The Case for Adelaide.....

[The Great Dane]

Which club do you reckon would be most likely to hit the wall?

Sydney Roosters
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Manly Warringah Sea Eagles
Cronulla Sutherland Sharks
St George Illawarra Dragons
Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers

The more interesting question is how many would still be around today if the NSWRL/ARL/NRL or angel investors hadn't bailed them out at one time or another.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Which club do you reckon would be most likely to hit the wall?

Sydney Roosters
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Manly Warringah Sea Eagles
Cronulla Sutherland Sharks
St George Illawarra Dragons
Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
Wests Tigers
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers

Manly are the weakest at the moment, especially if the Penns pull up stumps. Shit ground, small fanbase and no future.

Easts and Souths are strongest, but only because of who owns them. If either club lost their rich owners they could fall on hard times. Both were shit in the early 90s without their rich owners. Souths have the stronger fanbase, but Easts are more commercially attractive due to their location.

Canterbury has some money but lack brains in their head office. Decent-sized fanbase, but I cannot see them growing.

Tigers rely on Magpies for money, but NRL won't let Wests use their mascot. Could lead to a revolt from Magpies one of these days. Good sized fanbase, but scattered and more on the Balmain side, which makes them vulnerable as Magpies have the money. Only made the top eight 3 times, but still draw crowds at Leichhardt. Both Leichhardt and Campbelltown grounds have dilapidated facilities. They're a mixed bag that could be the biggest in Sydney but probably never will be due to the Balmain/Wests infighting robbing them of a strong identity.

Parramatta are financially strong and have a large and passionate fanbase. I'd say they're the biggest club in Sydney considering they haven't won a premiership in over 30 years but have a great stadium and fanbase. They're the Broncos of Sydney.

Penrith are strong in all areas but not dominant in any. Crowds are decent but could be bigger. Juniors are strong but haven't transitioned into onfield dominance. Financials are strong but not the envy of the league. Long term, I think they and Parramatta are the strongest clubs in Sydney. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day the Panthers merged with Magpies to form a super club called Western Sydney Panthers, representing Penrith all the way down to Macarthur. Would be a massive club with a large fanbase and junior catchment that would make them the envy of every other Sydney club.

Cronulla are asset strong and have a loyal fanbase. Always find a way to stay afloat. Are in a stronger position than Dragons, although St George has the larger fanbase.

Dragons are a club in crisis. Kogarah is not the sort of ground they should be playing at and Wollongong needs a grandstand on its eastern terrace. Neither the St George district nor Illawarra can survive on their own, but their partnership is holding the club back.

I'd have to say Dragons, Tigers and Sea Eagles are the most likely to fall over within the next 20 years.

 

[mongoose]

That's the craziest thing about it isn't it.

At the expense of other important areas of the game the NRL/ARL/NSWRL has spent money it can't afford, especially not now after covid, propping up businesses that would otherwise be insolvent.

Can you imagine any other business doing that, it's honestly insane.

Those clubs generate the TV money though. If the NRL reduced the grant significantly clubs would break away and form and new comp without question.

 

[The Great Dane]

Those clubs generate the TV money though. If the NRL reduced the grant significantly clubs would break away and form and new comp without question.

I'm sorry but smaller clubs like Cronulla, Wests, Manly, etc, aren't generating the bulk of the broadcasting dollars, and if you replaced some of them then at worst it wouldn't effect the broadcasting value, and at best it'd increase it. For example swap one of the above with a second Brisbane club and see which comp draws more interest from broadcasters...

You are probably right when you say that if the grants were reduced the clubs would revolt (though I remember reading somewhere that they had been reduced because of covid, could be BS though), but the point is that the grants never should have got so high in the first place.

Also just because we are stuck with those ridiculous grants doesn't mean that we can't invest that money in better ways. I think, for example, that you and I could agree that $13mil a year invested into Perth/Adelaide/NZ/etc, is a better long term investment not only for the comp, but for the sport as a whole, than $13mil a year invested into every second suburb of Sydney.
Even then it wouldn't be necessary to relocate clubs/licenses to better invest that money. Take Manly for example, there's no reason why their grants couldn't be linked to them spreading there reach across all of NS and thus investing that money in all of NS.

