Play it, Sam.

 

These Columns are usually provoked by sportbiz events around Albachiara workflows, which find a natural narrative prop in the popular culture of film, literature or music.

This week we’ve been thinking a lot about Sam Renouf and the PTO, doing amazing things in very challenging markets, and who are about to reach significant milestones.

History, in fact, often reminds us that many of mankind’s greatest achievements happen during tough times, like these, with backs to the wall.

[Full disclosure: Albachiara is an advisor to the growth strategy and fundraising of the PTO].

 

Necessity is the mother of invention, and storms can actually often be a blessing in disguise. Orson Well‘s Renaissance, so many great companies born in the teeth of a recession, the iPhone during the Global Financial Crisis. All counter-intuitive but true more often than not.

In the darkest of times, when evil controlled Europe and North Africa, and it wasn’t certain that “good” would eventually prevail, Hollywood produced what many today consider its greatest ever film.

Casablanca.

“Play it, Sam“.

 

The eternal power and glory of sacrifice.

 

Look at her.

That’s what they call Old Hollywood box-office. Elite talent and beauty have always given us the escape from our daily grind. The real opiate for the masses. A star is a star.  We should never bring the Gods down to our level, because we will very quickly get bored and lose interest in them.

They must always remain on Mount Olympus. Oakmont take note.

Rick Blaine (Bogart) is neither hero nor bad guy. He is just someone who has gotten by in life by never sticking his neck out, always the pragmatist, understanding where power lay, and acting accordingly. A survivor, a politician, the opposite of a romantic or a zealot. The classic man for all seasons.

He represents humanity and human nature very well because we aren’t a great race, at the mean, and the median.

Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.

– Groucho Marx

Casablanca is not the most profound movie, or even the most artistic. The acting isn’t that delicate or nuanced, and it is never going to get pretentious film buffs all melodramatic and verbose. But it is a film that feels very familiar, holds up a mirror, and asks serious questions of its audience. You understand it better with age and experience, when you recognise fully what Rick ultimately does. And why he does it.

Love and legacy!

(No spoiler alert. If you don’t know this film by now, you deserve no protection.)

 

Maybe not today, not tomorrow, but soon.

Today’s Sunday Column is about the inevitable regret of losing the chance to do something truly memorable with your life, especially if that was actually in your power.

Rick doesn’t miss his moment. He lets his soulmate go, leaves her to another man, all for the greater good and a cause bigger than both of them. Being on the right side of history when it mattered.

What a motivation that should be for all of us. But sadly seldom is.

“What did you do during the war grandad?” 

 

“I let them sing the Marseillaise in my bar, right in front of those people. And I made sure the main guy got away to continue that fight.”

 

It is the ultimate act of sacrifice, extraordinary for a man like Rick, also selflessly handing everyone the justifications to move on, without blame, guilt or resentment.

If you don’t, you’ll regret it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life. 

Rick ends as the true hero. God bless you, she whispers.

 

Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. 

Isn’t this also a rather good summary of where the sport industry and its leaders find themselves today? Having to decide what path to follow, being forced to ask what needs to be thrown overboard to keep the ship afloat? How to let modern ideas and fresh blood have space?

Everyone being asked to consider what is the greater good.

In business language, sport is now stuck in the quicksand of the ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’, (“A situation where successful, established companies can fail to adapt to disruptive innovations because they focus on improving existing products and serving their current customers, while disruptive technologies often start by serving a different, smaller market.” Wiki.).

Sport has an established product, and a rich customer base still willing to pay for it all across the value chain. Why is there any need to make these choices, to have to innovate and change? To sacrifice?

A common refrain heard often in the hospitality boxes of our industry.

Readers of this Column know very well the reason, and change it absolutely must. The Storm is just getting started, and the only real question is if we do it proactively, with some kind of managed evolution, or we just let market forces rip us apart (and then cry into our beer).

For 5 years now, in total denial, we have done the latter.

“Poor me, poor me, pour me another one.”

 

The NCAA is being torn asunder. 

With all the examples now clearly in front of us, the complacency in this industry is utterly unexplainable (to me). There is more than enough evidence to understand with complete clarity that the “Overton Window” of sport has moved very significantly since 2020. Think where we were 5 years ago, compare it to today, and extrapolate all that with a bigger exponential rate of evolution going forward.

The very best example is American college sport. It was clear 3 years ago that it was imploding under its own weight, and that the end of the old model was approaching at pace.

The Shamateurism of our Games.

No one at the governing bodies of university sport did much about any of that, unless absolutely forced to by the Courts, and the whole eco-system is now on the verge of total collapse.

Matt Brown explains the shambles so clearly. This is serious stuff hitting at the very heart of American culture, and the sense of belonging that is unique to college sports.

