What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Gold Coast Bears/Nth Sydney/Gosford

Messages
21,867
Used to be a Bears fan and agree with all of this. Just need it locked in that North Sydney only gets 1 home game a year and that can never change

Yeah absolutely agree, it must not come to Sydney.

One regular season game &'one pre season.

Get together with Sydney clubs and offer an away membership for Sydney games. They'd probably be able to offer a 4-5 game package for Sydney fans.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,726
:white_check_mark: double the fan base

Not necessarily, I know quite a few Bears fans and each one has a different position on this, some say they wouldn't support them unless they're the North Sydney Bears, some say they could deal with them being the Central Coast Bears but not if they were to leave NSW, etc.

So maybe it'll lead to a large increase in the fan base, but at the same time you're definitely going to alienate a lot of Titans and Bears fans, so you're going to lose some before you start.
For example there're roughly 10k active Titans fans and I'd guesstimate roughly 6-8k Bears fans who could become active again, but once you've alienated 7k of the Titans fans and 3k of the Bears fans that leaves you with only 6k or so fans left who are're actively buying the product, most of whom aren't actually based on the GC, and it gets even more murky once you get into fair weathered fans and casuals.

:white_check_mark: improved away support

I'm also not so sure that is true, they'll definitely be a novelty factor jump in the first year or two in Sydney, but apart from the games at NS Oval I doubt that a lot of the old Bears fans will stick to the GC Bears too strongly, maybe more would if a Sydney membership was sold that included tickets to every Sydney/NSW/ACT game, but even then I'd only expect the Bears to add a few thousand at most.

:white_check_mark: improved jersey & name

That's subjective, and I'm sure that a lot of the people on the gold coast would prefer their own brand, even if it isn't a very good one, instead of a transplanted Sydney brand.

:white_check_mark: better long term viability

How do we know that without seeing the other consortium's bids? Besides most of the Bears wealth seems to be tied up in assets so if their consortium of backers screw the pooch and bail then the Bears wouldn't be able to support the club to any great standard for long.

Look I'm not really against the Bears getting the licence, but there're plenty of better outcomes for the game on the Gold Coast then the Bears getting the licence.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,726
Used to be a Bears fan and agree with all of this. Just need it locked in that North Sydney only gets 1 home game a year and that can never change

Also an ex Bears fan, and 0 home games out of North Sydney would be better, if they can get other clubs to take their games against them to NSO then great, but if they're going to be the GC team then they should show that by committing all their games to the GC, or at least South East Queensland.
 
Messages
21,867
Not necessarily, I know quite a few Bears fans and each one has a different position on this, some say they wouldn't support them unless they're the North Sydney Bears, some say they could deal with them being the Central Coast Bears but not if they were to leave NSW, etc.

So maybe it'll lead to a large increase in the fan base, but at the same time you're definitely going to alienate a lot of Titans and Bears fans, so you're going to lose some before you start.
For example there're roughly 10k active Titans fans and I'd guesstimate roughly 6-8k Bears fans who could become active again, but once you've alienated 7k of the Titans fans and 3k of the Bears fans that leaves you with only 6k or so fans left who are're actively buying the product, most of whom aren't actually based on the GC, and it gets even more murky once you get into fair weathered fans and casuals.

It'd alienate bears fans? Anyone realistic must understand there's literally no other route back. I think most bears fans that haven't moved on to other clubs would be fine with it.

A doubling of the fan base is easily achievable given the low numbers the have currently. Not just talking crowds here but the general wider support.

I can understand some titans fans could be alienated but I think that can be managed with good PR. I mean we're talking a 10 year old club, how deep do the roots really go?


I'm also not so sure that is true, they'll definitely be a novelty factor jump in the first year or two in Sydney, but apart from the games at NS Oval I doubt that a lot of the old Bears fans will stick to the GC Bears too strongly, maybe more would if a Sydney membership was sold that included tickets to every Sydney/NSW/ACT game, but even then I'd only expect the Bears to add a few thousand at most.

It'll significantly increase from where there away support in Sydney is at the moment. I mean I'd guess most GC games in Sydney would bring in a very small number of people, I could easily see this increase by a large margin.


That's subjective, and I'm sure that a lot of the people on the gold coast would prefer their own brand, even if it isn't a very good one, instead of a transplanted Sydney brand.

Arguably the brand has a connection with the Gold Coast already. There has been a professional club based there called the bears.

