37 of 42 back IMG’s proposal

[The Masked Poster]

Bill Fallowfield was a disaster for RL and I *think* he was an active RU player. I believe he once had a conversation with Prince Phillip and he (Philip) commented on how he disliked the PTB. I think I'm correct in saying that this was the instigator for a few trial games of RL that were akin to a mix of RL-RU. ie RL played with 15 players or RU played with 13 etc 

[Toby Chopra]

13 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/will-img-succeed-where-others-have-failed-since-the-1970s/

Interesting look back. 

Fascinating piece, thanks. I had no idea about Caine. 

[Adelaide Tiger]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

Fascinating piece, thanks. I had no idea about Caine. 

Well after reading about Mr Caine I can only assume ‘Not a lot of people know that ‘ … I’ll get my coat!

[Oxford]

On 09/12/2022 at 17:21, Wakefield Ram said:

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/will-img-succeed-where-others-have-failed-since-the-1970s/

Interesting look back. 

 

On 09/12/2022 at 18:01, Jughead said:

Good article and many things are as present today as they were fifty years ago. 

As I said earlier the lessons of the past are always important. They do not illuminate or highlight a sport held back by Liverpool City and Blackpool Borough but a game let down by top sides, influential chairmen and dire decision making.

Most initiatives crashed on the rocks of those with power, influence and a Total inabilty to push the game forward through crushing self-interest.

To imagine that IMG have been brought in by people who are any different in outlook seems far fetched to say the least.

[Man of Kent]

Good article but what @Tides Of Historyhas missed (as Labour types often do) is IMG’s profit motive. 

The Caine and other reports were just that: reports. IMG is effectively running the game to make money from it. 

[briggyq]

I don't see anything that's really groundbreaking in the proposals but maybe a fresh set of people can implement them better, who knows but we've been here before for much of it and it failed but we shall see

[Adelaide Tiger]

3 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Good article but what @Tides Of Historyhas missed (as Labour types often do) is IMG’s profit motive. 

The Caine and other reports were just that: reports. IMG is effectively running the game to make money from it. 

I struggle to understand the issue about IMG making money out of the game.

Correct me if I am wrong.  AFAIK for IMG to make money out of the game then that means that the game is reaping far more money than it is currently attracting.  Is that not a positive?

Or would you prefer that IMG, or any other consultant, have nothing to do with the game?  If so how do you suggest the game increases income through its own endeavours?

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, briggyq said:

I don't see anything that's really groundbreaking in the proposals but maybe a fresh set of people can implement them better, who knows but we've been here before for much of it and it failed but we shall see

Its evolution rather than revolution, at least that is how it appears on paper. Some will appreciate that, some will despair at it. 

Whether the game is past the point where such a methodology will work is a worthy point of discussion. As is whether the evolutionary method has had to be adopted due to the internal structures of the Sport.

One of the most common phrases I've seen on this forum on topics such as this during the years I've been here is "shuffling deckchairs on the titanic". I sincerely hope IMGs involvement will amount to more than that!

[DI Keith Fowler]

4 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Good article but what @Tides Of Historyhas missed (as Labour types often do) is IMG’s profit motive. 

The Caine and other reports were just that: reports. IMG is effectively running the game to make money from it. 

Caine were paid and it was a multi year deal that the RFL ended early thus they lost out on profit due to performance.

[JohnM]

On 09/12/2022 at 17:21, Wakefield Ram said:

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/will-img-succeed-where-others-have-failed-since-the-1970s/

Interesting look back. 

Yes indeed it was, covering a time when my following the game was diverted by other circumstances.

Specifically on Eddie Waring, he could have contributed more as a pundit and post- match interviewer rather than as a commentator. I'd say the same about Ray French, too. Both hugely experienced and knowledgeable people respected inside the game. Commentator though? Hmmmm.

Edited December 11, 2022 by JohnM

[Man of Kent]

3 hours ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

I struggle to understand the issue about IMG making money out of the game.

Correct me if I am wrong.  AFAIK for IMG to make money out of the game then that means that the game is reaping far more money than it is currently attracting.  Is that not a positive?

Or would you prefer that IMG, or any other consultant, have nothing to do with the game?  If so how do you suggest the game increases income through its own endeavours?

You’ve misunderstood me, chief.  I’m massively in favour of this precisely because IMG has skin in the game, the profit motive.

The article tries to compare consultancy reports of yore with the IMG deal but it’s a case of apples & oranges.

[Adelaide Tiger]

5 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

You’ve misunderstood me, chief.  I’m massively in favour of this precisely because IMG has skin in the game, the profit motive.

The article tries to compare consultancy reports of yore with the IMG deal but it’s a case of apples & oranges.

Fair enough.  I have just re-read the final sentence from your post that I replied to and I can see how the sentence can be viewed from differing angles.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

More news from East Hull this morning about how the club are getting the platform lined up to grow in the IMG era…

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/hull-kr-board-james-mcnicol-7919098.amp

 

[Oxford]

22 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

You’ve misunderstood me...........

Well, that's a first on this forum, whatever next?

[Angelic Cynic]

1 hour ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

More news from East Hull this morning about how the club are getting the platform lined up to grow in the IMG era…

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/hull-kr-board-james-mcnicol-7919098.amp

 

Yep.It is all about timing.When the Caine report was made,the 1970's Hull KR were relegated, and in trouble, until Millward took over.

The press report,today,mentions administration in the 1990's.

It seems to be going well for you,at this moment in time.

