PRL: Dead Man Walking?

Kimbo wrote: Have a read... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2022/12/21/premiership-clubs-heading-disaster-having-amassed-300m-net-debt/

On reading the article my concerns are increasing exponentially. For a couple of clubs to be in the mess they are in is sad enough, but to see these levels of debt across 10 more clubs points to an imminent disaster.
Bear in mind that the UK is now technically in recession and this is predicted to be pretty long lasting (2years?). In this climate income will likely be difficult to get and I’d say many current and potential sponsors will be cutting back on some of the spending the RFU benefits from.

Here is the link to the last set of RFU accounts https://www.englandrugby.com/dxdam/83/83fa24b1-cb28-4702-b4a9-06c8740e67fd/Annual-report-2021.pdf

The effects of COVID are clear and reserves are down, but what I find interesting is the general tone of the Report and Accounts.
This is not the report of a governing body IMO, but rather a corporate.
The focus (if there is any) is pretty much on areas that are sort of important, but rather superficial. I am not knocking any of the social equity and inclusion themes, but they are being used to distract and camouflage some real issues.
One example is that the claim is made that playing performance of England teams is a target achieved. Really? Thank god for the women’s performance the folks at HQ must be thinking as it is only their 100% record that props up the men’s stats. In terms of return in money invested the success of the Red Roses is fanbloodytastic! Look at the money and results from the men’s game though and I’d judge the ROI from the worlds biggest Rugby Union as poor - YMMV.

Unbelievably the RFU CEO makes the assertion that the state of the community game is GOOD… ffs. This assertion alone should worry folks representing the rugby community across the country.

Now I know these reports aim to spin matters somewhat, but this is last years report. When we see the mess that has emerged since this was reported I am wondering just how much further HQ can distance itself from the real issues facing rugby.

Without sound financial management there is no game. It seems to me from reading the report that the spin is describing an events management company rather than a Governing Body.

On page 24 the report states that revenue is down by 60%, but that selling rights to a VC things will be alright as new opportunities will emerge. Yep that’s right new opportunities will emerge … Teo of our biggest clubs going bust, the game and league structure thrown into total chaos and having 10 clubs at the top tier with £300m of debt between them. Oh and the control of potential revenue sources that could help restructure the game now shared (or rather lost) with NEW Co. That entity is managed separately from the RFU council and bypasses any proper governance from clubs and counties.
Just how many of you turned in to the shopping channel to watch the 6 Nations this year? I use Amazon a lot, but Prime only access puts yet another paywall between potential fans and the game. How does that fit with the social inclusion strategy?

Again it’s smoke and mirrors … on reading the report I was struck by how many times actions or activities were stated as ‘being planned’. The subtext here is that HQ is progressive and dynamic, but when you look at the details pretty much all of them are subjects or themes that represent a succession of failures over the past 20+ years. Oh and don’t forget to notice they’ll throw in reference to ‘new investment’ probably mentioning CVC to show the dynamic partnership at work … oh please god give me strength!!

I know it is not easy, but really hard to run the business of rugby for clubs and country. The fact that so many clubs manage to keep playing is testament to the efforts of thousands of volunteers, working hard for the game they love. The issue for me though is that over 20 years there has been a failure to recognise the scale of the problems coming downstream. The approach taken by HQ though seems to disproportionately value an Elite rather than the majority that actually funds the whole game. This majority includes the likes of us and all the others at our clubs. The Elite and increasing somewhat predatory investors are demanding far more from us for far less. This is not right nor fair. It also is probably contrary to the obligations the RFU has.

The RFU is not a company, but a society registered under the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014. Nevertheless, the Rules (constitution) of the RFU state that the fiduciary duties of members of the Board are to be the same as those of directors of a private limited company.

Take a look at page 29 … the decisions taken by the board… these must be the most important ones - after deciding what to have for lunch and the selection of the clarets. It beggars belief that any competent board could say that the sale of one of the biggest revenue earners for Rugby in the world would “not have a material effect on the business model”.

That is a bit like Mary telling Joseph that it was alright as she wasn’t actually f****d and it was fine under Gods own special rule book anyway.

Gonna stop now as my wife is telling me my face is redder than usual.

Edited by dumbape - 22 Dec 2022 at 12:22

That's true tigerburnie but in the case of the Rugby Premiership there doesn't seem to be any acceptance that debt will have to be repaid by themselves. They seem to regard themselves as rugby royalty who don't carry money and so someone else will sort it out - usually some fictional entity that will appear when they "grow the game".