[Full disclosure: Albachiara has invested in The College Sports Company, a pure-play beneficiary of all this exploding NIL market. Another company born in a moment of true chaos, currently closing a strong capital fundraising].

 

Who in sport today thinks of the greater good? 

… or asks if they themselves are part of the problem?

People can believe what they want, but in 10 years time, this industry will be utterly unrecognisable. Nothing will be the same, and if you don’t accept this scenario, you should close the article now, as it has no insight to offer you.

The question for those still reading at this point is: who can be the altruistic Rick Blaine in the sports governance of today?

Especially in the big institutions that dominate the money, like FIFA, UEFA, NFL, EPL, ICC, IOC, World Rugby. Who will make the ultimate sacrifice, maybe rendering their own personal position obsolete? All for the greater good. To get Victor Laszlo on that plane.

The signs aren’t positive. People historically are too scared to rock the boat, too content with their golden remuneration and status, too busy reading the flows of politics and power to ever look after anything but themselves.

We’ll get another rights cycle, the kids will come back to us once they grow up and have a family, they’ll pay our subscriptions. The platforms and Big Tech will bid for our rights, piracy will be solved. YouTube? A horrendously squalid experience… No need to change.

Sadly, so very sadly, this attitude absolutely still dominates our sector. Many may disagree, but that’s likely because these people haven’t ever been part of any effort to seriously innovate.

 

Try to change things and see what happens. 

Between running the breakaway Scottish Premier League, trying an Atlantic league, a British league, watching (from the inside) UEFA try and head off super-leagues, I’ve seen a fair bit of these battlefields in the first person. And that’s before all the challenger projects of the last 10 years.

This below is therefore an experienced and qualified opinion.

Anyone who sees the issues with sport’s status quo, and calls for some kind of change to alleviate them, will often find themselves getting personally attacked, as either a crass philistine, or a carpet-bagger on a cash-grab. The sport incumbents will play the man, not the ball, simply because having to confront the actual truth of the message is just too uncomfortable. And inconvenient.

Truths like this.

From The Times: read here

Tennis is about to have its lovely uplifting fortnight of English attention, so rugby has to be today’s case study. It’s also another one currently on the Albachiara desk [full disclosure].

Ampere says that interest in watching rugby, for people below 34, is at 5% and going south.

So only one person in twenty, below middle age, is interested in rugby. Even 35-54, it’s only at 12%, and again on a downward trajectory.

One quietly then asks oneself what actually is the average age of the rugby fan, and how has that trend moved in this century?

Sorry to be blunt, but what fucking part of this is in any way acceptable to whomever calls themselves the custodians of the sport? What version of this status quo is OK for you, and doesn’t need an emergency adrenaline shot?

 

Problems only get solved if you truly face into them. 

This is hard independent data on a sport and its business model, apparently on the road to nowhere. Overdosing and flailing around.

It’s actually very easy to articulate this truth, and not be afraid, because deep down we all know this to be true. Everyone does. You are all nodding at this bit. Rugby has serious issues, and the Ampere report isn’t fresh insight.

I wanted to write a positive article about rugby.

The whole eco-system of rugby is a financial basket-case. The Reports and Accounts of clubs and Unions don’t lie. The global club game just isn’t working for anyone, whether it’s investors, players, (younger) fans, and it has two existential blockages to future appeal and participation. You can really only play and learn rugby if you go to a posh fee-paying school. Even then, you need to have parents who are comfortable with the injury risks, especially concussion.

One doesn’t need to be a rugby guy to conclude that all this feels a bit sub-optimal, and could be vastly improved. Must be improved. Surely this glorious sport deserves a chance at a better future? If not for us, then for our grandchildren. because on the current road, it won’t be around anymore when those kids have disposable income.

One in twenty under the age of 35, and dropping. There is just no escaping that datapoint.

 

It’s time for everyone to find their definition of “greater good”.

We are now all being forced to choose. 

No one likes a scrap more than me. An honest conflict. Throw in a bit of testosterone and edge. The spice of life. In Italy they often call this stuff a “much-needed cleaning of the air ”.

You can have a right barney, and then genuinely hug it out 10 minutes later.

 

One can absolutely admire the commitment and violence of the defence from the rugby incumbents. Aggression reminiscent of JPR at his very best. Threatening people that they will never work in the sport again if they engage in any way with the “bad guys”. I have to say I do admire that! Good old fashioned bullying. I’d certainly do the same.

But may I humbly ask if you are sure that you are acting for the greater good of your sport, and not just for yourselves?

Data like Ampere, the rivers of financial red ink, the bankruptcies at clubs, the excessive personal bonus schemes, the overly-demanding player calendar of games: it’s all utterly damning.

I could go on, but you don’t even need to be a top KC to make the case that the burden of proof on innocence at this point lies with rugby’s current leaders.

