Hey guys. Quick update on this story: SA Rugby has postponed a planned Special General Meeting (SGM) to consider a proposal to conclude a private equity investment in the sport’s commercial rights at the request of Mr Gayton McKenzie, the Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture. The meeting was scheduled to take place in Cape Town on Thursday but will now be rescheduled at the Minister’s request to more fully brief government on the proposal. A new date for the SGM before year-end will only be confirmed after the engagement with the minister.
watch tim's video (from eggchasers rugby), titled "NO DEAL! | SOUTH AFRICA PRIVATE EQUITY DEAL TO BE VOTED DOWN??!" that will explain *exactly* what will happen to saru/sa rugby if the deal were to go through. hopefully that's the end of it. this deal must *never* happen.
Thank you so much. Just watched it now. I think it's worth noting that Tim's video came out after more information about the deal came to light. My video came out before that information was known. I think given what we know now, it's best to move on. I still support private investment in principle.
I don't hear enough specifics of how it would benefit the individual franchises, and what's in it for them. I think in particular the Cheetahs and other marginilised franchises. How would they benefit specifically. I think clear answers should be given before these votes are harvested
Yes, that's a very fair comment. I think it's safe to assume that SARU will have given all the details and specifics to the individual members (the Cheetahs being one of them of course) and that same information has not yet been made known publicly. I think it only makes sense that each of the members also benefit from this otherwise SARU would have nothing to bargain with in terms of asking them to vote in favour of this proposal.
My suspicion is that most of these money's generated never reaches the players and structures, but rather end up in the pockets of some fat cats scimming off the top
The benefit for the franchises and players need to be so overwhelming significant that it becomes an offer that's impossible to refuse, and on top of that the fat cats must not be the big benefactors
Look I think there's always going to be an element of that. No matter where you go the guys at the top are in it for themselves. Make no mistake, you invest because you want a return on that investment. Even at a micro level, we all do that. While I might not like it, I accept it. The key here is that there will be more money for South African rugby overall to improve every aspect of the sport in our country. That can only be a good thing in my opinion. However, the members of SARU who have seen the presentations are the ones who will truly know how much they will benefit and we'll find out on Thursday how they've voted.
Ek dink die grootste verskil is die TV-nommers wat Suid-Afrika aan die sport bydra. In die jare van SANZAR en Super Rugby was Nieu-Seeland en Australië die grootste begunstigdes van die TV-geld. Ter konteks, ons bevolking is ongeveer dubbel die gesamentlike bevolking van Nieu-Seeland en Australië, en onthou, rugby is nie so gewild in Australië nie, so daardie twee was eintlik parasiete wat ons TV-geld suig. Nou met die URC is daar gelykheid met die verspreiding van TV-geld en ek dink dit maak ons baie meer aantreklik vir belegging as Nieu-Seeland. Om baie eerlik te wees, dink ek die Amerikaanse beleggers wat in die All Blacks gespring het, het dit net gedoen omdat hulle destyds die wêreldkampioene was, en hulle ontdek nou dat daar nie baie is om te benut nie, omdat hulle getalle so klein is.
Please don't come on my channel and make clearly racist comments. Debate and discuss the rugby all you like but I will not tolerate what you have said here. Most of those very same black players at the Sharks helped the Springboks win back-to-back Rugby World Cups. Clearly the problem lies elsewhere, wouldn't you say?
@@frontrowrugby ek hoop jy is reg. As mens CVC met Liberty se Formule 1 betrokkenheid vergelyk, kan mens sien wanneer geld belê word met die oog om die sport uit te brei en winsgewend te maak. CVC se betrokkenheid by die URC en EPR is kommerwekkend. Ek sal ook nie verbaas wees as CVC agter die pogings is om die Britse Rugby Kampioenskap te maak nie. Ek dink hulle is bekommerd hulle gaan hulle belegging in EPR verloor. Weet jy wie die Amerikaanse beleggers is?
Haha, I can see why you would think that but I follow American sports (casually I must admit) and Seattle is very much a sports hub in the States. Many of those teams this group owns or co-owns are staples of the U.S. sports leagues. I can assure you there's nothing strange going on there.
