18th club, whose next?

[Perth Red]

Agreed, I think @flippikat is on the money. Announce that the NRL's intention is to be in both regions within the next 5 years. Call for bids and then work out the staggered entry dates that suit the game and the respective winning bids. Once they are both in the comp, put #20 out to tender and see what comes up.

All three should have the same conditions placed on them as #17. Money and assets, bank guarantee paid, condition of entry is x amount invested in grass roots and the women's game and also contingent on their annual grant being funded by the boos in TV money. This makes expansion not only feasible, but profitable.

But only if news Ltd want them in? lol.

 

[flippikat]

Agreed, I think @flippikat is on the money. Announce that the NRL's intention is to be in both regions within the next 5 years. Call for bids and then work out the staggered entry dates that suit the game and the respective winning bids. Once they are both in the comp, put #20 out to tender and see what comes up.

All three should have the same conditions placed on them as #17. Money and assets, bank guarantee paid, condition of entry is x amount invested in grass roots and the women's game and also contingent on their annual grant being funded by the boos in TV money. This makes expansion not only feasible, but profitable.

Cheers. I suspect the NRL *may* actually be using the Dolphins as a test-run/precident in that way - if a bid can jump through the same hoops and over the same hurdles, then they could have a chance.

Going from 18 to 19 shouldn't be hard if both 18 and 19 tick the boxes, yeah?

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Cheers. I suspect the NRL *may* actually be using the Dolphins as a test-run/precident in that way - if a bid can jump through the same hoops and over the same hurdles, then they could have a chance.

Going from 18 to 19 shouldn't be hard if both 18 and 19 tick the boxes, yeah?

If they can prove to have solid financial backing and the increase in the TV money due to their presence covers their NRL grant then it is a no brainer... This is why I'm excited that actual growth seems to be on the agenda at the NRL at the moment and you're right, if the Dolphins prove to not only pay their way but provide a financial win for the game we could see less reluctance to add more teams in the future.

In terms of player depth, it's up to the NRL to increase pathways in the Pacific and NZ. That seems to be the low hanging fruit. The building blocks are there... Hunters, Silktails, Pacifique XIII... NZ 2 will help also. I suspect Gus working with the Warriors and NZRL on pathways (before he withdrew due to COVID) wasn't an accidental appointment.

 

[siv]

WA government is a classic example of why we should not proceed with a WA team short to medium term

NZ just doesnt have the finances to run NZ2. WArriors have gone bust twice

 

[titoelcolombiano]

WA government is a classic example of why we should not proceed with a WA team short to medium term

NZ just doesnt have the finances to run NZ2. WArriors have gone bust twice

I think with NZ 2, unlike the Dolphins who put up their own money, it will be NZ TV that will come to the party to fund the team. Plus if NZ 2 are team 18, the Aussie TV money will also be boosted because of the extra game.

 

[flippikat]

WA government is a classic example of why we should not proceed with a WA team short to medium term

NZ just doesnt have the finances to run NZ2. WArriors have gone bust twice

Rubbish.

Firstly, even as a Kiwi I know it's each state's right to set their border policy - and every other sports league with teams from WA have navigated the WA Government's New Zealand-esque stringent border - basically by shuffling the draw and temporarily relocating teams. The competitions found a way.

To deny a spot to a big market, just by how their Government chooses to protect it's citizens (in a 1 in 100 year pandemic!) strikes me as petty, and almost as if your grasping for reasons to say no to Perth.

As for NZ 2 - well, just look some of the numpty former owners of the Warriors. The value is there in having an NZ club, more so with 2 - and I strongly suspect the value of 2 will be more than the sum of it's parts, due to the "NZ derby" it gives the competition.

 

[flippikat]

I think with NZ 2, unlike the Dolphins who put up their own money, it will be NZ TV that will come to the party to fund the team. Plus if NZ 2 are team 18, the Aussie TV money will also be boosted because of the extra game.

And THERE (I think) is the logic behind the NRL pumping for NZ 2 as team 18 instead of Perth.

If it's the other way round (Perth as 18, NZ 2 as 19), TV gets an extra game AND a late night time slot all at once... so there's a risk the NRL could get shortchanged (like a kid born on December 22 that gets a combination Christmas and Birthday present).

By drip-feeding "features of value" to broadcasters, they get a decent slice for NZ 2 (team 18, extra game), and again for Perth (team 19, late night games!)

