The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

You are going over it again Harry and failing to respond to my point, deliberately or otherwise.

Toronto are a potentially dangerous distraction from the real dangers facing the sport in this country. Clearly you think otherwise.

Sorry Johnny, I think we have far more problems than Toronto pose, I don't believe we have or should have any commitments to them at all, if they are in future to exist at a cost to the game here dump them, people keep saying we need to sell what we have got better than we do, so let's put that money we would spend into Marketing, a Chief Executive over all the game who is not afraid to make decisions whoever it upsets and the grassroots and community.

[GUBRATS]

15 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Sorry Johnny, I think we have far more problems than Toronto pose, I don't believe we have or should have any commitments to them at all, if they are in future to exist at a cost to the game here dump them, people keep saying we need to sell what we have got better than we do, so let's put that money we would spend into Marketing, a Chief Executive over all the game who is not afraid to make decisions whoever it upsets and the grassroots and community.

You're on dodgy ground there Harry , what if that that Chief Exec decided on licencing ?

[Robin Evans]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You're on dodgy ground there Harry , what if that that Chief Exec decided on licencing ?

Then thats the way it goes. We can all make our decisions on what we do after that is decided. 

I do believe that the most of the decision making processes has to be taken away from clubs and managed by the game.... similar to the FA/FIFA.

If licencing does comes back I will draw a line and stick with my memories of what the game once meant to me. I have plenty of other things to do that will fill the void left by rugby.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I recall being surprised that the MLS TV rights were worth around $90m usd per year. And that is for football, with 24 NA teams across their markets. 

We are talking very small TV deals IMHO. 

Canada has a smaller population and a lower GDP than the UK. Rugby league will be among the most niche of minority sports even with a team doing okay in Toronto. Any TV deal is going to be minuscule compared to Australia and the UK, and probably smaller than anything we might get in France.

[The Future is League]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think this is part of the problem. Vague pots of gold on offer. 

Nobody can ever articulate the size of the prize on offer. Let's say things go really well, TWP survive and say Ottawa make it in SL within 5 years. 2 Canadian teams in SL going well. What do we think we can get in TV rights and maybe other commercial deals? 

Because unless we are talking serious money it makes a lot of it a waste of time. 

What is the sports rights value in Canada?

But we have to have an idea of what we are chasing. What are the comparable commercial deals that we are aiming for? 

We won't know until if and when it happens

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Imo Harry transcontinental clubs should not be in the lower tiers , straight into SL with them , but retain P and R between the European clubs is the only way it can work 

I agree, would say the same for French/European clubs too tbh. The benefits of pro playing talent, competition exposure and associated sponsorship and TV revenue will only come by being in the top tier. P/R should if it is maintained, be and English exercise to decide the makeup of our teams in the top flight.

[Dave T]

44 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

We won't know until if and when it happens

That is not a business case anyone will invest in. 

There will be deals out there to use as a benchmark. 

It's fine if you don't know, i wouldn't expect you to, I just think it is hard to claim there are riches when you then admit you don't know whether there is or not. 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

You're on dodgy ground there Harry , what if that that Chief Exec decided on licencing ?

Then so be it, I will be down Etherstone St and Twist Lane, no more pondering about what the future holds.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Robin Evans said:

Then thats the way it goes. We can all make our decisions on what we do after that is decided. 

I do believe that the most of the decision making processes has to be taken away from clubs and managed by the game.... similar to the FA/FIFA.

If licencing does comes back I will draw a line and stick with my memories of what the game once meant to me. I have plenty of other things to do that will fill the void left by rugby.

My feelings entirely, I hadn't read yours when I wrote my response, FWI the places I name are the homes of Leigh Miners and Leigh East. 

[GUBRATS]

53 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I agree, would say the same for French/European clubs too tbh. The benefits of pro playing talent, competition exposure and associated sponsorship and TV revenue will only come by being in the top tier. P/R should if it is maintained, be and English exercise to decide the makeup of our teams in the top flight.

