Munster Team Talk Thread VI - Stander Up and Fight

davo2001

Return of the JJ

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Why does the image you posted have "Your Exclusive offer" written at the top?

Because ticketmaster like to make me feel important when I'm not?

davo2001

Return of the JJ

vkid wrote: »

Seems to have been sent out to people who bought tickets on TM this year. Got 2 this time. I'd say I'm up in the Sky, but feck it...i don't care at this stage.

Nope, still some available:

http://www.ticketmaster.ie/event/1800527DC15D80DA?did=tsap&awc=6643_1491840419_f8ebd2775a543133815b5a469ecac253

LuckyGent88

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

Managed to get somebin the end. Just wasn't giving me them initially. Looks like plenty of tickets around anyway.

Possibly a bit too high up forbthe father so might look to swap it at some stage

ScrubsfanChris

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

vkid wrote: »

Seems to have been sent out to people who bought tickets on TM this year. Got 2 this time. I'd say I'm up in the Sky, but feck it...i don't care at this stage.

Ah I see, I'm after mis-reading some previous posts

leakyboots

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

MRSC membership is only 30 quid a year lads, well worth it for instances like these (and the bobs go straight to the Academy)

Awesomeness

Got sorted. Looks like there are a few there. Mainly up high and the North stand

ScrubsfanChris

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

Awesomeness wrote: »

Got sorted. Looks like there are a few there. Mainly up high and the North stand

Never been in the North stand, whats the view like, similar to the lower south stand?

ablelocks

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

seating choices are odd - you think you're gonna be in the west or east stand, but in reality it's the south stand.

for me, blk 112 is coming up as east stand lower and south stand lower - same row and seats. blk 119 is coming up for the west stand lower. as far as i can see on the map, 119 is also in the south stand.

and now, west stand lower cat 2 tickets are also showing blk112? same row and seat number as souths stand cat 3 for a tenner less!?

Kevski

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

ablelocks wrote: »

seating choices are odd - you think you're gonna be in the west or east stand, but in reality it's the south stand.

for me, blk 112 is coming up as east stand lower and south stand lower - same row and seats. blk 119 is coming up for the west stand lower. as far as i can see on the map, 119 is also in the south stand.

Aren't they the blocks in the corners? Sounds like they might be on the border between the two stands - one seat might technically be in the south stand and the one next to it in the east/west stand.

awec

thomond2006 wrote: »

Will Saracens even have 1,000 fans there at this rate?

I'm sure all three Saracens fans have got sorted by now.

PTH2009

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

awec wrote: »

I'm sure all three Saracens fans have got sorted by now.

All three can do that hand waving thing sarries fans lol

Prob bring over just under 4000, a few Leinster fans who are not travelling too France mite buy a few tickets too, sponsors etc have there few tickets and the rest will be Munster fans

thomond2006

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

PTH2009 wrote: »

All three can do that hand waving thing sarries fans lol

Prob bring over just under 4000, a few Leinster fans who are not travelling too France mite buy a few tickets too, sponsors etc have there few tickets and the rest will be Munster fans

When 6,000 Glasgow fans can turn up at their home QF, I doubt they'll bring 4k. I don't think they even applied for 4,000 tickets.

Cookiemunster

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

PTH2009 wrote: »

All three can do that hand waving thing sarries fans lol

Prob bring over just under 4000, a few Leinster fans who are not travelling too France mite buy a few tickets too, sponsors etc have there few tickets and the rest will be Munster fans

They only asked for 2,500 tickets so I doubt they'll be bringing 4000.

CatFromHue

Their low fan base does raise the question as to where all their money comes from

Eod100

thomond2006 wrote: »

When 6,000 Glasgow fans can turn up at their home QF, I doubt they'll bring 4k. I don't think they even applied for 4,000 tickets.

I'd be shocked if much more than 1k travel over tbh..

UK club attendance is a bit weird though. 71k at Saracens v Quins at Wembeley at the weekend apparently. But Saracens v Northampton in Champions Cup QF last season only drew 8k. Fair enough in the CC semi 2 weeks later they got double that at home but still..