If SARUGBY has an external partner that is only after money, what are our chances when we earn Rands to afford a springbok rugby jersey, a ticket to watch a game or a subscription to watch at home? These investors won't listen to a sob story of a poor country who love the game. This might be great for the players but the spectators will pay the dividends the investors demand. This is a US funding model, do they seem happy with their hyper capitalist world? Let them invest, but selling the brand is naive and foolish!
I don't think this is about taking Springbok paraphernalia or match tickets away from the fans. This is about increasing revenues for SARU. That additional money will be used to strengthen the sport in South Africa. The rand and our geography puts us in a disadvantageous position. I really think this is the way to go. And remember we're not selling the brand. They're creating a brand new company that looks after the commercial side and SARU will still own 80% of that new company.
Sure, because SARU is such a trustworthy and inclusive body. Juniors down, women rugby terrible and all our unions littered with politics and quotas! All our stadiums are empty and stellenbosch elites run SARU the very thing that supporters hate! As it stands quotas are destroying our game and as for an American partner the Sharks are suffering under Jay Z and his rock sports investment and stake! Funny how SARU has not even opened its mouth on allowing gangsters and rappers into a sport that’s always seeker to grow it at grass roots levels. Tell us where has SARU done anything for SA rugby when it’s the tax payer and our school fees, children,time and money that keeps the game alive! Talk shit elsewhere, WHAT USA INVESTMENT is SARU bringing in, we don’t want black America or it’s money go fly a kite!
SARU is probably the best-run sports federation in South Africa right now. Judge them and what has taken place in the last five years rather than 20 years ago when admittedly they were terrible. You are right that the Junior Springboks are not doing well of late but the women's team is actually the best it's ever been and that's down to the federation putting resources there. By the way, that's part of Rassie's overall plan. Not all stadiums are empty and Stellenbosch elites have always run our rugby. Some things will never change and you have to accept it, for better or for worse. Please explain how quotas are destroying our game? Which teams are currently implementing quotas? What is SARU's quota policy? Regarding the Sharks, it's not a very good comparison. Domestic rugby all over the world struggles. Except for France and Japan, most teams are struggling because the market is very small. Frankly it was a foolish investment on the part of the Americans. Finally I don't appreciate at all that you come on my channel and tell me to "Talk shit elsewhere" ... You're welcome to engage with me and the others here and discuss and debate but I will not tolerate you swearing at me. Similarly I will not tolerate your comment about "We don’t want black America or it’s money ..." Who is black America? Who is "we"? And if you watched the video you may have noticed that none of the investors in talks with SARU for this new company are even black.
You are 100% correct. These big money guys will weasel their way into becoming a voice and main influencer of what happens in the actual team. The Spirngboks should retain a sense of humility and remain connected to the grassroots - namely the South African citizen. I am not against development or being old school and conservative. Big money has NO capability to deal with the emotional reality of who we are as a nation.
I think it's worth noting that these big money guys are coming in specifically for commercial reasons and they are 20% stake holders in a brand new company of which SARU will own the remaining 80% The reality is that it's a professional sport and at domestic level rugby is struggling in most parts of the world. Private investment as far as I can see is inevitable if we are to stay ahead of our competitors. Remember SARU still retains control of the actual sport. The new company is for commercial purposes only.
I hope it goes through. It is the future of the game. It seems that we are leading WR again. This is not only important for us but on a international scale.
It won’t, the majority of fans are against it! SARU knows this that’s why it’s vague on EVERYTHING! We have the sharks under American sponsors and we can see the results of it… keep dreaming
It's probably not the same thing, but years ago Stade Francais took over the management of Cape Town Stadium, with Morne du Plessis as the boss. This was gonna solve all the problems, preventing the stadium from becoming a white elephant and all that. But then it all stopped happening, and I wasn't paying too close attention so I can't remember what it was all about?
I must be honest I also inly vaguely remember that. I know there's a company called Stadium Management that looks after some of the venues that were built for the 2010 World Cup but similarly not entirely sure how that's going. Almost Thursday so hopefully all will be revealed very soon.
Hi Andre. I don't think they're selling it. Remember SARU is the governing body for rugby in South Africa so they pretty much control everything about the sport in our country. There's nothing unusual about that. Now it stands to reason they also have to do whatever they can to maximise the commercial side of things. Usually that will be match tickets, jerseys etc. This will be a separate company that exists solely for the purpose of generating higher revenues and maximising the commercial elements and those profits will then in turn be used to make the sport in our country stronger. Don't forget SARU will still control 80% of this new company. I think it sounds like a good deal.
