18th club, whose next?

[Pippen94]

So we should fund the other bids too then?

..no, they should find their own funding like PNG.

 

[Bukowski]

It is a very strange location! It is an industrial area surrounded by low cost housing suburbs. It’s only a 15min drive from Hillarys, sorrento etc which are up market beach side suburbs. Can’t see where they could build it in Malaga, it’s already fully developed, only the buffer strip with Reid Highway left but can’t see them using that,

Someone over here claims it’s nearer whiteman park/ Ellenbrook but that’d be even further away from the nicest areas!
the northern suburbs do have some strong local Jnr clubs (nth beach,Joondalup, Ellenbrook and Alkimos).

I heard they are intending to link up the bold park sporting centres with a precinct type development so very surprised it isnt being built there. Much nicer area and more central.

they have just built a $50mill soccer centre out at queens park which again isn’t an obvious nice place to put one so who knows, maybe they are spreading the love around Or using up the cheapest crown land.

Sam Kerr Football Centre (WA State Football Centre) | Austadiums

Information about Sam Kerr Football Centre (WA State Football Centre) in Perth including venue layout, history, records, events, map, tickets, directions and accommodation.

www.austadiums.com

Perth Film Studios

www.dlgsc.wa.gov.au

It will be next door to this

 

[Perth Red]

So we should fund the other bids too then?

Yes, it’s a great use of tax payers money. In fact the aus govt should fund every prof sports club in the pacific region, you know it makes sense.

I thought it was dodgy use of public money till I saw what they did with buying digicell and gifting it to telstra, what a rort! There is zero accountability when it comes to public spending!

 

[Pippen94]

Yes, it’s a great use of tax payers money. In fact the aus govt should fund every prof sports club in the pacific region, you know it makes sense.

I thought it was dodgy use of public money till I saw what they did with buying digicell and gifting it to telstra, what a rort! There is zero accountability when it comes to public spending!

Childish argument

 

[SirPies&Beers]

Yes, it’s a great use of tax payers money. In fact the aus govt should fund every prof sports club in the pacific region, you know it makes sense.

I thought it was dodgy use of public money till I saw what they did with buying digicell and gifting it to telstra, what a rort! There is zero accountability when it comes to public spending!

isnt this tax payer money coming from allocated $4.9 billion year spending on foreign items anyways?

$60mil from $4.9b is what 1.3% or something small? the cash will be spent on foreign territories anyways thats what its budgeted for. if it doesnt go to league it could well end up in rugby in fiji or cricket in afghanistan or soccer in palestine. the rest of the $4.9 bill then gets spent on foreign aid like medical or education and even defence. mostly in pacifica.

this isn't extra tax we are paying, its the same tax we have already been paying where a portion was already allocated and budgeted for international spending.

so whats the big deal? at least the money is going into rugby league and i reckon in 10/20 years time almost every club will have at least 1 papuan player in their system/top 30/overall squad/pathway system etc. its almost there now really.

you know who benefits most? perth does because they arent in a league heartland and will need to rely a bit on players from elsewhere. no better place to start internationally than papua.

 

[Pippen94]

isnt this tax payer money coming from allocated $4.9 billion year spending on foreign items anyways?

$60mil from $4.9b is what 1.3% or something small? the cash will be spent on foreign territories anyways thats what its budgeted for. if it doesnt go to league it could well end up in rugby in fiji or cricket in afghanistan or soccer in palestine. the rest of the $4.9 bill then gets spent on foreign aid like medical or education and even defence. mostly in pacifica.

this isn't extra tax we are paying, its the same tax we have already been paying where a portion was already allocated and budgeted for international spending.

so whats the big deal? at least the money is going into rugby league and i reckon in 10/20 years time almost every club will have at least 1 papuan player in their system/top 30/overall squad/pathway system etc. its almost there now really.

you know who benefits most? perth does because they arent in a league heartland and will need to rely a bit on players from elsewhere. no better place to start internationally than papua.

Great post. $60 million is actually 10% of what Australia gives PNG annually. I don't remember anybody here complaining about the existing, much bigger funding.

 

[Wb1234]

Do you mean the 9.6M grant in 2006 to provide a single stadium at the southern end of which didn’t cover the full scope to build?

I felt it wasn’t enough at the time to provide acceptable levels of comfort for people that use the stadium for public use to attend many events not just sharks games 10-12 times a year.

Turns out most of this forum agree it wasn’t enough given the amount of slack thrown at the stadium. You won’t find any sharks fans defending it. I hate the place.

What the above doesn’t change is that 600M is a large amount of money for a footy team that let’s face it, will be full of expats from AU who are looking for a tax break all in the name of political sway. Yep they deserve a team alright.

