IRL Annual Report

[gingerjon]

Just now, Derwent said:

Indeed. The tournament had income of £30.2m which was made up of :-

Government Funding & Grants   £13.4m

Match Income  £10.0m

Sponsorship £3.5m

Broadcasting £1.7m

Other Income  £1.6m

Struggling to see the issue there.

[Dunbar]

I'm impressed at the speed in which our forum members can digest, analyse and review a financial report.

Some next generation Warren Buffet's here.

[Derwent]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Struggling to see the issue there.

I didn't say there was one ? Just providing information.

[Archie Gordon]

I don't think this shows a decent RLWC profit for sure because there's not enough info. There were operating losses in 2021 (and possibly 2020?) and large operating profits in 2022 - the year of the event. That seems as expected given the timeline.

What looks worrying is the 2022 operating profits only just took the UK company back into the black by the end of that year. So nothing there to invest. 

EDIT: And don't forget that these are the IRL accounts. There's nothing here to say how the RFL fared as host. Derwent's numbers seem plausible for the overall picture. I'm not sure we've learned much about the profitability of the RLWC from this report.

Edited February 27 by Archie Gordon

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, Derwent said:

I assume the IRL income was from the hosting fee for the World Cup and not related to the actual tournament itself ?

Because the actual tournament over here made a loss of ~£415,000 even after receiving £13.4m of government funding.

Where are you getting your £415k loss from? These accounts are for the period up to 31st December 2022 and include income from the World Cup period.

[Derwent]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

Where are you getting your £415k loss from? These accounts are for the period up to 31st December 2022 and include income from the World Cup period.

The accounts for Rugby League World Cup 2021 Ltd were filed at Companies House a couple of months ago. They were the operating company for the world cup. They paid hosting fees etc to the IRL. So all of the actual income and expenditure relating to the physical staging of the tournament is within the RLWC 2021 Ltd accounts.

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, Derwent said:

The accounts for Rugby League World Cup 2021 Ltd were filed at Companies House a couple of months ago. They were the operating company for the world cup. They paid hosting fees etc to the IRL. So all of the actual income and expenditure relating to the physical staging of the tournament is within the RLWC 2021 Ltd accounts.

would those not also include this £4m payment to the IRL for hosting and therefore the RLWC made a "profit" of £3.5m when you take that one off payment to the IRL out of it.. I assume RLWC 2021 LTD now gets wound down therefore if they hadn't paid the IRL earlier they would do now so the above, while "creative" in an accounting point of view, is not wholly untrue

Edited February 27 by RP London

[Archie Gordon]

1 minute ago, RP London said:

would those not also include this £4m payment to the IRL for hosting and therefore the RLWC made a "profit" of £3.5m when you take that one off payment to the IRL out of it.. I assume RLWC 2021 LTD now gets wound down therefore if they hadn't paid the IRL earlier they would do now so the above, while "creative" in an accounting point of view, is not wholly untrue

The hosting fee does seem to be the profit, yes (give or take). That much is probably true (though not clear from this report).

But the IRL (UK) doesn't have £3.5m in the bank - the fee has just filled a hole.

[Damien]

22 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I don't think this shows a decent RLWC profit for sure because there's not enough info. There were operating losses in 2021 (and possibly 2020?) and large operating profits in 2022 - the year of the event. That seems as expected given the timeline.

What looks worrying is the 2022 operating profits only just took the UK company back into the black by the end of that year. So nothing there to invest. 

Looking at the INTERNATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE LIMITED accounts I see the following profits and losses:
2022 - 3,467,702
2021 - (641,528)
2020 - (1,235,504)
2019 - (1,115,633)

This to me makes an overall profit of £475,037 based on that company. This obviously excludes stuff like the millions in grants that were given out and I suspect the rights fee (but there's not enough information really on that).

Edited February 27 by Damien

[Archie Gordon]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

Looking at the INTERNATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE LIMITED accounts I see the following profits and losses:
2022 - 3,467,702
2021 - (641,528)
2020 - (1,235,504)
2019 - (1,115,633)

This to me makes an overall profit of £475,037 based on that company. This obviously excludes stuff like the millions in grants that were given out and I suspect the rights fee (but there's not enough information really on that).

And that's what I find a bit worrying. A small profit over 4 years that includes a RLWC. The next 4 years doesn't include a RLWC (for the IRL (UK)). It still looks hand-to-mouth for that company. The RLIF (Aus) seems to be doing OK, however. What I can't quite work out is whether this means that there's money to invest in Aus/NZ/Pacific but not in Europe - i.e. how independent is the IRL and RLIF spend?

