18th club, whose next?

[Perth Red]

Adding other teams to a city only works if that city is under serviced. There is no demand for a second Melbourne team and wont be for decades to come.
Vlandys can carp on about tribalism all he likes but reality is all prof sport is built on tribalism, be it inter city rivalry or city v city, state v state, country v country.
eventually we may see second teams in Auckland and a third team in Brisbane but they are both a long ways from being needed. A second team in Melbourne is even further away.

 

[Wb1234]

Anyone suggesting Melbourne two has rocks in their head

as @Jamberoo has said look what happened to victory crowds

 

[Steel Saints]

Not sure what to make of this thread. I didn't realise that the Voice referendum is such a key issue to determine the 18th club .

Anyway, FWIW, I'm happy to see one of Perth or Christchurch become No. 18. Hopefully one day, both clubs are involved in a 20 team comp.

Obviously both will have a set of challenges to overcome, especially in a sporting landscape against other established sports in their respective markets. But it won't be nowhere near as challenging as having a PNG team in the comp.

Perth can learn some lessons from the Storm, while Christchurch could get some tips from the Warriors.

When they announced team 18, I hope the NRL has commonsense with the pick of the new club.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Not sure what to make of this thread. I didn't realise that the Voice referendum is such a key issue to determine the 18th club .

Anyway, FWIW, I'm happy to see one of Perth or Christchurch become No. 18. Hopefully one day, both clubs are involved in a 20 team comp.

Obviously both will have a set of challenges to overcome, especially in a sporting landscape against other established sports in their respective markets. But it won't be nowhere near as challenging as having a PNG team in the comp.

Perth can learn some lessons from the Storm, while Christchurch could get some tips from the Warriors.

When they announced team 18, I hope the NRL has commonsense with the pick of the new club.

Storm were bankrolled by News Ltd when they held a 50% stake in the NRL. They provided the Storm with enough money to spend more on their football operations than every club bar the Broncos. Perth won't be given this luxury.

 

[Bukowski]

Not sure what to make of this thread. I didn't realise that the Voice referendum is such a key issue to determine the 18th club .

Anyway, FWIW, I'm happy to see one of Perth or Christchurch become No. 18. Hopefully one day, both clubs are involved in a 20 team comp.

Obviously both will have a set of challenges to overcome, especially in a sporting landscape against other established sports in their respective markets. But it won't be nowhere near as challenging as having a PNG team in the comp.

Perth can learn some lessons from the Storm, while Christchurch could get some tips from the Warriors.

When they announced team 18, I hope the NRL has commonsense with the pick of the new club.

Unfortunately this thread is no longer about team 18.
.

 

[Vlad59]

Unfortunately this thread is no longer about team 18.
.

It’s really dumb thread now. Full of BS

 

[Bukowski]

It’s really dumb thread now. Full of BS

Putrid boring shit. Pippen would have loved it.

 

[Steel Saints]

Storm were bankrolled by News Ltd when they held a 50% stake in the NRL. They provided the Storm with enough money to spend more on their football operations than every club bar the Broncos. Perth won't be given this luxury.

News Ltd may have bankrolled the Storm in the initial years, but did nothing to grow the club as a brand in Melbourne. Instead what happened is under their watch, embarrassingly was the salary cap debacle.

Since News Ltd gave up ownership, the Storm have grown as a club, and this is the period where Perth can learn something from them.

 

[Vlad59]

News Ltd may have bankrolled the Storm in the initial years, but did nothing to grow the club as a brand in Melbourne. Instead what happened is under their watch, embarrassingly was the salary cap debacle.

Since News Ltd gave up ownership, the Storm have grown as a club, and this is the period where Perth can learn something from them.

Great summary

 

[Wb1234]

News Ltd may have bankrolled the Storm in the initial years, but did nothing to grow the club as a brand in Melbourne. Instead what happened is under their watch, embarrassingly was the salary cap debacle.

Since News Ltd gave up ownership, the Storm have grown as a club, and this is the period where Perth can learn something from them.