If you add in the French then it could become a little stupid imo , and in reality the French clubs can just about fit in the lower tiers , as could Valencia 

[Harry Stottle]

55 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I agree, would say the same for French/European clubs too tbh. The benefits of pro playing talent, competition exposure and associated sponsorship and TV revenue will only come by being in the top tier. P/R should if it is maintained, be and English exercise to decide the makeup of our teams in the top flight.

The Tail is firmly wagging the dog in your world Tommy.

[Oldbear]

14 hours ago, Dave T said:. 

What is the sports rights value in Canada?

Honestly I think it would be really small. NHL is a religion here so don’t even think of a fraction of that figure. MLB and NBA are long established North American favourites, and actual Canadians play in those leagues. MLS only gets the deal it gets because soccer has a strong grass roots at the junior level and the CFL definitely attracts an older, blue collar audience outside of Saskatchewan and Manitoba so that hampers it’s TV value. Unless TWP were wildly successful, like contenders for trophies then it’s audience will be a small niche market (message to my countrymen in Ontario, the rest of Canada typically hates Toronto teams unless they are the only Canadian team in that league, then they represent the country so we watch, and take interest if they win), and small niche markets mean small deals and games hidden away behind paywalls.

Ironically an Ottawa team in SL might draw more public interest from the rest of Canada than TWP, such is the general dislike of all things Toronto in the rest of the country, having said that the Canadian media is based in Toronto so tends to ignore happenings in other parts of the country, heaven knows what they will do if the Canucks make it to the Stanley Cup final.

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Honestly I think it would be really small. NHL is a religion here so don’t even think of a fraction of that figure. MLB and NBA are long established North American favourites, and actual Canadians play in those leagues. MLS only gets the deal it gets because soccer has a strong grass roots at the junior level and the CFL definitely attracts an older, blue collar audience outside of Saskatchewan and Manitoba so that hampers it’s TV value. Unless TWP were wildly successful, like contenders for trophies then it’s audience will be a small niche market (message to my countrymen in Ontario, the rest of Canada typically hates Toronto teams unless they are the only Canadian team in that league, then they represent the country so we watch, and take interest if they win), and small niche markets mean small deals and games hidden away behind paywalls.

Ironically an Ottawa team in SL might draw more public interest from the rest of Canada than TWP, such is the general dislike of all things Toronto in the rest of the country, having said that the Canadian media is based in Toronto so tends to ignore happenings in other parts of the country, heaven knows what they will do if the Canucks make it to the Stanley Cup final.

Thanks, so why do so many people make out there is a pot of gold on offer here? 

I see some other benefits like new fans, new sponsors and hopefully new media deals, but if we look at current numbers, to make this wash its face, we probably need a further £2.3m per annum per team. This should give central funding and cover travel costs. 

The other benefit I could see would be an increase in competition value elsewhere, I. E. In the UK and France if we have another strong team adding some big names into the league and playing in front of big crowds. But I think this is a bit abstract tbh, in the same way we were always told London is important to Sky yet the deals go up despite them not being in. 

I personally think it would be very very difficult to make it pay, that isn't to say we shouldn't do it, but this is why I have been comfortable with not paying a couple of million a year of existing money to fund it. 

I think the financial decision is marginal at the very best, and we need to make sure we don't get caught up with the glamour. 

However, these things are exciting and we also shouldn't discount them too easily, we need to demonstrate ambition even if these things are very difficult or long term wins. 

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

Thanks, so why do so many people make out there is a pot of gold on offer here? 

I see some other benefits like new fans, new sponsors and hopefully new media deals, but if we look at current numbers, to make this wash its face, we probably need a further £2.3m per annum per team. This should give central funding and cover travel costs. 

The other benefit I could see would be an increase in competition value elsewhere, I. E. In the UK and France if we have another strong team adding some big names into the league and playing in front of big crowds. But I think this is a bit abstract tbh, in the same way we were always told London is important to Sky yet the deals go up despite them not being in. 

I personally think it would be very very difficult to make it pay, that isn't to say we shouldn't do it, but this is why I have been comfortable with not paying a couple of million a year of existing money to fund it. 

