Elstone talks TV deal, Private Equity and next season (ish)

[Martyn Sadler]

24 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Such a bad deal that Serie A are in the middle of doing it and Pro Rugby have done it and Premiership Rugby have done it.  British Lions is going that way..  its a great brand it will go places.   Don't blame me if you get flattened by the steam roller.  Why is Owen Farrell not playing RL.  Why is Shaun Edwards in RU?  Why is Andy Farrell in Ireland.  Even before that, why did Robinson win a RU World Cup medal? Because it's a game that is making big news.

They all went into rugby union before the introduction of private equity. No one argues against the fact that rugby union generates more income than Rugby League.

 

25 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

I dont know if CVC  is right for RL, there are others, but they and Premiership Rugby are all heavily incentiveised to improve revenues... you must be blind deaf and dumb if you don't know that.  

CVC appointed its own man to run Premiership Rugby, so in that sense it is incentivised to improve revenues.

But I don't know many people connected with Premiership rugby union who are happy now with the fact that they sold out to CVC. The money largely went to clubs paying off their overdrafts and directors' loans. There wasn't much left after that.

Having said that, there are many types of deals and it's certainly possible to structure a deal that will be good for Super League and Rugby League more generally. But you have to judge each deal on its merits, while remembering that PE companies are not philanthropic organisations and everything they do is for their own bottom line.

You must be even more blind, deaf and dumb if you don't know that.

 

[Scotchy1]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

It depends what the money is being used for, though I agree it seems a relatively small sum anyhow.

That is exactly my worry. 

It is said that it will be used centrally and clubs will have to bid for the money. But why are we taking this money and selling the family silver before knowing what it is for? and not only knowing what it is for but knowing what return we expect back. 

And if we know what we are using for, and what the return we expect from it, why arent we looking to finance that ourselves? The game has swallowed up about £30m in loans to keep going this year. What difference is £50m going to make, really. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Scotchy1 said:

That is exactly my worry. 

It is said that it will be used centrally and clubs will have to bid for the money. But why are we taking this money and selling the family silver before knowing what it is for? and not only knowing what it is for but knowing what return we expect back. 

And if we know what we are using for, and what the return we expect from it, why arent we looking to finance that ourselves? The game has swallowed up about £30m in loans to keep going this year. What difference is £50m going to make, really. 

Well exactly, hadn't thought about it in comparison to this year tbh.

Elstone seems frustrated at the lack of cash available at any one moment. I don't know what he plans to do with it or how he envisages that being repaid either. The only route I can see is taking the production of SL games in house to enhance the broadcast value. Beyond that, what realistically can he invest in?

A stadium for London Broncos or Bradford? Infrastructure is necessary but is this the sort of sum that could provide it across the game and provide revenues?

An increased Salary cap? Seems a bit of a waste really with no returns possible

[Rupert Prince]

34 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

They all went into rugby union before the introduction of private equity. No one argues against the fact that rugby union generates more income than Rugby League.

 

CVC appointed its own man to run Premiership Rugby, so in that sense it is incentivised to improve revenues.

But I don't know many people connected with Premiership rugby union who are happy now with the fact that they sold out to CVC. The money largely went to clubs paying off their overdrafts and directors' loans. There wasn't much left after that.

Having said that, there are many types of deals and it's certainly possible to structure a deal that will be good for Super League and Rugby League more generally. But you have to judge each deal on its merits, while remembering that PE companies are not philanthropic organisations and everything they do is for their own bottom line.

You must be even more blind, deaf and dumb if you don't know that.

"All Blacks rugby looking at private equity bids"   BBC (6Nov 2020) I know that. Familiar with it? Should we ignore it? 

Of course these organisations are businesses.  But unless the companies they get involved in don't don't grow then their own clients, such as pension funds, dont grow either.  They all have incentives... And the clubs benefit.

And I know that the reason the likes of Farrell turned his back on league was because RU were a much bigger outfit.  So we already have a bad start, and going backwards, even when compared to NRL.    We seem intent on staying pygmies. Such pygmies that people are wasting time willywaving about Leigh's application.  Smell the coffee.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

"All Blacks rugby looking at private equity bids"   BBC (6Nov 2020) I know that. Familiar with it? Should we ignore it? 

Of course these organisations are businesses.  But unless the companies they get involved in don't don't grow then their own clients, such as pension funds, dont grow either.  They all have incentives... And the clubs benefit.

And I know that the reason the likes of Farrell turned his back on league was because RU were a much bigger outfit.  So we already have a bad start, and going backwards, even when compared to NRL.    We seem intent on staying pygmies. Such pygmies that people are wasting time willywaving about Leigh's application.  Smell the coffee.

