37 of 42 back IMG’s proposal

[GUBRATS]

Just now, DI Keith Fowler said:

I don't support Wigan you nitwit. 

You look like a Wigan fan 

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

And all those clubs have one thing in common ? 

If you're going to attempt an answer , at least read the question first Tommy ,otherwise it makes you look stupid 

You didn't read the original post pal, and are now complaining about something never said!?!

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

You didn't read the original post pal, and are now complaining about something never said!?!

All those you quoted don't rent their stadiums , they either own outright or lease and run them , that's where the difference lies , you know this though , but choose to pretend it doesn't make a difference 

I'll look forward to all the fun of the Headingley ' fan zone ' when I visit this year , what will they have on ? , Will it be ? , I bet it'll be Beer 

[whatmichaelsays]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

All those you quoted don't rent their stadiums , they either own outright or lease and run them , that's where the difference lies , you know this though , but choose to pretend it doesn't make a difference 

I'll look forward to all the fun of the Headingley ' fan zone ' when I visit this year , what will they have on ? , Will it be ? , I bet it'll be Beer 

What is it you actually want from this exchange Grubs?

Those that can, should. Because heaven forbid, they might actually make attending rugby league more attractive to more people and just might make some money in the process.

Those that can't? Well, that sounds like a Leigh problem....

[DI Keith Fowler]

10 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You look like a Wigan fan 

I support Widnes, who are in a council owned ground where we don't get the bar receipts and aren't allowed to run any fan parks outside the ground. Yet I'm still able to think what another club is doing is good, I like Hull KRs attempt too.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I support Widnes, who are in a council owned ground where we don't get the bar receipts and aren't allowed to run any fan parks outside the ground. Yet I'm still able to think what another club is doing is good, I like Hull KRs attempt too.

Me too 

[Tommygilf]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

All those you quoted don't rent their stadiums , they either own outright or lease and run them , that's where the difference lies , you know this though , but choose to pretend it doesn't make a difference 

I'll look forward to all the fun of the Headingley ' fan zone ' when I visit this year , what will they have on ? , Will it be ? , I bet it'll be Beer 

If you can't, you can't. Ownership of stadium doesn't actually have to hinder this, given it is of course Wigan we are talking about initially.

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

If you can't, you can't. Ownership of stadium doesn't actually have to hinder this, given it is of course Wigan we are talking about initially.

It would have ' hindered ' Wigan if they hadn't been fortunate enough to have a council owned facility next door to the stadium they use , because if there hadn't or the council decided they wouldn't lease it to them , they'd have done ' naff all ' 

[GUBRATS]

So the general consensus is that to improve the ' match day experience ' you need  

And lots of it , I hope somebody tells IMG

[Tommygilf]

22 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It would have ' hindered ' Wigan if they hadn't been fortunate enough to have a council owned facility next door to the stadium they use , because if there hadn't or the council decided they wouldn't lease it to them , they'd have done ' naff all ' 

So not owning your ground is a problem until it isn't. Excellent thing to establish.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I don't support Wigan

Don't worry I won't tell anyone!

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

On 03/01/2023 at 17:58, Man of Kent said:

With the IMG deal, their setting up a unit in Leeds and producing the C4 coverage, couldn’t Super League effectively bring production in-house? That would make it a more attractive proposition to broadcasters - not just Sky.

And if it meant losing the Baz ‘n’ Tez ‘n’ Phil’s 1990s ex-Wigan fest, even better.

Possibly. Sky would pay more as no production costs. 

It's tricky- for £15k or so you can get a good I follow 4 camera production- at a quality sky would probably broadcast (certainly on red button). 

For a proper broadcast your looking at much more- 12 cameras minimum, sound engineers, a full production team. Cost is multi millions across a season 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

Another leading local entrepreneur joins the Hull KR board, as the club resets for the IMG era.

“As MKM, we have been supporting Hull City Football Club for over 20 years, and it’s time we had a presence closer to our base in the East to compliment it. Big changes are coming to how the league is run, and I’m excited by the plans the club has in embracing them.”

But I’m sure the usual suspects on here will say IMG aren’t a factor, despite the direct quote! 

The future’s bright, the future’s red & white 

 

[steve oates]

41 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Another leading local entrepreneur joins the Hull KR board, as the club resets for the IMG era.

“As MKM, we have been supporting Hull City Football Club for over 20 years, and it’s time we had a presence closer to our base in the East to compliment it. Big changes are coming to how the league is run, and I’m excited by the plans the club has in embracing them.”

But I’m sure the usual suspects on here will say IMG aren’t a factor, despite the direct quote! 