It's investment, they're not selling the Springboks. It's not like they're giving 100% of the brand away. Our Springboks brand isn't as strong as it should be, so this is a big plus
@@Baz-h9h Indeed. News today that has come out indicates that that this is not a great deal for us right now. I still support private investment in principle but the deal must be good for all parties.
I won't lie, I don't know enough about the world of finance and commerce to judge how good or bad 20% is but I think we're moving in the right direction. My guess is the 20% can be increased or decreased in the future.
The AB’s and Wobblies, the French , Ireland and even England are going to wonder how they became the passengers I’m really hoping that they could do this with smaller nations like Samoa, Fiji, etc
Hahaha, they're not as terrible as they once were. I actually think they've turned things around quite remarkably in the last 6 years or so. A few years ago they were shocking but right now I'd say they are our best-run sports federation.
@@frontrowrugby well in SA that’s a very low bar. In fact it’s buried. If the management are not acting entirely out of self interest then it’s a miracle.
Yeah look I'm not going to argue that the bar is very low! But I do think we can give them some credit because as I say a few years ago they were really terrible. Granted the success on the field probably papers over many cracks but I do think what goes on upstairs affects the players on the field so they must be doing something right ... even if it's just a little bit!
@@frontrowrugby our success on the field despite layers of meddling by SARU and the ANC. Rassie , Siya have overcome the obstacles created by those meddlers. We need more Rassie’s and Siya’s at SARU. We all had to sit through the absurdity of a RWC winning coach getting fired and then later SARU appointing a coaching team that led us to total humiliation. A lack of sense of shame by authority figures is the SA norm sadly.
I am not convinced myself. It hasn't really worked for the Sharks, has it? Why can't South African businesses step up? Why do we need the mighty dollar, which may not have the same passion and understanding of what rugby truly means in this country? I fear they may run it as a venture capital project, and it will purely boil down to money, and the tradition and emotion, synonymous with SA rugby, may be lost. I am happy to be proven wrong, though.
You raise a lot of good points there, Jacques. So the way I see it is that domestic rugby globally is in pretty bad shape. Therefore the Sharks investment was a poor choice and it is panning out that way as far as we call can see. This investment is something that goes way beyond just one domestic team and we know that the international game is very strong. Plus the Springboks bring a large TV audience to the table which investors love. It's also why New Zealand and Australia are struggling now because they are no longer benefitting from South Africa's Super Rugby TV revenues. This is a good thing in my view. Your concerns are very valid but I would point out that it will be a brand new and separate company that will only focus on the commercial side of things. If it does what it is intended to do - make more money for South African rugby allowing us to improve in all areas then I think it's great.
Indeed that is the case but I think a major difference here is that South Africa brings serious eyeballs to the party in terms of television rights and viewership. New Zealand cannot compete with our numbers - it's not even close. It's for that very reason that in the Super Rugby era New Zealand and Australia were effectively being bankrolled by South African rugby and that is the true reason why those two are struggling right now. The All Blacks, for all their on-field success, are actually not an attractive investment and I think that's why they're trying to break into the American market i.e. playing Fiji in San Diego. So yes, you're right in terms of them going downhill but I think our instance is quite different.
@@frontrowrugby I think you are deluding yourself if you think South African rugby is different and won't be affected like New Zealand. Look what has happened in the UK when they accepted Private Equity money and see if you think the three clubs that have gone bankrupt agree with your analysis. You are selling part of your silverware which you will never get back as the deal is forever. The amount that they will take I heard was 27%, not the 20% you have stated. That's a lot to give away.
@@mikem3010 Couple of things, Mike. News today that has come out indicates that that this is not a great deal for us right now. I still support private investment in principle but the deal must be good for all parties. But there are massive differences between the New Zealand and UK deals and what SA Rugby is trying to do. Judge each deal by its own merits. And it's not 27% it is indeed 20%
Remember it's a separate company and the investors are coming in to expand SA Rugby at a commercial level only. SARU will own 80% of this venture while receiving commercial expertise from international investors.
Again what investors? Who? This isn’t SARUs call you dipswitch. It’s down to us as our kids play the game! Why has SARU not devulged the most basic of questions, choosing instead to glamourise it! It’s time Cape Town and the DA get the hell out of Rugby
If you watched the video you would know who the investors are and their track record. I made it very clear. I'd also appreciate it if you wouldn't come on my channel and call me names.