Watch Casablanca. Look hard into the mirror, study all the evidence over the last 30 years of your stewardship, and realise that if you do nothing, you’ll regret it. Maybe not today, not tomorrow, but for the rest of your life.

R360 isn’t an iceberg, it’s a lifeboat. They’re not asking for money, and they want to play nice. That’s a gift that doesn’t come around every day.

 

Building challenger sports leagues is a hard shift.

In truth, going up against any institutional sport, and the people who run it, is a thankless task. This week we saw another innovator seemingly hit a brick wall.

“The global economic landscape has shifted dramatically in the past year, and this business decision has been made to ensure our long-term stability as the world’s premier track league. Our attention is now on 2026.”

– From the BBC, read here

Johnson has “found his stop-loss”, for now, and we wish him well. He is at least trying to do something to save the sport he loves which, like rugby, is seeing its mass-market appeal trend towards zero.

All things must pass.

Athletics, like all Olympic sports, don’t work in a four-year pop-up model. That’s just such a ridiculous idea in today’s always-on, 24/7 entertainment markets, as to be rather quaint.

The Olympic movement itself needs completely fresh thinking. A zero-based budgeting approach with a blank canvas.

Nonetheless, bizarrely, many emerging sports still see getting accepted into the Olympics as some kind of golden ticket to a land of milk and honey. It isn’t. It’s an addiction. The IOC and its model only gives enough money to survive on the breadline, not to thrive, offering very little exposure beyond every 4th Summer/Winter. These sports need to find their salvation elsewhere, and admirably, many are trying.

Johnson with track and field, others in swimming, sailing, volleyball, even curling now. They have all looked at some kind of challenger league, usually via the much-maligned private sector of capitalists, who actually put their money where their mouth is. Guys like Larry Ellison at SailGP, Sir Mike Moritz at the PTO (Professional Triathlon Organisation). Nicole Junkerman with volleyball.

And, of course, these attempts to find some kind of sustainable model for a sport will often be labelled by the Luddites as the new plaything of a billionaire. Remember, they always go after the man, not the ball, when criticising change. How dare a rich man and his cold finance try and save our sport?

We demand that you let us guide our sport into irrelevance in peace.

 

All these challenger leagues have the same plot.

All and any challenger league can only build momentum when the incumbent governing body is rubbish. If the sport is being run well, there is absolutely no chance of a challenger getting traction.

Being “rubbish” comes in all shapes and sizes.

A favourite these days could be the WNBA, a league utterly unable or unwilling to leverage, on and off the court, the arrival of a genuine generational talent. Caitlin Clark is Tiger Woods: the same outlier background vastly widening appeal. If the WNBA  “forces” Clark to start up her own women’s basketball league, they will have no one to blame but themselves. And it would be so easy, because she is the whole ballgame (pun intended). Check the ratings.

The plot in these things is, in fact, always the same:

• The current set-up isn’t sustainable. It isn’t working for athletes, for fans, for the owners of the assets, or for the product/market fit. The status quo is not fit for purpose, and this is by far the easiest part of the investor deck to write. It’s so bloody obvious. A child could explain it.
• One then asks oneself. Is the existing governing body open for discussion? Without exception, even with the LIV people, these innovators want to work within the existing structures. Everyone, whether American Big Finance, Sovereign Wealth, or Asian HNWIs, all see the value of the traditions of sport. The storied locations, the memories, the names on trophies. They start by asking if change can be achieved within the current structures. Without fail.
• Then starts the pain. The whole tapestry of self-interested intransigence is unfurled, disguised by a plethora of the most ridiculous excuses, like “it’s a betrayal of 9/11 families”. All to prevent any kind of debate whatsoever. Roll out the usual cast of old players and compliant media to label the innovator as a heartless corporate raider who doesn’t get it.
• Then, frustrated, the challenger league has to consider going rogue. Which it doesn’t really ever want to do. Not just because it’s really hard to line up all the ducks, but because they love the sport and its legacy. No one wants to go off the program.

These stories right here are how they will eventually write the screenplay of sport’s Casablanca.

But sometimes, just sometimes, you can get a plot twist, and find an enlightened and altruistic governing body. God bless them, she whispered.

 

How to save an Olympic sport. 

Welshman Sir Michael Moritz is a billionaire, and his philanthropy goes far and wide, well beyond sport. He loves his triathlon, and a few years ago decided to invest a not-insignificant part of his wealth in creating an entirely new and sustainable model for the sport. Giving the elite athletes a living wage and the exposure their absurd talent deserves. Combining all that with a participation structure for the many wealthy amateurs willing to put themselves through this physical purgatory. Finding an analogue and digital revenue model, aware of where media rights need to now sit within a niche sport.

