New Zealand's fate in the race to host the 2011 World Cup will be decided on broadcasting rights and revenues rather than stadium capacity, NZRFU chief executive Chris Moller said yesterday.
Eden Park's capacity would be boosted to 55,000 at a cost of $25 million in one of the proposal details Moller could reveal yesterday.
"But New Zealand's bid is not dependent on building new venues," he added.
The crucial components in the three-way hosting scrap with Japan and South Africa were the commercial spin-offs for the International Rugby Board.
If the figures, broadcast times and details of television deals stacked up for New Zealand, then the corporate deals with sponsors, advertisers and the hospitality industry would follow.
"It will be won on cold, hard commercial facts, not rugby tradition or empathy," Moller said.
The Government would pay New Zealand's fee to host the tournament; the work now was to convince the IRB it could make enough further revenue.
Moller made several presentations about New Zealand's bid yesterday to the media and interested parties in Wellington and Auckland, with another scheduled today in Christchurch.
He emphasised he was prohibited by a confidentiality agreement from divulging any financially sensitive details or commenting on New Zealand's rivals to host the seventh World Cup.
According to previous reports, Australia paid the IRB a A$21 million fee to host the event in 2003, while the tournament was broadcast to a global audience of 3.4 billion.
Revenue raised from 2003 television rights sold to major broadcasters in Britain, France, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia amounted to 44 million. While ticket prices, fees, profits or losses were off the discussion list, Moller confirmed that a period from September 24 to November 5 was the union's preferred tournament time.
He also said the mayors in the greater Auckland area had agreed Eden Park should be their region's main stadium.
An upgrade of the West Stand with a clip-on, and some minor work elsewhere, would raise capacity from 45,000 to 55,000, cost $25 million and avoid the need for resource consent.
There was another option of replacing the South Stand to create a 60,000-seat stadium, a plan which would cost $130 million and create resource consent challenges.
Moller said the question of crowd capacity was not critical either to the IRB or to New Zealand, who would collect the ticket money as their only source of revenue. Making a profit was not the motive behind the union's bid.
It was probably the last time the country could afford to host the World Cup, and it was about the country's heritage and rugby legacy.
New Zealand had shown it could host America's Cups and Apec, and the Lions tour would also be a useful audition for the World Cup.
New Zealand was a stadium of four million people, the Government has supported the initiative, the country was English-speaking, had a strong anti-drug record and had been prominent in delivering rugby expertise to the world through coaches, players, commentators and supporters.
A decision on hosting rights will be made at the IRB council meeting in November, where New Zealand needs to gain a majority of the 24 votes.
Before that verdict, a World Cup review group will visit during the Lions tour when they will gather information on the criteria being used to evaluate Japan, South Africa and New Zealand.
A World Cup advisory committee will collate the details and make a host recommendation to the IRB.
"In many ways it is like the competitions review we have asked all the unions to complete here," Moller said.
He returned to New Zealand on Monday after a return flight to Dublin where he presented New Zealand's bid to the IRB.
IRB chairman Syd Miller, deputy Bob Tuckey, chief executive Mike Miller, tournament director Kit McConnell and communications director Greg Thomas heard the proposal.
"We have now guaranteed the tournament fee, so we have got a ticket to the dance," Moller said yesterday.
Cold, hard facts of the Cup
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.