The decision to take international rugby’s biggest rivalry to Baltimore was about far more than filling an American stadium. It forms part of a much broader push into the United States (US), where even a tiny share of the country’s enormous sports economy could transform the finances of global rugby and dramatically increase the commercial value of teams such as the Springboks.

The Springboks and All Blacks played in Baltimore in front of 68 173 spectators, setting a new attendance record for a rugby match in the US.

For World Rugby, matches of this scale offer a way of putting the sport in front of American audiences years before the US hosts the men’s Rugby World Cup in 2031 and the women’s tournament in 2033.

The economic logic behind the American push is straightforward. Rugby’s traditional markets, including South Africa, New Zealand, Britain, Ireland, and France, are saturated. Rugby commands substantial audiences in these countries, but the potential for rapid expansion in broadcasting, sponsorship, and matchday revenue is limited.

The US offers something entirely different.

Its sports industry is worth hundreds of billions of dollars when broadcasting, sponsorship, advertising, ticketing, merchandise, and associated industries are considered. That means rugby does not have to become one of America’s dominant sports for the market to have an enormous impact on its finances.

The strategic calculation is that capturing even around 1% of American sports spending could double global rugby revenues.

The American strategy revolves around major events rather than waiting decades for the sport to develop organically. Instead of relying exclusively on grassroots participation to build an audience, rugby can take established international brands into American cities immediately. Few rugby brands are better suited to that strategy than the Springboks and All Blacks.

Both teams have global recognition, an established rivalry, and South Africa has a large expatriate community capable of providing an initial audience. Putting them into major American stadiums then exposes the spectacle to sponsors, broadcasters, and spectators who may have little previous connection with rugby.

Baltimore demonstrated the potential of that strategy.

The crowd of nearly 70 000 showed that major international rugby matches can attract substantial American audiences, particularly when the world’s leading rugby nations are involved.

Related to that potential is another commercial development sitting behind the Springboks’ growing exposure to the United States – which is to buy the commercial rights to Springbok rugby.

An attempt to buy into the Springboks’ commercial rights has already come from US-based Ackerley Sports Group. It proposed investing over a billion rand for a 20% stake in a new SA Rugby commercial company that would hold assets including Springbok sponsorship, broadcasting, licensing, branding, and other commercial rights.

SA Rugby initially entertained the proposal, arguing that Ackerley could provide both capital and access to international commercial networks, particularly in the US.

The proposal ultimately failed to secure the required support. SA Rugby’s member unions rejected the transaction in December 2024 after it failed to receive the required 75% approval.

That did not end efforts to bring outside capital into the Springboks' commercial operation.

A competing consortium subsequently emerged with a proposal reportedly worth several billion rand for a larger stake in the Boks.

Ackerley nevertheless indicated that it remained interested in participating in a transaction and was prepared to work alongside South African investors.

The Springboks are already one of international rugby’s most recognisable teams, but their commercial value has historically been constrained by the relatively small size of South Africa’s domestic economy and media market. And fears that South Africa’s economy and politics are headed downhill and that large numbers of middle-class people are exiting the country have ignited further urgency on finding an alternative economic model for the team.

Breaking meaningfully into the US changes that calculation.

A Springbok brand capable of selling sponsorships, broadcasting rights, merchandise, and major matches into the world’s richest sports market is a considerably more valuable commercial asset than one dependent primarily on South African and traditional rugby markets.

Baltimore’s success has upped the price of those rights by demonstrating that the Springboks can attract tens of thousands of spectators in an American city, provide premium live content for broadcasters and streaming platforms, and offer sponsors exposure to an audience outside rugby’s traditional geographic boundaries.

Rugby's traditional television sales model has generally depended on relatively small national markets and, increasingly, subscription television. Establishing an American audience gives rugby access to a vastly larger media economy, including television networks and streaming companies competing for live sporting content.

Corporate sponsorship provides another opportunity. American companies spend billions of dollars every year associating their brands with sport. The approaching 2031 and 2033 World Cups give rugby a defined period in which to convince major American corporations that the sport can deliver a commercially valuable audience.

The Baltimore match formed part of a much larger commercial experiment in whether the Springboks can be connected to American spectators, broadcasters, sponsors, and investors.