No you never made known the investors you said “private investors” ASG which says nothing! And your reasoning of marking rugby commercial! If SARU cannot do this for a 4x WC team my reasoning stands that SARU is not fit for purpose. For all we know they are just another woke Cape Town arm which again bends the knee to government even further! As for SARU funding schools, again parents have done this for decades… these do not belong to government or SARU! I wouldn’t have to resort to name calling had you understood (which you do) this and instead didn’t try sell the public lies! It’s a resounding NO! If you have not noticed the bela bill also spelled out that schools belong to those WHO BUILT and FUND it, like SARU it belongs to those who built,fund and keep it going! Good luck though it seems you have not thought any of this through
No, actually I mentioned the name of the investing firm as well as their three partners by name. You shouldn't have to resort to name calling at all. It is possible to disagree and have a constructive discussion at the same time.
Peter, If we can get an external business plan to fund South African rugby, it’s a no brainier , they will pump money into our already established global brand of rugby 100 fold of what our government or internal business revenue could ever afford, they couldn’t even if they wanted to. So it’s like the URC, we can have a platform where we have our best players salaries being paid by someone else and we still have the privilege and choice of when we want them? This is going to set us up in a completely new and different dimension of where rugby is right now and possibly actually save the game from becoming like rugby league….??
Exactly! You and I are on the same page here. The only negative here for me is that it has taken us this long to get to this point. We are always going to be disadvantaged by the rand and to a lesser extent geography. But we bring great value to the sport and as long as we can make sure our players are in demand, we will be in demand! Let's bring those U.S. dollars in, I say! Love your URC reference - it's so clever. Let them pay our salaries! A no-brainer if ever there was one. We can't compete with those numbers anyway.
@@frontrowrugbywell, it’s simple, if someone else is going to pay our players to be elite athletes in $ euros or pounds, I say go for it! We are scoring in every possible way! We can focus our rands on nurturing our young players while our stars get what they deserve. If the rest of the world doesn’t cotton on , then that’s their problem
No it’s not that simple, they are taking on a major stake and the public know nothing about what’s on offer! No thanks, it’s not SARUs call it’s ours and they don’t even have the balls to address the current issues or even ask us! The majority of South Africans will never accept this and it’s quite simple if SARU doesn’t meet our demands We will simply boycott, our kids can play offshore
That's a very good question. I think the biggest difference is the TV numbers South Africa contributes to the sport. In the years of SANZAR and Super Rugby New Zealand and Australia were the biggest beneficiaries of the TV money. For context, our population is about double New Zealand and Australia's combined and remember, that rugby isn't that popular in Australia so those two were actually parasites sucking our TV money. Now with the URC there is equity with the TV money distribution and I think that makes us way more attractive for investment than New Zealand. To be very honest I think the American investors who jumped into the All Blacks only did so because they were the world champions at the time and are finding now there isn't a lot to leverage because their numbers are so small. For what it's worth, keeping top players in the country to me is a non-issue in a professional sport. That's the old way of thinking. By allowing our boys to play overseas we are actually getting France, Japan and the UK to pay their salaries while they're still available for the Springboks! It's very clever.
@@frontrowrugby Indeed. And while our top boys earn money in an environment that's possibly less competitive, we extend their careers and at the same time we are extending our player pool while younger players get introduced to top level domestic rugby.
Hey guys. Quick update on this story:
SA Rugby has postponed a planned Special General Meeting (SGM) to consider a proposal to conclude a private equity investment in the sport’s commercial rights at the request of Mr Gayton McKenzie, the Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture. The meeting was scheduled to take place in Cape Town on Thursday but will now be rescheduled at the Minister’s request to more fully brief government on the proposal. A new date for the SGM before year-end will only be confirmed after the engagement with the minister.
watch tim's video (from eggchasers rugby), titled "NO DEAL! | SOUTH AFRICA PRIVATE EQUITY DEAL TO BE VOTED DOWN??!"
that will explain *exactly* what will happen to saru/sa rugby if the deal were to go through.
hopefully that's the end of it. this deal must *never* happen.
Thank you so much. Just watched it now. I think it's worth noting that Tim's video came out after more information about the deal came to light. My video came out before that information was known.