Cookiemunster

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

CatFromHue wrote: »

Their low fan base does raise the question as to where all their money comes from

Their South African sugar daddy. They lose millions every year.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Their South African sugar daddy. They lose millions every year.

Who?

Erik Shin

Stander Up and Fight

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Who?

Johann Rupert

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Erik Shin wrote: »

Johann Rupert

Oh well, that's incorrect so. It's mostly Wray's money, for better or for worse. Wasn't it like 10 years ago that they had all that South African influence come in with Venter and the boys?

Cookiemunster

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Who?

A chap name Johann Rupert owns 50% of the club. He's rather rich.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Cookiemunster wrote: »

A chap name Johann Rupert owns 50% of the club. He's rather rich.

It was a long time ago they got that South African money.

It's Wray's money and the debt they've built up that made that club what it is today. They wish they had a "sugar daddy".

Cookiemunster

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It was a long time ago they got that South African money.

It's Wray's money and the debt they've built up that made that club what it is today. They wish they had a "sugar daddy".

In this interview with Nigel Wray from last May it's stated his financial load at Saracens has been shared with South African investors over the past few seasons.

From a 2014 interview. "Johann Rupert and his family, they own 50 percent of the club, I own 50 percent of the club. It's been a fantastic partnership," said Wray, who had previously been in sole charge of Saracens since rugby union turned professional in 1995.

"They've been incredibly supportive and I can't think of one South African player who has come to this club, who hasn't been a real gentleman. They are outstanding people and have made an outstanding contribution.

"It's always great in life to have a partner, and to do things with people because being on your own is a lonely road," Wray added

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Cookiemunster wrote: »

In this interview with Nigel Wray from last May it's stated his financial load at Saracens has been shared with South African investors over the past few seasons.

That journalist might claim it has been, but none of the finances they've released that I've seen suggest that they've had any further help at all. They're reliant on debt which the parent company will supposedly fund. If you ask me, there's not much chance of that in practice if the **** actually hit the fan.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

CatFromHue wrote: »

Their low fan base does raise the question as to where all their money comes from

Does it?

When you look at their squad, it's no more star-studded than Munster's. Less so probably, and most of their really big names (the Vunipolas, Farrell) were either developed in-house or signed as youngsters. They simply don't deserve this reputation of buying in talent, they're not remotely on a par with the likes of Toulon, Wasps, etc.

As for where the money comes from.
- Their usual home gate of 9-10,000 compares well with most pro clubs in Europe. They supplement that with the occasional 70,000 gate, like on Saturday.
- They win things. Winning = prize money.
- The English TV deal absolutely dwarfs the Pro12.
- With maybe 4 or 5 guys in the senior England squad, and a few more guys on the fringes, they get a fair wedge directly from RFU.

The idea that they only compete because of their sugar daddy is completely wrong. They are far closer to being self-sufficient than any Irish province.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

Does it?

When you look at their squad, it's no more star-studded than Munster's. Less so probably, most of their really big names (the Vunipolas, Farrell) were either developed in-house or signed as unknown youngsters. They simply don't deserve this reputation of buying in talent.

As for where the money comes from.
- Their usual home gate of 9-10,000 compares well with most pro clubs in Europe. They supplement that with the occasional 70,000 gate, like on Saturday.
- They win things. Winning = prize money.
- The English TV deal absolutely dwarfs the Pro12.
- With maybe 4 or 5 guys in the senior England squad, and a few more guys on the fringes, they get a fair wedge directly from RFU.

The idea that they only compete because of their sugar daddy is completely wrong. They are far closer to being self-sufficient than any Irish province.

Ah now, if Saracens were close to being self-sufficient you wouldn't have Wray lamenting to the press about how worrying their financial results are. I'd say they're one of the least self-sufficient clubs in world rugby. They've no sugar daddy at all, only the promise of Wray maybe coming into save them if they can't service their debt (which is many multiples of what their income will ever be).

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ah now, if Saracens were close to being self-sufficient you wouldn't have Wray lamenting to the press about how worrying their financial results are. I'd say they're one of the least self-sufficient clubs in world rugby. They've no sugar daddy at all, only the promise of Wray maybe coming into save them if they can't service their debt (which is many multiples of what their income will ever be).

