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!

If perth is such a can't miss home run for nrl expansion..?!

MugaB

Coach
Messages
11,822
Businesses won't invest in a product unless it provides them access to a large market. There's no incentive for businesses to invest a significant sum in a Sydney club when it's only reaching one-ninth of the potential market. It's why the Cowboys are drawing more money from sponsorship and corporate hospitality than every Sydney club.
All hail the cowboys..... New sponsor TABCORP
BWAHAHAGAHAHAHAHAAAAA POKIE DEN LOL
 

Iamback

Coach
Messages
16,993
I like the WA AFL model. The two clubs pay a license fee to the State body based on their financial performance which goes directly to funding the local grassroots across the State.
It means the WAFC has a lot more money to invest than the RL state bodies do and isnt reliant on the National body throwing loads of money at them (admittedly they also have a very sweet stadium deal from the State Govt thrown in).

eg WAFC in 2021 had revenue of $32mill with a $3.6mill grant from AFL,
NSWRL $35.6mill with a grant of $23.6mill from NRL!
And remember WA being a 1/4 the size of NSW

Shame NRL never adopted this. NRLVic would be in a much healthier position (as would NRLWA eventually) and we may have seen a lot more kids in Vic playing RL and feeding the Storm.

Except those areas who have no Juniors or need less funding would get the same
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,331
That is pretty ironic. As Iamback said there wouldn’t be many Rugby League clubs (and I might add sporting clubs) that don’t make some money from gambling.
 

Iamback

Coach
Messages
16,993
That is pretty ironic. As Iamback said there wouldn’t be many Rugby League clubs (and I might add sporting clubs) that don’t make some money from gambling.

NHL direct feeds from the US now how their Sportsbet version ads, Those who don't are owned by oil money
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,769
NHL direct feeds from the US now how their Sportsbet version ads, Those who don't are owned by oil money
Great point

half the premier league is owned by oil money (formerly also Russian oligarchs) yet we have dopes here questioning leagues clubs involvement in our game
 
Messages
12,413
Any reasonable accountant for a start or a lawyer.
Yet you labelled the Titans unviable because much of their revenue is from the governing body, which you believe the Sydney clubs are entitled to receive.

Theres no words for the kind of stupidity that consistently makes up things that werent said.

I didn't make anything up motherf**ker. You've defended the existence of the Sydney clubs for months, yet you said the Titans and Knights should have been axed:

I dont care. Either a club is viable or its not. If its not viable then f**k it off. You want perfectly viable clubs gone because you dont like where they are from and you dont like their revenue streams, but are perfectly ok with the league bailing out clubs that are actually financially destitute.

You were exposed putting words into my mouth a couple of months ago. When you were called out by multiple posters you doubled down and stuck to your claim. You'll never admit to being wrong about anything.

Keep losing it then, because it absolutely is. Media rights and licensing has to be distributed somehow, and that is by agreement between the governing body and the clubs. See also: practically every league in the goddamn world where the media rights are centrally negotiated.

Yet you're against the Titans receiving a hand before the annual grant was 130% of the salary cap:

and they were still receiving the grant that everyone else was before that - the grant didnt spring into being recently. Calm down my dude, you seem to becoming a little unhinged.

The annual grant wasn't settled at 130% of the salary cap until December 2016 you turkey!


The Titans financial struggles began in 2014 and led to the club going into administration in February 2015.


They werent viable when they went into voluntary administration, they werent viable when they couldnt pay their debts, they werent viable when the NRL took them over. That they are viable now is all very well. But they werent.

The Titans weren't any worse of than the Sydney clubs. The only difference is the Sydney clubs can fall back on gaming machine revenue and don't have to pay $2m in stadium rental fees. Nor did they have to pay $600k for office space.

The club posted a $4.9m loss for the 12 months to the end of the 2014 season.

● The NRL issued $2.35m in “emergency funding” between September and December last year and paid two monthly club grants in advance totalling $1.28 million in the same period.

● The club had $246,403 cash in bank accounts, of which only $68,092 was recovered by administrators due to eight finance leases for motor vehicles.

● Their greatest asset was “goodwill”, valued at $10.6 million.

● They owed the Australian Taxation Office $273,671.

The figures paint a bleak picture of how close the Titans were to folding before the NRL intervened on February 24.

An inability to sign replacement and new sponsors for this year after the end of contracts with iSelect and Coral Homes severely dented cash flow.

High Cbus Super Stadium hiring costs of about $2 million a year also contributed, along with a decline in membership and corporate hospitality.

The club’s operating costs out of its former Robina headquarters, believed to be $600,000 a year, were also listed as a financial burden.


In fact, the Sharks ran up a larger debt than the Titans after the annual grant was raised to 130% of the salary cap!

