Brisbane Bombers Bid

[Albert Rosenfeld]

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Shabab and Boko Haram have all protested against the naming of a second Brisbane team as the Bombers, because all of the aforementioned groups claim it is a violation of copyright.

 

[Pippen94]

Plastic bid with no point of difference from Broncos. Millionaires no guarantee of success - see Tinkler, Palmer. NRL will probably pick it tho.

 

[taipan]

Can we call them the channel 9 Brisbane Bombers.To honour their recommendation to remove a Sydney team.

 

[Perth Red]

Plastic bid with no point of difference from Broncos. Millionaires no guarantee of success - see Tinkler, Palmer. NRL will probably pick it tho.

To compete with broncos any new club is going to need some serious money behind it. Reality is your Redcliffe or ipswich’s Pokie money isn’t going to cut it. A club will need some significant coined business people owning it,

 

[Pippen94]

To compete with broncos any new club is going to need some serious money behind it. Reality is your Redcliffe or ipswich’s Pokie money isn’t going to cut it. A club will need some significant coined business people owning it,

Not really - just need to find a fan base. Targeting a specific area will work better than being an imitation of broncos.

 

[The Great Dane]

Not really - just need to find a fan base. Targeting a specific area will work better than being an imitation of broncos.

What a great way to turn all the people not from your chosen specific area off supporting your new club.

Do you really think it's a good idea to create a demand for an NRL club in every suburb of Brisbane thus recreating all the problems in Sydney in Brisbane, especially when the NRL doesn't have room for a club in every suburb of Brisbane.

If the NRL is smart then two clubs will be it for Brisbane, so better make it a big strong one, a Man City to go with the Broncos Man Utd, otherwise it's all a waste of time.

 

[Pippen94]

What a great way to turn all the people not from your chosen specific area off supporting your new club.

Do you really think it's a good idea to create a demand for an NRL club in every suburb of Brisbane thus recreating all the problems in Sydney in Brisbane, especially when the NRL doesn't have room for a club in every suburb of Brisbane.

If the NRL is smart then two clubs will be it for Brisbane, so better make it a big strong one, a Man City to go with the Broncos Man Utd, otherwise it's all a waste of time.

A league tried that in Melbourne & what they got is the very popular Victory along with City who have no fans. By contrast the Wanderers in western Sydney were an instant success. No point in creating a team for all Brisbane as broncos already exist. Hell, crushers tried this & they came & went.

 

[The Great Dane]

A league tried that in Melbourne & what they got is the very popular Victory along with City who have no fans.

The A-league did what they always do, they gave the license to the consortium offering the largest license fee instead of giving it to the group with the best bid. . .

Melbourne Heart's failure is because they were a bad bid that didn't have the means to pull off what they were attempting, not that the idea behind what they were attempting was necessarily flawed.

By contrast the Wanderers in western Sydney were an instant success.

Western Sydney is a giant region that represents most of the city, though in name it may be regional it's really no different to what I'm suggesting, in fact it's basically exactly what I'm suggesting, a giant club that represents a ton of people that can act as the Man Utd to Sydney FC's Man City.

To compare Western Sydney to i.e. Redcliffe or the regions that other smaller suburban clubs in or around Brisbane represent that are always brought up in expansion talks, is absurd on the face of it.

No point in creating a team for all Brisbane as broncos already exist. Hell, crushers tried this & they came & went.

Nobody is suggesting that another club is created to represent all of Brisbane, they're just suggesting that we don't create tiny bloody suburban clubs that won't be able to support themselves like is always suggested.

Also the Crushers failure had little to nothing to do with their merits as a club, and everything to do with the time that they were founded in and their lack of financial backing.

 

[Pippen94]

The A-league did what they always do, they gave the license to the consortium offering the largest license fee instead of giving it to the group with the best bid. . .

Melbourne Heart's failure is because they were a bad bid that didn't have the means to pull off what they were attempting, not that the idea behind what they were attempting was necessarily flawed.

Western Sydney is a giant region that represents most of the city, though in name it may be regional it's really no different to what I'm suggesting, in fact it's basically exactly what I'm suggesting, a giant club that represents a ton of people that can act as the Man Utd to Sydney FC's Man City.

To compare Western Sydney to i.e. Redcliffe or the regions that other smaller suburban clubs in or around Brisbane represent that are always brought up in expansion talks, is absurd on the face of it.

Nobody is suggesting that another club is created to represent all of Brisbane, they're just suggesting that we don't create tiny bloody suburban clubs that won't be able to support themselves like is always suggested.

Also the Crushers failure had little to nothing to do with their merits as a club, and everything to do with the time that they were founded in and their lack of financial backing.

I can't think of any instance of a 2nd team setting up shop having success by claiming to represent the same area & sharing stadiums. United & City originated out of different parts of greater Manchester & this is reflected in fan demographics.
Redcliffe represents Morton Bay which has a population roughly the size of Canberra only slated to grow much faster.
Western Corridor has an even larger catchment area.
Both would add viewers to non-broncos TV matches in Brisbane.

 

[Perth Red]

I can't think of any instance of a 2nd team setting up shop having success by claiming to represent the same area & sharing stadiums. United & City originated out of different parts of greater Manchester & this is reflected in fan demographics.
Redcliffe represents Morton Bay which has a population roughly the size of Canberra only slated to grow much faster.
Western Corridor has an even larger catchment area.
Both would add viewers to non-broncos TV matches in Brisbane.