To clarify, I know they're not "self-sufficient" in an income > costs sort of way, but then, are any of the Irish provinces?

The other point is that this is the first season of the new RFU/Premiership agreement and the first season of the new BT TV deal, so certainly income should be up in their next set of figures, so they are getting there.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

To clarify, I know they're not "self-sufficient" in an income > costs sort of way, but then, are any of the Irish provinces?

No, I'd doubt they are self-sufficient. But they don't need to be, which is why they aren't.

But Saracens do need to stop losing millions annually and they have not managed to do that. More alarmingly, I just don't see how they become self-sufficient without slashing their playing budget.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, I'd doubt they are self-sufficient. But they don't need to be, which is why they aren't.

But Saracens do need to stop losing millions annually and they have not managed to do that. More alarmingly, I just don't see how they become self-sufficient without slashing their playing budget.

See my edit above re increased income this season. Word was that the new TV deal was 80% more than the previous, while the RFU agreement pumps £30 million per season into the Premiership, so maybe another £2.5 - 3 million for Sarries.

They're no different to many other English or French clubs in that they're basically relying on TV rights money to keep going up, but I don't really see any problem with that.

Zzippy

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

Allianz Park is a nightmare to get to, which is a contributory factor in attendance. My uncle lives over there and used to go to a lot of Sarries games (he's Munster, really, just a rugby fan) but since they moved he rarely goes anymore. Went over for the Connacht game a cpl years ago and we had to get a train, a bus, then a long walk to get to the ground. Having said that, they have a great matchday experience, family-friendly atmosphere and lots of volunteer stewards to direct people, so they're trying to create the fanbase, but location is really killing them IMO.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

See my edit above re increased income this season. Word was that the new TV deal was 80% more than the previous, while the RFU agreement pumps £30 million per season into the Premiership, so maybe another £2.5 - 3 million for Sarries.

They're no different to many other English or French clubs in that they're basically relying on TV rights money to keep going up, but I don't really see any problem with that.

I think the problem is that they're just not seeing any increase in attendance or interest off the field.

I think they've basically taken a gamble on spending big to build an excellent squad and then winning in Europe in the hopes of building a big following. They saw Leinster and Munster transform their attendances thanks to European rugby. But they've done that now and the crowds never came. So how are they supposed to make a profit... I can't see where else it comes from without slashing their playing budget. Even if they make 2-3 million more per season, I think they're still making the biggest loss of any club in the Premiership.

stephen_n

CatFromHue wrote: »

Their low fan base does raise the question as to where all their money comes from

They are £45,000,000 in debt, they get it from banks.

aloooof

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Oh well, that's incorrect so. It's mostly Wray's money, for better or for worse. Wasn't it like 10 years ago that they had all that South African influence come in with Venter and the boys?

Three cheers for Sireli Bombo!

PTH2009

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

stephen_n wrote: »

They are £45,000,000 in debt, they get it from banks.

Sure Munster give them a hand with that. We will beat them in the semi final so they won't have to spend funds travelling to Scotland for the final lol

They are old club so it's weird they have such a small fan base, London is a huge city though so they prob have a large fan base but a lot won't travel to games. They have sum quality players though

awec

Are there not rules around debt etc? How are Saracens getting around those?

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

awec wrote: »

Are there not rules around debt etc? How are Saracens getting around those?

So long as you remain solvent, then no bother.

As long as the owners keep absorbing the loss and paying the bills, then Sarries can keep going.

Neil3030

So how are Sarries failing​ to build a big following, yet 70k turn up for the game last week in Wembley?

Neil3030

John Hayes Ligind

Neil3030 wrote: »

So how are Sarries failing​ to build a big following, yet 70k turn up for the game last week in Wembley?

They effectively give away the tickets, going by past seasons.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Julien Rapid Eagle wrote: »

They effectively give away the tickets, going by past seasons.

Loads of them get given away. Loads of others sell for 5 pounds or the like

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

Neil3030 wrote: »

So how are Sarries failing​ to build a big following, yet 70k turn up for the game last week in Wembley?

Because they're big cheating bastards obvs.

