NZR is confident it will be able sign an improved deal with Adidas – or a rival apparel manufacturer such as Under Armour or Nike – even without including Super Rugby teams as the All Blacks remain a treasured property with enduring brand value.
And if NZR can secure more income selling the rights to just its national teams, it will pave the way for Super Rugby clubs to keep the income from whatever apparel deals they strike.
Super Rugby clubs are currently able to generate revenue through ticket sales and sponsorships. They do not receive any broadcast revenue or apparel partnership income as this is held by NZR, who in return pay the player's salaries.
This hybrid model where NZR meets most of the running costs and keeps the major sources of income, allowing the clubs to generate small independent revenue streams is coming under increasing pressure to adapt because of increased private equity investment in Super Rugby.
NZR is the majority shareholder in each club, but all five now have private investors who feel they need greater leeway to make a return on their investment.
There's also a collective desire among the five clubs to be able to build stronger brand identities that are less aligned with NZR and the All Blacks.
Being in control of their own apparel relationship will likely lead to clubs offering a greater range of merchandise at different price points – with official licensed products sitting alongside a range of fan clothing.
And it is likely that once the clubs are granted permission to seek their own apparel partners, that they will do so collectively – selling the rights to all five teams in a bundled package and then splitting the revenue.
It is believed that the Blues and Crusaders – the two biggest and best supported clubs – could sell the rights to produce their kit for a total value of about $1m a year – split between about $600,000 cash and $400,000 in product and marketing spend.
The other clubs, however, may struggle to attract those sorts of numbers and a collective deal could prove to be better value for all five teams because the trump card in any sales pitch would be the possibility of their being a World Club Championship in 2024.
Talks are ongoing about a short competition in 2024 – possibly between four to six weeks – that would see the best club teams from Super Rugby, Japan, the UK, South Africa and the Celtic Nations meet in a best versus best scenario.
This competition would not replace Super Rugby but be in addition too and the likely audience and media profile would be such that it could greatly increase the price an apparel partner would be willing to pay to own the rights.
Certainty about the future of Super Rugby Pacific would also be welcomed by the clubs ahead of any apparel tender process. Rugby Australia has only committed to the competition until 2023 and chairman Hamish McLennan has made several strong claims in recent days that his organisation is prepared to breakaway and form their own tournament in 2024.