I also think it's overly simplistic to say that the clubs would break away and form a new comp if grants were reduced, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

What Dane doesn't get is Sydney's 9 clubs generate strong TV ratings in Australia's largest metropolitan area. The exception is the Sea Eagles. New teams in Adelaide and Perth are not going to rate strongly in Sydney or Brisbane. Not even the Knights draw ratings in Sydney, and they're from NSW.

Storm are well supported in Brisbane, but only because Queensland's most legendary players of the last 20 years played for them and been successful, along with the fact Brisbane has been severely under represented since 1997. Broncos haven't won since 06 and it took Cowboys 20 years to win their only premiership. Titans are a joke. Storm have flown the flag for the parochial Queenslanders who love to beat Sydney's teams.

Adelaide and Perth will not have these advantages. The best option for both cities is to entice a couple of Sydney clubs to relocate. That way they will have an established fanbase in Australia's largest city to beef up their TV ratings. Dragons in Adelaide and Tigers in Perth could be a winner as they have many fans that are scattered all around the country.

Mark my words, Brisbane 2 will eat into the Storm's fanbase in southeast Queensland somewhat.

 

[taipan]

Why waste money on growth areas when there's already money being wasted in the middle of Dragons territory?

Agree waste of time pouring money into Jubilee Oval.I'm more than happy for Adelaide to come back in, provided the support is there financially, sponsors wise and fan support.Likewise Perth, my view is Brisbane needs at least another team, and current NRL clubs need to be retained.

 

[The Great Dane]

What Dane doesn't get is Sydney's 9 clubs generate strong TV ratings in Australia's largest metropolitan area. The exception is the Sea Eagles. New teams in Adelaide and Perth are not going to rate strongly in Sydney or Brisbane. Not even the Knights draw ratings in Sydney, and they're from NSW.

Storm are well supported in Brisbane, but only because Queensland's most legendary players of the last 20 years played for them and been successful, along with the fact Brisbane has been severely under represented since 1997. Broncos haven't won since 06 and it took Cowboys 20 years to win their only premiership. Titans are a joke. Storm have flown the flag for the parochial Queenslanders who love to beat Sydney's teams.

Adelaide and Perth will not have these advantages. The best option for both cities is to entice a couple of Sydney clubs to relocate. That way they will have an established fanbase in Australia's largest city to beef up their TV ratings. Dragons in Adelaide and Tigers in Perth could be a winner as they have many fans that are scattered all around the country.

Mark my words, Brisbane 2 will eat into the Storm's fanbase in southeast Queensland somewhat.

What you don't understand is that not everything is about Sydney and/or Brisbane.

This sort of short sighted, stupid, insularity is what's doing the game in. You want to grow big and strong, that means eventually you've got to grow outside of Sydney, and that means growing in the next biggest markets (Vic, WA, SA).

Also you are mad if you expect current fans of clubs to stay on board en masse once a team has relocated, even amongst fans that don't live in a clubs' region that is very unusual.
In other words you can relocate the Tigers wherever you want, but no matter what you do you can't relocate their fan-base along with them, and stupid ideas of trying to represent both markets (i.e. be everything to everyone) is the quickest way to make sure that a relocation fails.

 

[mongoose]

I'm sorry but smaller clubs like Cronulla, Wests, Manly, etc, aren't generating the bulk of the broadcasting dollars, and if you replaced some of them then at worst it wouldn't effect the broadcasting value, and at best it'd increase it. For example swap one of the above with a second Brisbane club and see which comp draws more interest from broadcasters...

You are probably right when you say that if the grants were reduced the clubs would revolt (though I remember reading somewhere that they had been reduced because of covid, could be BS though), but the point is that the grants never should have got so high in the first place.

Also just because we are stuck with those ridiculous grants doesn't mean that we can't invest that money in better ways. I think, for example, that you and I could agree that $13mil a year invested into Perth/Adelaide/NZ/etc, is a better long term investment not only for the comp, but for the sport as a whole, than $13mil a year invested into every second suburb of Sydney.
Even then it wouldn't be necessary to relocate clubs/licenses to better invest that money. Take Manly for example, there's no reason why their grants couldn't be linked to them spreading there reach across all of NS and thus investing that money in all of NS.

I also think it's overly simplistic to say that the clubs would break away and form a new comp if grants were reduced, but that's neither here nor there.

I'm with you that teams in new markets would add more value than some of the Sydney clubs. But i guess clubs like Manly and others have built their whole business model around getting that TV money, which in equal comp they somewhat deserve. It's not a good business model though.