The All Blacks are looking at it because they've lost a shedload of money this year and despite being consistently strong on field and having a reasonable following outside of their home country, they're still limited by representing New Zealand and its relatively low 5 million people.

I agree though that PE has potential.

[M j M]

44 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

"All Blacks rugby looking at private equity bids"   BBC (6Nov 2020) I know that. Familiar with it? Should we ignore it? 

Of course these organisations are businesses.  But unless the companies they get involved in don't don't grow then their own clients, such as pension funds, dont grow either.  They all have incentives... And the clubs benefit.

And I know that the reason the likes of Farrell turned his back on league was because RU were a much bigger outfit.  So we already have a bad start, and going backwards, even when compared to NRL.    We seem intent on staying pygmies. Such pygmies that people are wasting time willywaving about Leigh's application.  Smell the coffee.

I'm starting to come to the conclusion  that you don't really understand what PE is, why they would be involved and what difference they would make to Rugby League apart from some up front money. Every post is "look, all these other cash-strapped businesses are doing it, we're going to get left behind" which, frankly, doesn't make much sense.

[Scotchy1]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Well exactly, hadn't thought about it in comparison to this year tbh.

Elstone seems frustrated at the lack of cash available at any one moment. I don't know what he plans to do with it or how he envisages that being repaid either. The only route I can see is taking the production of SL games in house to enhance the broadcast value. Beyond that, what realistically can he invest in?

A stadium for London Broncos or Bradford? Infrastructure is necessary but is this the sort of sum that could provide it across the game and provide revenues?

An increased Salary cap? Seems a bit of a waste really with no returns possible

All of those things, you would think, would have more traditional routes available to them. 

I dont think they are bad things, i think in-house production/additional channel etc, would be great. If its cost is £50m why cant that come from a loan, or even investment from those within in the game? 

A stadium for london/bradford etc, great lets do it. But why is PE better than a mortgage?

The only PE - like thing i can see making sense (on the info available) would be the NRL, where the offering is not only financial but expertise and other less tangible benefits like branding etc. 

[Rupert Prince]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

The All Blacks are looking at it because they've lost a shedload of money this year and despite being consistently strong on field and having a reasonable following outside of their home country, they're still limited by representing New Zealand and its relatively low 5 million people.

I agree though that PE has potential.

Thank you.  As you say,  the All Blacks need money.  We all need money!   Although perhaps we should call it more properly 'investment.  Obviously if we throw it down the toilet it's all wasted.  If we can find the right partner for us then we might be helped to invest wisely.

[Rupert Prince]

46 minutes ago, M j M said:

I'm starting to come to the conclusion  that you don't really understand what PE is, why they would be involved and what difference they would make to Rugby League apart from some up front money. Every post is "look, all these other cash-strapped businesses are doing it, we're going to get left behind" which, frankly, doesn't make much sense.

It's not just front money as you call it. But hey... I've seen 70 years.  I'm sanguine about my future.   People younger than me are the ones to stop think about the sterility of their rugby league future without investment.

[Man of Kent]

I wonder if the plan is for licensing and for PE to be used to bring up the lesser clubs up to speed in relation to infrastructure.

A Super League where all clubs have modern facilities fit for the 2020s makes plenty of sense. 

[Scotchy1]

18 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I wonder if the plan is for licensing and for PE to be used to bring up the lesser clubs up to speed in relation to infrastructure.

A Super League where all clubs have modern facilities fit for the 2020s makes plenty of sense. 

Doesnt really work in a world of Promotion and Relegation. 

[Blind side johnny]

3 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

Doesnt really work in a world of Promotion and Relegation. 

"House!"

[Scotchy1]

5 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

"House!"

I can imagine the conversations at Rothschilds now. 

"Give SL £50m and we are going to use it to improve the facilities of clubs who then drop out of the league, youll make your money back ten times over"

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Scotchy1 said:

Doesnt really work in a world of Promotion and Relegation. 

Exactly, nor does risking the competitions major assets (the big 5/6)

[Scotchy1]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Exactly, nor does risking the competitions major assets (the big 5/6)

Its one of many things which don't really appear to make sense.

PE seems utterly incompatible  with how the game is set up and how it needs to move forward.

There is the other complication of the governance here. Even if you get 12 clubs next year completely committed to PE and their plans. There is no guarantee the next club up will be.

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

All of those things, you would think, would have more traditional routes available to them. 

I dont think they are bad things, i think in-house production/additional channel etc, would be great. If its cost is £50m why cant that come from a loan, or even investment from those within in the game? 

A stadium for london/bradford etc, great lets do it. But why is PE better than a mortgage?

The only PE - like thing i can see making sense (on the info available) would be the NRL, where the offering is not only financial but expertise and other less tangible benefits like branding etc. 