I think given what we know now, it's best to move on. I still support private investment in principle.
its needed expert advise
I agree! Thanks for the comment, Petrus.
I don't hear enough specifics of how it would benefit the individual franchises, and what's in it for them. I think in particular the Cheetahs and other marginilised franchises. How would they benefit specifically. I think clear answers should be given before these votes are harvested
Yes, that's a very fair comment. I think it's safe to assume that SARU will have given all the details and specifics to the individual members (the Cheetahs being one of them of course) and that same information has not yet been made known publicly. I think it only makes sense that each of the members also benefit from this otherwise SARU would have nothing to bargain with in terms of asking them to vote in favour of this proposal.
My suspicion is that most of these money's generated never reaches the players and structures, but rather end up in the pockets of some fat cats scimming off the top
The benefit for the franchises and players need to be so overwhelming significant that it becomes an offer that's impossible to refuse, and on top of that the fat cats must not be the big benefactors
Look I think there's always going to be an element of that. No matter where you go the guys at the top are in it for themselves. Make no mistake, you invest because you want a return on that investment. Even at a micro level, we all do that.
While I might not like it, I accept it. The key here is that there will be more money for South African rugby overall to improve every aspect of the sport in our country. That can only be a good thing in my opinion. However, the members of SARU who have seen the presentations are the ones who will truly know how much they will benefit and we'll find out on Thursday how they've voted.
Jammer Pieter, maar waar is die bewyse dat hierdie gaan werk? NZ is in finansiële gemors na hulle dit gedoen het.
Die sharks is al klaar onder n Amerikanse borg… ons kan sien how pik swart is hulle span en hoe goed dit daar gaan
Ek dink die grootste verskil is die TV-nommers wat Suid-Afrika aan die sport bydra. In die jare van SANZAR en Super Rugby was Nieu-Seeland en Australië die grootste begunstigdes van die TV-geld. Ter konteks, ons bevolking is ongeveer dubbel die gesamentlike bevolking van Nieu-Seeland en Australië, en onthou, rugby is nie so gewild in Australië nie, so daardie twee was eintlik parasiete wat ons TV-geld suig.
Nou met die URC is daar gelykheid met die verspreiding van TV-geld en ek dink dit maak ons baie meer aantreklik vir belegging as Nieu-Seeland. Om baie eerlik te wees, dink ek die Amerikaanse beleggers wat in die All Blacks gespring het, het dit net gedoen omdat hulle destyds die wêreldkampioene was, en hulle ontdek nou dat daar nie baie is om te benut nie, omdat hulle getalle so klein is.
Please don't come on my channel and make clearly racist comments. Debate and discuss the rugby all you like but I will not tolerate what you have said here. Most of those very same black players at the Sharks helped the Springboks win back-to-back Rugby World Cups. Clearly the problem lies elsewhere, wouldn't you say?
@@frontrowrugby ek hoop jy is reg. As mens CVC met Liberty se Formule 1 betrokkenheid vergelyk, kan mens sien wanneer geld belê word met die oog om die sport uit te brei en winsgewend te maak.
CVC se betrokkenheid by die URC en EPR is kommerwekkend. Ek sal ook nie verbaas wees as CVC agter die pogings is om die Britse Rugby Kampioenskap te maak nie. Ek dink hulle is bekommerd hulle gaan hulle belegging in EPR verloor.
Weet jy wie die Amerikaanse beleggers is?
@@frontrowrugby Unfortunately doses still exist. Forgive him, because a doos can't think.
Ackerly sports group, known for..... Teams you have never herd about....
Haha, I can see why you would think that but I follow American sports (casually I must admit) and Seattle is very much a sports hub in the States. Many of those teams this group owns or co-owns are staples of the U.S. sports leagues. I can assure you there's nothing strange going on there.
Excellent reporting 👏🏼
Thank you very much, Margie. I tried to convey what I think is quite complicated in a clear and concise manner. Appreciate your kind words!
If SARUGBY has an external partner that is only after money, what are our chances when we earn Rands to afford a springbok rugby jersey, a ticket to watch a game or a subscription to watch at home? These investors won't listen to a sob story of a poor country who love the game. This might be great for the players but the spectators will pay the dividends the investors demand. This is a US funding model, do they seem happy with their hyper capitalist world? Let them invest, but selling the brand is naive and foolish!
