It has taken "more than 110 years of blood, sweat and tears to build the All Blacks into one of the world's best sporting brands and just 15 minutes to inflict serious and lasting damage," according to Gregor Paul of the NEW ZEALAND HERALD. As headlines "reverberate around the world telling of Japan's shock win at Rio, New Zealand Rugby will have to finally address its hugely unpopular decision to re-name the national sevens team the All Blacks." Regardless of what the men's sevens team does next at the Olympics -- even if it wins the Gold Medal -- "the facts can't be changed that huge parts of the world believe the All Blacks suffered a humiliating loss on the biggest sporting stage of all." The Japan Times and Reuters both "used the term All Blacks in the headline of their reports on Japan's shock 14-12 victory in Rio." The All Blacks, as New Zealanders understand them, play 15-a-side rugby, are "back-to-back world champions, undefeated in 11 consecutive tests and in possession of the best win ratio of virtually any team in any code from anywhere in the world." That distinction "is critical." The All Blacks "trade off their success to a significant extent: their sustained excellence is their unique selling point" and worth an estimated NZ$80M ($58M) a year in direct income, which is close to 70% of all the game in New Zealand's revenue. That money comes from "two major sponsorship deals with AIG and adidas, a handful of smaller arrangements with domestic corporations; broadcast income from Sky TV and ticket sales from tests." In '12, the New Zealand Rugby Union "extended the 'All Blacks' prefix" to the sevens, Maori and U20 teams. The justification was that "the rest of the world didn't distinguish between the All Blacks and other New Zealand national teams and already perceived them to be one generic brand." NZRU CEO Steve Tew said, "What it did for us, was to ensure we could showcase the All Blacks brand in more places and time-zones and this in turn is helping to expand the commercial and partnership opportunities available to us." They were given a status they had not earned, "all so the rugby union could leverage more sponsorship income by offering a broader portfolio of teams to stick corporate logos on" (NZ HERALD, 8/11).
