David Kirk and Mark Robinson turn from rivals to allies in navigating NZ Rugby’s new era: Gregor Paul

David Kirk (left) and Mark Robinson. Photos / Getty Images; Herald graphics

Four years ago, David Kirk and Mark Robinson were on opposite sides of the table, locked in what became a fierce and at times spiteful negotiation to approve a private equity deal with US fund manager Silver Lake.

Kirk, the former All Black who led the team to their first World Cup triumph in 1987, was operating in his then role as chairman of the New Zealand Rugby Players Association (NZRPA).

Robinson, also a former All Black, was a year into his tenure as chief executive of New Zealand Rugby (NZR).

For the better part of eight months, they traded blows privately and publicly. NZRPA stood alone as the voice of dissent, staunchly withholding its consent to complete a transaction that had been negotiated without its input or knowledge.

Robinson and his chairman, Brent Impey, became incensed and exasperated that they couldn’t steamroll Kirk and the players into approving a deal that would have the US firm buy a 12.5% stake in the game’s commercial assets, which had been valued at $3.1 billion.

It was a period in which Robinson and Impey borrowed heavily from the Donald Trump playbook, overselling the benefits of the deal while rubbishing those who stood against it.

Exchanges became heated and NZR’s two flagship officials consistently said their opposites – Kirk and NZRPA chief executive Rob Nichol – were peddling misinformation about a deal that had limited risk and would prove transformational.

When NZRPA unveiled a possible alternative means to raise capital via a public offering through investment firm Forsyth Barr, Robinson responded with what many felt was a gratuitous personal attack on Nichol when he released a statement that said: “We are shocked and disappointed that Rob Nichol has shared another counter-proposal with media before sharing it with New Zealand Rugby.

“Through doing this, the NZRPA leadership has unilaterally taken a decision to attempt to destroy the Silver Lake deal.

“We are sorry, that for the players, their own union has put them in this position where the greatest opportunity for the future of all of rugby in New Zealand could be lost.”

He also accused NZRPA of leaking confidential documents, while NZR staff fed information to the media to suggest Kirk, as the independent chairman of Forsyth Barr, had a conflict of interest.

On a separate occasion, Impey called Kirk “disingenuous” on Newstalk ZB, and at NZR’s annual general meeting in April 2021, he famously said, “rejecting the Silver Lake would be the biggest own goal in the history of New Zealand sport”.

It was a tactic that was never going to break or even bend the erudite Kirk, who had the strength of character to not travel to South Africa with the Cavaliers in 1986, and the mental fortitude to withstand the inevitable backlash meted out to him by his All Blacks peers who did.

But Kirk’s resistance wasn’t driven by Robinson and Impey’s aggressive sales tactic.

He opposed it because it was predicated on an illegal mandate the national body granted itself to unilaterally change the professional players’ payment terms, but really, he was against it because it was a bad deal for the game.

Kirk and Robinson both sit in the academic heavyweight division having studied respectively at Oxford and Cambridge, but the former combines his intellectual horsepower with a glittering corporate CV that has had him dabble in politics, work for the world-renowned consultancy group McKinsey, serve as chief executive of Fairfax Media, set up a private equity investment firm, and hold various directorships across Australasia.

Former midfielder Mark Robinson has been chief executive of New Zealand Rugby since 2019. Photo / Getty Images

Robinson, on the other hand, came into the NZR role in early 2020, well versed in global rugby politics, but with no experience heading a sizeable and complex organisation, and he was eventually forced to concede defeat and rework the deal from the ground up.

In June 2022, NZRPA gave its approval for NZR to sell up to 7.5% of the game’s commercial assets – valued at $3.5 billion – in a deal that would require Silver Lake to wait three years before it could convert its investment into equity.

It was not only a victory for Kirk, but for all of New Zealand rugby because that initial deal tabled by Robinson and Impey would have been catastrophic had it been approved.

Based on NZR’s annual accounts since 2022, Silver Lake would have been entitled to $100 million in distributions – from a business that has posted combined losses of $56m.

In correspondence NZRPA sent to NZR in June 2023, the trade body laid out why it had opposed the initial deal: “There were several reasons for this, including the lack of a robust business plan, the overall economics of the deal including valuation, excess reserves and resulting serious concerns for the robustness of NZR’s operating model, the lack of any opportunity for New Zealanders to co-invest and insufficient development of what NZRPA considered to be a truly comprehensive partnership with Silver Lake.”

NZRPA had written to NZR at that time because it felt the latter had reneged on a critical component of the revised deal, which was to open a $100m capital raise opportunity for domestic institutions.

When NZR said there was no local interest and it would instead take more money from Silver Lake, which had agreed to underwrite the offer – a guarantee to pump in at least another $62m – NRPA took out a High Court injunction to prevent the transaction going ahead.

The war that had ended in June 2022 had erupted again, and in urging NZR not to take more capital from Silver Lake, NZRPA reminded the national body why it had returned to the negotiating table in late 2021.

NZRPA said it agreed the game needed a capital injection to support revenue growth through building a bigger global fan base.

But it was also clear it thought there were more cost-effective ways to raise money than selling future revenue and, critically, it said: “We believed if the capability to grow the game was not within NZR then those who were there should move aside and allow the right capability to be engaged.

“Importantly, when we reflected on all of this and our experiences, we recognised that the current NZR board and management were not capable of raising capital via other means, building the plan required and identifying the right capability.

“Further, even if they moved aside, the NZR governance system was not capable of attracting, identifying or appointing the capability required to ensure the NZR board (and by extension management) were fit for such purpose.”