The Sharks could have been relocated or forced out of the NRL altogether had Peter V’landys not stepped in to ensure the survival of the Cronulla club.

NRL powerbrokers were concerned about the long-term viability of the Sharks in 2018, just two years after they broke through for their maiden premiership. During the week, the Herald revealed that then-NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg and former chief financial officer Tony Crawford met with Cronulla chairman Dino Mezzatesta and then-CEO Barry Russell in December of that year to ask why the club should remain in the competition.

So strong was the desire among some in the NRL executive to relocate or remove Cronulla from the premiership that the matter was taken to the ARL Commission. Sources with knowledge of the situation said Greenberg and Crawford were leading the push to shift the Sharks just a year after the franchise had celebrated its 50th season in the top flight.

At the time, V’landys had not yet ascended to the chairmanship and had only been a commissioner for a relatively short period. However, the Racing NSW boss felt there was no justification for the move and fought hard to ensure the Sharks remained a part of the NRL in their current guise.

While there were concerns about Cronulla’s financial position at the time, V’landys pointed to the fact it was not dissimilar to that of other clubs, that there were compelling reasons why off-field fortunes could improve and that the Shire outfit had a large and loyal following that should not be lost to rugby league.

Ultimately, his advocacy was key in convincing the other commissioners to retain the Sharks, who are now back in the black financially after turning around a $5.5 million loss.


This is not the case with the Sydney clubs unless you cherry pick the revenues you personally believe they should have, instead of the revenue they are presently legally entitled to generate and spend how they wish.

It was with Cronulla in 2018!

See the link I posted above.

I dont give a damn about professional sport outside of Australia.
How convenient!

IM all for clubs diversifying off pokies. But that also isnt football revenue, and isnt your whole goddamn stick about the Sydney clubs not making enough football revenue? Lets face it, your issue iseems to be with gambling revenue. So lets hear it for your condemnation of the Cowboys, Raiders, Knights, Dolphins and Broncos additional revenue streams that are outside your apparently very personal spehere of acceptable behaviour.

I think all clubs should earn the bulk of their revenue from football operations. I'd like to see the Queensland clubs remove gaming machines from their Leagues Clubs, but let's not pretend it's a like for like comparison. The Broncos and Cowboys earn more revenue from football operations than gaming machines. For the Sydney clubs it's the other way around.

 
Last edited:

Pneuma

First Grade
Messages
5,475
Yet you labelled the Titans unviable because much of their revenue is from the governing body, which you believe the Sydney clubs are entitled to receive.



I didn't make anything else motherf**ker. You continuously defend the existence of the Sydney clubs but said the Titans and Knights should have been axed:


You were exposed putting words into my mouth a month of two ago. When you were called out on it by multiple posters you doubled down and stuck to your claim. You'll never admit to being wrong about anything.



Yet you're against the Titans and Knights receiving a hand before the annual grant was 130% of the salary cap.



The annual grant wasn't settled at 130% of the salary cap until December 2016 you turkey!


The Titans financial struggles began in 2014 and led to the club going into administration in February 2015.




The Titans weren't any worse of than the Sydney clubs. The only difference is the Sydney clubs can fall back on gaming machine revenue.

The club posted a $4.9m loss for the 12 months to the end of the 2014 season.

● The NRL issued $2.35m in “emergency funding” between September and December last year and paid two monthly club grants in advance totalling $1.28 million in the same period.​
● The club had $246,403 cash in bank accounts, of which only $68,092 was recovered by administrators due to eight finance leases for motor vehicles.​
● Their greatest asset was “goodwill”, valued at $10.6 million.​
● They owed the Australian Taxation Office $273,671.​
The figures paint a bleak picture of how close the Titans were to folding before the NRL intervened on February 24.​
An inability to sign replacement and new sponsors for this year after the end of contracts with iSelect and Coral Homes severely dented cash flow.​
High Cbus Super Stadium hiring costs of about $2 million a year also contributed, along with a decline in membership and corporate hospitality.​
The club’s operating costs out of its former Robina headquarters, believed to be $600,000 a year, were also listed as a financial burden.​

In fact, the Sharks ran up a similar debt to the Titans after the annual grant was raised to 130% of the salary cap!

