Springbok Ticket Prices Spark Debate on Affordability and Access
- Karen Scheepers
- Jul 9
- 17 min read
At a recent Springboks Test match, swathes of empty blue seats were visible at Loftus Versfeld Stadium despite the national team’s massive popularity, a visual sign of the brewing discontent over ticket prices.
Empty Seats Amid World Champions’ Homecoming
South African rugby fans are used to packed stadiums whenever the world champion Springboks play at home. But during the mid-2025 test series against Italy, thousands of seats went unfilled. In the first Test at Loftus Versfeld (Pretoria) on 5 July 2025, television cameras caught large stretches of empty seating, an astonishing sight given the Springboks’ iconic status.
Many supporters point to a clear culprit: ticket prices starting around R900 even for the cheapest seats. Such prices, they argue, have put attending live matches out of reach for ordinary South Africans. The public backlash over “exorbitant” ticket costs has been swift, sparking a nationwide debate about affordability, accessibility, and the financial realities of rugby in South Africa.
This discontent is a sharp contrast to just last season. In 2024, fresh off a World Cup triumph, all six Springbok home Tests sold out in euphoric fashion. Big-name opponents (New Zealand and Ireland) and the post-World Cup buzz saw fans flock to stadiums despite some grumbling over prices (some Cape Town attendees reportedly paid up to R4,000 for All Blacks tickets).
But 2025’s less glamorous incoming series (against the Barbarians, Italy, and Georgia) has tested the limits of fan loyalty. SA Rugby set a nominal low-end price tier of R250–R350 for these mid-year matches, yet only a few thousand such budget tickets were offered and they sold out instantly. The vast majority of seats were priced between roughly R850 and R3,000 each. In practical terms, around R900 has become the new “cheap” ticket, a price many fans argue is simply unaffordable in the South African context.
The effect has been visible in the stands. Unlike 2024’s full houses, the 2025 Tests have seen noticeable gaps. Loftus Versfeld was only about 80% filled (approximately 40,000 fans in a 51,000-seat venue) for the first Italy Test, highly unusual for a Springbok home game. A week earlier, a Springboks vs Barbarians exhibition in Cape Town also struggled with attendance (weather was a factor, but large sections behind the posts remained unsold). Normally Springbok Tests are near-instant sellouts, so this dip in turnout has raised alarms. Loyal supporters, it seems, are thinking twice when faced with triple-digit rand prices and lower-profile opposition.
Steep Climb in Ticket Prices Since 2019
The rise in Springbok ticket prices over the past few years has been dramatic. Not long ago, seeing the Boks play didn’t require breaking the bank. In 2019, a fan could attend a Rugby Championship test match for as little as R100 (with top-end seats around R950). By 2022, after two years of COVID-emptied stadiums, entry-level prices had crept up to about R150, and premium tickets for a marquee All Blacks clash were capped around R1,500. Fast forward to 2024–2025, and prices have surged several-fold. Official tickets now typically start in the mid-hundreds of rand for any Test, with the best seats often running R3,000 or more.
The table below highlights this escalation:
Year (Event) | Example Fixture | Approx. Price Range (ZAR) |
2019 (pre-WC) | vs. Australia (Rugby Champ.) | R100 (cheapest) – R950 (top) |
2022 (post-COVID) | vs. New Zealand (Mbombela) | R150 – R1,500 (top) |
2024 (world champs at home) | vs. New Zealand (Cape Town) | ~R500 – R3,000 (official range; some up to R4,000) |
2025 (Incoming Series) | vs. Italy (Loftus Versfeld) | R250–R350 (limited seats) – R3,000 (most tickets) |
Table: Springbok home Test ticket price ranges, 2019–2025. Prices have more than tripled at the top end, and even “cheap” seats have risen sharply. Sources: SA Rugby ticket announcements and media reports.
This steep increase has outpaced general inflation and wages, as discussed later, and it marks a stark turnaround for a rugby culture that once prided itself on filling stadiums with passionate fans from all walks of life. R900 is now effectively the floor to see the Springboks live, a threshold at odds with what many locals can afford. The result, as seen this season, is patches of empty seats where there used to be standing-room-only crowds.
How Do Springbok Ticket Prices Compare Globally?
SA Rugby’s leadership has defended the pricing by claiming that Springbok Tests “remain among the most affordable top-tier sporting events” worldwide. It is true that major rugby matches overseas can carry hefty price tags. For instance, top tickets for a Six Nations game at London’s Twickenham Stadium can cost anywhere from around £91 up to £203 (roughly R2,000 to R4,800), seemingly above South Africa’s rates on paper.
