With more than 193,500 spectators gathered for their three matches at the Stade de France – Japan, New Zealand, Argentina – Antoine Dupont and his comrades broke attendance records for a November tour. But this popular success is not synonymous with proportional revenue for the French Rugby Federation (FFR), due to the contract which binds it until the end of the year with the consortium which manages the Saint-Denis venue. .
“A match like the one against Japan is great, but with 50,000 spectators we are losing money at the Stade de France whereas we would be earning money in the provinces,” laments Florian Grill, the president of the FFR.
However, the current concession held by the Vinci-Bouygues consortium expires at the end of the year. In the coming weeks, the State must decide on the award of a new 30-year concession. Two candidates are in the running: Vinci-Bouygues, which is ready to step up again, and the GL Events group, one of the heavyweights in events in the world.
“The obligation to play all or almost all matches at the Stade de France is not rational from an economic point of view. »
“We pretend to be better”
Beforehand, the two contenders began negotiations with the French Rugby Federation. “The State’s decision is getting closer,” explains Florian Grill. He has three possibilities. Either he chooses one of the two actors, or he continues to discuss with both, or he declares the call for tenders unsuccessful. The fact that he chooses an actor does not mean that we have the obligation to sign with him if the proposals do not satisfy us. We said the offers didn't suit us. Neither candidate is convincing. »
And the president of the FFR continued: “We repeat that rugby represents 40% of direct income and even 50% if we add indirect income from Stade de France revenues. We claim to be better than the proposals made to us today. »
The year 2024, which, due to the Olympic Games, required the French XV to play its three matches of the Six Nations Tournament in Marseille, Lille and Lyon, allowed the Federation to have a precise idea of the advantages and the disadvantages of this “exile”. And work on a plan B.
“Provincial alternatives”
“We explored the provincial alternatives,” says Florian Grill. The obligation to play all or almost all matches at the Stade de France is not rational from an economic point of view. Given the financial situation of the Federation, we will choose the most economically profitable solutions. Marseille is one of the real alternatives. There is less gauge, less hospitality, but the rental cost is very significantly cheaper. This is also true for Lyon. »
What about Matmut Atlantique in Bordeaux? “For the French men's XV, 42,000 spectators is a bit small, but for the French women's team it can be a real objective. We had 28,000 people in Chaban-Delmas last spring. So this can be a target. »
This is not the first time that the FFR has held difficult negotiations with the Stade de France. The consortium's lack of flexibility led Pierre Camou, president of the FFR from 2008 to 2016, to embark on the project of building a Grand Stadium, owned by the FFR. An ambition immediately abandoned by Bernard Laporte, his successor.
Related News :