It's a good point that if clubs were paid in terms of how much they bring to the broadcast revenue it would not be equal. Broncos would get a huge portion, maybe Storm, Eels, Rabbitohs, Bulldogs below them, Tigers, Dragons, Cowboys, Roosters the next rung down, then the rest (sadly Canberra somewhere near the bottom).

 

[Perth Red]

I've got no problems with all the existing clubs staying. I've got a massive problem with the NRL's lack of ambition and strategy to expand and then blaming the lack of viability of the existing clubs as an excuse, whilst refusing to do anything about it.
The AFL brings in (pre covid) $265mill a year more than the NRL! That gap would pay for massive investment in heartland grass roots, money for new NRL clubs and decent investment in growing the game at all levels in new areas. We need a closing the gap strategy! Its getting wider!!

2013 Gap $199mill
2016 Gap $219.3mill
2019 Gap $265.4mill

 

[taipan]

I've got no problems with all the existing clubs staying. I've got a massive problem with the NRL's lack of ambition and strategy to expand and then blaming the lack of viability of the existing clubs as an excuse, whilst refusing to do anything about it.
The AFL brings in (pre covid) $265mill a year more than the NRL! That gap would pay for massive investment in heartland grass roots, money for new NRL clubs and decent investment in growing the game at all levels in new areas. We need a closing the gap strategy! Its getting wider!!

2013 Gap $199mill
2016 Gap $219.3mill
2019 Gap $265.4mill

They have a far bigger membership base, the Vicfumblers are majority obsessed with their code,WA is about the same, plus their crowds are far ahead of ours.so you are not comparing apples with apples.
V'Landys noted in the Australian today via Brent Read"
The game is set to emerge from the COVID crisis in a far better financial state, than many had initially expected.
We're going to be a lot better than we expected .If we get 40k (crowds) in the next two weeks (at SOO) that is an important factor because we wouldn't have got that mid season.The NRL has a line of credit at their disposal but they remain confident they won't need it.
Once the NRL resolves talks with the player sand clubs over their share of financing. V'Landys next major assignment will be expansion.
He and the Commission will ramp up their plans to expand the competition next month, when they meet with potential candidates ,with a view to add another team in Queensland by 2022 at the earliest."

IOW the NRL will expand within their financial resources ,not in the amounts the AFL have.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I'm with you that teams in new markets would add more value than some of the Sydney clubs. But i guess clubs like Manly and others have built their whole business model around getting that TV money, which in equal comp they somewhat deserve. It's not a good business model though.

It's a good point that if clubs were paid in terms of how much they bring to the broadcast revenue it would not be equal. Broncos would get a huge portion, maybe Storm, Eels, Rabbitohs, Bulldogs below them, Tigers, Dragons, Cowboys, Roosters the next rung down, then the rest (sadly Canberra somewhere near the bottom).

Cowboys are the third most watched NRL team on television.

 

[TheRam]

The next Sydney club that goes bust should be forced to relocate. Under no circumstance should the ARLC bail them out unless their board is removed and they base themselves out of Adelaide or Brisbane or NZ or Perth. Their fans will still get to see them play in Sydney against the other 8 clubs.

It will never happen now that they get a mega grant of $13m a year. The ARLC were so weak to give in so easily to the clubs and not demand real KPI's that are tangible and actionable against the clubs if not met to get that money.

Now all we have are clubs that can sit there and just feed off the tit of the NRL and never improve or grow their base and even if they are perennial cellar dwellers it won't matter. They are guaranteed a lifeline every year and forever.

How is that a good thing for the game?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

It will never happen now that they get a mega grant of $13m a year. The ARLC were so weak to give in so easily to the clubs and not demand real KPI's that are tangible and actionable against the clubs if not met to get that money.

Now all we have are clubs that can sit there and just feed off the tit of the NRL and never improve or grow their base and even if they are perennial cellar dwellers it won't matter. They are guaranteed a lifeline every year and forever.

How is that a good thing for the game?

Wasn't John Grant responsible for that?

It's kind of funny that a former Queensland and Aus rep has ensured the survival of all 9 Sydney clubs, considering how many people from outside of NSW whinge about the amount of teams.