Likewise, in France, standard Test match tickets range from roughly €30 to €150 (about R600–R3,000) for regular games, and can climb higher for marquee fixtures basket-mag.com. However, direct price comparisons without context can mislead. Average incomes in Europe are many times higher than in South Africa, and many fans there obtain tickets through club memberships or lotteries at face value. In other words, a £100 (±R2,400) ticket in England, while expensive, represents a much smaller fraction of the typical UK monthly paycheck than a R1,000 ticket does for a South African earner.
A more illuminating measure is purchasing power parity (PPP), essentially adjusting prices by local cost of living. Using a “Big Mac Index” style PPP analysis, one report compared top-end ticket prices for equivalent big games across countries. It found that the most expensive seat for a Springboks vs All Blacks match in Auckland, New Zealand would come out to around R968 in local purchasing-power terms iol.co.za. That is significantly lower than the roughly R3,000 top price charged for Springbok home tests. In effect, South African fans are being asked to pay about three times more than New Zealanders for a similar marquee game after accounting for local earning power.
The same analysis showed Springbok Tests in London and Cardiff this year having top tickets equivalent to roughly R1,469 and R1,017 respectively, still far cheaper in real terms than South Africa’s high-end prices, even though those countries are wealthier. In short, Springbok tickets are now among the costliest in the world when adjusted for what people earn locally.
It’s worth noting that fan access models differ internationally. In rugby nations like England and France, a significant portion of tickets for big matches are distributed to local rugby clubs, long-time members, or via lotteries at face value, which can soften the blow of high official prices. Some unions also offer concessions, for example, the Welsh Rugby Union provides 50% discounts for under-18s at many games autumn-internationals.co.uk.
New Zealand, with smaller stadiums, often sells out tests via fan clubs and season packages, and All Blacks tickets, while not cheap, are generally seen as good value relative to Kiwi incomes. By contrast, South Africa’s system is a more straightforward public sale, and the combination of limited cheaper seats and no local membership discounts has meant regular fans face a stark choice: pay the going rate or miss out.
The Economic Reality for South African Fans
To understand why a R900 ticket causes such angst, one must consider South Africa’s economic context. While top earners in the country do very well, the average worker’s wage is relatively modest. As of mid-2024, average monthly earnings were about R27,500 (≈$1,500) before tax, and the average household brings in around R205,000 per year (≈R17,000 per month) news24.com.
These averages, however, mask deep inequality, a small wealthy minority skews the mean upward. In reality, most South Africans earn far less. The median income for black households (the largest demographic group) is under R82,000 per year (≈R6,800 per month), and many workers in poorer provinces have a median wage of only about R4,000–R5,000 monthly.
In this light, a mid-range Springbok ticket around R900 represents roughly a week’s wages for someone at the median income level. Taking a family to a match compounds the cost: for a family of four, even sitting in one of the cheaper sections (around R500 per seat), the outing could easily cost R3,000 when adding fuel, food, and drinks iol.co.za. Such an amount is out of reach for a huge portion of the population, especially amid tough economic times. South Africa’s unemployment rate remains extremely high (around 33% officially, and over 40% by expanded measures that include discouraged jobseekers) tradingeconomics.com.
Those who do have jobs have been squeezed by rising living costs; inflation spiked above 7% in 2022 and, while it has since eased to about 4–5% in 2023–2024 macrotrends.net, consumers still feel the pinch of past price hikes in fuel, food, and electricity. Stagnant wages and a string of interest rate increases have further crimped disposable income for middle-class households. In short, the economic backdrop means that for many South Africans, a rugby ticket has shifted from an accessible treat to a serious luxury purchase.
From 1995 to Now: Rugby’s Changing Accessibility
The debate over ticket pricing carries significant historical weight. Rugby in South Africa isn’t just any sport, it’s tied deeply to national identity and unity, especially since the iconic 1995 Rugby World Cup victory. In the early post-apartheid era, rugby administrators and icons like Nelson Mandela sought to transform the Springboks from a symbol of the old white establishment into a team that “united the nation” across racial and class lines. Part of that democratization of the game meant bringing new, diverse crowds into stadiums.
For many years after 1995, a day at the rugby was reasonably affordable, helping to fill big venues and create a fervent atmosphere that represented all South Africans. Ticket prices were kept low enough that working-class fans and families could attend, and initiatives through schools and clubs often provided access to those who couldn’t pay. The sight of packed grandstands with supporters of all colors singing Shosholoza in unison became a point of pride.