I think the financial decision is marginal at the very best, and we need to make sure we don't get caught up with the glamour. 

However, these things are exciting and we also shouldn't discount them too easily, we need to demonstrate ambition even if these things are very difficult or long term wins. 

So you don't really know and are sitting on the fence ?

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So you don't really know and are sitting on the fence ?

Pretty much

I think it's where this is a bit of a leap of faith, and it's where it comes to individual's risk appetite. Mine personally is that I would go for it as long as somebody else is paying, which is the approach the game took. I am happy with that. 

Others want to go for it and pump millions of quid into it. 

Others want to steer well clear. 

I think it is too difficult to say which is right or wrong, and they are all just options that carry risk and different levels of reward. 

[Scubby]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Pretty much

I think it's where this is a bit of a leap of faith, and it's where it comes to individual's risk appetite. Mine personally is that I would go for it as long as somebody else is paying, which is the approach the game took. I am happy with that. 

Is that your mantra for contributing to this forum?  

[dkw]

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Mine personally is that I would go for it as long as somebody else is paying,

Or the "Dave T at the pub" system as its famously known.

[GUBRATS]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Pretty much

I think it's where this is a bit of a leap of faith, and it's where it comes to individual's risk appetite. Mine personally is that I would go for it as long as somebody else is paying, which is the approach the game took. I am happy with that. 

Others want to go for it and pump millions of quid into it. 

Others want to steer well clear. 

I think it is too difficult to say which is right or wrong, and they are all just options that carry risk and different levels of reward. 

So is it Warrington's year then ?

[Dave T]

31 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So is it Warrington's year then ?

Of course.

No.

Maybe...

[The Future is League]

20 hours ago, Dave T said:

That is not a business case anyone will invest in. 

There will be deals out there to use as a benchmark. 

It's fine if you don't know, i wouldn't expect you to, I just think it is hard to claim there are riches when you then admit you don't know whether there is or not. 

We all know the riches are there we (Rugby League) just have to fine a way to obtain them.

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

We all know the riches are there we (Rugby League) just have to fine a way to obtain them.

In Toronto? In Canada?

Specifically what sources of riches?

Because, looking at the Canadian sports market, the CFL, NHL and MLB have all lost teams in the past decade or so. NBA went from two teams to a whole one in 2001. The NFL might be vaguely interested but never enough to do anything.

I cannot see how Canada represents a game-changing market for rugby league. It's very much in the 'nice to have as long as there's no risk' side of things. In that way, to me, it is fundamentally different to supporting development expansion in the UK and France.

[The Future is League]

Just now, gingerjon said:

In Toronto? In Canada?

Specifically what sources of riches?

Because, looking at the Canadian sports market, the CFL, NHL and MLB have all lost teams in the past decade or so. NBA went from two teams to a whole one in 2001. The NFL might be vaguely interested but never enough to do anything.

I cannot see how Canada represents a game-changing market for rugby league. It's very much in the 'nice to have as long as there's no risk' side of things. In that way, to me, it is fundamentally different to supporting development expansion in the UK and France.

North America, which is the most lucrative sports market in the world.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, The Future is League said:

North America, which is the most lucrative sports market in the world.

So not Toronto or Canada then. Which aren't.

So what value is there, how much does it cost to get it, what steps are required to get to that value?

[The Future is League]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

So not Toronto or Canada then. Which aren't.

So what value is there, how much does it cost to get it, what steps are required to get to that value?

Canada is part of North America.

The game of Rugby League needs somebody in North America who understands how the sports market works there and tap in it.

Easier said than done.

I say again that the TWP are the best chance the game has ever had of breaking into the riches of the sports market there.

[gingerjon]

12 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Canada is part of North America.

But it is not the same market as the USA. It is not a rich market. Established sports like hockey, CFL, basketball and baseball have all retrenched there recently.

So, to repeat: what is the value rugby league is chasing and how does it get there?

Because if TWP are our best chance then it's not going to happen.