Lmao

no news ltd money no comps

no fans

indeed when news ltd sold the storm the condition was the arlc had to keep giving them top up money for five years of I think 5 million pa

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

News Ltd may have bankrolled the Storm in the initial years, but did nothing to grow the club as a brand in Melbourne. Instead what happened is under their watch, embarrassingly was the salary cap debacle.

Since News Ltd gave up ownership, the Storm have grown as a club, and this is the period where Perth can learn something from them.

Melbourne Storm have been one of the most successful teams on the field since News Ltd sold their stake in the club due to the money and connections of News Ltd between 1998 and 2012. Bellamy was an assistant at the Broncos before News Ltd shifted him to the Storm. Cronk, Slater and Smith continued to play for years after the sale. Between 2012 and 2018 the ARLC provided the Storm with $26.5m to ensure the club could overspend on their football department.

The sale figure is confidential but the new owners will have immediate access to more than $20 million in NRL funding, guaranteed to the club when News withdrew as part-owner of the competition.

Melbourne Storm sale all but a done deal with only an official confirmation to come

Sale of Storm a done deal

www.foxsports.com.au

In 2012, the Australian Rugby League Commission guaranteed $26.5 million over the next six years to Melbourne Storm with the express aim to being “to keep the game thriving in Victoria”.

Melbourne Storm Financials - Sports Industry AU

Periodically certain AFL leaning folks bring up the Melbourne Storms funds and debt profile over the years. In 2010, Crikey

www.footyindustry.com

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Great summary

He's wrong. ARLC provided an extra $26.5m over six years to the Storm when News Ltd sold their stake in the club.

ARLC isn't going to give an extra $26.5m to a Perth-based team over six years. For Perth it will be sink or swim. Perth won't have Craig Bellamy gifted to them by News Ltd, either. Nor will Perth have just one team in SEQ to compete with for juniors.

Perth won't learn anything from Melbourne because it won't be given all the advantages that made the Storm successful.

 

[Wb1234]

Melbourne Storm have been one of the most successful teams on the field since News Ltd sold their stake in the club due to the money and connections of News Ltd between 1998 and 2012. Bellamy was an assistant at the Broncos before News Ltd shifted him to the Storm. Cronk, Slater and Smith continued to play for years after the sale. Between 2012 and 2018 the ARLC provided the Storm with $26.5m to ensure the club could overspend on their football department.

The sale figure is confidential but the new owners will have immediate access to more than $20 million in NRL funding, guaranteed to the club when News withdrew as part-owner of the competition.​

​

Melbourne Storm sale all but a done deal with only an official confirmation to come

Sale of Storm a done deal

www.foxsports.com.au

​

In 2012, the Australian Rugby League Commission guaranteed $26.5 million over the next six years to Melbourne Storm with the express aim to being “to keep the game thriving in Victoria”.​

​

Melbourne Storm Financials - Sports Industry AU

Periodically certain AFL leaning folks bring up the Melbourne Storms funds and debt profile over the years. In 2010, Crikey

www.footyindustry.com

Love how people try and bs about the reasons for the storms success

 

[Bukowski]

News Ltd may have bankrolled the Storm in the initial years, but did nothing to grow the club as a brand in Melbourne. Instead what happened is under their watch, embarrassingly was the salary cap debacle.

Since News Ltd gave up ownership, the Storm have grown as a club, and this is the period where Perth can learn something from them.

There's also plenty of expansions teams in Perth from other sports that have had both success and failure. They will have a wealth of knowledge coming in.

 

[Steel Saints]

Lmao

no news ltd money no comps

no fans

indeed when news ltd sold the storm the condition was the arlc had to keep giving them top up money for five years of I think 5 million pa

At the end of 1997, Perth Reds and Hunter Mariners were axed and were quickly replaced by the Melbourne Storm the following year. So at such short notice, and in a non heartland area, News Ltd had no choice but to finance them in the early years.