That is why recent scenes of empty seats and the sentiment that rugby is becoming an “elitist” entertainment, strike a nerve. “Remember when a Springbok ticket was R100? Those days are gone,” lamented one longtime supporter on an online forum. Many fear that the sport could regress to only being accessible to wealthy, predominantly white fans, undoing some of the post-1995 progress. Rugby, after all, has historically been a unifying force across classes and communities in South Africa.
The Springboks’ slogan in the professional era, “Stronger Together”, speaks to that ideal of inclusivity. Critics argue that if young kids in townships or average working families are priced out of seeing their heroes in person, the game risks losing a generation of supporters. The post-apartheid rugby boom was built on expanding the fan base; today’s administrators are being reminded that accessibility was, and is, key to rugby’s place in South African society.
Why Hike the Prices? Inside SA Rugby’s Finances
If expensive tickets are causing such backlash, why has SA Rugby (the South African Rugby Union, SARU) set them so high? The answer lies in the union’s financial structure and recent changes in its revenue model. Unlike many national sports teams, the Springboks receive no direct government funding and must generate their own income to fund everything from the elite team to development programs. “We generate our own funding. We don’t receive any funding from elsewhere,” explains Rian Oberholzer, SA Rugby’s CEO, underscoring that they rely on three main revenue streams: corporate sponsorships, broadcast rights, and ticket sales/match-day events. Every rand the Springboks earn has to cover not only the costs of the world champion team (player travel, salaries and win bonuses, stadium rentals, logistics) but also grassroots rugby and the operations of the 14 provincial unions across the country.
Ticket sales have become more crucial than ever in recent years due to a restructuring of how Test matches are run. Historically, Springbok home Tests were hosted by provincial unions, which paid SARU a fixed fee for the right to stage the game. The host union then set local ticket prices and kept the gate proceeds. Under that old model, revenue from Test match tickets accounted for only about 20% of SA Rugby’s “Springbok brand” income, a relatively small slice compared to rugby nations like England or Ireland, where sold-out home Tests can contribute nearly half of the union’s income. But around 2022, SA Rugby centralized its control of Springbok Tests.
The national union now directly manages ticketing and match operations and then shares the proceeds with all provincial unions (not just the host venue). “It’s about controlling your own product,” Oberholzer notes. “The Springbok is our biggest income generator… We had to adjust our models to fund our programs and our unions. Previously, most unions received no income from Tests… Our new model ensures that every union in South Africa benefits from Springbok matches.”
This shift means Springbok ticket revenue has become a lifeline for the entire domestic rugby ecosystem. Cash-strapped provincial unions, many of which face financial trouble, now rely on a share of big Test match gates to stay afloat. In this “pressure cooker” environment, SARU feels it must charge premium prices to sustain the sport. Every high-priced sellout pumps money into development initiatives and keeps the professional teams running.
Indeed, SA Rugby officials point out that after back-to-back World Cup titles, expectations (and expenses) are sky-high, from costly training camps to player insurance and bonuses for a championship squad. “People want a winning team… It’s tough to meet the budget. When the money comes in one door it goes out the next,” SARU President Mark Alexander told a TV interviewer, implying that the price of success is literally paid in rands. In the union’s view, charging what the market will bear for tickets is necessary to bankroll a world-beating team and a broad rugby pipeline in a country with a weak currency and limited other funding.
Broadcast rights are the other pillar of SARU’s finances, but they come with their own trade-offs. The bulk of South Africa’s rugby broadcast deal is with the pay-TV network SuperSport (DStv), reportedly worth billions of rand over multiple years. That money is indispensable, yet it means most Springbok games are behind a decoder paywall. The free-to-air public broadcaster SABC has often been left out due to rights issues and its own financial woes. For example, the first Springbok games of 2025 were not shown on free television at all, leaving millions who can’t afford DStv unable to watch their team.
Only after public outcry and in recognition of the symbolic 30th anniversary of the 1995 World Cup, did SARU strike a one-off deal to simulcast the second Italy Test on SABC2 in mid-July. This dynamic underscores SA Rugby’s balancing act: the SuperSport contract is vital for funding, but it also limits access and puts more pressure on in-person attendance as the primary way for fans to experience games. With no subsidy from government or elsewhere, SARU has been reluctant to slash ticket prices, fearing it would undermine one of its main revenue streams when they need it most.
Fan Backlash: Rugby for the People, or Only for the Rich?