[Damien]

15 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

And that's what I find a bit worrying. A small profit over 4 years that includes a RLWC. The next 4 years doesn't include a RLWC (for the IRL (UK)). It still looks hand-to-mouth for that company. The RLIF (Aus) seems to be doing OK, however. What I can't quite work out is whether this means that there's money to invest in Aus/NZ/Pacific but not in Europe - i.e. how independent is the IRL and RLIF spend?

I'm sure it will be pretty dormant now until the next World Cup on these shores. There is so much smoke and mirrors around all of this it's pretty difficult to work out what's what without much more information than you can see in the accounts. The RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD CUP 2021 LIMITED company is obviously used to put on World Cup events, and was previously RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD CUP 2013 LIMITED, but includes so much other stuff that its value is limited. It's the money flowing back to the IRL UK and Australian companies that's important.

I presume the 2 companies exist because it's the easiest and most beneficial way to operate and put events on in the 2 principal RL markets. The report does say that grants are administered through the Australian Company rather than the UK Company. Its does also say:

The company’s balance sheet shows that the surplus in the year has enabled it for the first time to have a healthy, positive balance sheet going forward.

Obviously what we may think of as being healthy and positive may be different to the IRL!

Edited February 27 by Damien

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

So looking at this it is fair to say that the RLWC did make a fair profit for the IRL, even after all of the issues and delays:

In 2022, the company received £4.81m of income, most of this being from the World Cup.

In the financial year ended 31st December 2022, the company had £1.04m of operating costs. This produced an operating profit of £3.76m. This compared to an operating loss of £489k in the previous financial year.

This is obviously great news and shows what could have been if it wasn't for Covid and the delay.

It'd be good for one of our financial experts to analyse this in more detail, there is the important point of the loan to tide the company over from the year before. It'd be good to try and understand if this 'profit' was the staging rights fee, or real profit. 

But it does dismiss the view that the tournament was loss making. 

[Dave T]

37 minutes ago, Damien said:

Looking at the INTERNATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE LIMITED accounts I see the following profits and losses:
2022 - 3,467,702
2021 - (641,528)
2020 - (1,235,504)
2019 - (1,115,633)

This to me makes an overall profit of £475,037 based on that company. This obviously excludes stuff like the millions in grants that were given out and I suspect the rights fee (but there's not enough information really on that).

It's also really difficult to fully understand because they have the two companies with charges between them muddying things. 

But in reality, this should probably be showing a few million profit every four years that covers the losses (costs) for running the show in between. 

If only they could stage more than just a World Cup every four years.

Edited February 27 by Dave T

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

I think it also show that the talk of £10+ million profit, before Covid struck and the delay, wasn't fantasy. It was very probable and that amount really would have been transformative.

It does show that while huge tournaments like this carry bigger risks, the rewards are bigger. This was a world cup that had a worldwide pandemic to contend with, and it made millions. 

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's also really difficult to fully understand because they have the two companies with charges between them muddying things. 

But in reality, this should probably be showing a few million profit every four years that covers the losses (costs) for running the show in between. 

If only they could stage more than just a World Cup every four years.

Yeah that's my take really.

To really advance we need that profit to be more, as RLWC2021 would have been without the delay, and a little boost between those 4 years (Confederations Cup anyone).

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It does show that while huge tournaments like this carry bigger risks, the rewards are bigger. This was a world cup that had a worldwide pandemic to contend with, and it made millions. 

And even the most ardent of RFL haters would struggle to put on a convincing argument that the RFL should have foreseen Covid and the year's delay. It was unprecedented and once in a lifetime stuff.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

Do you think attendances would have been much higher if it wasn’t for Covid? There may have been a minor affect (eg elderly people got out of the habit of going to games) but the WC was well after that, things were completely back to normal. 

Better price to seating plans would have helped but anyway....

[RP London]

59 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

The hosting fee does seem to be the profit, yes (give or take). That much is probably true (though not clear from this report).

But the IRL (UK) doesn't have £3.5m in the bank - the fee has just filled a hole.

totally understand what you are saying. My point is that  its still profit from a world cup that apparently didn't make any profit and surely just shows that we need events like that making money like that to fill the holes or to bolster the coffers. 

[Damien]

23 minutes ago, RP London said:

totally understand what you are saying. My point is that  its still profit from a world cup that apparently didn't make any profit and surely just shows that we need events like that making money like that to fill the holes or to bolster the coffers. 

Yes it's crazy to exclude it, it's absolutely part of the profit and benefit.

I also never hear anyone say that the government subsidies that other sports get for their World Cups don't count. The RU 2023 World Cup got funding from the French government to pay a £150 million rights fee to their international RU board. What we got is chicken feed compared to that.