I grant you it's subjective but I'd wager general rugby league fans would consider 'bears' a stronger brand than 'titans'

To me the Gold Coast is screaming out for tradition not Mickey Mouse monikers. Giants, chargers & Titans all have shared a plastic image in my view. Seagulls was just plain shite.

How do we know that without seeing the other consortium's bids? Besides most of the Bears wealth seems to be tied up in assets so if their consortium of backers screw the pooch and bail then the Bears wouldn't be able to support the club to any great standard for long.

Look I'm not really against the Bears getting the licence, but there're plenty of better outcomes for the game on the Gold Coast then the Bears getting the licence.

We don't, I grant you. But I do know we have a very dodgy history with private ownership in recent times. I have very serious concerns that private buyers will become bored & frustrated with the losses.

I think all things being equal having the backing of a leagues club is a much safer long term option. Obviously if the bears bid comes up short in regards to leagues club support that's another matter.

But you can see with the NRL's pursuit of Wests Newcastle that they're much more interested in long term viability than a high sale number. The goal here isn't to make money but have a long term viable club.

I'd hope if the NRL do sell to a private buyer they can secure some type of bank guarantee like happened at Newcastle. The NRL shouldn't have to bail out the club once again.
 
Last edited:
Messages
21,867
Also an ex Bears fan, and 0 home games out of North Sydney would be better, if they can get other clubs to take their games against them to NSO then great, but if they're going to be the GC team then they should show that by committing all their games to the GC, or at least South East Queensland.

I don't see the harm in one a year. As long as the contract stipulates no more than that. It'd also help grow the Sydney fan base.
 

CC_Roosters

First Grade
Messages
5,221
I do think it would be a good news story south of the border, but would the Queensland press and public buy into it as a positive if the Bears were successful or see it as some sort of hostile takeover by nsw interests.

Hard to know really unless the ARLC roll the dice. If they got it wrong and the Gold Coast Community disengaged then it would probably lead to the end of a franchise in the region.
 

toomuchsoup

Juniors
Messages
2,060
Bring em' back!

The red and black shits all over the light blue

It'd be a hard transition and they'd need a really good plan to keep current fans, but in the long run, the bears brand is so much better than the titans.

All their Sydney games would instantly become grudge matches and ignite old rivalries

Could have a seagulls style heritage jersey aswell
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Killing one of the 3 Qld teams to revive an 11th NSW team is a terrible f*cking idea...

It would be insulting to the people who have supported the titans for the last 10 years and it would be insulting to just about every Qld RL fan.

Qld has its own proud RL history (too much of this has already been lost to accomidate Sydney clubs and the expanding NSWRL).

Bears on the GC is a terrible idea!!!
 
Messages
21,867
Killing one of the 3 Qld teams to revive an 11th NSW team is a terrible f*cking idea...

It would be insulting to the people who have supported the titans for the last 10 years and it would be insulting to just about every Qld RL fan.

Qld has its own proud RL history (too much of this has already been lost to accomidate Sydney clubs and the expanding NSWRL).

Bears on the GC is a terrible idea!!!

So where does this proud Queensland history fit in with the titans? They don't seem to have embraced any Queensland history. In fact many talk about the colours already feeling like NSW.

I mean there's a Queensland cup side on the Gold Coast called the bears already. There's a former AFL team that played there called the bears.

The Gold Coast seagulls had a red, black & white strip too. It's not a completely foreign fit at all.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
The more i think about it, the more it seems like a mistake to have gone with "Gold Coast" as the team name. It was inevitably going to draw comparisons to the 4 dead brands and we would never hear the end of "how long until THIS gold coast team dies?"....

In hindsight, they should have gone with "South Queensland Titans" instead (still based on the GC obviously). Better to be compared to the Crushers (a team killed by Broncos greed).

The Titans name absolutley needs to stay, but im wondering if it isnt too late too change the location name to "South Queensland" (in the same way the Warriors went from "Auckland" to "New Zealand" 5 yeats into their existence.

It might help to broaden their potential fan base and it could help develop rivalries develop rivalries with other clubs. But, if nothing else, it should stop the deathriding...
 
Last edited:

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,168
In hindsight, they should have gone with "South Queensland Titans" instead (still based on the GC obviously). Better to be compared to the Crushers (a team killed by Broncos greed).

The Titans name absolutley needs to stay, but im wondering if it isnt too change the location name to "South Queensland" (in the same way the Warriors went from "Auckland" to "New Zealand" 5 yeats into their existence.

I agree. They could also change their colours to a red or crimson or one of those Qld type colours. Just keep the Titans name and badge.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,726
It'd alienate bears fans? Anyone realistic must understand there's literally no other route back. I think most bears fans that haven't moved on to other clubs would be fine with it.