I don't think this is about taking Springbok paraphernalia or match tickets away from the fans. This is about increasing revenues for SARU. That additional money will be used to strengthen the sport in South Africa. The rand and our geography puts us in a disadvantageous position. I really think this is the way to go. And remember we're not selling the brand. They're creating a brand new company that looks after the commercial side and SARU will still own 80% of that new company.
Sure, because SARU is such a trustworthy and inclusive body. Juniors down, women rugby terrible and all our unions littered with politics and quotas! All our stadiums are empty and stellenbosch elites run SARU the very thing that supporters hate! As it stands quotas are destroying our game and as for an American partner the Sharks are suffering under Jay Z and his rock sports investment and stake! Funny how SARU has not even opened its mouth on allowing gangsters and rappers into a sport that’s always seeker to grow it at grass roots levels. Tell us where has SARU done anything for SA rugby when it’s the tax payer and our school fees, children,time and money that keeps the game alive! Talk shit elsewhere, WHAT USA INVESTMENT is SARU bringing in, we don’t want black America or it’s money go fly a kite!
SARU is probably the best-run sports federation in South Africa right now. Judge them and what has taken place in the last five years rather than 20 years ago when admittedly they were terrible.
You are right that the Junior Springboks are not doing well of late but the women's team is actually the best it's ever been and that's down to the federation putting resources there. By the way, that's part of Rassie's overall plan.
Not all stadiums are empty and Stellenbosch elites have always run our rugby. Some things will never change and you have to accept it, for better or for worse.
Please explain how quotas are destroying our game? Which teams are currently implementing quotas? What is SARU's quota policy?
Regarding the Sharks, it's not a very good comparison. Domestic rugby all over the world struggles. Except for France and Japan, most teams are struggling because the market is very small. Frankly it was a foolish investment on the part of the Americans.
Finally I don't appreciate at all that you come on my channel and tell me to "Talk shit elsewhere" ... You're welcome to engage with me and the others here and discuss and debate but I will not tolerate you swearing at me.
Similarly I will not tolerate your comment about "We don’t want black America or it’s money ..." Who is black America? Who is "we"? And if you watched the video you may have noticed that none of the investors in talks with SARU for this new company are even black.
You are 100% correct. These big money guys will weasel their way into becoming a voice and main influencer of what happens in the actual team. The Spirngboks should retain a sense of humility and remain connected to the grassroots - namely the South African citizen. I am not against development or being old school and conservative. Big money has NO capability to deal with the emotional reality of who we are as a nation.
I think it's worth noting that these big money guys are coming in specifically for commercial reasons and they are 20% stake holders in a brand new company of which SARU will own the remaining 80%
The reality is that it's a professional sport and at domestic level rugby is struggling in most parts of the world. Private investment as far as I can see is inevitable if we are to stay ahead of our competitors. Remember SARU still retains control of the actual sport. The new company is for commercial purposes only.
How is this Kirkwood guy connected to England Rugby (who wants to out the Springboks from the URC) ?
Good question but I'm not familiar with that. Do you have any more information on that?
I hope it goes through. It is the future of the game. It seems that we are leading WR again.
This is not only important for us but on a international scale.
That makes two of us! I see no negatives here.
It won’t, the majority of fans are against it! SARU knows this that’s why it’s vague on EVERYTHING! We have the sharks under American sponsors and we can see the results of it… keep dreaming
It's probably not the same thing, but years ago Stade Francais took over the management of Cape Town Stadium, with Morne du Plessis as the boss. This was gonna solve all the problems, preventing the stadium from becoming a white elephant and all that. But then it all stopped happening, and I wasn't paying too close attention so I can't remember what it was all about?
I must be honest I also inly vaguely remember that. I know there's a company called Stadium Management that looks after some of the venues that were built for the 2010 World Cup but similarly not entirely sure how that's going. Almost Thursday so hopefully all will be revealed very soon.
Springbok rugby belongs to the people. How dare you sell it!
Hi Andre. I don't think they're selling it. Remember SARU is the governing body for rugby in South Africa so they pretty much control everything about the sport in our country. There's nothing unusual about that. Now it stands to reason they also have to do whatever they can to maximise the commercial side of things. Usually that will be match tickets, jerseys etc.
This will be a separate company that exists solely for the purpose of generating higher revenues and maximising the commercial elements and those profits will then in turn be used to make the sport in our country stronger. Don't forget SARU will still control 80% of this new company.