He recruits a young ex-pro triathlete called Sam Renouf to be his CEO, and goes to talk to World Triathlon (the governing body) about his vision for what would become the PTO (Professional Triathlon Organisation). All as part of the existing structures and governance, respecting the Olympics and the other formats of the event. And he found a governing body with whom he could do business for mutual benefit.

Kudos to World Triathlon.

Sir Mike’s story isn’t new to the Sunday Column. As the most famous venture capitalist in the world, he is a man who has always funded people trying to break through the ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’. That’s a key insight.

The one with Sir Mike.

 

The PTO is a vision and a reality fit for 2025.

What Sam and his team are building is one of the top reasons to be cheerful for our industry. It isn’t all doom and gloom, and it can be done.

Here are some validation elements to qualify the claim.

 

* Established the first world tour for long-distance triathlon.
with the best athletes in the sport competing in a ‘season-long narrative’ of events in iconic locations: London, Singapore, Dubai, San Francisco, Vancouver, Doha.

 

* Signed sensible broadcast deals with some of the biggest names in sport.
Warner/TNT, Sky, Fox, CCTV, BeIN, DAZN, but crucially underpinned with a digital strategy that’s grown into industry-leading social media metrics, with engagements from its avid fan base exceeding more established players. A modern media and content strategy.

 

* Produced courageous storytelling, via data and technology, on real-time athlete biometrics.
Adding the kind of context that’s become expected (demanded) by broadcasters and fans, but so often dismissed by rights holders as ‘too hard, too expensive, the athletes won’t let us’ etc. Walking the talk of modern narrative in sport.

 

* Attracted and collated over 50,000 amateur athletes paying for the opportunity to race alongside the top professionals.
Many of them travelling around the world to enjoy their passion. ‘The power of participation’ is now a key theme for our industry.

 

* Secured long-term sponsors and partners to support their vision with material 8-figure contracts.
Multiple revenue streams firing on all cylinders. Follow the money.

 

Innovation in a fundamentally changing economic reality.

All this now has to be the industry’s playbook when facing the ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’ in sport, through an honest relationship with the governing body, moving the more traditional product where it needs to go, for the benefit of all. In this case, delivering fresh new versions of the triathlon that sit alongside the Olympics.

It is no wonder that this PTO vision has attracted significant interest from credible outside investors wanting to join the journey and contribute actively. Middle East sovereign wealth, American sports funds, various high-profile family offices, and all of us who have worked on the raise, coordinated by the superb Oakvale Capital. They/we all see a path to significant return.

The point is this.

Smart fresh capital into sport is embracing what they themselves call “transformation” and “innovation”. Not just embracing it, but actively seeking it out.

“We are focused on transformative sports investments, investments that recognise the fundamental reality of a changing economic landscape in sport and the critical importance of innovation.  Connecting the participation base of a sport with the professional/elite product is paramount, and building a digital economy around that connection will mitigate the risk of that economic shift.  We are intent on building a portfolio of investments that recognises that imperative, and ideally works collaboratively with progressive governing bodies, to address the challenges ahead.” 

– Danny Townsend, CEO of SURJ Sports Investment

This is as clear as a bell. Breaking the inertia of the ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’. He is a man who is very, very clear on what he needs for financial return, and what works for the Kingdom. There is no ambiguity.

 

The models for sport are changing. They have to.

Whether it’s PTO, SailGP, the axioms are often very similar, as we can see with the new curling league here.

“Less is more” in terms of events.

 

Athletes paid better for fewer games, with upside kickers.

 

A clear position on the inclusion of women athletes and fans.

 

A ‘festival of sport’ model in iconic locations.

 

Franchises.

 

Sexier, less formal sports production and shoulder content, with the use of creators.

 

Prioritisation of ubiquity over exclusivity and paywalls.

 

YouTube strategy fully lent in.

 

More transparent and accountable governance.

 

There are many talented people, innovators like Sam Renouf, also willing to invest personally, who have so much to offer a sport and the industry in general. They think laterally, but are fully sensitive to legacy and tradition, especially to the international team competitions, where those exist. The Majors and the Olympics.

Guys like Sam, and any serious organisation, need a top CFO to really kick on. Especially these days. And I don’t mean what is called a “numbers” guy. I mean someone who has complete proactive ownership and dominance of a business model, and its sensitivities. A negotiator, a problem-solver, someone who can speak to capital with gravitas. Sam has Mark Bettels, a German professional, who over these two years is close to one of the most impressive characters in that role I have ever seen.

Our industry going forward needs people like Sam and Mark.

But most of all it needs Rick Blaine. Governing bodies that are brave enough to recognise the dramatic need for change, and are humble enough to discuss a solution within the existing structures. Maybe involving some kind of personal sacrifice. For the greater good.

That’s true glory. And true love for your sport.

You stepped up when it mattered.

​