NRL Laying Groundwork For NZ Expansion With New SKY NZ Broadcast Deal.

[Copa]

2 hours ago, Pulga said:

$160m is the new NZ NRL deal. 70% increase. Amazing really.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/opinion/phil-rothfield/saint-sinner-shoosh-phil-gould-v-peter-fitzsimons-feud-rears-its-ugly-head/news-story/c1d2e296642039f0fc89782a7da0cac9

A little bit of competition to get the rights and the value increases dramatically..

[Pulga]

Interestingly, the NRL in NZ deal is only $1m less per year than Australian RU's new deal.

Shows where the games sit. Australia has 6x the population....

Does that mean RL in NZ is 6X more popular than RU in Aus?

[Damien]

And people try and claim that a 2nd NZ NRL team wouldn't add value to the TV deal.

[The Rocket]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

And people try and claim that a 2nd NZ NRL team wouldn't add value to the TV deal.

And that`s the whole point of this deal, they haven`t even added another side yet and they`re getting $32m, would $40+ be out of the question if another team entered the comp in 2028.

This goes further to my argument that where ever there is a professional union competition League should be able to field a team out of those areas, I`m not talking taking over, just something that can provide an attractive alternative, a sideline interest for union fans to hang their hat on. Like what the Storm do in Melbourne with afl fans and the Warriors in NZ.

[Damien]

I really hope the NRL use this increase to really put back into New Zealand RL. For a fraction of the increase they could fund a semi-professional competition in NZ and increase development there quite substantially. This would only benefit the NRL by providing another source of players and increase interest in RL and the NRL, which will pay dividends down the line in future TV deals. It would also lay the foundations for NRL expansion down the line.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

38 minutes ago, Damien said:

I really hope the NRL use this increase to really put back into New Zealand RL. For a fraction of the increase they could fund a semi-professional competition in NZ and increase development there quite substantially. This would only benefit the NRL by providing another source of players and increase interest in RL and the NRL, which will pay dividends down the line in future TV deals. It would also lay the foundations for NRL expansion down the line.

I don’t see how a semi-professional competition in NZ would help RL in that country?

Its been proven in the past with the lion red cup and batercard cup that these competitions aren’t supported by the NZ public and lose huge amounts of money. Why not just run another professional NRL club with NZ2 in Christchurch ?

[Cumbrian Mackem]

55 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

And that`s the whole point of this deal, they haven`t even added another side yet and they`re getting $32m, would $40+ be out of the question if another team entered the comp in 2028.

This goes further to my argument that where ever there is a professional union competition League should be able to field a team out of those areas, I`m not talking taking over, just something that can provide an attractive alternative, a sideline interest for union fans to hang their hat on. Like what the Storm do in Melbourne with afl fans and the Warriors in NZ.

6+ years to plan for NZ2 is more than enough to sort out u16’&u18’s junior sides, owners/investors, sponsors and a home stadium etc.

The NRL could take x amount of games to Christchurch a year for the next 6 uears to keep the interest going and bubbling along until the NZ2 franchise officially joins the NRL.

[Damien]

21 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

I don’t see how a semi-professional competition in NZ would help RL in that country?

Its been proven in the past with the lion red cup and batercard cup that these competitions aren’t supported by the NZ public and lose huge amounts of money. Why not just run another professional NRL club with NZ2 in Christchurch ?

Because it would expand the game and the pie in New Zealand. It doesn't have to cost big money and that really shouldn't be the point. What it would cost is pennies in the grand scheme of things and the NRL takes far more from New Zealand than it puts back in, that was before this increase. If New Zealand got its fair share it could fund it easily and then some.

I also don't see why its a binary choice between that and another NRL club in New Zealand, it should be both.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

Because it would expand the game and the pie in New Zealand. It doesn't have to cost big money and that really shouldn't be the point. What it would cost is pennies in the grand scheme of things and the NRL takes far more from New Zealand than it puts back in, that was before this increase. If New Zealand got its fair share it could fund it easily and then some.