 

[Old tiger 79]

There is no case for Aderaid

 

[Old tiger 79]

Or Perth, or any other state outs side of Qld & NSW

 

[Perth Red]

They have a far bigger membership base, the Vicfumblers are majority obsessed with their code,WA is about the same, plus their crowds are far ahead of ours.so you are not comparing apples with apples.
V'Landys noted in the Australian today via Brent Read"
The game is set to emerge from the COVID crisis in a far better financial state, than many had initially expected.
We're going to be a lot better than we expected .If we get 40k (crowds) in the next two weeks (at SOO) that is an important factor because we wouldn't have got that mid season.The NRL has a line of credit at their disposal but they remain confident they won't need it.
Once the NRL resolves talks with the player sand clubs over their share of financing. V'Landys next major assignment will be expansion.
He and the Commission will ramp up their plans to expand the competition next month, when they meet with potential candidates ,with a view to add another team in Queensland by 2022 at the earliest."

IOW the NRL will expand within their financial resources ,not in the amounts the AFL have.

Club Membership base doesnt matter in regards to AFL central revenue! Yes they get massive crowds for finals which boosts the AFL coffers but then so do we for origin which balance things out. It certainly doesnt account for the gap rising every year!

TV deals, sponsorships, and other earned revenue are the difference, maybe because they have a national competition and are run without the constant in fighting, self-interest and media destruction we have to put up with? One things for sure when they formed an independent commission they werent stupid enough to let all the factions have seats and controlling power! Just a thought!

 

[ed612313]

Adelaide no..... Concentrate on png.

 

[taipan]

Club Membership base doesnt matter in regards to AFL central revenue! Yes they get massive crowds for finals which boosts the AFL coffers but then so do we for origin which balance things out. It certainly doesnt account for the gap rising every year!

TV deals, sponsorships, and other earned revenue are the difference, maybe because they have a national competition and are run without the constant in fighting, self-interest and media destruction we have to put up with? One things for sure when they formed an independent commission they werent stupid enough to let all the factions have seats and controlling power! Just a thought!

Their club membership base compared to ours makes a huge difference.Ask the Hawthorns, Collingwoods ,Richmond.WC Eagles for starters.To suggest it doesn't is ludicrous.
eg 90,000 members and our best is what?

And guess what if you have these huge membership, you are in a better position to sell sponsorships from larger companies to the clubs and the code itself.Any one with half a clue on marketing knows you have more chance of mass sales in a bigger market, than a smaller one.

Their Tv deals are based on 18 teams, ours 16.They have teams where we don't which is of course a no brainer. They have far more compliant media in their heartland states, and even in non heartland states they get a free run.One of our teams is in NZ which dilutes the TV deal comparison for this country.
They also got an extra few hundred million dollars thanks to Rupert and your mate Smithy. The gap on TV deals taking into account the number of people required for an AFL club ,is not that much greater than the NRL.

That's BS to say they don't have infighting with Colas that have happened, extra money for the Sunburns and the Gnats, changing of rules by head office which upsets some of the clubs.They had infighting when they tried to merge clubs like Hawthorn with another clubs years ago.You read of constant loggerheads with their clubs and the Commission over decisions.

Yet this same "perfect "AFL Commission ,had to organise a loan facility part of which they used ,they don''t have a State of Origin which provides large sums to the NRL(naturally the States want a say on the Commission) and they don't have a National side that plays.Now fro SOO and Rep sides clubs provide the players(their employers),and that is why they want input on the Board.
It's not perfect by any means but at least V'Landys is a doer, the earlier ones pretenders.
The NRL also beat them to the draw saving tens of millions of dollars by getting the game up and running 28/5..

But your ever loving mob the AFL doesn't have a team in NZ(they tried and failed), nor plays other teams overseas (as the RLWC 2021 will show).And like every other sporting code here ,they had to eat humble pie and take TV deal cuts.
I repeat the financial comparison between both is not apples v apples.Much as you push the AFL barrow.
The funds are different ,their costs are more, plus throw in my views above.They have shown how to waste money.

 

[Perth Red]

No ones talking about club revenue I’m talking about the gap in central game revenue. 90k Collingwood members don’t make the afl money.
Simple fact is the gap is widening, you can talk your usual nonsense all you like but that is the cold hard fact. That gap is why nrl sits a long way behind the afl, why they have 18 teams, why they can afford. National footprint, why they can invest in growth, assets etc etc. that’s the cold hard facts, mean while we have the likes of the sharks doing nothing to assist the nrl selling sponsors etc as you’ve pointed out,

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

what is the differnce as a percentage of total deal?????