The reaction from the South African public has been loud and passionate. Many supporters feel priced out of a sport that’s supposed to unite the nation. In recent months, social media have been abuzz with complaints from ordinary fans venting that they simply cannot justify spending thousands of rand to attend a single match. One viral TikTok video, filmed at Loftus Versfeld during the Italy game, panned across rows of empty seats with the blunt caption: “So many empty seats at Loftus due to high ticket prices by money-hungry SARU” thesouthafrican.com.
The clip struck a chord, racking up views and comments from frustrated devotees. It encapsulated a common sentiment: the Springboks belong to the people, not just well-heeled corporates or tourists. As one fan replied, “Our team is world champion because of support from the whole country. Now we’re shut out unless we’re rich.” Even SARU’s president Mark Alexander has acknowledged the concern, conceding that most South African households have very limited disposable income and that “the Springboks are now regarded as a team of the people”.
That very status, a national team carried by broad public passion, is what makes loyal fans feel angry or even betrayed when high prices exclude them. If rugby is a religion in South Africa, many lifelong believers are suddenly finding the tickets to the service too expensive. Traditional media and commentators have also weighed in. Sports columnists warn that empty stands and alienated fans could have long-term consequences for the sport.
Beyond the optics, an eroding fan base could mean less talent coming through (as fewer youngsters fall in love with the game) and lower merchandise and sponsorship appeal over time. Players themselves thrive on the energy of a packed crowd, several Springbok veterans have said there’s nothing like the spine-tingling roar of a full house singing the anthem, and that empty seats can dampen the atmosphere and even chip away at home-field advantage.
Fans have not just complained; they are also calling for solutions. Many are imploring SA Rugby to reconsider its pricing strategy, suggesting that the current approach is penny-wise but pound-foolish if it leads to half-empty stadiums. The sight of unoccupied bleachers is not just embarrassing for a world champion team, it fundamentally clashes with the joyful, inclusive spirit that has long characterized Springbok rugby.
Supporters point to other sports as evidence that affordability drives engagement. Recently, South Africa’s national soccer team, Bafana Bafana, drew a 50,000-strong sellout crowd to a crucial African Cup of Nations qualifier in the same Cape Town stadium where the Springboks struggled to fill seats iol.co.za. The key difference? Tickets for that Bafana match were priced at just R60 for adults. That family-friendly pricing allowed people from all walks of life to attend, and the result was a vibrant full house.
Of course, Springbok rugby is a different product. with higher costs and traditionally higher demand and one can’t directly compare a game against, say, South Sudan in soccer to a test against the All Blacks iol.co.za. But the lesson from soccer, fans argue, is clear: make it affordable, and the crowds will come. Rugby’s proudest moments in South Africa have been when it cut across social divides; the current trajectory, many fear, is turning it into a gated experience.
Another sore point is broadcast access. Those who can’t afford to be in the stadium at least want to follow the Boks on free TV. The limited availability of Springbok games on SABC has added to fans’ frustration. When the first Italy Test aired exclusively on pay-TV (SuperSport), millions of South Africans without a DStv subscription had no way to watch their beloved team live. Only after public pressure and the symbolic significance of the occasion, did SARU arrange for the second Italy match to be shown on free-to-air SABC2.
Many have floated creative ideas, from student discounts, to family bundle deals, to having sponsors underwrite blocks of tickets for schoolkids, anything to fill seats and give ordinary people a chance to share in the Springbok experience. The clear message is that rugby must not become an elitist pursuit in a country where it has historically been a unifying force.
Possible Solutions: Finding a Balance
SA Rugby now faces a tricky task: maintaining financial sustainability while keeping stadiums full and fans happy. Is there a sweet spot that ensures the books are balanced but the Bok anthem still echoes around packed stands? Stakeholders and observers have put forward several recommendations to tackle the issue:
Revise Ticket Tiers: Reintroduce a wider range of ticket pricing categories. Currently, Springbok Tests usually have about four price bands, but critics say the 2025 breakdown was poorly executed, for example, seats behind the try-lines (historically the cheap seats) were priced nearly as high as prime halfway-line spots. Even Oberholzer admitted this may have been a mistake, promising a review of category placements. Going forward, more truly low-cost seats should be offered. Even if it’s only in the upper tiers or far corners, having a substantial number of tickets in the R100–R250 range (not just a token few thousand in the rafters) would allow more ordinary fans to attend. The pricing pyramid should be widened: let those who can pay top dollar continue to do so, but also provide a larger base of affordable options. A fuller stadium at mixed price points could ultimately yield similar total revenue as a half-empty one with only expensive tickets and it will look and feel a lot better.