I also don't see why its a binary choice between that and another NRL club in New Zealand, it should be both.

For me it’s about getting more bang for your buck and I believe that running a South Island jersey flegg and sg ball cup sides along with a NSW cup side would be a better option and better use of money than running a National semi-professional competition.

[kiwis 13 6]

Spark bid for NZ NRL TV rights, increasing the amount the current holders Sky NZ paid. $32 million/year could easily pay 2 NRL club grants of $12.5 million/year with $7 million left over in profit. I hope NRL finally reinvest some profits into NZ domestic game... few Australians would know or perhaps care? about the level of poverty that effects rugby league in NZ, it would shock a lot of people! i think unless NRL is pressured by media attention they will continue to do as they have done for 27 years. Spend the millions made from NZ TV rights profit in Australia, on Australian youth development, bunker referee's or administrators at NRL headquarters in Sydney.

Lion Red Cup NZ national competition ran from 1994-1996. A brewery rivalry saw DB sponsor the Auckland Warriors to enter the Australian competition in 1995. Lion Red a long term sponsor of NZRL, sponsored NZRL to set up a national competition in 1994. At the time club competitions in Auckland, Wellington and Canterbury had semi professional elements. Up that time, NZ Provincial Rep teams were selected from local clubs for a short mid season NZ Representative competition or for one off games against touring international teams. Local clubs in regional competitions viewed the Lion Red Cup as rivals competing for players and often refused to play curtain raisers to the Lion Red Cup. Auckland NZ biggest Province was divided into 4 sides, Wellington & Canterbury were both divided into 2 sides. These sides lacked history or existing supporters and had unfamiliar names. By 1996 ARL VS Super league war happened, impacting all of rugby league. NZRL was involved in financial mismanagement and Lion Red stopped sponsoring the competition.

I attended 1st round of the Lion Red Cup in 1994, watching the North Harbour at Birkenhead War Memorial, back when the ground had a grandstand. Each box of the sponsors product had a free ticket to a game you could tear off the box. Was a decent crowd that day I'd estimate over 1,000. I actually went to a couple of Loin Red cup games that year. 

Ill save the exciting story of how Batercard cup folded for another post LOL...

[unapologetic pedant]

8 hours ago, kiwis 13 6 said:

The Lion Red Cup National Competition ran for 3 years from 1994-1996. 

These sides lacked any history or connection to Provincial sides and they all had unfamiliar names. 

I was following the preparations for that competition through the pages of the NZ edition of "Rugby League Week".

When they started announcing the team names, "Christchurch City Shiners" was the one that really sowed the seeds of doubt.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

10 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I was following the preparations for that competition through the pages of the NZ edition of "Rugby League Week".

When they started announcing the team names, "Christchurch City Shiners" was the one that really sowed the seeds of doubt.

“Christchurch city shiners” is truly awful.

[kiwis 13 6]

NZ National Competition the Bartercard Cup ran from 2000 - 20007. Over that time it featured - Auckland clubs, merged Auckland clubs, a Bay of Plenty club side Ngongotaha were in the 1st season. Provincial rep sides from Canterbury, Manawatu, Northland, Waicoa. Wellington had Wainuiomata club and a combined Porirua side, both withdrew & were replaced one Provincial rep side the Wellington Orca's. NZRL was involved in fraud, mismanagement and was $1.7 million dollars in debt. NZRL announced that Bartercard cup would finish at the end of 2007. It was replaced in 2008 by a short end of season NZ Provincial Competition. Which has now become the 4 team end of season NZRL premiership competition.

I can remember attending two Bartercard cup games both at the Basin reserve in Wellington. I saw Wellington get upset by the Northern Storm. I also watched Wellington play Mt Albert which was a competitive game that Mt Albert won. On both occasions the crowd would have been around 100 - 200 people. Over the years I watched games on Sky TV or Maori TV. Below are some links.