Unlikely alliance

Kirk and Robinson now find themselves on the same side. This month, the former started as chairman of NZR in a new board structure that NZRPA made a condition of approving the Silver Lake deal.

These two are no longer adversaries but peers, and in their first weeks on the same team, they have presented a united front.

Kirk has had meet-and-greets with NZR staff in both Auckland and Wellington, Robinson at his side on both occasions.

Last year, when it was confirmed Kirk would be taking over as chairman subject to ratification by the provinces, Robinson was asked about their relationship. He replied: “I get on with David, fine.”

But across the rugby landscape there is genuine fascination about how they will work together given their history and Kirk’s belief that NZR should never have sold future revenue, particularly when the executive granted itself a mandate to do so in a vote of no confidence.

There’s a long body of evidence to suggest this is not a relationship built on mutual respect and, equally, there is ample history that says New Zealand rugby performs best when there is strong alignment between its chief executive and chairman.

Former All Blacks captain David Kirk with coach Graham Henry during the 2011 World Cup. Photo / Getty Images

Already there are signs of a lack of alignment. It is understood Kirk has expressed to his fellow board members that he would not support any future attempts by any player to politicise the All Blacks haka.

This is Kirk – decisive, reasoned, principled and tapped into the bigger picture. Robinson has spoken publicly only once about the issue, which has been a hot topic since veteran halfback TJ Perenara made reference to the Treaty of Waitangi while leading the haka before the All Blacks' last test of 2024 in Italy, and the Herald subsequently revealed he did so without the consent of all his teammates and without following due process.

He was asked by Newstalk ZB’s Heather du Plessis-Allan in mid-December how he was feeling about that haka, given the level of division and public fallout it caused.

He said: “It was fantastic. You know, TJ did the call of the haka and it was great to see both him and Sam [former All Blacks captain Cane] go out on a match in a new market like that. I guess well supported by the team.

“This is a fantastic sort of evolution to the sport where you know, we’re working with athletes who want to use their platform to have views on things and our role is to balance that.

“We’ve got to recognise that this is a really interesting time across the country. You know, there’s lots of different views on this and this is a matter that was worked through with the team.”

But the many stakeholders who have spoken to the Herald have said any uncertainty about what path the game may now follow is not being driven by the different leadership styles between the two, but on the more fundamental issue that Kirk and Robinson have different visions for the game and different opinions about how well NZR is being managed.

Selling the vision

NZR has lost $56m in the past two years, its annual revenue has not grown since 2022, and the distributions made to provincial unions are dropping and not growing.

The forecast is for things to get even worse, however, after the decision by Ineos to unilaterally terminate its $21m-a-year All Blacks sponsorship.

There is also going to be a significant drop in broadcast income from 2026 – as much as $26m on the paper value of the present deal – unless significant deals can be struck with offshore broadcasters to offset the lower fee Sky is looking to offer for the domestic rights.

Rugby in New Zealand is not at crisis point, but with the All Blacks having seen their success rate drop to 70% in 2020-24, compared with 87% in 2010-19, and with numerous financial icebergs ahead, there is widespread concern it could find itself in serious trouble if there is no major shift in its approach.

Eight of the previous nine directors were swept out of office this month because there is unanimity across the game that NZR needs to change strategic direction, tighten its fiscal management and deliver on the promise that getting into bed with Silver Lake would prove transformational.

Kirk and his board need to sell stakeholders and the public a new vision, convince everyone they are going to embark on a journey to repair and grow.

How convincing that sales pitch will be if it retains the same executive team to implement it is the question being asked not only around the NZR board table, but throughout administrative circles.

It was certainly an issue the provincial unions brought up in December 2023 when a draft letter intended to be sent to NZR was leaked to the Herald.

The unions were offering their views on the recently published Pilkington review, which was an independent report into the governance structure of NZR.

In that letter, which was amended before it was sent to NZR, it was said: “Before we provide specific feedback on the recommendations in the Pilkington report, we want to stress that while the report and its recommendations are specific to the governance of NZR, the report strongly indicates the need for a significant change in direction in leadership and management across the organisation.

“While we agree that proposed changes to governance will create the right environment for a more productive and sustainable future, nothing will change unless there is a targeted focus on shifting the leadership and management practice within NZR.

“Areas of the report identify strategy, culture, communication and relationships as substandard and while the provincial unions can accept some responsibility for this, we need to see a demonstrable lift in leadership from NZR to forge a new path forward for the rugby system.

“Only NZR’s governance [board] can implement this change, so whatever model we land on for the future, the board of NZR must make this focus on leadership accountability their top priority for the future of the game.”

The new board not only has a clear mandate to implement strategic change – candidates interviewed for positions were told beforehand to present three key priorities they felt the union needed to follow – but so, too, is there a clear need for internal structural change in its executive set-up.

To complete the transaction with Silver Lake, NZR had to set up and transfer ownership of its commercial assets to a new company called New Zealand Rugby Commercial (NZRC), which has its own board and executive staff.

This was because, legally, NZR would be in breach of its incorporated society status if it went directly into a commercial relationship with Silver Lake.

But while NZRC served the purposes of facilitating the transaction, internally there is a desire to cut its operating costs, get better oversight of its spending and day-to-day business, and reduce the duplication in function between it and NZR.

NZRC has been operating without a chief executive since Craig Fenton left in November and sources have told the Herald a major executive restructuring may be in the offing – one that has a commercial manager (Fenton’s old role) and a rugby manager (Robinson’s present role} reporting to a chief executive who straddles both NZRC and NZR.