The Sharks could have been relocated or forced out of the NRL altogether had Peter V’landys not stepped in to ensure the survival of the Cronulla club.​
NRL powerbrokers were concerned about the long-term viability of the Sharks in 2018, just two years after they broke through for their maiden premiership. During the week, the Herald revealed that then-NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg and former chief financial officer Tony Crawford met with Cronulla chairman Dino Mezzatesta and then-CEO Barry Russell in December of that year to ask why the club should remain in the competition.​
So strong was the desire among some in the NRL executive to relocate or remove Cronulla from the premiership that the matter was taken to the ARL Commission. Sources with knowledge of the situation said Greenberg and Crawford were leading the push to shift the Sharks just a year after the franchise had celebrated its 50th season in the top flight.​
At the time, V’landys had not yet ascended to the chairmanship and had only been a commissioner for a relatively short period. However, the Racing NSW boss felt there was no justification for the move and fought hard to ensure the Sharks remained a part of the NRL in their current guise.​
While there were concerns about Cronulla’s financial position at the time, V’landys pointed to the fact it was not dissimilar to that of other clubs, that there were compelling reasons why off-field fortunes could improve and that the Shire outfit had a large and loyal following that should not be lost to rugby league.​
Ultimately, his advocacy was key in convincing the other commissioners to retain the Sharks, who are now back in the black financially after turning around a $5.5 million loss.​



It was with Cronulla in 2018!

See the link I posted above.


How convenient!



I think all clubs should earn the bulk of their revenue from football operations. I'd like to see the Queensland clubs remove going machines from their Leagues Clubs, but let's not pretend it's a like for like comparison. The Broncos and Cowboys earn more from football operations than gaming machine revenue. For the Sydney clubs it's the other way around.

Avoid drugs kiddies ^^^^^^^
 

MugaB

Coach
Messages
11,822
Yet you labelled the Titans unviable because much of their revenue is from the governing body, which you believe the Sydney clubs are entitled to receive.



I didn't make anything else motherf**ker. You continuously defend the existence of the Sydney clubs but said the Titans and Knights should have been axed:


You were exposed putting words into my mouth a month of two ago. When you were called out on it by multiple posters you doubled down and stuck to your claim. You'll never admit to being wrong about anything.



Yet you're against the Titans and Knights receiving a hand before the annual grant was 130% of the salary cap.



The annual grant wasn't settled at 130% of the salary cap until December 2016 you turkey!


The Titans financial struggles began in 2014 and led to the club going into administration in February 2015.




The Titans weren't any worse of than the Sydney clubs. The only difference is the Sydney clubs can fall back on gaming machine revenue.

The club posted a $4.9m loss for the 12 months to the end of the 2014 season.

● The NRL issued $2.35m in “emergency funding” between September and December last year and paid two monthly club grants in advance totalling $1.28 million in the same period.​
● The club had $246,403 cash in bank accounts, of which only $68,092 was recovered by administrators due to eight finance leases for motor vehicles.​
● Their greatest asset was “goodwill”, valued at $10.6 million.​
● They owed the Australian Taxation Office $273,671.​
The figures paint a bleak picture of how close the Titans were to folding before the NRL intervened on February 24.​
An inability to sign replacement and new sponsors for this year after the end of contracts with iSelect and Coral Homes severely dented cash flow.​
High Cbus Super Stadium hiring costs of about $2 million a year also contributed, along with a decline in membership and corporate hospitality.​
The club’s operating costs out of its former Robina headquarters, believed to be $600,000 a year, were also listed as a financial burden.​

In fact, the Sharks ran up a similar debt to the Titans after the annual grant was raised to 130% of the salary cap!

The Sharks could have been relocated or forced out of the NRL altogether had Peter V’landys not stepped in to ensure the survival of the Cronulla club.​
NRL powerbrokers were concerned about the long-term viability of the Sharks in 2018, just two years after they broke through for their maiden premiership. During the week, the Herald revealed that then-NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg and former chief financial officer Tony Crawford met with Cronulla chairman Dino Mezzatesta and then-CEO Barry Russell in December of that year to ask why the club should remain in the competition.​
So strong was the desire among some in the NRL executive to relocate or remove Cronulla from the premiership that the matter was taken to the ARL Commission. Sources with knowledge of the situation said Greenberg and Crawford were leading the push to shift the Sharks just a year after the franchise had celebrated its 50th season in the top flight.​
At the time, V’landys had not yet ascended to the chairmanship and had only been a commissioner for a relatively short period. However, the Racing NSW boss felt there was no justification for the move and fought hard to ensure the Sharks remained a part of the NRL in their current guise.​
While there were concerns about Cronulla’s financial position at the time, V’landys pointed to the fact it was not dissimilar to that of other clubs, that there were compelling reasons why off-field fortunes could improve and that the Shire outfit had a large and loyal following that should not be lost to rugby league.​
Ultimately, his advocacy was key in convincing the other commissioners to retain the Sharks, who are now back in the black financially after turning around a $5.5 million loss.​



It was with Cronulla in 2018!

See the link I posted above.


How convenient!