So govt money for a privately owned stadium is ok just not to a sports team

lol

 

[SirPies&Beers]

Great post. $60 million is actually 10% of what Australia gives PNG annually. I don't remember anybody here complaining about the existing, much bigger funding.

i might be slower than a drunken scaffie trying to do algebra but i was only reading about foreign aid spending last night. aussie gov have budgeted $4.9b between 24/25 and by time the papuan cash kicks in it will exceed $5b + on foreign spending budget. $60m is peanuts % of it really.

 

[Wb1234]

Yes, it’s a great use of tax payers money. In fact the aus govt should fund every prof sports club in the pacific region, you know it makes sense.

I thought it was dodgy use of public money till I saw what they did with buying digicell and gifting it to telstra, what a rort! There is zero accountability when it comes to public spending!

Wait till you find out about the 2 billion we pay the us every year for subs that will never be delivered and which we aren’t entitled to a refund of

 

[Wb1234]

i might be slower than a drunken scaffie trying to do algebra but i was only reading about foreign aid spending last night. aussie gov have budgeted $4.9b between 24/25 and by time the papuan cash kicks in it will exceed $5b + on foreign spending budget. $60m is peanuts % of it really.

Currently png receives around 440 million down from around 500 million

So this new money is just taking it back to previous levels

 

[Pippen94]

i might be slower than a drunken scaffie trying to do algebra but i was only reading about foreign aid spending last night. aussie gov have budgeted $4.9b between 24/25 and by time the papuan cash kicks in it will exceed $5b + on foreign spending budget. $60m is peanuts % of it really.

..and more effective at building relationship with countries. As pointed out china can offer endless funding. Can't offer NRL team.

 

[Wb1234]

I did, and it isn’t, it’s consolidation of an exiting strong market.

no I didn’t, I said they are unlikley to be as big as a genuine brisbane 2 could be. The proof of that one way or the other is yet to be seen. We’ve seen around a 15% drop off in crowds year 1 to year 2.
i think they’ve done very very well in their start up. They finished where most expansion teams have historically in first two years so on par there. Their marketing has been spot on, their fan and corporate start up has been strong, let’s hope it continues and doesn’t do a titans. moving more games to Suncorp is a good call.

calls for brisbane 3 are because the city wasnt divided up broncos north, easts south like it should have been. No need for a third club if that had happened.

And yet they are playing around ten games at Suncorp next year or something like that

Channel nine has given them almost as many fta games as the broncos

 

[Ozzi_78]

..no, they should find their own funding like PNG.

You got it!!!

 

[Ozzi_78]

So govt money for a privately owned stadium is ok just not to a sports team

lol

You missed the point totally. If it was privately owned and exclusively used by the sharks then I get your point. But it’s not.

 

[Pippen94]

You got it!!!

We all know why PNG are getting funding. Pondering why Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs for example aren't getting the same deal is a distraction. Irrelevant & irrational argument.

 

[Wb1234]

You missed the point totally. If it was privately owned and exclusively used by the sharks then I get your point. But it’s not.

It is privately owned by the sharks

Just because they have another tenant doesn’t mean squat

And since we are talking about clubs who bum money how many handouts did the nswrl give to the sharks to stop them from going broke

 

[Ozzi_78]

It is privately owned by the sharks

Just because they have another tenant doesn’t mean squat

And since we are talking about clubs who bum money how many handouts did the nswrl give to the sharks to stop them from going broke

About 3. And still not merged. Up up your ass.

 

[Matt_CBY]

Stop making sht up. I never said that at all about brisbane. I said it should be a genuine brisbane 2 club playing all games at suncorp, not redclifee called ‘the’ dolphins appealing to just a section of brisbane, Playing some games in a sub standard stadium and leaving a gap that will require a third licence to fill.

The fact thre are already calls for brisbane3 to fill a gap not filled by the dolphins has merely validated my sentiments on dolphins not being the best strategic choice.

Ah so you wanted another plastic club? One that mirrors the Broncos exactly and provides no poo t of difference?

yeah, that would’ve worked. Not.

 

[Matt_CBY]

I did, and it isn’t, it’s consolidation of an exiting strong market.

no I didn’t, I said they are unlikley to be as big as a genuine brisbane 2 could be. The proof of that one way or the other is yet to be seen. We’ve seen around a 15% drop off in crowds year 1 to year 2.
i think they’ve done very very well in their start up. They finished where most expansion teams have historically in first two years so on par there. Their marketing has been spot on, their fan and corporate start up has been strong, let’s hope it continues and doesn’t do a titans. moving more games to Suncorp is a good call.

calls for brisbane 3 are because the city wasnt divided up broncos north, easts south like it should have been. No need for a third club if that had happened.

You really do live in an alternate universe.

 

[Matt_CBY]

Firehawks where the right choice, but too big a threat to the broncos and as news ltd was paying for the new clubs admission it came as no surprise they went with the least threatening option.

it was, 6 rich people and a wa govt with a $400mill spending cheque.

Anyone who believes that the Firehawks were the right decision back then doesn’t deserve to have an opinion on future expansion.