My odds and reasoning for who will be club 18based on what little we know
Brisbane3 - 3/5
For: safe option and we know nrl is risk adverse. Strong LC backed second tier club ready to step up. Covers the last piece of the seq region. Moves Into the area afl is targeting. Preference of tv
Against: dolphins need clear air for a few years, not growing the game, same fans who already follow the game, possible creation of the Sydney problem in brisbane with over saturation.
Decision: will come down to how safe nrl want to play it
Perth - 3/5
For: new growth market for the game in Australia’s 4th biggest and one of richest cities. Metro market and new tv time slot works for tv value. Strongest grass roots and fanbase outside traditional areas. Supportive state govt and bid team ready to go.
Against: Extra travel time for teams, stadium needs upgrade or replacing to maximise revenue opportunities, player development will take some time. Questions over financial sustainability.
Decision: Will depend on what WA govt offers and how strong a financial viability case bid team can make and if nrl want to genuinely expand the game.
Pasifika/PNG 1/5
for: RL mad country, player pool easily developed, adds to international flavour of comp, Fed govt funding, pathways on place with Hunters.
against: country is unsafe, player attraction and retention would be very difficult, financial viability tied to ongoing govt funding. No value to Australian tv.
Decision: hard to see the obstacles being overcome and the risks being acceptable to conservative nrl. Will come down to if feds offer silly money or not.
NZ2 2/5
for: opportunity to grow nrl audience, player development easier, strategically important opportunity for future of game. Stadium in Christchurch will be a stunner.
against: no apparent bid team or financial support. No obvious single location for team. Auckland2 unlikely, Wellington lacks decent stadium, Christchurch viability questionable. Little value to Australian tv.
Decision: strategy will decide this one, does the nrl genuine,7 want to develop nz? Viability and competitiveness will also be a big question given warriors variable history.
Melbourne2 0/5
just a throw away news article by Vlandys to divert some attention from tassie afl announcement.
Adelaide 0/5
For: new market for the game in Australia’s 5th biggest city. Another metro market for tv value. Rams were well supported in their brief existence.
Against: No bid, stadium needs upgrading, very small grassroots.
Decision: Very remote possibility if nrl is convinced by the 5 metro market Politis argument but more likely club 20 if so.
Wild Card: The go anywhere Bears
Could be a wildcard decider given the myopia of the arlc and Vlandys seming desire to go back to the 70’s. Bears have stated they are happy to own a club in any market, them being tagged on to one of the above may boost its favouritism with the arlc.
so that’s my take on where things sit With what we know. Of course may be lots going on behind scenes we don’t yet know. And if the nrl has a serious strategy to get to 20 clubs in next 10 years then that could change thinking on club 18 decision.
so far re. Bids we know
WA govt funding a bid development to tune of $500k and Cumins has a consortium ready to bid With strong ties to NRLWA and Pirates brand.
Unknowns will Puddy or Sage also want to bid?
PNG has a bid team developing their bid.
unknowns: how will the pasifika element and proposed Australian location influence club ownership. Will nrl want to keep control of club given accountability for govt funding?
NZ2 no recent confirmation of an active bid team, Chalmers only one so far to come forward but wasn’t very specific on a bid.
unknowns: will the usa consortium who tried to buy warriors be interested? Location of club may see other bids co e out of woodwork.
Brisbane Tigers formally announced bid intention if given opportunity.
unknowns: will Ipswich and other local clubs Jon with them to create genuine southern brisbane club?
Bears happy to go anywhere And will no doubt bid either in partnership with someone or on own if given opportunity
unknowns: will the bears back off their non negotiables to be more attractive a partner?