Last month, I wrote a piece about how New Zealand Rugby (NZR) sued INEOS over a premature termination of a sponsorship deal (https://www.nicklieberthal.com/blog/new-zealand-rugby-serves-ineos). A settlement has now been reached to resolve the issue.
On Tuesday, both parties issued a statement to say the dispute had been resolved.
"New Zealand Rugby and Ineos can confirm that a settlement has been reached between the two parties," a joint statement read. "Whilst the details remain confidential, both organisations are satisfied with the outcome and acknowledge a desire to now move forward."
The deal had included the display of INEOS branding on All Blacks shorts and their training shirts.
It’s unlikely there will be a more important victory this year than the one NZR secured in reaching a financial settlement with UK petrochemical magnate, Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
The man who was once the richest in Britain and who is knee-deep in trying to turn around Manchester United having made a near 30 per cent investment in the club, decided in January this year to unilaterally end a six-year sponsorship agreement with the All Blacks three years early.
Ratcliffe's company, INEOS, refused to pay the first instalment of the sponsorship for 2025 - believed to be worth around NZ$20m – and then told NZR that it was terminating the agreement. Just like that, the $60m NZR was forecasting it would be taking from INEOS over the next three years disappeared. It was a huge blow – an enormous amount of money to suddenly lose.
The consequences of INEOS' walking away in the manner it did, would have been felt all over the rugby landscape but it would be particularly damaging to NZR's quest to retain its best players.
Under the terms of the agreement that the players have with their employer, 36.5% of all commercial income is ring-fenced in what is known as the, "Player Payment Pool" (PPP). This is the pot from which salaries are drawn.
Without the INEOS money, the PPP would have $7m less over the next three years and the consequences of that would have been significant when it is considered that the best players in New Zealand are typically paid about $1m per season.
It's already an almost impossible battle for NZR to keep its players from going to Japan where they can earn twice as much for half the commitment and so there was extreme nervousness about the damage Ratcliffe's decision was going to cause in terms of its impact on the All Blacks.
NZR took the decision to fight and adopted an unexpectedly hardline approach of lodging a motion to sue INeos at the High Court in Wellington.
It's possibly true that Ratcliffe gambled that NZR, a notoriously conservative organisation which is fiercely protective of the All Blacks brand, would not have wanted to endure the adverse publicity of a court case and public fight with a sponsor, and would have simply rolled over without a fight.
Sir Jim even took to talking in the media about the hard times his business was experiencing, telling the Telegraph: "I’m afraid life’s tough in trading in Europe, whether we like it or not," Ratcliffe said. "I know it’s easy to just carry on, but I'm afraid life’s tough in the outside world in trading."
"Europe is a tough place for business at the moment. It’s not just for us — it's for everybody in the car industry as well as the chemical industry."
"Really they’re pretty much the two biggest industries in Europe. Cars and chemicals are both about a trillion [euros in value], but they’re both having a tough time. At the moment, INEOS is the only chemical company in Europe that’s still building."
NZR was taking a risk – not only did it no longer have the guarantee of INEOS' $20m per annum, it would also have the unknown cost of legal fees, that could stretch into the millions depending how long the action lasted.
It was a risk it had to take as the consequences of not having that money were going to be catastrophic and the hardline approach worked.
Ratcliffe, having previously hinted that he would fight the case all the way through the courts, suddenly backed down this week and agreed to make a financial payment to NZR to bring the matter to a close and avoid the legal action.
The joint statement hat NZR chief executive Mark Robinson added to when he spoke to the media shortly after and said: "We think it’s a good outcome and have been working hard at this for a period of time. We’re pleased to have it resolved and tidied up."
The importance of resolving it can’t be overstated. Firstly, there is the precedent it has set. By standing up to a billionaire who tried to exit a valid contract with no due process, NZR has delivered a strong message to potential commercial backers that a deal is a deal and that anyone sponsoring the All Blacks will be made to pay what they agreed.
