Super Rugby - The Future
-
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
That's a point I've made before. Rugby competes with league in Melbourne and it's a non-contest when the league team is so successful.
Doesn't help that for the odd enquiring mind that turns up to see what the fuss is about that it's a vastly easier game to understand and watch.
-
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
@antipodean said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
It’s been a total shemozzle. Not just NZRU, the 3 unions. Japan in Japan out. Argentina in Argentina out. SA bigger and bigger. Then out. Force in then out then in again. Rebels in now out.
It’s hard to remain enthusiastic and optimistic about rugby in Australia and NZ. I just don’t care for super rugby anymore. 12 teams with 8 finalists…I’ll probably watch the final and maybe the semis.
-
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
John O'Neill hoped it would work
5 teams was a stupid idea back then and still was when SRP was introduced. Thankfully the Rebels gave Aust an out.
-
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
John O'Neill hoped it would work
5 teams was a stupid idea back then and still was when SRP was introduced. Thankfully the Rebels gave Aust an out.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
I think one of the problems was how quickly Aus expanded at the start.
Aus had 3 team in 2005 then 5 teams in 2011. They only had 5 seasons with 4 teams.
They would have been better off waiting to expand to Melbourne rather than rushing it - which ended up fucking all the Aus teams as it diluted their depth.
-
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
In the decades I've been following Super Rugby, I've attended maybe three or four games in person. I'd say that's the case for the majority of fans.
That doesn't mean the fans aren't enthusiastic, they just don't enjoy the stadium experience enough to justify all the additional costs (financial and otherwise) that come with attending a game.
-
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
I know this is a beat down on Super Rugby. But, Super Rugby still draws much better crowds than every sporting option, except the Warriors (who sell out every week). Data on the Phoenix has them averaging 10k (https://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp/a-league/crowds), which includes a 33k sell out. The Breakers are in a basketball arena, so what about 1500 to 2k? Super Rugby data I've seen sits at about 10 to 15k for most of the teams. The Highlanders were at about 12k. Fantastic for a city of Dunedin's size. Otago NPC last year was about 2k. While TV audience data was up about 10% on last year. Super Rugby is well attended and watched compared to other options in NZ.
-
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
I know this is a beat down on Super Rugby. But, Super Rugby still draws much better crowds than every sporting option, except the Warriors (who sell out every week). Data on the Phoenix has them averaging 10k (https://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp/a-league/crowds), which includes a 33k sell out. The Breakers are in a basketball arena, so what about 1500 to 2k? Super Rugby data I've seen sits at about 10 to 15k for most of the teams. The Highlanders were at about 12k. Fantastic for a city of Dunedin's size. Otago NPC last year was about 2k. While TV audience data was up about 10% on last year. Super Rugby is well attended and watched compared to other options in NZ.
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@sparky said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
When you see the tiny crowds for Super Rugby, you realise most folks in the SH find it harder to retain enthusiasm for Supersnore too.
Who gets the biggest crowds in NZ sport right now?
The Wahs, the Nix, maybe the Breakers? Whether its the games themselves, or the way its packaged, apart from the odd game SR does not draw big crowds right now. Hasn't for some time
I know this is a beat down on Super Rugby. But, Super Rugby still draws much better crowds than every sporting option, except the Warriors (who sell out every week). Data on the Phoenix has them averaging 10k (https://www.austadiums.com/sport/comp/a-league/crowds), which includes a 33k sell out. The Breakers are in a basketball arena, so what about 1500 to 2k? Super Rugby data I've seen sits at about 10 to 15k for most of the teams. The Highlanders were at about 12k. Fantastic for a city of Dunedin's size. Otago NPC last year was about 2k. While TV audience data was up about 10% on last year. Super Rugby is well attended and watched compared to other options in NZ.
Breakers averaged about 6K last season
-
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
-
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
Fair call. It's still a lot less than it was say 10 years ago. The olds used to attend all Hurricanes home games, there was a waitlist for season tickets, and they used to get crowds of 25K+. Maybe Mr Fish is right, most fans can't be bothered heading to the ground to watch games live
-
I do agree things look a lot rosier when stadiums are full (and it creates a better atmosphere, encourages other people to attend games etc), but broadcast deals/TV viewership is exponentially more important and, at least from what's been reported, that's all looking fairly encouraging right now.
-
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
Fair call. It's still a lot less than it was say 10 years ago. The olds used to attend all Hurricanes home games, there was a waitlist for season tickets, and they used to get crowds of 25K+. Maybe Mr Fish is right, most fans can't be bothered heading to the ground to watch games live
@canefan said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I underestimated the size of a basektball arena. Still much smaller than every team except for the homeless Moana Pasifika. It doesn't change the argument that Super Rugby is generally still more popular than all options except for the warriors
Fair call. It's still a lot less than it was say 10 years ago. The olds used to attend all Hurricanes home games, there was a waitlist for season tickets, and they used to get crowds of 25K+. Maybe Mr Fish is right, most fans can't be bothered heading to the ground to watch games live
10 or so years ago we'd also get big crowds to horse racing events and suburban pubs would be full on a thursday night. Demographics and people's tastes change. Sky Stadium is a shitty place to go. For a good few years it would have been new, and way better than athletic park. From my perspective, without trains running a 20 minute trip takes potentially an hour. The beer is $13 a pop, and the food is shit. It isn't the fault of the rugby. It is all the steps and issues around it. Wellington city for example, probably isn't the rugby city it used to be. The rugby fans are out in the Hutt, northern suburbs and Porirua. It is very niggly to get to and from the stadium from those locations.
-
Fans of NH teams go to games in larger numbers, they pay more for their tickets, they spend more on food and merchandise, they generate more noise and atmosphere. It's no surprise that the TV companies want to focus on their competitions and eventually all the top players will be playing in their leagues.
-
Fans of NH teams go to games in larger numbers, they pay more for their tickets, they spend more on food and merchandise, they generate more noise and atmosphere. It's no surprise that the TV companies want to focus on their competitions and eventually all the top players will be playing in their leagues.