I wonder how much due diligence IMG do,and whether the whole history of each club is considered? 

Will financial mismanagement,or going into debt while achieving success,count against clubs? Probably not.Being in the right place,at the right time,may be all it takes...

 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

9 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Yep.It is all about timing.When the Caine report was made,the 1970's Hull KR were relegated, and in trouble, until Millward took over.

The press report,today,mentions administration in the 1990's.

It seems to be going well for you,at this moment in time.

I wonder how much due diligence IMG do,and whether the whole history of each club is considered? 

Will financial mismanagement,or going into debt while achieving success,count against clubs? Probably not.Being in the right place,at the right time,may be all it takes...

 

I guess you can either continually fight the battles of the past, looking back to times under different conditions with different people, or you can address the present with the resources, ideas and value proposition that you have today.

I vote for the latter, but then I’m an entrepreneur who does this for a living so what would I know

[DI Keith Fowler]

40 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Yep.It is all about timing.When the Caine report was made,the 1970's Hull KR were relegated, and in trouble, until Millward took over.

The press report,today,mentions administration in the 1990's.

It seems to be going well for you,at this moment in time.

I wonder how much due diligence IMG do,and whether the whole history of each club is considered? 

Will financial mismanagement,or going into debt while achieving success,count against clubs? Probably not.Being in the right place,at the right time,may be all it takes...

 

Absolutely IMG shouldn't be making decisions on which clubs fulfil criteria right now but instead based on where the clubs were 30+ years ago, that is the only fair and logical way to do it.

[gingerjon]

8 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Absolutely IMG shouldn't be making decisions on which clubs fulfil criteria right now but instead based on where the clubs were 30+ years ago, that is the only fair and logical way to do it.

Look, if it's good enough for Council Tax banding ...

[RigbyLuger]

1 hour ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Absolutely IMG shouldn't be making decisions on which clubs fulfil criteria right now but instead based on where the clubs were 30+ years ago, that is the only fair and logical way to do it.

That's what those clickbait merchants preparing their 432nd retread of "Why Bradford should be in Super League" articles hope. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

I think there is merit under a normal P&R system for promoting the team who got more points in a previous year. Fight me.

[dkw]

5 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

More news from East Hull this morning about how the club are getting the platform lined up to grow in the IMG era…

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/hull-kr-board-james-mcnicol-7919098.amp

 

There's 2 ways for clubs to react to this IMG thing, grasp the opportunity and attempt to grow with the situation, or throw their toys out the pram as they aren't happy with change or an expectation of some effort. Great to see Hull KR go with the former, hopefully others follow suit.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, dkw said:

There's 2 ways for clubs to react to this IMG thing, grasp the opportunity and attempt to grow with the situation, or throw their toys out the pram as they aren't happy with change or an expectation of some effort. Great to see Hull KR go with the former, hopefully others follow suit.

Absolutely. We should be using IMG’s 12 year commitment as 3rd party validation that Rugby League is a good long-term investment. In my real life we call it “social capital”, and the credibility could be priceless if we lean into it 

[north yorks trinity]

Social capital presumably depends on the general public being aware of IMG and holding them in high esteem. Whilst I appreciate that they appear to be an experienced multinational organisation with a large and diverse portfolio (or at least have a website suggesting this!), and this in itself may be a positive reason to be involved, I wonder if many people have actually heard of them. I hadn't, though accept it could just be my ignorance. I suspect though that the smallish number of people who know much about rugby league is greater than the number who know of IMG and that as such the game itself has more social capital than IMG. No idea if that's true, just my suspicion.

[Angelic Cynic]

16 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I guess you can either continually fight the battles of the past, looking back to times under different conditions with different people, or you can address the present with the resources, ideas and value proposition that you have today.

I vote for the latter, but then I’m an entrepreneur who does this for a living so what would I know

Mind how you go - I am aware of a number of entrepreneurs who vacillate between bankruptcy and wealth.

 

16 hours ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Absolutely IMG shouldn't be making decisions on which clubs fulfil criteria right now but instead based on where the clubs were 30+ years ago, that is the only fair and logical way to do it.

  Nothing is fair.But removing Toronto,because of non-payment when other clubs don't get removed because of non-payment isn't fair.Nor were mergers et al.

Judging clubs on top payments from a broadcast company against others who received lesser amounts from the same broadcast company over many,many years,is also not fair.

Nor is the stadium issue.Nor is those clubs that spent in relation to Licensing criteria while others didn't. 

It don't bother me none...But it ain't fair,or logical.

Why not base the sport on what happens on the pitch? That may be fair and logical...

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

11 hours ago, north yorks trinity said:

Social capital presumably depends on the general public being aware of IMG and holding them in high esteem. Whilst I appreciate that they appear to be an experienced multinational organisation with a large and diverse portfolio (or at least have a website suggesting this!), and this in itself may be a positive reason to be involved, I wonder if many people have actually heard of them. I hadn't, though accept it could just be my ignorance. I suspect though that the smallish number of people who know much about rugby league is greater than the number who know of IMG and that as such the game itself has more social capital than IMG. No idea if that's true, just my suspicion.

No, it’s not the general public I’m talking about. It’s key decision-makers in commercial organisations - from potential growth partners, possible sponsors, or media rights buyers. These are the people we need to attract over the next 2 years.

The product has always been good, “samplers” have always liked it, but we have underperformed commercially and also need the intermediaries required in order to be able to get more people to sample. Customer growth follows that.