More importantly, the settlement – which is believed to have been around $25m (one full year, plus an additional compensation) – has plugged the significant hole in NZR’s accounts. The settlement means NZR can now bank what it would have banked had Ineos stayed on and it gives it at least a year to find a replacement sponsor.
NZRU have already locked down a glut of superstars, like Ardie Savea but the lure of Japanese rugby means more money must be found to keep its stars at home.
The value of having that money is that it can now make better, long-term offers to its key players, as it can now forecast with more certainty and confidence about how much will be available to pay them.
NZR has its long-established superstars – the likes of all three Barrett brothers (Beauden, Scott and Jordie), Ardie Savea, Cam Roigard, Will Jordan and Rieko Ioane – locked in until the World Cup in 2027.
Now that it has retrieved the Ineos money, it has begun the process of targeting those such as Tyrel Lomax (currently signed until 2026), Patrick Tuipulotu (2025), Tupou Vai’I (2025), Wallace Sititi (2025), Anton Lienert-Brown (2026) and Mark Tele’a (2025), to get them contracted through to 2029.
All of these players, plus the likes of: Tamaiti Williams; Ethan de Groot; Fletcher Newell; Asafa Aumua; Fabian Holland; Peter Lakai; Du’Plessis Kirifi and Cortez Ratima and Quinn Tupaea are going to be the emerging stars at the tail end of this World Cup cycle, and the senior crew by the time the British & Irish Lions arrive in 2029.
Damian McKenzie, who was also coming off contract at the end of this year, was the first of the key names NZR wanted to lock in, to make that commitment, when he signed a four-year contract extension this week that is believed to be worth around $1m a year.
Damian McKenzie, who was also coming off the end of his contract at the end of this year, was the first of the key names NZR wanted to lock in, to make that commitment, when he signed a four-year contract extension this week that is believed to be worth around $1m a year.
It’s a major signing for NZR as the 29-year-old is a key part of All Blacks coach, Scott Robertson’s plans. Last year wasn’t an easy one for McKenzie, as he started the season as Robertson’s preferred No. 10 but midway through the Rugby Championship, the coach lost faith and opted to start picking Beauden Barrett.
McKenzie, though, suggested that he’s had clarity from Robertson about where he sits in the pecking order and what role the All Blacks coach has in mind for him over the next three years. "Nothing’s guaranteed," McKenzie said. "I obviously got a great opportunity last year in the All Blacks, but just because I’ve signed for four more years doesn’t mean the spot’s there for me just to fall into," he said.
"I know the work that it takes to get into that position. And there’s plenty of areas in my game that need work and areas that I continue to try and improve on."
Wiith McKenzie now secured, the expectation is that other targeted players will announce in the next weeks and months that they are too making long-term commitments to New Zealand.
In a recent interview with the Rugby Direct podcast, All Blacks coach Scott Robertson – who obviously had a heads up that the INEOS situation was near resolution – suggested that there were more major signings in the pipeline.
"We’re in great shape," he said. "We’ve got a great group of loyal All Blacks and Super players who want to be All Blacks and young kids playing in our country who want that opportunity."
From being in danger of seeing an exodus, it’s not drawing too long a bow to say that if the All Blacks win the 2027 World Cup and follow it up with a series win over the British and Irish Lions, NZR’s victory over Sir Jim will have played a major part.
NZR said in February that Ineos had, "failed to pay the first instalment of the 2025 sponsorship fee, confirming its decision to exit our six-year agreement."
Citing the struggling chemicals industry in Europe, because of, "high energy taxes and extreme carbon taxes" along with, "the deindustrialisation of Europe," Ineos said in a statement at the time: "We have had to implement cost-saving measures across the business.
"We sought to reach a sensible agreement with the All Blacks to adjust our sponsorship in light of these challenges."
This whole matter sounds so messy. I suppose it's a win-win situation. NZR get their money and INEOS can move on. It's never nice when a legal matter lingers on for many years. It's always best to sort it out in a quick and swift manner. A bonus is that it's extremely beneficial that that the All Blacks are able to lock down on their star players for a little while longer.