But why would the IRFU fork out to improve those stadia when they will onlyn use them to host a couple of group games. They would be far better off investiging in grounds that Rugby Teams can use after the WC
The rugby cunts won’t play anywhere they can’t cater for “corporates” which pretty much rules out most of the GAA venues in their current forms.
It was why the Gaelic Grounds was never pursued for any of the big Munster / Leinster games.
Croke Park
Lansdowne Road
RDS
Thomond Park
Revamped Musgrave
Revamped Ravenhill
Revamped Sportsground
Revamped Dubarry Park
GAA Stadium A e.g. Thurles
GAA Stadium B e.g. Casement
Gives a spread of 3 Leinster, 3 Munster, 2 Connacht and 2 Ulster. GAA will probably upgrade Thurles and Casement themselves so IRFU only focus on their own.
Although didn’t New Zealand need an average attendance of 45,000 per game to break even on the WC or something like that? Maybe the above list wouldn’t work in that case. But no reason for Japan vs Romania or Canada vs Spain to be played in a place bigger than Musgrave Park.
But thats what I was asking, how much would they have to fork out realistically? They’d do it because it would work far far cheaper infrastructurally.
Is this the case also with a RWC I wonder? How much corporate venues would they have had in some of those NZ dives?
Pretty much all the money the IRFU would make on the WC would be through ticket sales. That is why the likes of the Millenium and Twickenham will be used as the Welsh and English fans will fill them in the group stages and they can used as quarter final venues as well.
Well maybe if we finance Rugby like horse racing for the next 10 years we would have an industry that would attract a rugby ‘philanthropist’ and tax exile like Tony O’Reilly to make up the shortfall.
Of course I would be against this though unless he moved home and paid his tax in this country.
Let it go croppy :rolleyes:
That’s what she said.
I was pretty against this when I first got wind of it, but to be honest, the more you think about it, you’d wonder if i isn’t completely out of the question. Fine, we’re a shambles of a country at the best of times, and barely struggle to hold piss ups, but if we could send the eurovision to a shithole like Millstreet nearly 20 years ago and get away with it, you couldnt rule this completely out of the possibility.
Also, with it being an all island event, I presume we could knock a few quid out of the British taxpayer for it also.
Larryduff might know more but wasn’t the Maze supposed to be redeveloped as a sports stadium. It could well have been scrapped, but i presume that a new stadium could be built in the north with my taxes
Is the RWC affected by the need to provide facilities like hotel rooms, infrastructure, etc like the Olympics and The Ryder Cup are?
I haven’t a notion but sure with the amount of hotels built in the last 10 years there’d be no shortage.
Maybe when rugby provides as much pay back to the economy as horse racing it will be eligible for similar funding
Hold on, sure didn’t Munster beating an All Blacks D team end all the crime in Limerick and put an end to the recession?
It’ll take a while to reach -€56m as a starting position for the coming year admittedly.
Interesting piece here that looks at how much it cost New Zealand to host the World Cup and the long term benefits to the economy.
There would likely be less initial outlay for Ireland if we used Twickenham, the Millenium Stadium and Murrayfield
World Cup ‘absolutely worth’ price tag
15/12/2011 Rugby World Cup Worth Cost - Government _ Stuff.co.nz
www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/5843621/World-Cup-absolutely-worth-price-tag 1/2
MICHELLE DUFF
World Cup ‘absolutel\ worth’ price tag
Last updated 05:00 25/10/2011
The price tag is in the millions, but with the golden gleam still shining on the Webb Ellis Cup the Government says the
Rugby World Cup was worth it.
Tournament organisers and Rugby World Cup Minister Murray McCully are hailing the tournament as a triumph that
exceeded all expectations set in 2005, when New Zealand beat favourites Japan and South Africa to win the hosting
rights.
The six-week, 48-game tournament cost taxpayers and the New Zealand Rugby Union $39 million, a loss that was
anticipated and has not been downgraded despite organisers surpassing the ticket sales target.
However, this does not include a direct Government spend of an extra $26m to run the festival and business
programmes, host high-level diplomatic guests and extend the Auckland fan facilities.
Including the $350m spent to upgrade stadiums and provide IRB-approved facilities around the country and millions more
pumped into infrastructure and preparations, the bill for the tournament has easily surpassed the $400m mark.
Despite this blow to the coffers, Mr McCully said yesterday the tournament had been a success, meeting all promises
made in the 2005 pitch."I think we actually over-achieved in that sense.
“We made a commitment to the IRB for a stadium of four million people but the Government actually asked for more
than that. We asked for a nation of four million outstanding hosts and I believe the New Zealand public delivered that.”
The tournament had been “absolutely” worth it financially, with a kickback for the economy that would be felt for years to
come, Mr McCully said. “I’m very satisfied that we showed very good commercial judgment.”
The most recent study into the long-term benefits, carried out by Coventry University’s centre for the international
business of sport and commissioned by MasterCard, puts the direct benefits at $780m in spending by overseas visitors,
with a long-term impact of $1.44 billion. “The real value comes through building our brand as a trading nation, with a
huge number of business organisations that are contributing to our future wealth. The benefit from this tournament is
something that will reach over the next decade,” Mr McCully said.
Tournament boss Martin Snedden was satisfied every element had been delivered as promised.
“It’s been a fantastic success from just about every angle. The passion and the vibrancy in the stadia everywhere was
just something magical.”
The operating costs of the tournament were $300m, including about $150m in tournament fees paid to the IRB. This was
mostly covered by ticket revenue of about $269m, leaving the expected deficit.
International visitor numbers looked on target to meet the expected 95,000. The final financial reports ± along with a
Government analysis into the success and legacy of the tournament ± would be completed in the next few months, and
Mr Snedden was not expecting any surprises.
“From a strategic point of view, we have absolutely nailed it.”
Economists have generally played down the long-term impact of hosting the Rugby World Cup, although Cameron
Bagrie, chief economist at ANZ, said New Zealand consumers had been distracted from a deteriorating world economy,
with Europe on the brink of a new financial crisis.
“For the past month the global scene has been nothing short of awful. If we hadn’t had the Rugby World Cup, I’m not
sure New Zealand would have shown the same sort of resilience that it has. It’s a one-off … but it’s helped deflect15/12/2011 Rugby World Cup Worth Cost - Government _ Stuff.co.nz
www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/5843621/World-Cup-absolutely-worth-price-tag 2/2
attention awa\ from some prett\ significant developments.”[font=Arial][size=3]
- The Dominion PoVW
[/size][/font]
Flesh that one out
$150m to the IRB to host it