NY Giants and Jets?

 

[Pippen94]

NY Giants and Jets?

Giants played out of Yankee Stadium in the Bronx - Jets Shea Stadium in Queens.

 

[The Great Dane]

Giants played out of Yankee Stadium in the Bronx - Jets Shea Stadium in Queens.

They've both played out of MetLife Stadium since 2010, before that they shared Giants Stadium from 1984-09, and even before that they shared other stadiums on occasion when it was necessary .

Starting from next year the Rams and Chargers will share SoFi Stadium in LA once it's completed construction, the Lakers and Clippers have shared the Staples Center since it opened in 99, and I'm sure that if I bothered to look that I could find plenty of other examples just in the USA alone.

Closer to home, every AFL team from Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth ground-share, and if that's not enough for you here is a Wikipedia article on teams that ground-share or have ground-shared in the past- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundshare.

The reality is that ground-sharing is becoming the norm more and more because it's cheaper and more efficient, and frankly unless the Queensland government is open to building another stadium similar to Suncorp, the best outcome for any new Brisbane club is to play out of Suncorp.

 

[The Great Dane]

Redcliffe represents Morton Bay which has a population roughly the size of Canberra only slated to grow much faster.

Just because you put it on paper it doesn't mean that it's true in reality!

The reality is that the Redcliffe Dolphin's have never and do not represent all of the Moreton Bay region, and if you try to jerry-rig them into a Moreton Bay club you'll almost certainly only succeed in disenfranchising the majority of people from Moreton Bay that don't identify with the Redcliffe Dolphins.

Unless the NRL team is going to have a totally new brand that represents a whole lot more people then just Redcliffe or even Morton Bay, the Dolphins shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an NRL license.

Western Corridor has an even larger catchment area.

Western Corridor is a better bid than the Dolphins (it's probably the best of a bad bunch), but it focuses to much on areas outside of Brisbane, namely Ipswich. The NRL needs a second Brisbane club, and maybe that club can represent Ipswich as well, but what it definitely doesn't need is a bunch of regional clubs that are on Brisbane's door.

 

[Pippen94]

They've both played out of MetLife Stadium since 2010, before that they shared Giants Stadium from 1984-09, and even before that they shared other stadiums on occasion when it was necessary .

Starting from next year the Rams and Chargers will share SoFi Stadium in LA once it's completed construction, the Lakers and Clippers have shared the Staples Center since it opened in 99, and I'm sure that if I bothered to look that I could find plenty of other examples just in the USA alone.

Closer to home, every AFL team from Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth ground-share, and if that's not enough for you here is a Wikipedia article on teams that ground-share or have ground-shared in the past- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundshare.

The reality is that ground-sharing is becoming the norm more and more because it's cheaper and more efficient, and frankly unless the Queensland government is open to building another stadium similar to Suncorp, the best outcome for any new Brisbane club is to play out of Suncorp.

Probably not the best example to support your case - the Jets despite being around since 1960's still have far fewer fans than established Giants.

 

[The Great Dane]

Probably not the best example to support your case - the Jets despite being around since 1960's still have far fewer fans than established Giants.

No matter what you do it's inevitable that one club is going to be bigger than the other, even if it's only marginally so, but hypothetically where do you think the Jets are now if instead of being the New York Jets they are the e.g. the Hell's Kitchen Jets or even just the Manhattan Jets?

The answer is that they probably aren't anywhere near where they are now because most people from in New York that aren't from Hell's Kitchen or Manhattan aren't going to be interested in following a club from Hell's Kitchen or Manhattan, especially when the New York Giants exist, and that is one of the main issues that any new Brisbane team is going to face so long as the Brisbane Broncos exist.

Actually now that I think about it I'd totally follow the Hell's Kitchen Devils/Demons just because it's such a cool brand (might have copyright trouble with Marvel though), but that is an exception to the rule lol.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

To compete with broncos any new club is going to need some serious money behind it. Reality is your Redcliffe or ipswich’s Pokie money isn’t going to cut it. A club will need some significant coined business people owning it,

Redcliffe have much, much more than pokie money. They have an asset base that would make a lot of NRL clubs blush.

 

[Perth Red]

Redcliffe have much, much more than pokie money. They have an asset base that would make a lot of NRL clubs blush.

Does it return an annual revenue? If so how much?

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Does it return an annual revenue? If so how much?

Dolphins shopping centre was built a few years back and they've got a few other income producing assets in the area. I'll try and hunt down the annual report to have a look.

 

[Perth Red]

Dolphins shopping centre was built a few years back and they've got a few other income producing assets in the area. I'll try and hunt down the annual report to have a look.

Thing I always wonder about this scenario is how much gets diverted away from grass roots to top up the NRL club and is that a good outcome for the game overall? How much stronger would grassroots and Jnr RL be in Sydney if the $15mill a year plus that is going out of LC resources into propping up NRL clubs wasnt happening?

 

[Pippen94]

Brisbane is capital of rugby league throughout world. Ipswich Jets & Redcliffe would sell out stadiums every week should NRL choose to go down that route. Both would add TV ratings in Brisbane. Can't see any team establishing a following without focusing on a particular geographical area - no examples of this exist. Both north & south Brisbane are large enough to sustain teams.