Now is the time

[ATLANTISMAN]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Pure fantasy Mr Better, 

Twice you hope for "attracting a big investor" not once but 3 times in London and again twice more in France you've not got a snowballs in hell chance.

I don't know why all you fantasists who think that the game is going to be as successful anywhere else as it has been for the 128 years of its life believe its needs a radical change.

Get rid of P&R and introduce Franchising - which is going to happen under IMG but by a different name but it will be by the very same clubs that are now in existance, located in the sane places along the M62 and watch the lower divisions ebb away.

Morning Harry Outside of London (Mainly for its production line of juniors) i personally would 100% stick to traditional areas (France included teams in Paris etc are pure fantasy) The England brand can be used to take internationals outside of the heartlands and if the result is a few new amateur clubs then that's a positive.

Cornwall has a reasonable chance long term in the lower leagues.

American investment would be brilliant for some traditional clubs.

As for IMG it's just kicking the can down the road and I agree with you.

P

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Morning Harry Outside of London (Mainly for its production line of juniors) i personally would 100% stick to traditional areas (France included teams in Paris etc are pure fantasy) The England brand can be used to take internationals outside of the heartlands and if the result is a few new amateur clubs then that's a positive.

Cornwall has a reasonable chance long term in the lower leagues.

American investment would be brilliant for some traditional clubs.

As for IMG it's just kicking the can down the road and I agree with you.

P

You're dreaming in Technicolor if you think anyone from over here would invest in those small time traditional clubs.

They'd only be interested if they could be shown a way to make money from such investment, because over here owning a pro sports (whether in the major or minor leagues) is profitable.  That's why the franchise values are always rising year on year and why when one is sold it's invariably for more money than the current owners paid for it.

We agree that IMG won't turn things around, they simply don't have enough to work with for that.

[gingerjon]

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Get rid of P&R and introduce Franchising - which is going to happen under IMG but by a different name but it will be by the very same clubs that are now in existance, located in the sane places along the M62 and watch the lower divisions ebb away.

IMG's plan literally locks in the status quo. No more than two foreign clubs and no published pathway for a team outside the current RFL set up to even gain entry to League 1.

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

If I was a betting man my wager would be that IMG won't be around that long not even 50% of it, what they will get paid on is not any of the clubs buying into their system but the amount of newbies they can attract be that physically or through the many paying media outlets putting in extra monies. If we were back in the 60's or 70's when there was not the plethora of other activities available today they may have a chance, but we are in the main a provincial sport that >90% of its income is derived from, if IMG's methods can increase the proffits by 10% (which they will take if they last the course) they will have done extremely well, but I think long before the term is up they will realise they are "flogging a dead horse" and will cut their losses and scarper.

And I really do fear for the lower divisions longevity under IMG's methods.

Just my view of course.

Two points from that I suppose Harry.

1. I have a bit more faith in the game to succeed than you do! Other sports have done it, there's no prohibitive reason why we can't too.

2. I fear for the lower divisions (and the sport as a professional entity) if IMG's methods are not adopted. We've not brought them in because we are in a strong position, and its important we aren’t under any illusions about that.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Two points from that I suppose Harry.

1. I have a bit more faith in the game to succeed than you do! Other sports have done it, there's no prohibitive reason why we can't too.

2. I fear for the lower divisions (and the sport as a professional entity) if IMG's methods are not adopted. We've not brought them in because we are in a strong position, and its important we aren’t under any illusions about that.

I'm the same.....though it might be just some Magic Weekend positive feeling 

IMG do have a good track record and understand what will work (or at least ja e a better idea than us on this forum and the RFL ) 

[Damien]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Two points from that I suppose Harry.

1. I have a bit more faith in the game to succeed than you do! Other sports have done it, there's no prohibitive reason why we can't too.

2. I fear for the lower divisions (and the sport as a professional entity) if IMG's methods are not adopted. We've not brought them in because we are in a strong position, and its important we aren’t under any illusions about that.

The fact that there is now talk about Magic staying because some clubs want it, after IMG proposing to scrap based on the back of the fan survey and their observations, doesn't bode well as a first test.

[Tommygilf]

10 minutes ago, Damien said:

The fact that there is now talk about Magic staying because some clubs want it, after IMG proposing to scrap based on the back of the fan survey and their observations, doesn't bode well as a first test.

I think it couldn't be clearer from this weekend that Sky wanted it too, this isn't just some clubs.

I also think there has been a general downer on MW for a few years, probably since the Liverpool debacle, and some of that was unwarranted and built into a narrative.

Its very likely that MW will get a higher attendance than the Challenge cup final and engage more fans of different super league clubs this year. That isn't to be sniffed at, and I'm happy if opinions can be changed.

[GUBRATS]

Be interesting how it goes at Everton's new stadium in 2025

[Damien]

13 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think it couldn't be clearer from this weekend that Sky wanted it too, this isn't just some clubs.

I also think there has been a general downer on MW for a few years, probably since the Liverpool debacle, and some of that was unwarranted and built into a narrative.