With respect the direct quote includes Hull City who have been in trouble in recent years to the anger and dismay of the fans, whether the working man or the big business owners. Equally HKR have whilst in Superleague suffered relegation something rich backers do not want, Hull City recently were relegated to League one IIRC.

The "big changes" may well refer to the "closed shop" we are looking at where MKM can be sure that there will be no relegation and they can be assured as they watch Rovers games from the luxurious directors facilities, they won't be "going down" again. The closed shop idea isn't new at all, we had that some time ago, and so you can't say "it's IMG what done it". More likely the SL bosses told IMG to do it, to deflect those against such a move having a go at them

Do it they did and now they seem to have wandered off.  Maybe they have served their main purpose for now and there is not much else to do......

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, steve oates said:

With respect the direct quote includes Hull City who have been in trouble in recent years to the anger and dismay of the fans, whether the working man or the big business owners. Equally HKR have whilst in Superleague suffered relegation something rich backers do not want, Hull City recently were relegated to League one IIRC.

The "big changes" may well refer to the "closed shop" we are looking at where MKM can be sure that there will be no relegation and they can be assured as they watch Rovers games from the luxurious directors facilities, they won't be "going down" again. The closed shop idea isn't new at all, we had that some time ago, and so you can't say "it's IMG what done it". More likely the SL bosses told IMG to do it, to deflect those against such a move having a go at them

Do it they did and now they seem to have wandered off.  Maybe they have served their main purpose for now and there is not much else to do......

When do you return to your home reality?

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

27 minutes ago, steve oates said:

With respect the direct quote includes Hull City who have been in trouble in recent years to the anger and dismay of the fans, whether the working man or the big business owners. Equally HKR have whilst in Superleague suffered relegation something rich backers do not want, Hull City recently were relegated to League one IIRC.

The "big changes" may well refer to the "closed shop" we are looking at where MKM can be sure that there will be no relegation and they can be assured as they watch Rovers games from the luxurious directors facilities, they won't be "going down" again. The closed shop idea isn't new at all, we had that some time ago, and so you can't say "it's IMG what done it". More likely the SL bosses told IMG to do it, to deflect those against such a move having a go at them

Do it they did and now they seem to have wandered off.  Maybe they have served their main purpose for now and there is not much else to do......

I literally included that quote for you Steve, and tick tock tick tock here you come 

You can agree or disagree with IMG's role, or plans, whatever. That's all gravy. But you can't pretend black is white and this isn't a direct consequence, no matter how hard you wriggle. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

19 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Do it they did and now they seem to have wandered off.  Maybe they have served their main purpose for now and there is not much else to do......

Continually amazed by people thinking because they're not getting personal updates there's nothing happening behind the scenes. Rugby League commercial which is the body in which IMG will see most influence took the reins, er 4 days ago.

The only thing you've heard is the things they needed agreement of the clubs on, which is the structure.

I posted a thread a few months back with an interview with the head of IMG, it's not detailed but it gives you a flavour of what they're going to be looking at. They don't need to consult the clubs on the majority of this so you're not going to be reading about it in this weeks League Express, it doesn't mean it's not happening. 

IMG President Podcast

[sweaty craiq]

1 hour ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Another leading local entrepreneur joins the Hull KR board, as the club resets for the IMG era.

“As MKM, we have been supporting Hull City Football Club for over 20 years, and it’s time we had a presence closer to our base in the East to compliment it. Big changes are coming to how the league is run, and I’m excited by the plans the club has in embracing them.”

But I’m sure the usual suspects on here will say IMG aren’t a factor, despite the direct quote! 

The future’s bright, the future’s red & white 

 

Potentially great news for HKR.

[DI Keith Fowler]

Reading back on that podcast, obviously we now know licensing in a form is back in, but I'm intrigued by the role of the experts they might provide.

So currently we have someone sat at the RFL (or SL depending on how it's split) responsible for lets say digital marketing. We're not a big sport, we don't pay all that well, so who do we attract? People looking for experience, people who wouldn't be hired by bigger firms etc.

IMG are market leaders, they have people in these roles who are experts. We will likely benefit more from 10 hours of their time a week than having someone inexperienced doing 40 hours a week directly employed. I think that's what was alluded to by "stop trying to do everything in house". We don't necessarily need someone employed by the RFL to head things, we can receive (at no cost given the terms of the partnership) expertise from people much more qualified. 

I think that's quite an exciting prospect, we could be doing this right across the board (digital content, major events, TV production, branding etc.), even if it's just guidance it's expertise we don't currently have within the sport.

