Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blind side johnny

Private Equity

Recommended Posts

So according to the posts above the RFL who everyone says are useless are out of the reckoning and the clubs who are largely self-serving will have less power ...... er isn't that what everyone has been saying  are the problems for forever?


"It is, by a million miles, a better sport than union. League is 80 minutes of physicality, speed, good handling, good kicking. It’s continuous."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that any Club Chairman wanting to get their hands on any additional money,should have to write off any existing debt. That would show whether they are in this for the good of the game or merely to retrieve what they have already 'invested'. I fully accept that some well meaning owners may not be in a postion to write off existing debt,in which case,I'm afraid they shouldn't be entitled to any additional funds.

Remember,Private Equities first priority is to make money,they are not a charity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The 4 of Us said:

There is a bit Turkeys and Christmas about this but it’s moving towards a franchising model that would probably suit best anyway. Effectively in order to get the possibility of a share each club has to be bound by the terms on which the money is invested. Although it makes SL stronger the clubs get less of a say. 

Yes thats true about it going to franchising

If they did buy in it would probably be the end of p and r.  Suddenly I'm warming to this idea lol 

If the strong super league clubs did actually take less this would be a good thing.

It's what afl does.  Their weak clubs get 25 million from the game.  The strong clubs get like 12 million.

Dave Smith wanted to try this in the nrl but the clubs wouldn't allow it

Edited by aj1908

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of disequal funding or funding for specific projects becomes nonsensical if the clubs are deciding where it goes. That makes no sense as clubs would obviously prioritise themselves and, for the poorer clubs, the ones who need investment, paying off debts would be the most pressing concern. 

It also becomes a bit of a nonsense under P+R. Just doesnt work or make any sense. Why are a PE firm going to put money in to the game and see, say Salford, take a couple of million to spend on marketing and growing Salford, if Salford are then relegated and replaced with someone else? That someone else then has to deal with less money as part of the TV funding now goes to PE. 

For PE to work and for the game to be attractive to it, there needs to be an end to P+R, it just doesnt fit. The money to go on specific projects, the money largely to go on assets physical and IP, and there to be a set exit plan in 5 - 10 years. 

Done well this really could be a game changer for the sport in this country. If say £200m comes in, we spend £130m on Stadiums for London, Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford and parts thereof and part of say elland road (a refurbished one) thats all money that helps clubs build, building the value of SL. 

Then £30-50m on creating a platform for all games to be shown, that is the infrastructure plus platform (plus imo the rights to the championship, league 1 and NRL) for a subscription platform,

and £20-40m on marketing and specific projects (such as 9s) 

then in 10 years time the game will be in a much better position, the PE can exit and the growth come back to the game. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The idea of disequal funding or funding for specific projects becomes nonsensical if the clubs are deciding where it goes. That makes no sense as clubs would obviously prioritise themselves and, for the poorer clubs, the ones who need investment, paying off debts would be the most pressing concern. 

It also becomes a bit of a nonsense under P+R. Just doesnt work or make any sense. Why are a PE firm going to put money in to the game and see, say Salford, take a couple of million to spend on marketing and growing Salford, if Salford are then relegated and replaced with someone else? That someone else then has to deal with less money as part of the TV funding now goes to PE. 

For PE to work and for the game to be attractive to it, there needs to be an end to P+R, it just doesnt fit. The money to go on specific projects, the money largely to go on assets physical and IP, and there to be a set exit plan in 5 - 10 years. 

Done well this really could be a game changer for the sport in this country. If say £200m comes in, we spend £130m on Stadiums for London, Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford and parts thereof and part of say elland road (a refurbished one) thats all money that helps clubs build, building the value of SL. 

Then £30-50m on creating a platform for all games to be shown, that is the infrastructure plus platform (plus imo the rights to the championship, league 1 and NRL) for a subscription platform,

and £20-40m on marketing and specific projects (such as 9s) 

then in 10 years time the game will be in a much better position, the PE can exit and the growth come back to the game. 

Agreed 

But how would the pe firms be paid back down the track 

The worst case scenario is clubs blow this money on players or debts then basically have sold off part of future revenues forever 

People on here hated koucash.  He was a genuine fan and wrote off his money.  These guys are nothing like that.

Edited by aj1908

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

Agreed 

But how would the pe firms be paid back down the track 

The worst case scenario is clubs blow this money on players or debts then basically have sold off part of future revenues forever 

People on here hated koucash.  He was a genuine fan and wrote off his money.  These guys are nothing like that.

Well you would expect that those figures can be worked out in advance. 

Say 25% of the commercial revenue with a buy out of £200m in 10 years time. 

At current levels that would see them get pretty much a 50% return on revenue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The idea of disequal funding or funding for specific projects becomes nonsensical if the clubs are deciding where it goes. That makes no sense as clubs would obviously prioritise themselves and, for the poorer clubs, the ones who need investment, paying off debts would be the most pressing concern. 