Its very likely that MW will get a higher attendance than the Challenge cup final and engage more fans of different super league clubs this year. That isn't to be sniffed at, and I'm happy if opinions can be changed.

Its not up to Sky unless they want to pay handsomely for it. They have never given the impression though that they care either way and have consistently said that structure and fixtures aren't up to them.

Yet again Magic got a cumulative attendance in the range it always does and no different than many SL rounds. The logic for getting rid of Magic was quite clear, get rid of unpopular loop fixtures, not cannibalise our marquee events and to create space in the calendar for internationals. To tear that up because some clubs want to have a big day out, who don't normally get one, isn't a good start to the whole new IMG world for me. This weekend hasn't changed anything, the momentum and reports about this changing started weeks ago.

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its not up to Sky unless they want to pay handsomely for it. They have never given the impression though that they care either way and have consistently said that structure and fixtures aren't up to them.

Yet again Magic got a cumulative attendance in the range it always does and no different than many SL rounds. The logic for getting rid of Magic was quite clear, get rid of unpopular loop fixtures, not cannibalise our marquee events and to create space in the calendar for internationals. To tear that up because some clubs want to have a big day out, who don't normally get one, isn't a good start to the whole new IMG world for me. This weekend hasn't changed anything, the momentum and reports about this changing started weeks ago.

Even if it's a good idea to keep it, the reasoning (this last one was good, subjectively - nothing more or less than that) would be so stereotypically rugby league that it might as well wear a flatcap and do an Eddie Waring impression.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Even if it's a good idea to keep it, the reasoning (this last one was good, subjectively - nothing more or less than that) would be so stereotypically rugby league that it might as well wear a flatcap and do an Eddie Waring impression.

That's quite true as well. Its a really reactive, rather than proactive, strategic approach.

[Tonka]

It’s to RL’s credit that it isn’t losing major, established clubs the way RU is.  Maybe for once we should be applauding ourselves.  

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

The fact that there is now talk about Magic staying because some clubs want it, after IMG proposing to scrap based on the back of the fan survey and their observations, doesn't bode well as a first test.

I'm fine with IMG evolving their plans based on experience, it's a sign of maturity. If it is a broadcast property that media values, then as long as we package that up to monetise it properly (which seems to be the 'between the lines' of the RFL saying it is still a possibility to continue), and we have a strategic plan to actually grow attendances at it, then I'm fine with it even though not a fan myself.

One quick thing though: People have come away from this weekend thinking it was a success, a step forwards for Magic. But the crowd was only up by 1,000. In a season when there's a wider spread of success in the league at the moment, and for example Hull KR were given the best time slot, having a good season, and so took far, far more than usual. Guess the same could be said for Leigh versus Toulouse last year etc. So it really wasn't a roaring success, sales-wise. 

We're still only talking about 55% of tickets getting sold. That's not a success and if we're keeping it we need to be more ambitious, and invest in growing it... which means aggressively promoting it to a local, "casual sports fan" audience. It will never fully stack up on the "big day out" model alone. 

[THE RED ROOSTER]

On 02/06/2023 at 16:52, gingerjon said:

Nobody has made a serious call to merge the codes in a hundred years.

Nobody is about to start now.

Cough - Phil Caplan and Forty-20 magazine a couple of months ago.

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/paper-talk-rugby-code-merger-st-helens-hangover

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

5 minutes ago, Tonka said:

It’s to RL’s credit that it isn’t losing major, established clubs the way RU is.  Maybe for once we should be applauding ourselves.  

That's not our success. It shows us that Rugby Union was a more attractive prospect to investors who had more money to risk, albeit it then blew up in their faces. Rugby League just operates at a lower level of financial risk and reward is all. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 minute ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Cough - Phil Caplan and Forty-20 magazine a couple of months ago.

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/paper-talk-rugby-code-merger-st-helens-hangover

I think the operative phrase in Gingerjon's post was "a serious call" 

[Tommygilf]

34 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its not up to Sky unless they want to pay handsomely for it. They have never given the impression though that they care either way and have consistently said that structure and fixtures aren't up to them.

Yet again Magic got a cumulative attendance in the range it always does and no different than many SL rounds. The logic for getting rid of Magic was quite clear, get rid of unpopular loop fixtures, not cannibalise our marquee events and to create space in the calendar for internationals. To tear that up because some clubs want to have a big day out, who don't normally get one, isn't a good start to the whole new IMG world for me. This weekend hasn't changed anything, the momentum and reports about this changing started weeks ago.

Sky pay for the product that underpins the whole sport financially, I think their opinion is important; though I agree that comes with a valuation. Magic is clearly a plus for them that they push, I bet a not insignificant number of our Main Event screened fixtures are taken up by Magic Weekend games for example (I believe it was 4 this year, all of Saturday and 1 game Sunday).

Do you believe mid season internationals would come if magic went? Would the RFL make as much money from them? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see that happen, but playing devils advocate its the money on the table. There isn't much cloth to cut at the RFL and unless a viable alternative was suggested, I don't see them getting rid of MW. The same its a poorly attended waste of time argument could be made about the Cup too, lets not forget. 