Edited February 27 by Damien

[Dave T]

38 minutes ago, Damien said:

Yes it's crazy to exclude it, it's absolutely part of the profit and benefit.

I also never hear anyone say that the government subsidies that other sports get for their World Cups don't count. The RU 2023 World Cup got funding from the French government to pay a £150 million rights fee to their international RU board. What we got is chicken feed compared to that.

Indeed. Public funding for tournaments like this is standard. We need even more of it! 

[BristolDevonCharlie]

Lots of interest here....

Edited February 27 by BristolDevonCharlie

[BristolDevonCharlie]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

It's also really difficult to fully understand because they have the two companies with charges between them muddying things. 

But in reality, this should probably be showing a few million profit every four years that covers the losses (costs) for running the show in between. 

If only they could stage more than just a World Cup every four years.

Aye, aye. 

They have already moved to split the three World Cups up to make more revenue generation options for the IRL. 

From Danny Kazandjian:

"The result was the reformatted world cups, the hosting offer of multiple world cups until 2030 to provide certainty, and a change to the world cup business model. Whereas, historically, local organising committees of world cups had kept all the commercial rights and paid IRL a fee, from now IRL will retain global broadcast and sponsorship rights, effectively tripling its revenue streams. I expect the results to be significant, and increased revenue will mean more direct and indirect investment in the membership, allowing them to grow and further IRL’s fundamental mission. The caveat to that is the need to place the world cups until 2030 – a mark IRL is attempting to achieve in 2024."

Also, I enjoyed the clarity on the men's RLWC qualification process. Answers those wildly predicting France to play England this autumn rather than play in World Cup Quals.

"The inaugural men’s World Series in 2025 will feature Cook Islands, as the sole Asia-Pacific nation yet to qualify for RLWC2026, and the winners of the 2024 European, Middle East Africa and Americas Championships"

Edited February 27 by BristolDevonCharlie

[sam4731]

33 minutes ago, BristolDevonCharlie said:

Aye, aye. 

They have already moved to split the three World Cups up to make more revenue generation options for the IRL. 

From Danny Kazandjian:

"The result was the reformatted world cups, the hosting offer of multiple world cups until 2030 to provide certainty, and a change to the world cup business model. Whereas, historically, local organising committees of world cups had kept all the commercial rights and paid IRL a fee, from now IRL will retain global broadcast and sponsorship rights, effectively tripling its revenue streams. I expect the results to be significant, and increased revenue will mean more direct and indirect investment in the membership, allowing them to grow and further IRL’s fundamental mission. The caveat to that is the need to place the world cups until 2030 – a mark IRL is attempting to achieve in 2024."

Also, I enjoyed the clarity on the men's RLWC qualification process. Answers those wildly predicting France to play England this autumn rather than play in World Cup Quals.

"The inaugural men’s World Series in 2025 will feature Cook Islands, as the sole Asia-Pacific nation yet to qualify for RLWC2026, and the winners of the 2024 European, Middle East Africa and Americas Championships"

So given that the RLWC qual process is only open to full members, I'm looking forward to an MEA championship of South Africa vs South Africa, and an Americas championship of Jamaica vs Jamaica.

[BristolDevonCharlie]

2 hours ago, sam4731 said:

So given that the RLWC qual process is only open to full members, I'm looking forward to an MEA championship of South Africa vs South Africa, and an Americas championship of Jamaica vs Jamaica.

 

Yes, indeed. In October the IRL said:

"Only IRL full members on March 31, 2024 will be eligible for the Men’s World Cup."

Therefore, I have a feeling we may have a few more full members being made in the next 33 days!

Even if that happens, the European nations have drawn a very short straw - for no real reason.

Also, interestingly Tonga is still not listed as a full member in the IRL 2023 report (in fact they are not listed at all), suggesting that they need to sort themselves out by 31st March too!

[Worzel]

7 hours ago, Derwent said:

I assume the IRL income was from the hosting fee for the World Cup and not related to the actual tournament itself ?

Because the actual tournament over here made a loss of ~£415,000 even after receiving £13.4m of government funding.

Yes but the hosting fee is just a transfer of tournament profits to the IRL, but guaranteeing them up front.

The Govt. funding was provided on a "design your tournament to break even" basis, after the hosting fee, so basically we missed that objective by half a million. Perversely, if we made money the Govt. may well have looked at that and said "hang on, that's our money that you didn't need". It was an odd set up. 

The next tournament size and shape is driven by the reality that they don't think they can extract £13.4m of state funding next time. So people saying "this one made a profit, so why are we making it smaller next time" are kind of missing the point really.