New Zealand's netball establishment is about to try a very different game plan.
Authors
- Hoani Smith
Lecturer in Sport Management and Sport Science, Lincoln University, New Zealand
- Phil Borell
Senior Lecturer (Above the Bar), Aotahi School of Maori and Indigenous Studies, University of Canterbury
- Tom Kavanagh
Lecturer in Sport Sociology, Lincoln University, New Zealand
Netball New Zealand has agreed in principle to hand the running of its domestic league to entrepreneur Anna Mowbray and her husband, former All Black Ali Williams, from 2027. The pair are already co-owners of A-League football club Auckland FC.
While the couple would run the professional competition, the national body would still look after the Silver Ferns, national selection, player pathways and the community game.
The move could bring more money and commercial expertise into the professional game. But it also comes with a challenge: ensuring what is good for the business is also good for the sport.
A tricky balancing act
We already see different versions of this separation in New Zealand. The privately owned Warriors league franchise and Breakers basketball franchise compete in Australian leagues while national bodies govern their respective sports. Auckland FC operates on a similar model in football.
New Zealand Rugby remains more closely tied to its professional game. In 2022, it partnered with US private-equity firm Silver Lake, which invested in a new entity set up to run NZR's commercial operations.
But the experience shows private investment is no simple fix. In 2025, NZR moved to simplify the structure , bringing its commercial and rugby operations closer together under a single chief executive and management team.
New Zealand Cricket has taken a different path again, giving players greater flexibility to pursue lucrative T20 opportunities overseas.
There are different sports with different models. But each is trying to balance the same competing interests: commercial growth, player opportunities, national teams, pathways and the wider game.
For New Zealand sport, that balancing act is made harder by scale. A relatively small population means smaller broadcast and sponsorship markets, even as the country continues to produce athletes sought by wealthier competitions overseas.
Rugby players can head away to Japan or Europe, cricketers to T20 leagues around the world, and netballers to Australia or Britain. Basketballers and footballers have even larger overseas markets to pursue.
That competition for talent can create tensions at home as well. Netball New Zealand has increased the number of overseas players allowed in each ANZ Premiership team from one to two, potentially lifting the standard of the competition.
But opening more places to international players also means fewer opportunities for emerging New Zealanders - adding another complication to the balance between building a stronger professional league and developing local talent.
New Zealand has always been able to produce top-level athletes. But increasingly, the challenge is giving them enough reason to stay.
Consider what New Zealand is up against. Australia's top Australian rules competition, the AFL, has a A$4.5 billion broadcast deal , while its leading rugby league competition, the NRL, has signed one worth A$5.3 billion from 2028.
In the United States, the numbers are larger again. Basketball's NBA has a media deal worth around US$76 billion .
Australian football offers perhaps the closest comparison. In 2020, the A-Leagues were separated from Football Australia, leaving the professional competitions commercially run while the national body remained responsible for governance and the wider game.
But separating the professional business from the wider sport can change whose interests carry the most weight. Investors and sponsors are important, but so too are players, fans, development pathways and community participants.
That relationship becomes particularly important at grassroots level, where sport relies heavily on volunteers, coaches and local clubs. If the professional and community games drift too far apart, people can lose their connection to the top level and begin to disengage.
Why private investment needs safeguards
The potential benefits of private investment are clear. It can bring money and commercial expertise, attract sponsors, improve broadcasting and marketing, and build a stronger fan experience.
But greater commercial freedom also needs safeguards. If some owners have much deeper pockets than others, competitive balance can quickly suffer.
This is why Australia's NRL uses a salary cap to spread talent across clubs and stop the richest teams outbidding everyone else for the best players. It also helps stop clubs spending beyond their means just to keep up.
New Zealand netball might consider similar measures - whether through a salary cap, minimum player payments, revenue sharing or limits on team spending.
The final league rules and player arrangements are still being developed, with player terms to be negotiated with the New Zealand Netball Players' Association . So exactly what those safeguards will look like remains unclear.
Netball New Zealand says the community game will not change, with clubs and centres continuing as they do now. It says protecting resources for around 150,000 registered players is one reason for the move.
This will be a key test: can private investment strengthen the professional league without weakening the pathways, volunteers and community game beneath it?
Commercial growth will be important, but investors will also need to recognise that sport has responsibilities beyond profit. The lesson is not that every New Zealand sport should privatise.
Instead, each sport needs to be clear about who runs the professional business, who governs the wider game, who benefits when new money comes in - and who carries the cost if things go wrong.
Netball is about to test that balance.
With rugby, cricket, football, league and basketball facing many of the same pressures, the rest of New Zealand sport should be watching closely.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