I heard there was only 12,000 tickets sold but Brendan Venter shipped 59,000 South Africans over to fill the gaps, and the Rand is so weak it only cost 20 quid in total, and then Nigel Wray took all their passports and sold them to Tesco as indentured workers.

Or maybe they're doing a good job of marketing the events and selling tickets, but that's very unlikely.

stephen_n

awec wrote: »

Are there not rules around debt etc? How are Saracens getting around those?

Don't think so, Wasps are £43,000,000 in debt too, but a lot of that is tied up in the stadium seemingly. They better hope BT come up with a better deal next time around.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

Because they're big cheating bastards obvs.

I heard there was only 12,000 tickets sold but Brendan Venter shipped 59,000 South Africans over to fill the gaps, and the Rand is so weak it only cost 20 quid in total, and then Nigel Wray took all their passports and sold them to Tesco as indentured workers.

Or maybe they're doing a good job of marketing the events and selling tickets, but that's very unlikely.

It's not because they're doing a great job of marketing anyway. Or else they'd have regular attendances and they wouldn't be struggling to sell tickets and pulling nightmarish publicity stunts like they do.

I was in the middle of it. I went with a big group of guys to Ospreys v Sarries in Wembley stadium. The reason they went, despite not being rugby fans, was because they were entered in a pub draw for tickets to that game. The pub then called people to tell them they'd won, and they had to go through multiple people to find takers for the game, luckily my cousin realised I was a rugby fan and so he decided I would accompany his mates and they'd make a night of it. There were a fair few groups like that at the game and I can't say I thought the game or presentation itself (shocking half time music etc) would have convinced many of them to return (and Sarries attendances since seem to confirm that theory).

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

So long as you remain solvent, then no bother.

As long as the owners keep absorbing the loss and paying the bills, then Sarries can keep going.

The owners aren't absorbing the loss. The club is. And the club even stated clearly in their accounts that there is no guarrantee that their parent company will pay up if the club is unable to maintain its debt.

There's no getting around the fact that the club is in a very bad financial situation. Even the Chairman has said it.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's not because they're doing a great job of marketing anyway. Or else they'd have regular attendances and they wouldn't be struggling to sell tickets and pulling nightmarish publicity stunts like they do.

I was in the middle of it. I went with a big group of guys to Ospreys v Sarries in Wembley stadium. The reason they went, despite not being rugby fans, was because they were entered in a pub draw for tickets to that game. The pub then called people to tell them they'd won, and they had to go through multiple people to find takers for the game, luckily my cousin realised I was a rugby fan and so he decided I would accompany his mates and they'd make a night of it. There were a fair few groups like that at the game and I can't say I thought the game or presentation itself (shocking half time music etc) would have convinced many of them to return (and Sarries attendances since seem to confirm that theory).

In fairness, Saracens v Ospreys was a hard sell. Trying to get people out to watch some randomers from Swansea in the middle of December is not the same as a local derby against Quins in April. Tickets for the Quins match at the weekend started at £20.

But discounting tickets is not an unusual tactic. I paid €10 for my tickets to the Leinster v Wasps game. I don't remember anyone slating Leinster for their desperation then.

Sarries have a ground that holds 10,000 people, they usually get 9,500. It seems like they are doing OK on attendances.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The owners aren't absorbing the loss. The club is. And the club even stated clearly in their accounts that there is no guarrantee that their parent company will pay up if the club is unable to maintain its debt.

There's no getting around the fact that the club is in a very bad financial situation. Even the Chairman has said it.

Yes, I was more replying to the comment that 'banks' were keeping them afloat.

.ak

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

Lets try and stay on topic please...

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

In fairness, Saracens v Ospreys was a hard sell. Trying to get people out to watch some randomers from Swansea in the middle of December is not the same as a local derby against Quins in April. Tickets for the Quins match at the weekend started at £20.

But discounting tickets is not an unusual tactic. I paid €10 for my tickets to the Leinster v Wasps game. I don't remember anyone slating Leinster for their desperation then.

Sarries have a ground that holds 10,000 people, they usually get 9,500. It seems like they are doing OK on attendances.

I'm not sure why you're comparing them to Leinster or Irish provinces. They don't have financial problems, Saracens very much do. Regardless, a promotional one-hour sale for tickets in the Aviva is different to what Saracens were doing.