Unfortunately most old footy fans aren't rational. They are completely emotional beings when it comes to their footy clubs.
In my experience most old Bears fans who haven't moved on by now never will, and unless it's the Bears as they understand them (as in the NS or CC Bears) then most will consider them to not be the Bears but a cheap imitation! And yes there is a contingent of NS Bears fans who consider even the idea of Bears playing home games in Sydney outside of NSO as sacrilege, and another that consider anything outside of North Sydney or the CC to be sacrilege and so on, I imagine that once you get to the idea of the Bears being based on the GC that the numbers willing to keep supporting would be pretty thin.

A doubling of the fan base is easily achievable given the low numbers the have currently. Not just talking crowds here but the general wider support.

I don't see any evidence to suggest that a doubling of fans is reasonable, and the only fans that really matter are the paying customers, the people that if pressed say they are a Titans fan, or whoevers fan, but haven't watched a game or attended a game in 5 years, and don't purchase merchandise, etc, add nothing to the club in real terms so we really shouldn't worry about them when it comes to discussions like these.

I can understand some titans fans could be alienated but I think that can be managed with good PR. I mean we're talking a 10 year old club, how deep do the roots really go?

It took me (and most of the other footy fans in Canberra/Queanbeyan of the time) less then ten year to become a rusted on Raiders fan, it takes most kids much less then ten years to build a connection with a footy club once they've started the process.
The problem that the Titans have had is that they have consistently failed to inspire that connection with their target audience, manly due to terrible management, which doesn't seem to be a problem with that the Titans have anymore, or at least for the moment as every club goes through those periods of utter hopelessness from time to time.

BTW, I hope you have a bloody good PR team in mind to spin 'the NS Bears and proceeding with a hostile takeover of your club' into a good thing.

It'll significantly increase from where there away support in Sydney is at the moment. I mean I'd guess most GC games in Sydney would bring in a very small number of people, I could easily see this increase by a large margin.

Frankly no club should be reliant on away support to survive, so I don't really care that the Bears will grow the GC away support from a figure in the Hundreds to a few thousand, so I grant you that they'll grow away support in Sydney, however they'll probably drop it in Brisbane and Townsville, but it's a moot point because it shouldn't even factor into the discussion.

Arguably the brand has a connection with the Gold Coast already. There has been a professional club based there called the bears.

Lol, I don't think there's a single Norths or Burleigh fan that would agree with you, but ok.

I grant you it's subjective but I'd wager general rugby league fans would consider 'bears' a stronger brand than 'titans'

To me the Gold Coast is screaming out for tradition not Mickey Mouse monikers. Giants, chargers & Titans all have shared a plastic image in my view. Seagulls was just plain shite.

You know back when the Raiders, Steelers, and Brisbane started people used to say that they were soulless too, I'm sure that the older fans of the time used to say similar things about the Panthers back in the day as well, nobody would say that now because all the brands have established themselves in the market and have built up lore and history around themselves.

The Giants, Seagulls, Gladiators, and Chargers were never given the chance to establish themselves, because those brands were all punted before they had enough time to do that, and the constant poor performance of the Titans on and of the field (particularly off it) has made it impossible for them to establish themselves.

I've thought for a few years now that the Titans brand is so synonymous with failure and misfortune that the Titans might be better dumping the brand and going with a 'we're returning to our roots' marketing scheme and going back to the Chargers brand.
The Chargers because Giants is taken in the Australian sporting market now, the Seagulls brand is owned by another club (ironically I think the Bears own it now), nobody remembers the Gladiators, so that leaves the Chargers who at this point have an interesting little story to tell that could be sold, it's also a very unique brand for the sports landscape in Australia. Just a thought though.

We don't, I grant you. But I do know we have a very dodgy history with private ownership in recent times. I have very serious concerns that private buyers will become bored & frustrated with the losses.

Yeah we've had terrible luck with the Broncos, Storm, Rabbitohs, Warriors, effectively the Raiders and Roosters as well, I'm probably forgetting a few others as well.

Even so this Bears bid is supposed to be back by a consortium and not the Bears themselves, I'm sure that the leagues club will have some sort of input but it's supposed to be financially backed by the consortium and not the leagues club it's self.

I think all things being equal having the backing of a leagues club is a much safer long term option. Obviously if the bears bid comes up short in regards to leagues club support that's another matter.

But you can see with the NRL's pursuit of Wests Newcastle that they're much more interested in long term viability than a high sale number. The goal here isn't to make money but have a long term viable club.