Dynamic Pricing by Match: Adjust ticket prices based on the opponent and expected demand. Fans are more willing to pay high rates for headline clashes (New Zealand, England, the British & Irish Lions tour, World Cup finals, etc.) than for mid-tier opposition. In 2025, SA Rugby ostensibly charged the same top price (around R3,000) for games against Italy and Georgia as it did for a blockbuster against the All Blacks the year before. Many argue this shouldn’t be one-size-fits-all. For a series against teams like Georgia or a lower-ranked side, entry prices could be set lower across the board to reflect the lower demand, helping ensure the stadium still fills up for smaller fixtures. Conversely, premium rates can be maintained for All Blacks or Lions showdowns that will sell out regardless. The goal should be maximizing total turnout (and aggregate revenue) over a season, not necessarily squeezing the most out of each individual game in isolation.
Promotions and Bundles: Use creative marketing to make attending more affordable. In 2019, SA Rugby tried a “season ticket” bundle, fans could buy a combined ticket for two home Tests (Australia and Argentina) at a discounted total of R900. That bulk deal helped ensure both matches were well-attended in a year with only a couple of home games. Similar ideas could be revived. For example, offer a multi-match pass (buy tickets to two or three Tests together at a discount) or a family package (e.g. four tickets for the price of three). Even last-minute flash sales or two-for-one deals for sections that haven’t sold by game week could be considered, better to have a paying fan in the seat at half price than the seat empty at full price. These kinds of promotions can boost attendance without permanently “cheapening” the value of tickets.
Community Allocations: Set aside a portion of tickets for schools, youth clubs, and communities at very low cost (or even free). For instance, a few thousand seats per game could be designated for rugby development programs, schoolkids, or community groups from disadvantaged areas. Sponsors or CSR funds could cover the nominal cost. Imagine buses of schoolchildren from rural villages getting the chance to attend their first Test match, or local volunteer coaches rewarded with tickets, these would be investments in rugby’s future fan base. (The Springboks did something similar in spirit during their 2023 World Cup trophy tour, bringing the Webb Ellis Cup to small towns to inspire young fans.) Filling some seats with enthusiastic youngsters not only boosts the atmosphere, it helps build loyalty among the next generation of supporters.
Broader Broadcast Access: While not directly about tickets, making more games available on free TV can complement attendance efforts. When fans regularly see their team on accessible platforms, it sustains their interest and desire to attend in person when they can. The widely-praised decision to air the second Italy Test on SABC showed the demand for national reach. Perhaps going forward, at least one match per series (or a weekly highlights package) could be given to SABC, or big games simulcast on free-to-air, to ensure truly national viewership. Enhanced radio coverage and public fan park viewings are other avenues. The idea is that if more people can follow the Boks without paying, the pressure on stadium tickets as the only way to see the game might lessen, allowing a bit more flexibility on pricing. Plus, better broadcast exposure grows the fan base, which in time can create more paying customers, a long-term play that builds goodwill even if it means slightly less immediate TV revenue.
Sponsor Subsidies for Fans: Tapping sponsors to help make rugby more accessible. South African rugby has no shortage of big sponsors, some already provide perks like pre-sale ticket access or fan giveaways. These partners could be enlisted to directly offset costs for supporters. For example, a corporate sponsor might underwrite a “cheap seats” section (filling an upper tier with tickets at half price, in exchange for branding that section). A major bank or telecom could sponsor a certain number of discounted tickets for students or run contests that give out thousands of free tickets as a promotional exercise. Such marketing spends could be justified by the goodwill and positive publicity of being seen to “stand with the fans.” It’s a model seen in some other countries’ sports events and could work in South Africa’s passionate market.
Ultimately, none of these ideas alone is a silver bullet. But collectively, they show a path to finding a balance between revenue and reach. Even SA Rugby officials appear to recognize the need for adjustment, Oberholzer has indicated that the union is reviewing its ticket category pricing after the 2025 experience. The hope among fans and pundits is that SARU will mix and match these strategies to “give everyone a fighting chance to share in the Springbok experience,” as one supporter put it.
As the Springboks continue their 2025 season and look ahead to future tours, fans and stakeholders alike will be watching to see if SARU heeds the call for greater affordability. A full stadium decked out in green and gold is an image money can’t easily buy, but sensible pricing can certainly help deliver it. In the words of one fan on social media: “Make it accessible, and we will fill the stands. We love this team, just give us a fighting chance to show it.”
If the Springbok administrators can get the game plan right off the field, they can ensure that no trophy or balance sheet ever comes at the expense of the people’s passion. South African rugby, at its best, has always been Stronger Together and that must include everyone, from the lowest-priced seat to the most expensive box.