Contrast that with Perth as 18, then NZ 2 as 19 - Fox/Nine may say "OK, more money for an extra game per weekend & a new timeslot" when Perth is added as 18, but when the NRL tries adding NZ 2 as team 19, Aussie broadcasters will say "Well, what's in it for us? There's already a NZ club, and going from 18 to 19 doesn't add a game each weekend..." - a really tough sell.

 

[Perth Red]

Cheers. I suspect the NRL *may* actually be using the Dolphins as a test-run/precident in that way - if a bid can jump through the same hoops and over the same hurdles, then they could have a chance.

Going from 18 to 19 shouldn't be hard if both 18 and 19 tick the boxes, yeah?

So were only going to let in clubs who are in second tier and have a pokie empire behind them? That will be a pretty short list of options for 'expansion' lol

 

[Perth Red]

And THERE (I think) is the logic behind the NRL pumping for NZ 2 as team 18 instead of Perth.

If it's the other way round (Perth as 18, NZ 2 as 19), TV gets an extra game AND a late night time slot all at once... so there's a risk the NRL could get shortchanged (like a kid born on December 22 that gets a combination Christmas and Birthday present).

By drip-feeding "features of value" to broadcasters, they get a decent slice for NZ 2 (team 18, extra game), and again for Perth (team 19, late night games!)

Contrast that with Perth as 18, then NZ 2 as 19 - Fox/Nine may say "OK, more money for an extra game per weekend & a new timeslot" when Perth is added as 18, but when the NRL tries adding NZ 2 as team 19, Aussie broadcasters will say "Well, what's in it for us? There's already a NZ club, and going from 18 to 19 doesn't add a game each weekend..." - a really tough sell.

You're kidding yourself if you think the NRL is going to 19 teams anytime in the next two decades! Given that reality you then have to ask what city would be most valuable for NRL/RL over the next 20 years, Christchurch (380k and thats if they can actually put a bid together) or Perth (2.2million with three investors waiting).

 

[flippikat]

You're kidding yourself if you think the NRL is going to 19 teams anytime in the next two decades! Given that reality you then have to ask what city would be most valuable for NRL/RL over the next 20 years, Christchurch (380k and thats if they can actually put a bid together) or Perth (2.2million with three investors waiting).

It's a gamble of a strategy, if that indeed is the plan.. but I wouldn't completely rule it out.

The entry of the Dolphins parks any further Qld expansion for a while.. so the next 2 markets of interest are clearly Perth & NZ 2.

The NRL's posturing is clearly signaling NZ 2 as the "next cab off the rank".. and it cleverly keeps the bigger market (and new time zone) there for an odd-numbered expansion that's a "hard sell" in itself.

 

[Colk]

So were only going to let in clubs who are in second tier and have a pokie empire behind them? That will be a pretty short list of options for 'expansion' lol

He does think a 10th team in Sydney is the better value

 

[The Great Dane]

You're kidding yourself if you think the NRL is going to 19 teams anytime in the next two decades! Given that reality you then have to ask what city would be most valuable for NRL/RL over the next 20 years, Christchurch (380k and thats if they can actually put a bid together) or Perth (2.2million with three investors waiting).

We know from experience that that's not the equation that the NRL is making though...

The real question you have to ask is what does News, Nine, and potentially other broadcasters and stakeholders, think has the best risk/reward ratio and return on investment for them over the next 20 years. Figure that out and you'll have almost certainly have figured out which market will get the 18th NRL license.

As things stand it's highly unlikely that Perth comes out on top in that equation. It just is what it is.

 

[The Great Dane]

The entry of the Dolphins parks any further Qld expansion for a while..

That's a bad assumption to make.

It will very quickly become clear to NRL HQ that they have painted themselves into the position of needing multiple teams to maintain market coverage in Brisbane. Whether or not that means that Brisbane will get a third team before Perth and NZ2 in particular remains to be seen, however once they make that realisation the NRL will take demand for teams in at least the south and west of Brisbane very seriously.

IMO as long as the current administration is in power at the ARLC/NRL a third Brisbane team is more likely to happen than Perth, or any other expansion outside the 'heartlands' in Australia.