I think all clubs should earn the bulk of their revenue from football operations. I'd like to see the Queensland clubs remove going machines from their Leagues Clubs, but let's not pretend it's a like for like comparison. The Broncos and Cowboys earn more from football operations than gaming machine revenue. For the Sydney clubs it's the other way around.

Wow chucked in a muthá fúka too
 

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,706
I like the WA AFL model. The two clubs pay a license fee to the State body based on their financial performance which goes directly to funding the local grassroots across the State.
It means the WAFC has a lot more money to invest than the RL state bodies do and isnt reliant on the National body throwing loads of money at them (admittedly they also have a very sweet stadium deal from the State Govt thrown in).

Honestly everyone should take the WAFC model. I really hope the AFL does this in Tas, but Im not holding my breath.

The two clubs are owned by the WAFC for the good of football in the state. However, they do have a seat on the board of the WAFC as well, which means their interests are completely steam rolled by the state body (as happened in SA). The clubs pay a royalty derived on their profit that keeps the state clubs and governing body in enough cash.

The SANFL on the other hand could have been the same, but where the WAFC had a profit share of the clubs, and gave them practical rent terms at Subiaco, the SANFL gouged the crap out of Port and Adelaide.

The QAFL were originally partners with Paul Cronin for the Bears license but that didnt quite pan out either.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,769
Honestly everyone should take the WAFC model. I really hope the AFL does this in Tas, but Im not holding my breath.

The two clubs are owned by the WAFC for the good of football in the state. However, they do have a seat on the board of the WAFC as well, which means their interests are completely steam rolled by the state body (as happened in SA). The clubs pay a royalty derived on their profit that keeps the state clubs and governing body in enough cash.

The SANFL on the other hand could have been the same, but where the WAFC had a profit share of the clubs, and gave them practical rent terms at Subiaco, the SANFL gouged the crap out of Port and Adelaide.

The QAFL were originally partners with Paul Cronin for the Bears license but that didnt quite pan out either.
Between the low grant they receive and the money they pay to the wafl those clubs get raped

if I was a fan I would be livid
 

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,706
Yet you labelled the Titans unviable because much of their revenue is from the governing body, which you believe the Sydney clubs are entitled to receive.

I mean sure, the NRL took them over for the f**king fun of it. And its not a matter of belief. All clubs in the NRL - whether in Sydney or not - are entitled to the grant under their funding agreements.

I didn't make anything up motherf**ker. You've defended the existence of the Sydney clubs for months, yet you said the Titans and Knights should have been axed:

Dude all you do is make shit up. Whether its something I said, or evidently even Australian acccounting standards.

They were literally unviable. The Sydney clubs arent. Key difference.


You were exposed putting words into my mouth a couple of months ago. When you were called out by multiple posters you doubled down and stuck to your claim. You'll never admit to being wrong about anything.

No I wasnt. And it was one poster who claimed I did something that no one else agreed with...but you. And he hasnt really posted in that thread since. That does seem a little convenient.

Yet you're against the Titans receiving a hand before the annual grant was 130% of the salary cap:

No I never said that at all. When will you stop making shit up.


The annual grant wasn't settled at 130% of the salary cap until December 2016 you turkey!

And I never said it was. They got the same grant as everyone else - whatever level it was - that they've been entitled to since 2008.

Calling me nasty names doesnt change that.

The Titans weren't any worse of than the Sydney clubs. The only difference is the Sydney clubs can fall back on gaming machine revenue

So they were worse off. Thanks for playing.


I think all clubs should earn the bulk of their revenue from football operations. I'd like to see the Queensland clubs remove gaming machines from their Leagues Clubs, but let's not pretend it's a like for like comparison. The Broncos and Cowboys earn more revenue from football operations than gaming machines. For the Sydney clubs it's the other way around.

In 2019, the Cowboys biggest earner was Gaming. Followed by the NRL Grant. (these were 48% of revenue)
In 2020, the Cowboys biggest earner was Grants, followed by gaming. (these were 60% of revenue)
In 2021, the Cowboys biggest earner was Grants, followed by gaming. (these were 52% of revenue)

In all 3 years, gaming revenue was much much higher than that of the closest football derived revenue.

In the first place noting that you dont consider the grant a legit form of revenue and also noting that the above doesnt count member subscriptions to the leagues club or food and beverage, the majority of income isnt derived by the club selling tickets and memberships and sponsorships.

But hey thanks for providing a link where I literally provided you with data. lol.
 

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
2,706
Between the low grant they receive and the money they pay to the wafl those clubs get raped

if I was a fan I would be livid

And some are,

Beyond the base grant, the grant is supposed to be the great leveller. West Coast get a great stadium deal and their crowds arent affected by timetables or competing clubs/sports, which somewhat evens out the grants the other clubs get to keep them in the game.

The WAFC also get money from the AFL.
 
Top