Fifteen years later, News Ltd sold the Melbourne Storm in 2013, which incidentally was the first year of the new tv deal from 2013-2017, under the new independent commission at the time.

I can't recall the condition that the ARLC had to give top up money, but with the game becoming independent and a new billion dollar tv deal at the time, they could actually afford to support the Storm.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Love how people try and bs about the reasons for the storms success

A few months ago @mongoose claimed News Ltd played no role in the day to day operations of the Storm. According to him and others, it's just a coincidence that the Storm were able to create a football department that was run more professionally and efficiently than every other sports club in the country.

The people who set up the club, John Ribot and Chris Johns, were employed by News Ltd to run Super League in the 1990s.

It's naive for people to think News Ltd provided $75m to the Storm between 1998 and 2012 without knowing what it was spent on or who was behind the operations of the club. No one in this country has more mates and connections in the business sector than Rupert Murdoch. If you want to set up a club from scratch in ememy territory and give it the best staff available to succeed then Rupert Murdoch is the only bloke that can pull it off.

Every club had to sit back and accept the rort because News Ltd held a 50% stake in the game and provided the bulk of its income through media deals.

It's no coincidence that the clubs demanded more funding once News Ltd sold their stake in the game.

It's also no coincidence that News Ltd severed all ties with the Storm when the salary cap scandal broke out. This was around the time that the News of the World phone hacking scandal broke out.

 

[Wb1234]

At the end of 1997, Perth Reds and Hunter Mariners were axed and were quickly replaced by the Melbourne Storm the following year. So at such short notice, and in a non heartland area, News Ltd had no choice but to finance them in the early years.

Fifteen years later, News Ltd sold the Melbourne Storm in 2013, which incidentally was the first year of the new tv deal from 2013-2017, under the new independent commission at the time.

I can't recall the condition that the ARLC had to give top up money, but with the game becoming independent and a new billion dollar tv deal at the time, they could actually afford to support the Storm.

Oh yeh just reminded me they got players from two teams who were killed off being Perth and the mariners so another leg up

lmao

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

At the end of 1997, Perth Reds and Hunter Mariners were axed and were quickly replaced by the Melbourne Storm the following year. So at such short notice, and in a non heartland area, News Ltd had no choice but to finance them in the early years.

Fifteen years later, News Ltd sold the Melbourne Storm in 2013, which incidentally was the first year of the new tv deal from 2013-2017, under the new independent commission at the time.

I can't recall the condition that the ARLC had to give top up money, but with the game becoming independent and a new billion dollar tv deal at the time, they could actually afford to support the Storm.

You're proving my point about the Storm. They're the only expansion club in NSWRL/ARL/NRL history to experience immediate on field success because they were able to recruit quality players from the remains of three axed clubs.

Perth won't have this luxury.

Yet people think it'll be just like the Storm?

News Ltd were able to pull off the Melbourne rort because they held a 50% stake in the game and were in a position of strength over the ARL during broadcast negotiations. They paid us peanuts for years and it impacted the bottom line of every club in the league. Not only were News Ltd getting the broadcast rights for a bargain, they were able to use some of their savings to give the Storm a huge advantage over every other club.

Broncos get hammered for their role in Super League between 95-97, yet Storm are given a free pass for f**king over the competition between 1998-2018.

 

[mongoose]

Record on repeat again.
Blah blah storm were helped by News blah blah Perth won't have the luxury therefore will be a failure... excellent well reasoned analysis as usual

 

[Maximus]

At the end of 1997, Perth Reds and Hunter Mariners were axed and were quickly replaced by the Melbourne Storm the following year. So at such short notice, and in a non heartland area, News Ltd had no choice but to finance them in the early years.

Fifteen years later, News Ltd sold the Melbourne Storm in 2013, which incidentally was the first year of the new tv deal from 2013-2017, under the new independent commission at the time.

I can't recall the condition that the ARLC had to give top up money, but with the game becoming independent and a new billion dollar tv deal at the time, they could actually afford to support the Storm.

You are wasting your time with those 2.