 

[The Great Dane]

I think with NZ 2, unlike the Dolphins who put up their own money, it will be NZ TV that will come to the party to fund the team. Plus if NZ 2 are team 18, the Aussie TV money will also be boosted because of the extra game.

Pfft, Redcliffe got the license because News offered the NRL an extra $20mil a year if Redcliffe got the licence.

It's no different to Western United and Macarthur Bulls winning A-league licenses because News offered the FFA extra dosh for teams from Melbourne and Sydney, it will have similar results to United and Bulls, and it's case in point of why the AFL is so much bigger and more successful than the other codes; the AFL always does what's best for the AFL in the long term, the other codes allow external stakeholders to dictate to them for short term gains with no care given to the broader impacts.

 

[The Great Dane]

someone cant handle the truth lol.

He can handle it just fine, that's why he's being so dishonest and evasive in the discussion.

 

[Colk]

We know from experience that that's not the equation that the NRL is making though...

The real question you have to ask is what does News, Nine, and potentially other broadcasters and stakeholders, think has the best risk/reward ratio and return on investment for them over the next 20 years. Figure that out and you'll have almost certainly have figured out which market will get the 18th NRL license.

As things stand it's highly unlikely that Perth comes out on top in that equation. It just is what it is.

Exactly right. Unfortunately due to a number of reasons (lack of revenue diversification/historical) the ARLC are mere pawns of News Limited/Nine.

 

[Perth Red]

Nothings changed despite all the bluster about how strong Vlandys is, if anything it’s probably worse under him.

when you read this from this article it really rams home how long the game has been under the total control, of two tv companies. A key reason why we have fallen so far behind AFL.

“In January 1997, Packer and Rupert Murdoch negotiated a deal on Murdoch's yacht in New Zealand's Bay of Plenty, for Nine to replace its ARL games on Sunday nights with Super League.

Packer was the big winner. He had lost the least from the Super League war. Most of the ARL funding had come from Optus and now Nine emerged with a 10-year free-to-air programming contract for rugby league. News also agreed to sell half of its shareholding in Foxtel and in Fox Sports to Nine at cost price.

And that was the ball game. "I would be telling a lie if I said I didn't feel wounded and bitterly disappointed," ARL chairman Ken Arthurson told journalists at the time. "It's a pity they couldn't have made the bloody deal in the first place. Then none of this would have happened."

Lachlan's legacy: $560m lost on Super League

Ten years after Rupert Murdoch set out to conquer rugby league, News Corporation has finally revealed the bill for its unhappy Super League adventure a staggering $560 million.

www.afr.com

 

[titoelcolombiano]

So were only going to let in clubs who are in second tier and have a pokie empire behind them? That will be a pretty short list of options for 'expansion' lol

I think backing could come in many forms. For example the wealthy backers that a Perth bid would have don't rely on pokies and I would imagine NZ expansion will be negotiated with the NZ TV networks as part of the process to pay for it. I'm happy for any form of funding as long as the bid can demonstrate financial sustainability and can add value to the comp.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Pfft, Redcliffe got the license because News offered the NRL an extra $20mil a year if Redcliffe got the licence.

It's no different to Western United and Macarthur Bulls winning A-league licenses because News offered the FFA extra dosh for teams from Melbourne and Sydney, it will have similar results to United and Bulls, and it's case in point of why the AFL is so much bigger and more successful than the other codes; the AFL always does what's best for the AFL in the long term, the other codes allow external stakeholders to dictate to them for short term gains with no care given to the broader impacts.

I'll ask you for the fourth or fifth time then and maybe get an answer this time. If Redcliffe weren't the best of the bidders, then which bid was better?

 

[The Great Dane]

I'll ask you for the fourth or fifth time then and maybe get an answer this time. If Redcliffe weren't the best of the bidders, then which bid was better?

I don't understand what your question has to do with anything. It's a red herring that is totally irrelevant to the point at hand, just like every time you bring it up.

Besides, I've answered you're question multiple times and each time you have refused to accept the answer and continued to assert that I haven't answered the question. It's almost like you have a script in your head of how the discussion should go, but when I don't follow that script you don't know how to respond and try to force the conversation back onto the script.

I'll answer one last time- each of the Brisbane bids were deeply flawed, and if given the option I wouldn't have picked any of them and would have either built a club that better fit the NRL's needs inhouse or expanded in another market while I waited for better opportunities in Brisbane to present themselves.