I think it sounds like a good deal.
It's investment, they're not selling the Springboks. It's not like they're giving 100% of the brand away. Our Springboks brand isn't as strong as it should be, so this is a big plus
@@Baz-h9h Indeed. News today that has come out indicates that that this is not a great deal for us right now. I still support private investment in principle but the deal must be good for all parties.
I cant see if he is AI or not?
Who exactly can you not see if he is AI or not? Me? Hahaha.
It just needs to be at the right price. Not maybe a bit cheap?
I won't lie, I don't know enough about the world of finance and commerce to judge how good or bad 20% is but I think we're moving in the right direction. My guess is the 20% can be increased or decreased in the future.
The AB’s and Wobblies, the French , Ireland and even England are going to wonder how they became the passengers
I’m really hoping that they could do this with smaller nations like Samoa, Fiji, etc
Hahaha, love this! Wouldn't it be great if a venture capitalist got hold of Samoa, Fiji etc.? It's a harder sell but why not? Would love to see it.
This will be a huge mistake
Why do you say that? What's your opinion on this?
Anything to get away from the shambles that SARU is.
Hahaha, they're not as terrible as they once were. I actually think they've turned things around quite remarkably in the last 6 years or so. A few years ago they were shocking but right now I'd say they are our best-run sports federation.
@@frontrowrugby well in SA that’s a very low bar. In fact it’s buried. If the management are not acting entirely out of self interest then it’s a miracle.
Yeah look I'm not going to argue that the bar is very low! But I do think we can give them some credit because as I say a few years ago they were really terrible. Granted the success on the field probably papers over many cracks but I do think what goes on upstairs affects the players on the field so they must be doing something right ... even if it's just a little bit!
@@frontrowrugby our success on the field despite layers of meddling by SARU and the ANC.
Rassie , Siya have overcome the obstacles created by those meddlers. We need more Rassie’s and Siya’s at SARU. We all had to sit through the absurdity of a RWC winning coach getting fired and then later SARU appointing a coaching team that led us to total humiliation.
A lack of sense of shame by authority figures is the SA norm sadly.
I am not convinced myself. It hasn't really worked for the Sharks, has it? Why can't South African businesses step up? Why do we need the mighty dollar, which may not have the same passion and understanding of what rugby truly means in this country? I fear they may run it as a venture capital project, and it will purely boil down to money, and the tradition and emotion, synonymous with SA rugby, may be lost. I am happy to be proven wrong, though.
You raise a lot of good points there, Jacques. So the way I see it is that domestic rugby globally is in pretty bad shape. Therefore the Sharks investment was a poor choice and it is panning out that way as far as we call can see.
This investment is something that goes way beyond just one domestic team and we know that the international game is very strong. Plus the Springboks bring a large TV audience to the table which investors love. It's also why New Zealand and Australia are struggling now because they are no longer benefitting from South Africa's Super Rugby TV revenues. This is a good thing in my view.
Your concerns are very valid but I would point out that it will be a brand new and separate company that will only focus on the commercial side of things. If it does what it is intended to do - make more money for South African rugby allowing us to improve in all areas then I think it's great.
NZ rugby went downhill when they went down this path...
Indeed that is the case but I think a major difference here is that South Africa brings serious eyeballs to the party in terms of television rights and viewership. New Zealand cannot compete with our numbers - it's not even close.
It's for that very reason that in the Super Rugby era New Zealand and Australia were effectively being bankrolled by South African rugby and that is the true reason why those two are struggling right now. The All Blacks, for all their on-field success, are actually not an attractive investment and I think that's why they're trying to break into the American market i.e. playing Fiji in San Diego.
So yes, you're right in terms of them going downhill but I think our instance is quite different.
@@frontrowrugby I think you are deluding yourself if you think South African rugby is different and won't be affected like New Zealand. Look what has happened in the UK when they accepted Private Equity money and see if you think the three clubs that have gone bankrupt agree with your analysis. You are selling part of your silverware which you will never get back as the deal is forever. The amount that they will take I heard was 27%, not the 20% you have stated. That's a lot to give away.
@@mikem3010 Couple of things, Mike. News today that has come out indicates that that this is not a great deal for us right now. I still support private investment in principle but the deal must be good for all parties.
But there are massive differences between the New Zealand and UK deals and what SA Rugby is trying to do. Judge each deal by its own merits.
