

Do you think it is easy selling a small time sport like RL in the current climate?


Company A offers money to sponsor SL
Company B offers to put some posters on the side of their trucks but no money

Hmmm let me think, i'm running a business thats short of money, I know i'll take company B sponsorship !

Enough said about the financial competence of the current Red Hall set up !!!

#20 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,832 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 07:51 AM

Company A offers money to sponsor SL
Company B offers to put some posters on the side of their trucks but no money

Hmmm let me think, i'm running a business thats short of money, I know i'll take company B sponsorship !

Enough said about the financial competence of the current Red Hall set up !!!

what about the clubs who sipported this initiative?
It would appear the money on offer was paltry.