And they DO have attendance problems. They're only taking a couple of thousand for one of the biggest games in their club's history. Maybe that's something worth comaring with the provinces.

If they weren't spending massively it wouldn't be an issue. But they are. They've taken a massive gamble that isn't paying off financially, and if things continue as they have been they will become the next Richmond. Another difference with the Irish provinces, where that is not remotely a risk.

thomond2006

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

What was the logic with moving out to Barnet? The high cost of land/property in central London comes to mind...

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm not sure why you're comparing them to Leinster or Irish provinces. They don't have financial problems, Saracens very much do. Regardless, a promotional one-hour sale for tickets in the Aviva is different to what Saracens were doing.

And they DO have attendance problems. They're only taking a couple of thousand for one of the biggest games in their club's history. Maybe that's something worth comaring with the provinces.

If they weren't spending massively it wouldn't be an issue. But they are. They've taken a massive gamble that isn't paying off financially, and if things continue as they have been they will become the next Richmond. Another difference with the Irish provinces, where that is not remotely a risk.

The Irish provinces don't have financial problems?

Munster (see .ak, I'm on topic here) had to be bailed out by IRFU when they couldn't keep up with the loans on Thomond a couple of years ago. The IRFU had to come in and take 50% ownership of the stadium and dish out some very lovely interest-free, open-ended loans. Is that really very different to what Saracens' owners do?

Munster (and other provinces, but I'm staying on topic) have the vast bulk of their players' salaries paid from central IRFU funds. If they had to bear the full weight of the salaries of all these stars, would things be so rosy?

As you say, the difference is that Saracens owners could, at some point, walk away and cut their losses. It's extremely unlikely though.

People don't like Saracens. I do. I think they're exactly what a rugby club should be.

davo2001

Return of the JJ

Munster (see .ak, I'm on topic here) had to be bailed out by IRFU when they couldn't keep up with the loans on Thomond a couple of years ago.

Got a link or a source for that?

leakyboots

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

Is Munster's loan not being 'restructured'? That's a bit different to being bailed out. The financial landscape is very different to when the original loan was being worked out.

And we've the 10 and 5 year ticket renewals coming up this year with the money ear-marked to be sent back to the IRFU by all accounts.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Former Former wrote: »

Munster (see .ak, I'm on topic here) had to be bailed out by IRFU when they couldn't keep up with the loans on Thomond a couple of years ago. The IRFU had to come in and take 50% ownership of the stadium and dish out some very lovely interest-free, open-ended loans. Is that really very different to what Saracens' owners do?

Yes it is different. Because 1) It's an asset. And 2) They have to cover the debt if Munster become insolvent. Neither of those apply to the Saracens debt, which has been created by opex and which the owners have no requirement to cover.

Former Former wrote: »

Munster (and other provinces, but I'm staying on topic) have the vast bulk of their players' salaries paid from central IRFU funds. If they had to bear the full weight of the salaries of all these stars, would things be so rosy?

But they don't have to bear the full weight of the salaries. It's a totally pointless exercise to imagine what would happen if they did.

Former Former wrote: »

As you say, the difference is that Saracens owners could, at some point, walk away and cut their losses. It's extremely unlikely though.

People don't like Saracens. I do. I think they're exactly what a rugby club should be.

Why is it extremely unlikely that the owners would walk away? As far as I'm concerned they're already doing that. They invested a lot of money a decade ago which saw lots of South Africans brought to London. Now those players have gone and there's been no more investment from them or the chairman. Brits in the press recently said the "south african era is over" and I think he's right. They no longer have a reason to sink tens of millions into an insolvent club, they'd much more likely just walk away like others before them.

Sorry, but they are not what a rugby club should be. A rugby club should not hire "fat ladys" to sing during a game they're winning. A rugby club should not offer fans their money back if an ex-player scores against them. A rugby club should not pipe in crowd noise into the away section to disrespect travelling fans. A rugby club shouldn't treat players the way they reportedly have done, like Andy Saul and some others. A rugby club shouldn't be breaching things like the salary cap. I'm sure there's more.