There're plenty of clubs with leagues clubs backing that have got themselves into financial strife over the years, including the Gold Coast Seagulls...

I'd hope if the NRL do sell to a private buyer they can secure some type of bank guarantee like happened at Newcastle. The NRL shouldn't have to bail out the club once again.

I think that there're some clubs that the NRL should bail out and others that they shouldn't for strategic reasons (for example losing the Broncos or the Storm would be disastrous for the sport at the moment, but we could eat the loss of a Sydney club or two, in fact we'd probably be better off losing a couple Sydney clubs) , the GC is one of the ones they probably should bail out where it's necessary for the time being.

So I'm not totally against the NRL bailing out clubs where necessary, but I agree that they should be trying to make sure that the Titans are as self sustainable as possible going forward, and if the best option to make them self sustainable is to sell them to the Bears then that's fine, however I still think there're possibly better outcomes for the sport on the GC then the Bears buying them out, whether or not those options will come to fruition is the real problem.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,726
The more i think about it, the more it seems like a mistake to have gone with "Gold Coast" as the team name. It was inevitably going to draw comparisons to the 4 dead brands and we would never hear the end of "how long until THIS gold coast team dies?"....

In hindsight, they should have gone with "South Queensland Titans" instead (still based on the GC obviously). Better to be compared to the Crushers (a team killed by Broncos greed).

The Titans name absolutley needs to stay, but im wondering if it isnt too late too change the location name to "South Queensland" (in the same way the Warriors went from "Auckland" to "New Zealand" 5 yeats into their existence.

It might help to broaden their potential fan base and it could help develop rivalries develop rivalries with other clubs. But, if nothing else, it should stop the deathriding...

I think picking a better name for the club would have been better (Dolphins for example), but I agree that calling them South Queensland wouldn't have hurt them.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,726
I don't see the harm in one a year. As long as the contract stipulates no more than that. It'd also help grow the Sydney fan base.

The Gold Coast gets 12 NRL games a year minus the ones they take on the road (which I think is a bad idea for the titans), that's not a lot of games to sell or help promote the game with, Sydney gets 108 minus the handful of games that are taken on the road, Sydney doesn't need another game, the Gold Coast needs all the games it can get.

Besides it doesn't show much commitment to the GC if the Bears come in and take a game down to the most over saturated RL market on the planet does it.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,420
I don't see the harm in one a year. As long as the contract stipulates no more than that. It'd also help grow the Sydney fan base.

Would it? How many "away" fans currently turn up to Sydney v Sydney games at Cronulla, Penrith etc? Few hundred tops? So given bears would be a qland team it is fair to surmise that even fewer old bears fams would turn up and pay at the gate expensive prices.

Passing off the Titans fans, concept of qlanders supporting a nsw brand and a 5th brand change is hardly justified by a few dozen bears die hards turning up to Sydney games I'd suggest.
 

CC_Roosters

First Grade
Messages
5,221
Has anyone discussed the relevant precedent in aussie sport for this sort of change in branding?? I.e the Manchester city group take over of the former melbourme heart in the a-league, they changed the name, colours and badge but as far as I know kept the old heart colours for the away kit. They have seen a small increase in support in the years since although you could argue that is down to certain marquee signings pulling people through the gates

So with the above example I would allow the bid with conditions
  • Bears badge and branding fully implemented
  • Bears home colours
  • Current titans colours for away jersey but with bears badge
  • No sydney home season games, it's a gold coast club and there is plenty of opportunity for fans to attend away games against Sydney clubs.
  • Commitments to support GC juniors
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
So where does this proud Queensland history fit in with the titans? They don't seem to have embraced any Queensland history. In fact many talk about the colours already feeling like NSW.

I mean there's a Queensland cup side on the Gold Coast called the bears already. There's a former AFL team that played there called the bears.

The Gold Coast seagulls had a red, black & white strip too. It's not a completely foreign fit at all.

First, I siad QRL had history, not the titans.

Second, going from a team that looks kinda like the NSW State team to a team that is explicitly from NSW is taking the problem and making it worse.

And you are grasping at straws if you think those other vague associations will have any positiove benifit...

I think picking a better name for the club would have been better (Dolphins for example), but I agree that calling them South Queensland wouldn't have hurt them.

Personally, i dont think its too late to make the change...

It would begin the Titan's move out of perpetual "little brother" status to a genuine contender for "biggest team in QLD". Maybe they never actually become this, but even the threat would be great for the club
 

Latest posts

Top