Canterbury Bulls Winning the inaugural NZ Bartercard Cup Final

https://canterburyrugbyleague.co.nz/2019/09/flashback-friday-bulls-2000-bartercard-card-triumph/

2002 NZ Bartercard Cup final, Mt Albert Vs Hibiscus Coast, was one of the last games to be played at Carlaw Park

 

2007 NZ Bartercard Cup Final Auckland Lions Vs North Harbour, this was the last year of the Bartercard Cup.

 

in part 3 the saga continues, we look back to see what can be learned and look towards the future...

[BrisbaneRhino]

It doesn't help expansion when you've got Mal Meninga trying to get Jerome Luai to switch to Australia. I think Gus Gould has finally got it - he's now talking about Origin players not needing to have to be available for Australian selection. At least he recognises how the demographics in the NRL have changed and that Origin cannot be a bar to expansion in NZ and the Pacific Islands.

[frank]

There won't be a 2nd  NZ team in  the NRL. The Aussies  have no intention of commiting  themselves to that.

They are only interested in what they can take out  of NZ not putting anything in. There is talk about  getting rid of the women's team due to the fact it is costing them.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

2 hours ago, frank said:

There won't be a 2nd  NZ team in  the NRL. The Aussies  have no intention of commiting  themselves to that.

They are only interested in what they can take out  of NZ not putting anything in. There is talk about  getting rid of the women's team due to the fact it is costing them.

You can’t compare the women’s game to a 2nd NZ NRL franchise although I do agree with you that 99% of the time the NRL’s thinking and decision making are based on $$$ and what’s not necessarily good for the game.

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

NRL’s thinking and decision making are based on $$$ and what’s not necessarily good for the game.

Mack, money is what is good for the game, with money you can do everything, and if you`ve got enough of it you could even put a team in Perth and pay for it.

No mate, it is all about money, and the more you have of it the better. They say it`s what makes the world go around apparently.

[Copa]

4 hours ago, frank said:

There won't be a 2nd  NZ team in  the NRL. The Aussies  have no intention of commiting  themselves to that.

They are only interested in what they can take out  of NZ not putting anything in. There is talk about  getting rid of the women's team due to the fact it is costing them.

The NRL CEO has talked about the possibility of a second NZ team. I doubt he was deliberately lying.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

2 minutes ago, Copa said:

The NRL CEO has talked about the possibility of a second NZ team. I doubt he was deliberately lying.

Past NRL CEO’s have also talked about the possibility of a 2nd NZ team along with a Perth team and expansion as a whole and yet we are still waiting to see such teams.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

9 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Mack, money is what is good for the game, with money you can do everything, and if you`ve got enough of it you could even put a team in Perth and pay for it.

No mate, it is all about money, and the more you have of it the better. They say it`s what makes the world go around apparently.

Money is indeed good for the game but only if you are willing to re-invest a certain amount of said money back into the game in order to grow the game even more.

[kiwis 13 6]

4 hours ago, frank said:

There won't be a 2nd  NZ team in  the NRL. The Aussies  have no intention of commiting  themselves to that.

They are only interested in what they can take out  of NZ not putting anything in. There is talk about  getting rid of the women's team due to the fact it is costing them.

Unfortunately I think your right, I also doubt that NRL will reinvest any significant amount of profit from NZ TV rights back into grassroots game in NZ. NRL in its various incarnations have a 27 year history of putting nothing from NZ TV right profits back into NZ grassroots. The NRL has now already got more money for the NZ TV rights, which has been quoted as $160 over 5 years or $32 million/year. That is enough money to fund 2 & 1/2 NRL club grants of $12.5 million/year. IF the NRL just pockets all the profits and continues to spend all of NZ sourced profits to fund Australain based player development pathways ,Bunker referees, NRL administrators salaries...it will mean NRL have gone to a sickening level of greed, treating NZ as a personnel ATM.

[Cumbrian Mackem]

5 minutes ago, kiwis 13 6 said:

Unfortunately I think your right, I also doubt that NRL will reinvest any significant amount of profit from NZ TV rights back into grassroots game in NZ. NRL in its various incarnations have a 27 year history of putting nothing from NZ TV right profits back into NZ grassroots. The NRL has now already got more money for the NZ TV rights, which has been quoted as $160 over 5 years or $32 million/year. That is enough money to fund 2 & 1/2 NRL club grants of $12.5 million/year. IF the NRL just pockets all the profits and continues to spend all of NZ sourced profits to fund Australain based player development pathways ,Bunker referees, NRL administrators salaries...it really would greed of a sickening level.

