Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

£275m Premiership offer on verge of collapse

Clubs owners are yet to agree with each other over the deal (Getty Images)

After the news broke yesterday that CVC Capital Partners had made an offer in the region of £275m for a controlling stake in Premiership Rugby, The Times are reporting that the 13 Premier Rugby Ltd member clubs are not in unanimous agreement as to how to proceed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Bruce Craig, who owns Bath, strongly opposes the offer and all PRL members would need to be on board and agree to the offer for it to go ahead, as has previously been agreed in the terms of the co-ownership of PRL.

With a meeting of the club owners set to take place on Tuesday, Craig’s opposition would be enough to prevent the sale to CVC and keep the controlling stake in PRL with the owners of the clubs.

With a net worth of £300m according to The Sunday Times Rich List in 2017 and a willingness to bankroll success and a new stadium for the club, Craig is one of the Premiership owners in a strong position to turn down the offer and retain the current control that the group has over the competition.

Video Spacer

Whilst CVC have reportedly insisted that they will only exert voting control over commercial elements, something which has seen most clubs eager to accept the offer, it is still a concern for Craig and, it would be fair to assume, the RFU.

After initial success in 2016 at international level and a new heads of agreement between the RFU and the Premiership clubs, both guaranteeing player release and sufficiently compensating clubs for the loss of players, relations have begun to breakdown once more between the two bodies of English rugby and it is likely that any takeover by CVC would only exacerbate this. The private equity firm would likely look for a higher level of compensation for player release in subsequent negotiations and with the RFU currently facing financial issues, that could prove a stumbling block for the England side’s bid for success in international rugby.

According to the latest report in The Times, the ownership of Bristol Bears could also oppose the deal, having not yet made their position on the offer clear. With Bristol backed by Steve Lansdown, whose fortune is valued at over £1.4b, per that same Rich List report from 2017, they are another club not in need of the immediate injection of funds that the CVC offer would provide.

ADVERTISEMENT

Either Craig will need to be persuaded of the benefits of the offer between now and Tuesday, or CVC will have to amend their offer, either increasing their financial investment and thus the valuation of the Premiership – which they currently value at £550m – or withdraw their demands for a controlling stake, something which it seems they are unlikely to do.

Failing either of those actions, it looks as though the deal could be dead in the water come Tuesday.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

H
Hellhound 28 minutes ago
South Africa player ratings | 2024 Autumn Nations Series

There is this thing going around against Siya Kolisi where they don't want him to be known as the best national captain ever, so they strike him down in ratings permanently whenever they can. They want McCaw and reckons he is the best captain ever. I disagree.


Just like they refuse to see SA as the best team and some have even said that should the Boks win a third WC in a row, they will still not be the best team ever. Even if they win every game between now and the WC. That is some serious hate coming SA's way.


Everyone forget how the McCaw AB's intimidated refs, was always on the wrong side, played on the ground etc. Things they would never have gotten away with today. They may have a better win ratio, but SA build depth, not caring about rank inbetween WC's until this year.


They weren't as bad inbetween as people claim, because non e of their losses was big ones and they almost never faced the strongest Bok team outside of the WC, allowing countries like France and Ireland to rise to the top unopposed.


Rassie is still at it, building more depth, getting more young stars into the fold. By the time he leaves (I hope never) he will leave a very strong Bok side for the next 15- 20 years. Not everyone will play for 20 years, but each year Rassie acknowledge the young stars and get them involved and ready for international rugby.


Not everyone will make it to the WC, but those 51/52 players will compete for those spots for the WC. They will deliver their best. The future of the Boks is in very safe hands. The only thing that bothers me is Rassie's health. If he can overcome it, rugby looks dark for the rest of the rugby world. He is already the greatest coach in WR history. By the time he retires, he will be the biggest legend any sport has ever seen

2 Go to comments
J
JW 43 minutes ago
'They smelt it': Scott Robertson says Italy sensed All Blacks' vulnerability

No where to be seen OB!


The crosses for me for the year where (from memory);


This was a really hard one to nail down as the first sign of a problem, now that I've asked myself to think about it. I'd say it all started with his decision to not back form and fit players after all the injuries, and/or him picking players for the future, rather ones that could play right now.


First he doesn't replace Perofeta straight away (goes on for months in the team) after injury against England, second he falls back to Beauden Barrett to cover at fullback against Fiji, then he drops Narawa the obvious choice to have started, then he brings in Jordan too soon. That Barret selection (and to a lesser extent Bell's) set the tone for the year.


Then he didn't get the side up for Argentina. They were blown away and didn't look like they expected a fight and were well beaten despite the scoreline in my opinion. Worst performance of the year in the forth game and..


Basically the same problems were persistent, or even exaggerated, after that with the players he did select not given much of an opportunity, with this year having the most number of unused subs I can remember since the amateur days.


What I think I started to realise early on was that he didn't back himself and his team. I think he prepared the players well, don't get me wrong, but I'll credit him with making a conscious choice in tempering his ambition and instead choosing cohesion and to respect (the idea of it being important in himself and his players) experience first and foremost (after two tight games and that 4th game loss). I think he chose wrong in deciding not to be, and back, himself. Hard criticism.


And it played out by preferring Beauden to Dmac on the EOYT (though that may have been a planned move).


I hope I'm right, because going through all the little things of the season and coming up with these bullets, I've got to wonder when I say his last fault is one we have seen at the Crusaders, playing his best players into the ground. What I'm really scared of now is that not wanting a bit of freshness in this last game could be linked with all these other crosses that I want to put down to simple confidence issues. But are they really a sign that he just lacks vision?


Now, that's not to say I haven't seen a lot of positives as well, I just think that for the ABs to go where they want to go he has to fix these crosses. Just have difficult that will be is the question.

23 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Why England's defence of the realm has crumbled without Felix Jones Why England's defence of the realm has crumbled without Felix Jones
Search