RugbyRebels

… or adopt a tiered funding model if they can’t bridge a current deficit by the end of the year. The WRU is prepared to activate the two year notification to the URC to reduce Welsh participation if necessary.

This makes some financial sense, noting that fewer teams also means less income. But it could leave swathes of wales without a pro team and, knowing what we know now about the outcomes when the Warriors were axed, there’s not much hope of supporters moving with the money unless there is a more fundamental change , ie all regions are disassociated from the clubs.

Less regions also makes recruitment more of an issue, the space for NWQ players becomes very limited.

Personally if the funding can’t be bridged then I’d support a 2+2 model and hopefully get two sides that can compete. But I’m not a fan of cutting another region.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2024 2:34 pm … or adopt a tiered funding model if they can’t bridge a current deficit by the end of the year. The WRU is prepared to activate the two year notification to the URC to reduce Welsh participation if necessary.

This makes some financial sense, noting that fewer teams also means less income. But it could leave swathes of wales without a pro team and, knowing what we know now about the outcomes when the Warriors were axed, there’s not much hope of supporters moving with the money unless there is a more fundamental change , ie all regions are disassociated from the clubs.

Less regions also makes recruitment more of an issue, the space for NWQ players becomes very limited.

Personally if the funding can’t be bridged then I’d support a 2+2 model and hopefully get two sides that can compete. But I’m not a fan of cutting another region.

Agreed. Some kind of tiered funding model would be much better than losing a region.

Read the first line as "...adopt a tired funding model..." which also seems true

Writing definitely seems to be on the wall, probably for the Dragons. Hard to justify the level of under performance. If it is to be tiered, would like it to be performance based, but unlikely. Once one club has the higher tier, they would be in dire straits if funding removed.

I listened to the scrumV podcast today where they interviewed our chairman and CEO.

Why are we in this mess- Covid. That was repeated a lot and frankly doesn’t explain everything in my opinion. The most revealing bit was where they announced that there was one person in the whole of the WRU who was financially qualified. One. In a £100m business. And apparently the large staff turnover following the sexism incident meant a lot of corporate knowledge was lost as it was purely in peoples heads. So the WRU has been badly managed for decades.

Interesting that the WRU was considered sound on 2019, despite the obvious underperformance of the regions and the dearth of quality new players coming through.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 7:44 am I listened to the scrumV podcast today where they interviewed our chairman and CEO.

Why are we in this mess- Covid. That was repeated a lot and frankly doesn’t explain everything in my opinion. The most revealing bit was where they announced that there was one person in the whole of the WRU who was financially qualified. One. In a £100m business. And apparently the large staff turnover following the sexism incident meant a lot of corporate knowledge was lost as it was purely in peoples heads. So the WRU has been badly managed for decades.

Interesting that the WRU was considered sound on 2019, despite the obvious underperformance of the regions and the dearth of quality new players coming through.

This bit is news to you ?

Does seem like an excuse and throwing the boys that left under the bus. Surely there are minutes from board meetings and filed reports that have all this info.

All I read seems to be like a typical consultancy approach. Pay us a shed load of money and we will tell you what you already know. No substance and no solutions in this meeting, we still have to wait longer and shell out a couple more million (that could easily have been used for the funding gap in the regions)

newgalesurf wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 3:47 pm

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 7:44 am I listened to the scrumV podcast today where they interviewed our chairman and CEO.

Why are we in this mess- Covid. That was repeated a lot and frankly doesn’t explain everything in my opinion. The most revealing bit was where they announced that there was one person in the whole of the WRU who was financially qualified. One. In a £100m business. And apparently the large staff turnover following the sexism incident meant a lot of corporate knowledge was lost as it was purely in peoples heads. So the WRU has been badly managed for decades.

Interesting that the WRU was considered sound on 2019, despite the obvious underperformance of the regions and the dearth of quality new players coming through.

This bit is news to you ?

Does seem like an excuse and throwing the boys that left under the bus. Surely there are minutes from board meetings and filed reports that have all this info.

All I read seems to be like a typical consultancy approach. Pay us a shed load of money and we will tell you what you already know. No substance and no solutions in this meeting, we still have to wait longer and shell out a couple more million (that could easily have been used for the funding gap in the regions)

I really hope it isn't costing that much!??

So far they're just looking at goals. Hopefully these will be measurable (and actually measured!), but the real strategy is yet to come. And it needs to be some kind of departure from what has come before. (Although having a strategy would be a departure from what's come before )

Think I am getting stories mixed up. Thought I read that MNP were involved somewhere

Feels like a missed opportunity to consider the relationship between union and regions.