It also becomes a bit of a nonsense under P+R. Just doesnt work or make any sense. Why are a PE firm going to put money in to the game and see, say Salford, take a couple of million to spend on marketing and growing Salford, if Salford are then relegated and replaced with someone else? That someone else then has to deal with less money as part of the TV funding now goes to PE. 

For PE to work and for the game to be attractive to it, there needs to be an end to P+R, it just doesnt fit. The money to go on specific projects, the money largely to go on assets physical and IP, and there to be a set exit plan in 5 - 10 years. 

Done well this really could be a game changer for the sport in this country. If say £200m comes in, we spend £130m on Stadiums for London, Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford and parts thereof and part of say elland road (a refurbished one) thats all money that helps clubs build, building the value of SL. 

Then £30-50m on creating a platform for all games to be shown, that is the infrastructure plus platform (plus imo the rights to the championship, league 1 and NRL) for a subscription platform,

and £20-40m on marketing and specific projects (such as 9s) 

then in 10 years time the game will be in a much better position, the PE can exit and the growth come back to the game. 

SL might be , after 10 years locked out , not sure what state the Lower tiers would be in 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Most of them wouldnt see a difference 

Based on how attendances and interest declined during the years of licencing that's probably not correct. 

We need to have our eyes open about what all this talk of investment and expansion means. Yes pursue it but the way some people arrogantly talk on here you'd think strength in the game's heartlands wasn't also critical. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, M j M said:

Based on how attendances and interest declined during the years of licencing that's probably not correct. 

We need to have our eyes open about what all this talk of investment and expansion means. Yes pursue it but the way some people arrogantly talk on here you'd think strength in the game's heartlands wasn't also critical. 

The strength of the heartland game isnt getting 400 at Hunslet, nor is it really fundamentally damaged by getting 1800 at leigh instead of 2.5k

Most clubs, in almost all years pay no mind whatsoever to promotion to SL. It has no effect on them.

The strength of the game in the heartlands lay in the amateur game and a few SL clubs, not a few clubs in the championship. It's crazy to expect the entire game to structure itself around this to the obvious detriment of other areas.

Under franchising the championship was also a televised competition. Under P+R next year the coverage is far less

Edited by scotchy1
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

The strength of the heartland game isnt getting 400 at Hunslet, nor is it really fundamentally damaged by getting 1800 at leigh instead of 2.5k

Most clubs, in almost all years pay no mind whatsoever to promotion to SL. It has no effect on them.

The strength of the game in the heartlands lay in the amateur game and a few SL clubs, not a few clubs in the championship. It's crazy to expect the entire game to structure itself around this to the obvious detriment of other areas.

agreed.  people argue that their championship club is important to rugby league to keep the juniors in the area going, when in reality there will probably be a super league club down the road or close by which the juniors could go too.  its not much of a heartland when these clubs crowds are poor and they struggle for finances yearly for many of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

agreed.  people argue that their championship club is important to rugby league to keep the juniors in the area going, when in reality there will probably be a super league club down the road or close by which the juniors could go too.  its not much of a heartland when these clubs crowds are poor and they struggle for finances yearly for many of them.

Which is fine and too a degree quite true , but don't expect fans of clubs who will decline to be happy about it 

Do you support any club in particular ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Well you would expect that those figures can be worked out in advance. 

Say 25% of the commercial revenue with a buy out of £200m in 10 years time. 

At current levels that would see them get pretty much a 50% return on revenue. 

Where is the £200m coming from to buy them out in 10 yrs time? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Which is fine and too a degree quite true , but don't expect fans of clubs who will decline to be happy about it 

Do you support any club in particular ?

in england no.  as an expansionist i like seeing les catalans doing well, and obviously toronto.  it will be interesting to see if they last or if it fails, why. 

but its good to see a club like hull kr trying to further improve their ground.  id be happy if wakefield and cas got their grounds.  equally if they didnt i eventually would like to see them out of super league.

as much as im not a fan of leigh their crowds in super league were actually quite good.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

in england no.  as an expansionist i like seeing les catalans doing well, and obviously toronto.  it will be interesting to see if they last or if it fails, why. 

but its good to see a club like hull kr trying to further improve their ground.  id be happy if wakefield and cas got their grounds.  equally if they didnt i eventually would like to see them out of super league.

as much as im not a fan of leigh their crowds in super league were actually quite good.

 

 

That doesn't answer my question 

I asked 

Do you expect fans of clubs that will most probably decline as a result to be happy about it ?

Do you support ( as in pay to watch ) any particular club ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

That doesn't answer my question 

I asked 

Do you expect fans of clubs that will most probably decline as a result to be happy about it ?

Do you support ( as in pay to watch ) any particular club ?

theres winners and losers in everything in life when there is change.  thats the point i was making.  if people are complaining about this change because it will hurt their club - whilst it may be good for the rest of the game - then it might be good to ignore the complaints.

league tickets arent free last time i checked so when i go to games i have to pay for tickets.

are you trying to get into a contest as to who pays to go to the most games a year lol really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2019 at 23:40, The British Lion said:

Not sure about this. I have a massive want for London to prosper as a SL club. They performed admirably well on the field last season in SL, and I was sad to see them go down.