What does the NZRL have to say if at all anything about this?

[The Rocket]

4 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Money is indeed good for the game but only if you are willing to re-invest a certain amount of said money back into the game in order to grow the game even more.

I don`t think that anyone could say that not enough money is being spent on junior development in Oz, whether we are getting enough bang for our buck is debatable. In response to a paper produced by Souths CEO Blake Solly just recently, on that very topic, the NRL has set up a task force to address some of the I thought valid points made in that  paper.

With regard to the Kiwi Land thing, I totally agree with your thoughts the other day on the development of junior pathways, as opposed to semi-professional competitions. Having wages that are equal to or higher than other sports at the professional level would probably be the best form of investment at that level.

 

7 minutes ago, kiwis 13 6 said:

That is enough money to fund 2 & 1/2 NRL club grants of $12.5 million/year.

It costs $30m minimum to run an NRL club, that`s $17m on top of the grant. It`s finding someone with that extra $17m/yr on a sustainable basis that is the challenge, same as Perth, same as anywhere.

[kiwis 13 6]

8 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

What does the NZRL have to say if at all anything about this?

https://nzrl.co.nz/nzrl-announce-a-long-term-partnership-with-sky-and-the-nrl-through-to-the-end-of-2027/  

Direct Quote from NZRL CEO from the above link

Greg Peters, NZRL CEO says: “Sky has been a long-term supporter of Rugby League for over 25 years now, and the nature of this renewed partnership enhances and deepens this to a new level. 

“Against the backdrop of our current sponsorship agreement, coupled with added value over the next seven years, this enables us to support the game in ways we haven’t seen before, from grassroots to high performance.

“This kind of partnership signifies a new era and is a real milestone for Rugby League. Thank you to Sky Sport for sharing our vision and supporting us in such a significant capacity.”

 

[The Great Dane]

On 01/07/2021 at 10:33, kiwis 13 6 said:

Unfortunately I think your right, I also doubt that NRL will reinvest any significant amount of profit from NZ TV rights back into grassroots game in NZ. NRL in its various incarnations have a 27 year history of putting nothing from NZ TV right profits back into NZ grassroots. The NRL has now already got more money for the NZ TV rights, which has been quoted as $160 over 5 years or $32 million/year. That is enough money to fund 2 & 1/2 NRL club grants of $12.5 million/year. IF the NRL just pockets all the profits and continues to spend all of NZ sourced profits to fund Australain based player development pathways ,Bunker referees, NRL administrators salaries...it will mean NRL have gone to a sickening level of greed, treating NZ as a personnel ATM.

I don't have time to look up exact amounts, it'd be in the annual report somewhere (probably bundled with the states and affiliates expenses). Gus Gould was even talking about how he got them to double it earlier this year (though whether that is double pre or post covid figures IDK).

The fact that without direct overview from the NRL/ARLC the vast majority of that investment has disappeared into a money pit, to the point that you have so little to show for it that you don't even realise that you are getting the grants in the first place, is as much the NZRL's fault as it is the NRL's for giving them the money in the first place. It is also exactly what everybody with a brain warned would happen.

On top of that the NRL fund the Warriors, the NRL clubs develop every pro-RL player from NZ (except for those that come through RU systems and the handful that come though the ESL), they are the only thing that keeps RL in the mainstream in NZ, etc, etc, to the point that RL effectively wouldn't be a major sport in NZ anymore if it wasn't for NRL intervention.

BTW, aside from direct grants to the local governing bodies in most cases, most of what I said about NZ is/was true (pre-covid) for all the major PI nations except PNG to an extent, and that focus on development in the PI's and NZ has had significant effects locally in Australia, particularly for the local grassroots and professional pathways.