Super Rugby shows ITM Cup still needed

The current bussiness model is not sustainable. Lets the private owners run the professional rugby with the Unions running the grassroots and national teams.

true, IW, but the current turmoil in NZ rugby is offering some pointers on cost management which could have some applications here. Then there's the question of broadcast money (do we count that as sponsorship or not?). Having the NXRU onboard could help ensure FTA coverage since the NZ public would demand it. Such a competition could initially be limited to sydney and to a limited number of teams (say 2 initially). This is assuming that players salaries would have been lowered (something that looks likely to happen in the semi-pro ITM Cup anyway). In the wake of lower salaries, the doorway to professional contracts should widen perhaps by the inclusion of more Super rugby teams and/or player transfers on a TT basis (ie allowing estbalished test players to play in the other country thereby addressing poaching claims)

Allblackfan, "The crucial key here is that sponsorship needs to cover expenses so that gate takings can become the host union’s profit." The difficulty is getting sponsorships with limited FTA television, as Cronulla and Canberra have found. Essentially, you'd need $2m to run a professional rugby team - 20 players at $80k, plus a coach, two assistants and some contracted medical people. According to the 2010 NSW Waratahs annual report, they had a total of $5.248m in sponsorship income. I think your plan of covering base costs out of sponsorship is a bit optimistic.

For the record, your way to control private owners is to say 'Oh, dont worry, we'll control private owners'

Not dust TC, MUD.

Nomis, this level is for development/rehabilitation ie develop new upcoming stars and allow established ones to return from injury. If there is high quality footy being played, the crowds will come; established stars would be a bonus (the ITM Cup last year showed this) According to JON, there is strong interest by broadcasters in a TT competition (in the event that SA goess its own way, it must be added). Look at netball; brand new TT competition. There are two major obstacles to this: jurisdiction and finances. (oh and pay TV should not have exclusive access)

I don't think the ARU needs it to make money. AUS needs a better third tier to develop and produce players. That needs it to be it's main aim. Anything else is a bonus.

Unfortunately, that solution probably won't work now allblackfan. The Wallabies won't be available to play in it. And so it won't attract the sponsors or broadcasters. There is no longer the widow for it. It needs to be an affordable structure for non-test SR players to mix it up with the up and coming. But what? I'd suggest no more than 8 teams. But it can't be the Super franchises + some (overkill), and it can't be new teams like the ARC, and it can't be a few clubs (because who gets the cut?). It's a very difficult situation. One that caused me to write a very radical (and probably unworkable) article about it: http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/05/04/a-new-structure-for-club-rugby-in-australia/ But hey, what other solution is there?

The ARU won't do this though Darwin. It would cut the heart out of the Sydney clubs. It's not a fight worth having. Another solution for a developmental third tier in AUS must be found.

just heard Jock Hobbs died in hospital. He was 52. His wife Nicky is Robbie Deans's sister. RIP

IW, one option is not to use stadiums like Parramatta or Bluetongue but use shute shield grounds (unless demand requires an upgrade in which case you could look at double-headers in these stadiums, say). Given the large number of Kiwis living in Aust, there is a strong chance you could pull a decent crowd in. I've said this elsewhere but will repeat here again -- in 2006, the Auckland NPC team played NSW at Gosford on a wet wednesday with no marketing and still pulled a crowd of about 7000 (mostly kiwis too). The crucial key here is that sponsorship needs to cover expenses so that gate takings can become the host union's profit.

rugbug, the only way an expanded ITM Cup would work would be if Super rugby didn't exist. You obviously couldn't have the two operating in parallel

Ah how would that work TC every single NZ province including the amatuers are assigned to a franchise, the SR teams play out of major cities however none belong solely to the city they play out of. Look at the Blues for example = Northland, North Harbour and Auckland City Hurricanes = East Coast. Hawkes Bay, Horowhenua - Kapiti, Manawatu, Wanganui, Taranaki, Wairarapa Bush, Wellington Four of the aforementioned teams play in the Heartland Championship however very single union is affiliated to a Franchise

If it wasn't for NZ rugby in the 70's and 80's Australian rugby would be non existent

I don't think they would at all, sure some might but I believe the majority would be against it as we already have super rugby where we play Australian teams. What makes the ITM cup special is that it is brother against brother, neighbour against neighbour and mate against mate and everyone loves a good old family domestic. No to Australian teams but i'm certainly open to the idea of Australian players playing in the current teams. The cost of international travel alone for these provinces in NZ and some of the Clubs in Australia would send them broke by week three of the competition. Provinces are struggling to pay their players and now people expect them to pay international airfares and hotel expenses as well. Sadly it just wont work and thats the cold hard reality of it. Super rugby barely works as it is, and as has been pointed out it certainly isn' the money spinner some like to think it is.

Taranaki has imported Australian players on a few occassions, Ed Jenkins, Hilgendorrf, Brock James etc and I do believe Fainifo played for Waikato last year

mania I didn't say Australian sides should join the ITM Cup. The Force and Rebels were in virgin markets and so will take a long time to develop players, but it will happen and those areas are massive. In terms of spectators they have added two new huge areas. So yes they are revolutionary. As would Adelaide be although again in terms of players it would take a long time as it's a virgin market. But the other new possibilities, Western Sydney and Gold Coast, would add not only new spectator markets but would instantly produce players, the vast numbers who are plucked by the NRL because there are only one Super team in NSW and Queensland. The presence of rugby in its two heartland areas would instantly be doubled as would the number of contracts that could be offered to players.

KPM- i dont see how throwing more money at aus club sides would make them any more competitive to play in ITM. its not about money its about quality of rugby. aus clubs would just dilute the quality of ITM. yes aus has a big problem with no national comp but adding more super teams? please no. not the same old rubbish from the SANZAR nations. get new teams from different countries in. your line "...and each additional team would revolutionise rugby in Australia in its own way" how? what has Force and Rebels revolutionised since their inception? nothing and they are as usual the easy beats. you need the national comp before SR but before that you need a grass roots structure. your putting the cart before the horse. no to more superTeams from the SANZAR nations. sort out your inhouse problems first and foremost of those is organising a strong grassroots system to nurture and develop young and up and coming talent.

mania well I certainly agree that it would be very hard for Australia to join the ITM Cup and not necessarily desirable for either party, unless someone very generous was willing to pay for it. I think Australia has bigger problems that its own national competition, which is thought of as a magical silver bullet. They desperately need more Super teams to compete against the dominant NRL and each additional team would revolutionise rugby in Australia in its own way. Once there are a decent number of Super teams then a national competition could be added.

KPM - we'll just agree to disagree on this one. by all means if aus want to test this scenario out i say go for it, but in NZ i doubt it would be for the greater good. need to fix whats here first before commiting to any commercial improvements. ITM is NZ's comp, i dont think Aus should be involved in it. Aus club rugby isnt good enough to play ITM. ITM needs to drop payments for players it cant afford. not every up and coming player deserves to be paid. poaching from richer nations is just a neccessary evil in modern rugby.