There is a value in a Magic Weekend concept. Whether that is marquee fixtures in larger than usual venues or a festival tournament or MW as it already is I'm willing to hear ideas on. 

Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, Tonka said:

It’s to RL’s credit that it isn’t losing major, established clubs the way RU is.  Maybe for once we should be applauding ourselves.  

Yeah we got away with reducing our minimum wage to £12.5k for full time professional rugby league players and have only had 1 top flight club have to resort to council loans because nobody else will give them credit yay!

Union is a warning I agree. However the line between being financially prudent and extreme cheapskates is very thin in RL, let us not allow that to Rose Tint our spectacles.

[Tonka]

7 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

That's not our success. It shows us that Rugby Union was a more attractive prospect to investors who had more money to risk, albeit it then blew up in their faces. Rugby League just operates at a lower level of financial risk and reward is all. 

Yeah but if the upshot is that the clubs don’t go bust then that sounds like a good decision 

[Tonka]

13 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Yeah we got away with reducing our minimum wage to £12.5k for full time professional rugby league players and have only had 1 top flight club have to resort to council loans because nobody else will give them credit yay!

Union is a warning I agree. However the line between being financially prudent and extreme cheapskates is very thin in RL, let us not allow that to Rose Tint our spectacles.

I don’t disagree with that sentiment, and Im definitely not a rose tinted kinda guy 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

3 hours ago, Tonka said:

Yeah but if the upshot is that the clubs don’t go bust then that sounds like a good decision 

I’m not sure it was a decision. Our own failure led us to our limitations 

[THE RED ROOSTER]

On 05/06/2023 at 18:22, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I think the operative phrase in Gingerjon's post was "a serious call" 

Mr Caplan probably reads this forum you know and it was a serious article. if wrong on its basic premise.

At the risk opf incurring a ban from TRL for posting an article from their competition - you read it in its full glory below.

https://rugbyleaguehub.com/rugby-re-united-an-almost-inevitable-direction-of-travel/

[DACS]

Just on English club RU, they aren't any bigger as a group than the bigger name RL clubs, as per Ackorman. What they do have is the money (generally much richer backers plus central funding) and reflected glamour of international RU, which makes their club game seem a much bigger deal than it is. Have a look outside the RU Premiership, into their second tier - there's nothing there at all - Ampthill, Ealing Trailfinders, Bedford, Caldy, Coventry, Cornish Pirates, Doncaster, Hartpury University, Jersey Reds, London Scottish, Nottingham, Richmond. That's a desert of scaleable teams, and I'd say a weaker looking set than our own Championship in terms of potential. 

By going it alone in terms of England, Scotland and Wales they have effectively destroyed the possibility of a truly national competition. There were some potentially very big club sides in Wales, in Swansea and Cardiff and a couple of others, plus a couple of well-known historic clubs in Scotland. The lack of coverage of northern England would have been largely irrelevant in that world.

Its quite remarkable how there seems to be not much talk of a crisis in RU looking at 3 of their top tier clubs folding plus the ongoing issues in Wales.  Can you imagine losing 3 SL clubs in one season? The only reason I can see is that ultimately most people only care about the internationals, which will continue to pay for the entirety of the sport. We should keep out fingers crossed that RU in the UK remains as self-centred as it has been to date, and that they have invited incompetent owners into the mix.

In terms of RL, I think IMG have made a good start. They've forced clubs to recognise that nobody outside the sport is currently interested in the game, and that they need to stabilise the clubs in SL to provide some certainty for investors. Once they've done that, they can work on bringing in money. That's their job. Its not a fantasy, but it is hard to bring in money to a sport lacking even national interest. They at least have the contacts and desire (through sharing extra revenues) to have a chance of making this happen. Without something like this I think its hard to see a future for pro RL as an ever-decreasing sport, withering at all levels until complete irrelevance.  

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

9 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Mr Caplan probably reads this forum you know and it was a serious article. if wrong on its basic premise.

At the risk opf incurring a ban from TRL for posting an article from their competition - you read it in its full glory below.

https://rugbyleaguehub.com/rugby-re-united-an-almost-inevitable-direction-of-travel/

We’re a sport where decision-makers can’t even take a long enough view on strategy to establish a club in Perth, despite all the demographic and commercial reasons to do so, in a market where we have the wealth and media profile to make long term plans. 

We’re a sport where club owners expect a newly promoted club to pay for all of their competitors’ travel, just because it’s slightly further away. 

Just because something might make sense on a McKinsey strategy pitch deck, does not mean it would ever make sense within the real world of human decision-making. 

[RP London]

On 02/06/2023 at 18:20, Damien said:

Reading the OP he makes it sound like Rugby League has a choice about this and can just click it's fingers and get overseas investment. It's never been a conscious choice not to have overseas investment, more that the sport has never been attractive enough to attract it. I don't see anything that has changed to encourage an overseas investor to plough money into a SL club. 

I'm assuming the RFL inbox is similar to my own at which point by my reckoning in the past month they have turned down at least 17 offers from various Nigerian Princes... 

Also someone has been looking at naughty websites again and is being offered a little blue pill... but that might just be my inbox.