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, steve oates said:

 

The "big changes" may well refer to the "closed shop" we are looking at where MKM can be sure that there will be no relegation and they can be assured as they watch Rovers games from the luxurious directors facilities, they won't be "going down" again. The closed shop idea isn't new at all, we had that some time ago, and so you can't say "it's IMG what done it". More likely the SL bosses told IMG to do it, to deflect those against such a move having a go at them

Do it they did and now they seem to have wandered off.  Maybe they have served their main purpose for now and there is not much else to do......

Can you provide any evidence where IMG or the RFL have stated there will be any sort of 'closed shop' ?

By definition a close shop is where there is no further entry into that particular group - something IMG have actually stated isn't part of their plan. They've stated that any club who achieves a Grade A license will be exempt from relegation from SL, so ANY club can get themselves promoted and gain an A license - so not a closed shop at all if its open to everyone. The only thing that will stop a club from gaining an A license is the clubs themselves and their ability to meet the criteria set.

That may change in the future if we ever get to a point where the number of A License clubs exceeds the number where the available funding can sustain the top flight, but lets face it, its highly unlikely thats going to happen in the next decade by the time IMG's current contract expires. 

[Toby Chopra]

1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said:

Can you provide any evidence where IMG or the RFL have stated there will be any sort of 'closed shop' ?

By definition a close shop is where there is no further entry into that particular group - something IMG have actually stated isn't part of their plan. They've stated that any club who achieves a Grade A license will be exempt from relegation from SL, so ANY club can get themselves promoted and gain an A license - so not a closed shop at all if its open to everyone. The only thing that will stop a club from gaining an A license is the clubs themselves and their ability to meet the criteria set.

That may change in the future if we ever get to a point where the number of A License clubs exceeds the number where the available funding can sustain the top flight, but lets face it, its highly unlikely thats going to happen in the next decade by the time IMG's current contract expires. 

Indeed. We currently have - at best - 6 Cat A clubs. If by some miracle in a decade's time we have 12, then European rugby league will have been transformed for the good, and no-one will be worrying about closed shops, as the sport will be thriving. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

52 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Reading back on that podcast, obviously we now know licensing in a form is back in, but I'm intrigued by the role of the experts they might provide.

So currently we have someone sat at the RFL (or SL depending on how it's split) responsible for lets say digital marketing. We're not a big sport, we don't pay all that well, so who do we attract? People looking for experience, people who wouldn't be hired by bigger firms etc.

IMG are market leaders, they have people in these roles who are experts. We will likely benefit more from 10 hours of their time a week than having someone inexperienced doing 40 hours a week directly employed. I think that's what was alluded to by "stop trying to do everything in house". We don't necessarily need someone employed by the RFL to head things, we can receive (at no cost given the terms of the partnership) expertise from people much more qualified. 

I think that's quite an exciting prospect, we could be doing this right across the board (digital content, major events, TV production, branding etc.), even if it's just guidance it's expertise we don't currently have within the sport.

This is precisely why I've been onboard with this from the get-go

What rugby league needs to grow isn't the capital that private equity would bring, it is expertise that the sport doesn't have. I'm much happier we've basically sold an equity stake in the game in exchange for IMG's expertise, than if we'd sold say 25% of future TV rights in exchange for £20m today. That's money that owners would have just p*ssed up the wall on salaries or other things that didn't create long term value, just as they did the first time in 1995.

This model is the perfect strategy for growth. Doesn't guarantee success, nothing does, but gives us the best chance.

 

[GUBRATS]

56 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Indeed. We currently have - at best - 6 Cat A clubs. If by some miracle in a decade's time we have 12, then European rugby league will have been transformed for the good, and no-one will be worrying about closed shops, as the sport will be thriving. 

The sport , or the cat A clubs ?

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Can you provide any evidence where IMG or the RFL have stated there will be any sort of 'closed shop' ?

By definition a close shop is where there is no further entry into that particular group - something IMG have actually stated isn't part of their plan. They've stated that any club who achieves a Grade A license will be exempt from relegation from SL, so ANY club can get themselves promoted and gain an A license - so not a closed shop at all if its open to everyone. The only thing that will stop a club from gaining an A license is the clubs themselves and their ability to meet the criteria set.

That may change in the future if we ever get to a point where the number of A License clubs exceeds the number where the available funding can sustain the top flight, but lets face it, its highly unlikely thats going to happen in the next decade by the time IMG's current contract expires. 

You were doing fine until " criteria set " 

[newbe]

Surely IMG should clarify and confirm there measures for 2024 season now. It will at least let clubs plan now, no matter were clubs  think should be.