And it's not 27% it is indeed 20%
20% stake is WAY too much! At the very most they can sell 15%, but imo no more than 10% shares.
Remember it's a separate company and the investors are coming in to expand SA Rugby at a commercial level only. SARU will own 80% of this venture while receiving commercial expertise from international investors.
Again what investors? Who? This isn’t SARUs call you dipswitch. It’s down to us as our kids play the game! Why has SARU not devulged the most basic of questions, choosing instead to glamourise it! It’s time Cape Town and the DA get the hell out of Rugby
If you watched the video you would know who the investors are and their track record. I made it very clear.
I'd also appreciate it if you wouldn't come on my channel and call me names.
No you never made known the investors you said “private investors” ASG which says nothing! And your reasoning of marking rugby commercial! If SARU cannot do this for a 4x WC team my reasoning stands that SARU is not fit for purpose. For all we know they are just another woke Cape Town arm which again bends the knee to government even further!
As for SARU funding schools, again parents have done this for decades… these do not belong to government or SARU! I wouldn’t have to resort to name calling had you understood (which you do) this and instead didn’t try sell the public lies!
It’s a resounding NO! If you have not noticed the bela bill also spelled out that schools belong to those WHO BUILT and FUND it, like SARU it belongs to those who built,fund and keep it going! Good luck though it seems you have not thought any of this through
No, actually I mentioned the name of the investing firm as well as their three partners by name.
You shouldn't have to resort to name calling at all. It is possible to disagree and have a constructive discussion at the same time.
Peter, If we can get an external business plan to fund South African rugby, it’s a no brainier , they will pump money into our already established global brand of rugby 100 fold of what our government or internal business revenue could ever afford, they couldn’t even if they wanted to.
So it’s like the URC, we can have a platform where we have our best players salaries being paid by someone else and we still have the privilege and choice of when we want them?
This is going to set us up in a completely new and different dimension of where rugby is right now and possibly actually save the game from becoming like rugby league….??
Exactly! You and I are on the same page here. The only negative here for me is that it has taken us this long to get to this point. We are always going to be disadvantaged by the rand and to a lesser extent geography. But we bring great value to the sport and as long as we can make sure our players are in demand, we will be in demand!
Let's bring those U.S. dollars in, I say!
Love your URC reference - it's so clever. Let them pay our salaries! A no-brainer if ever there was one. We can't compete with those numbers anyway.
@@frontrowrugbywell, it’s simple, if someone else is going to pay our players to be elite athletes in $ euros or pounds, I say go for it! We are scoring in every possible way!
We can focus our rands on nurturing our young players while our stars get what they deserve.
If the rest of the world doesn’t cotton on , then that’s their problem
Couldn't have said it better myself!
No it’s not that simple, they are taking on a major stake and the public know nothing about what’s on offer! No thanks, it’s not SARUs call it’s ours and they don’t even have the balls to address the current issues or even ask us! The majority of South Africans will never accept this and it’s quite simple if SARU doesn’t meet our demands We will simply boycott, our kids can play offshore
How has this actually helped nz who can't even keep their top players in the country?
That's a very good question. I think the biggest difference is the TV numbers South Africa contributes to the sport. In the years of SANZAR and Super Rugby New Zealand and Australia were the biggest beneficiaries of the TV money. For context, our population is about double New Zealand and Australia's combined and remember, that rugby isn't that popular in Australia so those two were actually parasites sucking our TV money.
Now with the URC there is equity with the TV money distribution and I think that makes us way more attractive for investment than New Zealand. To be very honest I think the American investors who jumped into the All Blacks only did so because they were the world champions at the time and are finding now there isn't a lot to leverage because their numbers are so small.
For what it's worth, keeping top players in the country to me is a non-issue in a professional sport. That's the old way of thinking. By allowing our boys to play overseas we are actually getting France, Japan and the UK to pay their salaries while they're still available for the Springboks! It's very clever.
@@frontrowrugby Indeed. And while our top boys earn money in an environment that's possibly less competitive, we extend their careers and at the same time we are extending our player pool while younger players get introduced to top level domestic rugby.
It's very clever I think.
The smell of money attracts all sorts of predators. Watch this space...
Yes, let's see what happens. While I am in favour of this the reality is that any investment comes with risk. Let's see how SARU votes on Thursday.