Yeah it doesn't really add up tbh. I'd be very wary of it purely because there doesn't seem to be a strategy for it.

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Thank you.  As you say,  the All Blacks need money.  We all need money!   Although perhaps we should call it more properly 'investment.  Obviously if we throw it down the toilet it's all wasted.  If we can find the right partner for us then we might be helped to invest wisely.

Its slightly different for them though, as they need it to prop them back up to a level they were previously operating at. Super League on the other hand seem to want to use the money for another purpose(s).

[Tommygilf]

13 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

Its one of many things which don't really appear to make sense.

PE seems utterly incompatible  with how the game is set up and how it needs to move forward.

There is the other complication of the governance here. Even if you get 12 clubs next year completely committed to PE and their plans. There is no guarantee the next club up will be.

Quite, the scenarios could be that PE will secure its major assets and promote others where they see fit. Because they will own the sport they could quite literally decide who's in and who's out, or who is vulnerable to relegation and who isn't.

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

It's not just front money as you call it. But hey... I've seen 70 years.  I'm sanguine about my future.   People younger than me are the ones to stop think about the sterility of their rugby league future without investment.

In stark terms, I think your general sentiment is right.

To contrast with yourself I'm 23. I've never seen a full Wembley for the likes of Offiah or Davies playing for GB. I've not seen a Kangaroos tour. I've not seen a full Wembley for the Challenge Cup Final. Those epic moments from the game's past are just historic events for me and sadly, the way the game is going, could be unlikely to ever be repeated for me or my future children in our lifetimes without serious and major turnarounds. That is the serious problem the game faces.

[Scotchy1]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Quite, the scenarios could be that PE will secure its major assets and promote others where they see fit. Because they will own the sport they could quite literally decide who's in and who's out, or who is vulnerable to relegation and who isn't.

Even then, all that is within the gift of the game now. If it so wished. 

From whats being put out it seems a complete none starter. Not just because it doesn't make sense to you or I but why would a leeds or sts sign up to this? There seems literally no benefit to them for this structure.

 

As I said earlier. If you were talking about the international  game. Absolutely. Spend £50m over the next 10 years on building the international game and you could see massive growth where everyone wins. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Scotchy1 said:

Even then, all that is within the gift of the game now. If it so wished. 

From whats being put out it seems a complete none starter. Not just because it doesn't make sense to you or I but why would a leeds or sts sign up to this? There seems literally no benefit to them for this structure

Exactly, but once again it seems the game and its leaders are unwilling to actually do the deed themselves and instead create a Private Equity bogeyman.

I think someone said similar earlier in this thread. Saints, Leeds, Wigan, Hull, Catalans and Wire have no need to have anything like this. Even Huddersfield and KR really. Like I said I really don't know what the money could be used for, except some mass waves of development officers etc which even then shouldn't need the pro game to sell out to PE for.

[ATLANTISMAN]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

The All Blacks are looking at it because they've lost a shedload of money this year and despite being consistently strong on field and having a reasonable following outside of their home country, they're still limited by representing New Zealand and its relatively low 5 million people.

I agree though that PE has potential.

Totally spot on T try selling international (Outside of a shirt deal like Nike)  sponsorship for the All Blacks to a NZ audience its impossible.

P 

[M j M]

29 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

In stark terms, I think your general sentiment is right.

To contrast with yourself I'm 23. I've never seen a full Wembley for the likes of Offiah or Davies playing for GB. I've not seen a Kangaroos tour. I've not seen a full Wembley for the Challenge Cup Final. Those epic moments from the game's past are just historic events for me and sadly, the way the game is going, could be unlikely to ever be repeated for me or my future children in our lifetimes without serious and major turnarounds. That is the serious problem the game faces.

Let's not whitewash the past. Wembley wasn't full for those 1990s test matches. In fact international crowds are at a relative high right now.

[jamescolin]

Go back to the old days and have one league. Cut out all the different arguments. Lancashire v Lancashire clubs and Yorkshire v Yorkshire clubs, plus 4 games against teams from other county.. Clubs outside of these counties to be assigned as a  Yorks or Lancs club. Top eight play off.

[Big Picture]

6 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

In stark terms, I think your general sentiment is right.

To contrast with yourself I'm 23. I've never seen a full Wembley for the likes of Offiah or Davies playing for GB. I've not seen a Kangaroos tour. I've not seen a full Wembley for the Challenge Cup Final. Those epic moments from the game's past are just historic events for me and sadly, the way the game is going, could be unlikely to ever be repeated for me or my future children in our lifetimes without serious and major turnarounds. That is the serious problem the game faces.

Being a member of the younger generation so to speak, what do you think is the reason why so many others of your generation aren't as interested in the sport as their parents and grandparents were?