Rugby's Rights Dilemma and The Future of the Six Nations
The Six Nations has once again graced our TV screens, as old rivals are reacquainted for battle in the all too familiar sight of empty stadia. Still, the expected level of passion has been met with great gusto thus far; fans or no fans. There has been no shortage of drama from Twickenham to The Principality and what a treat it’s been to have top class international rugby to enjoy.
It has been mooted that the Six Nations is on a trial of sorts over the next five weeks. The current rights deal is due to expire at the end of this tournament and the competition itself is in the proverbial shop window, as it were.
The Autumn International Cup was something of a damp squib and failed to ignite the imagination. A shift towards negative tactics and increased kicking led to less exciting games and fewer tries. England are the obvious example here, who were absolutely phenomenal at times in the 2019 World Cup, but have reverted to increased safety measures since. However, the challenges don’t end there..
The game itself has been the subject of some pretty significant scrutiny and a little mutiny, for good measure, over the last number of months. Most notably, fourteen recently retired players, one of whom a World Cup winner with England, recently began legal action proceedings for negligence against World Rugby, the RFU and the WRU over the effects of concussion.
Not only is this troubling for the bodies in question and players of the game, past and present, but it is also a PR disaster for the sport. What parent observes that and doesn’t think twice about their child playing rugby? At Fifty-Three Six, we produced a documentary on concussion in rugby, which goes into detail on the matter. You can watch the doc below:
This Six Nations, then, offers the platform for the tournament and indeed Northern Hemisphere rugby, to showcase ‘the product’ and provide entertainment for fans. It is a chance to reshape the narrative of the sport around brilliant games and breathtaking tries. And what a platform it is. As we are all housebound, viewing figures are through the roof. Records are being smashed everywhere you look.
The clash between England and Scotland on ITV last Saturday demanded the attention of 8.4 million people. For a sport that is so often in the shadows within the balance of power in the UK, the Six Nations remains a draw.
On a global level, you would have to say that rugby remains a relatively niche sport. There are realistically, a very limited number of countries who can compete at the top level. The game has struggled for traction into new markets, which is why USA and Canada remain of such interest to the governing bodies with their finger on the pulse of the sport. To engage a global audience in the World Cup, for example, requires a greater spread of competitive teams and less 90-0 scorelines.
FINANCIAL TROUBLE & WARNING SIGNS
Like most sports, rugby has been hit exceptionally hard by the impact of the pandemic. The RFU is warning of a possible £145m revenue loss due to Covid and a likely five year recovery period. USA Rugby had to recently file for bankruptcy. This isn’t a sport coming from a relative position of strength financially, either.
It was well documented that the 2018 accounts of the Premiership clubs in England demonstrated this with a combined loss of £50m and only Exeter closing the year with a profit. This was before the pandemic. Hence why the sport has been so receptive to private equity money from CVC, who have their own chequered track record in their ownership of F1 between 2006 and 2017. This fantastic FT article on the matter surmised the venture by saying:
Yet, if sports bodies end up being overtaken by commercial concerns, they could lose touch with the interests of fans, the audience that attracted financiers in the first place. There is form in this regard. While CVC made a healthy profit by selling Formula One in 2016 for $8bn, followers and industry executives complained the buyout firm’s 10-year tenure in charge of the motorsport led to its domination by rich teams, predictable racing results and a poorer sporting spectacle. Bernie Ecclestone, the former F1 boss who ran the sport for CVC, said in 2017 that he was “embarrassed” at “selling this shitty product”.
So, where does all this leave us? You have a sport that is going through a PR minefield (in the UK anyway), struggling for growth on a global scale, under pressure financially, and requires exposure. 8.4million viewing on a Saturday afternoon in the UK alone will tend to help with that.
And yet, as we enter this new rights realm for the Six Nations, there would appear to be strong indications that the days of the tournament on terrestrial TV are numbered. Amazon and Sky Sports are both known to have registered interest and one of whom may be the new likely home. On one level, this is completely understandable. There will be more money on the table from these suitors in a time when the sport deeply requires a commercial shot to the arm.
And yet, what impact will that decision have on the sport? For comparison sake, take the first Lions test against South Africa in 2009 - one of the biggest games in recent memory. 900,000 people tuned in for that game on Sky Sports. Not quite 8 million.
Cricket is an interesting test case here too. The ECB benefited significantly from the Sky Sports deal to take it from Channel 4, from a commercial point of view. It must be noted that the quality of the coverage has been outstanding too.
However, this excellent piece of research on the ‘Impact of Pay TV on Sport’ by Dr Paul Rouse highlighted the trade off. He noted that the 2005 Ashes Series, shown live on Channel 4, garnered an audience of 8.4m. “It was terrestrial television that drove the game into the forefront of public consciousness and brought a new generation of enthusiasts onto the streets” wrote English cricket writer Matthew Engel. By contrast, the 2006-7 Ashes series between England and Australia did not draw more than 500,000 viewers.
What is the practical effect of pay TV on a sport? Well, data supplied by Sport England shows a decrease in the number of people participating in cricket in England from 2016 to 2020:
Applying a further rugby lens and again drawing on the research of Paul Rouse, we see clearly the impact of Heineken Cup viewership in Ireland, after Sky Sports won the rights from national broadcaster, RTE. Leinster’s quarter final clash against Toulouse in 2006 was shown on RTE and drew an audience of 255,000 people. The Irish province’s clash against Wasps the following year, again at the quarter final stage, saw an audience of just 47,000 on Sky Sports.
So the dilemma for rugby and the Six Nations more specifically is clear and obvious. Go for the best commercial deal possible and you may well sacrifice the overall growth of the sport. The question is: Can they afford not to? Probably not.
At Fifty-Three Six we specialise in converting fans into customers, whatever form that may take. We have built out bespoke Direct to Consumer models, leaning on our production and digital acquisition experience. If you’d like to chat, please get in touch below!
