Springbok’s Tour : Are Admission Charges Too High?

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 192, 11 May 1937, Page 14

Springbok’s Tour : Are Admission Charges Too High?

“Little Eric” writes : “I understand it is the Labour Government's definite policy ■ to strictly prohibit profiteering and exploitation of the public. In pursuance of this policy the prices of numerous commodities have been fixed and prices stabilised. Yet, one of the most ( glaring examples of profiteering and exploitation ' that this country has yet experienced is apparently being allowed to gq unchal- . lenged. “I refer to the admission charges fixed i , by the New Zealand Rugby Union for . admission to the forthcoming Springbok’.-. . football matches in New Zealand. Admis sion charges for the Test matches range up to 22/6, while provincial matches will cost up to 10/-. These prices, of course include admission to the stand. “If ever an attempt was made to commercialise an amateur game, it is, in my opinion, being made by the New Zealand Rugby Union in its fixation of prices ' on such a high scale throughout New Zealand for the eo.ming Springboks’ matches. “One can imagine this august body sitting in solemn conference anil fixing the prices, knowing full well that under no circumstances would they be called on to pay. On the contrary, and in recognition of their valuable services to the Rugby code, they will receive complimentary tickets, which, no doubt, will admit the member and his wife to the best part of the stand at Athletic Park or elsewhere. “On the other hand,, players who turn out Saturday after Saturday' and do so much to fill the coffers of the Rugby union will he placed in the same category as ordinary spectators, ami required to pay the same admission fees. j “It. would be interesting to peruse the | balance-sheet for the last Springboks’ ; 1 tour of New Zealand. What profit was ' < made as a result of the tour? | ; “What expense is being incurred In > < bringing the 1937 Springboks to New j 1

Zealand, and what is the estimated revenue at the admission charges fixed? “As our worthy Government appears to have no hesitation in interfering in any business where there is a suggestion .'f profiteering I suggest that it might well look into the business side of the New Zealand Rugby Union.” All the money that the New Zealand union receives goes back into the game by way of loans to affiliated unions to ' improve their grounds and accommodation for public and players. In bringing a team of 31 South African players and managers to New Zealand, the N.Z.R.U. mdortakes a big financial risk, and would ■n unwise to budget for anything but a übstantial profit on the tour. If the South African team did poorly in the matches in Australia, and if some of iheir star players were injured in the matches in the Commonwealth, gates in the Dominion might be seriously affected, and the N.Z.R.U. pul to heavy loss on the tour. With regard to the prices fixed for admission to the Springbok games in New Zealand, anyone who so desires can see the matches on payment of 2/6, and it is estimated that this is the price which 40.009 will pay to see the Test matches. There are others, however, who are prepared to pay a higher price to secure seats in the stand, and a certain number of seats have been fixed to accommodate these people. Our correspondent is in error when he states that admission charges for rhe Test matches range up to 22/6. The highest price is £l, which includes amusement tax, ami for these seats the N.Z.R.U. will receive 18/-. The New Zealand Rugby Union publishes its balance-sheet annually, ami copies are supplied to affiliated unions and the Press. Anyone interested ean I obtain a copy of the annual report, and I balance-sheet on application ■ to the secrc-J

tarv. In these balance-sheets the profits or losses made on tours by visiting teams are given. . , . , . In view of the big financial risk involved in bringing the South African team to Now Zealand, it cannot be said that the admission charges arc too high.—Sports Editor.