However, I viewed it in their current circumstances, and thought, how are they 'ever' going to propel themselves upward from lets face it, what looks like a league 1 stadium, small following, with the added costs of running a SL team?

I have no major fixes to be honest. But, I wonder, if the SL board (id have previously said the RFL) could bankroll the project in London, as did the NRL with Melbourne.

In short, we need some central, purposeful investment to see expansion - In the UK. David Hughes has been MORE than a faithful, and committed investor....with little assistance in terms of vision from whoever (RFL + SL authorities). I was sad to see London playing in what looks like an amateur ground, with a few thousand followers, with playing so well, to get relegated.

London needs a successful team, a decent stadium, a brand (so many have been explored and not worked)...but I do believe there is a strong place for London in RL.

How often do people look at London and think "there is a city desperately short of top class sport and a proper stadium!"

I would suggest rarely, which is the problem London Broncos have.


"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

theres winners and losers in everything in life when there is change.  thats the point i was making.  if people are complaining about this change because it will hurt their club - whilst it may be good for the rest of the game - then it might be good to ignore the complaints.

league tickets arent free last time i checked so when i go to games i have to pay for tickets.

are you trying to get into a contest as to who pays to go to the most games a year lol really?

Indeed , so you admit this probably will damage some clubs , do you expect the supporters of those clubs to be happy about it ?

From your non answer , I assume it is a no , you don't follow any particular club that will be affected , that's fine , just say so , but I retain the right to dismiss your opinion as having no emotion attached to it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Indeed , so you admit this probably will damage some clubs , do you expect the supporters of those clubs to be happy about it ?

From your non answer , I assume it is a no , you don't follow any particular club that will be affected , that's fine , just say so , but I retain the right to dismiss your opinion as having no emotion attached to it 

What non answer.?

Yes I think.fans of clubs that are hurt will complain.  I said that before.

But their complaints are based on selfish interests.

To be fair clubs outside of super league are there for a reason.

Leigh had a crack so did Widnes.  Maybe super league is beyond them if we are being realistic.

And frankly I'm.flabbergasted how much money the rfl and super league clubs found for Leigh whilst Toronto didn't get a penny.

If I were a Leigh fan of be feeling pretty lucky tbh 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aj1908 said:

What non answer.?

Yes I think.fans of clubs that are hurt will complain.  I said that before.

But their complaints are based on selfish interests.

To be fair clubs outside of super league are there for a reason.

Leigh had a crack so did Widnes.  Maybe super league is beyond them if we are being realistic.

And frankly I'm.flabbergasted how much money the rfl and super league clubs found for Leigh whilst Toronto didn't get a penny.

If I were a Leigh fan of be feeling pretty lucky tbh 

As I said , you have no emotional attachment , so I will ignore your opinion 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

The clubs, via the growth the game would see. 

It won't be.

It will.be whatever share it's worth then.

If say they got 25 percent now for 200 million then down the track they'd want 25 percent of what it's worth then.

It's not a loan it's equity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aj1908 said:

It won't be.

It will.be whatever share it's worth then.

If say they got 25 percent now for 200 million then down the track they'd want 25 percent of what it's worth then.

It's not a loan it's equity.

The value is what someone is willing to pay. 

The risk for the PE is that they get down the line and SL just doesnt buy it back. Their equity cant just be sold to anyone so SL just waits until.they have to sell for a lower price.

Having a price agreed for a buyout isnt uncommon and protects both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/12/2019 at 14:37, scotchy1 said:

The idea of disequal funding or funding for specific projects becomes nonsensical if the clubs are deciding where it goes. That makes no sense as clubs would obviously prioritise themselves and, for the poorer clubs, the ones who need investment, paying off debts would be the most pressing concern. 

It also becomes a bit of a nonsense under P+R. Just doesnt work or make any sense. Why are a PE firm going to put money in to the game and see, say Salford, take a couple of million to spend on marketing and growing Salford, if Salford are then relegated and replaced with someone else? That someone else then has to deal with less money as part of the TV funding now goes to PE. 

For PE to work and for the game to be attractive to it, there needs to be an end to P+R, it just doesnt fit. The money to go on specific projects, the money largely to go on assets physical and IP, and there to be a set exit plan in 5 - 10 years. 

Done well this really could be a game changer for the sport in this country. If say £200m comes in, we spend £130m on Stadiums for London, Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford and parts thereof and part of say elland road (a refurbished one) thats all money that helps clubs build, building the value of SL. 

Then £30-50m on creating a platform for all games to be shown, that is the infrastructure plus platform (plus imo the rights to the championship, league 1 and NRL) for a subscription platform,

and £20-40m on marketing and specific projects (such as 9s) 

then in 10 years time the game will be in a much better position, the PE can exit and the growth come back to the game. 

So Bradford, London, Castleford and Wakefield who have done nothing to improve their grounds in the last 25 years, just sit tight and wait for a big hand out?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...