What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Brisbane Tigers make their bid to be 18th team

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
20,261
Perth really is the most obvious choice for nrl expansion:
Growing city of 2.2million people
richest state in australia
Drew 42k crowd to nrl this season
Third strongest grassroots state in australia already producing nrl and nrlw players with strong potential for growth of participation and player production
beautiful affordable city to raise family in attracting players to relocate
Bid consortium of millionaire committed owners
Supportive cashed up state govt
growth potential for tv audience
increase in value of sponsorship to nrl by having another big capital city in the comp
75 year history of rugby league and local clubs
perfect location for new tv time slot
suitable regular stadium and bigger top class one if and when needed
takes the fight to afl and puts another nail in unions coffin
removes the public perception rugby league is a two state game
politis and finally Vlandys recognise value of an Australian wide competition
You make a great case for a third fumble ball team in Perth
 
Messages
11,729
He didn’t actually say that. He intimated that the only people in support of a Perth side are those being teased by fumbleball work colleagues about the game being popular in two states.

It was a pretty stupid comment but not what you are framing it as.
That was a tongue in cheek comment aimed at mongoose and Dane.

To be fair, the game doesn't need Adelaide, Perth, NZ2, Brisbane 3 or PNG to remain the second richest sport in the country. Teams from these regions will offer extra value, albeit in different ways.

The value of teams in all five metro areas is vastly overstated. Adding teams in Adelaide and Perth won't lead to us getting as much as AwFuL from Foxtel and Ch9 because the games appeal to different demographics and don't provide the same opportunities to run advertisements. Ch7 benefits from airing non-Victorian teams into their home markets every round. Ch9 doesn't do this with the non-Sydney teams.

Adding teams in Adelaide and Perth will provide an extra 15-30k viewers from these markets when these teams are broadcast on Ch9. It'll also lead to 30k fewer people watching in Brisbane when no Queensland team is involved.

The Storm's inability to develop a steady supply of local juniors doesn't bode well for Adelaide and Perth. Perth Red blames it on lack of funding, but that doesn't change the fact we've had 25 years of a strong Storm outfit genetating negligible growth in participation and the ARLC isn't going to sink millions into developing the game at the grassroots level. That means Adelaide and Perth will be reliant on the heartland states.
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,191
That was a tongue in cheek comment aimed at mongoose and Dane.

To be fair, the game doesn't need Adelaide, Perth, NZ2, Brisbane 3 or PNG to remain the second richest sport in the country. Teams from these regions will offer extra value, albeit in different ways.

The value of teams in all five metro areas is vastly overstated. Adding teams in Adelaide and Perth won't lead to us getting as much as AwFuL from Foxtel and Ch9 because the games appeal to different demographics and don't provide the same opportunities to run advertisements. Ch7 benefits from airing non-Victorian teams into their home markets every round. Ch9 doesn't do this with the non-Sydney teams.

Adding teams in Adelaide and Perth will provide an extra 15-30k viewers from these markets when these teams are broadcast on Ch9. It'll also lead to 30k fewer people watching in Brisbane when no Queensland team is involved.

The Storm's inability to develop a steady supply of local juniors doesn't bode well for Adelaide and Perth. Perth Red blames it on lack of funding, but that doesn't change the fact we've had 25 years of a strong Storm outfit genetating negligible growth in participation and the ARLC isn't going to sink millions into developing the game at the grassroots level. That means Adelaide and Perth will be reliant on the heartland states.

Agreed.

I am very sceptical about PNG and obviously more pro Perth and NZ 2 than you are but ultimately the game is in better shape than it has been for a while
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,191
Didn't Perth Red say we need a Perth-based team so the game can shed its reputation of being a "two state sport"?

He might have. Again though I didn’t say that.

I don’t have close friends or work colleagues who like fumbleball (or at least professs that they do) Notwithstanding, if I did, I would not really care what they think of League.

So, personally I am not for a Perth team because of what fumbleball fans think. I’m for it because you need new customers and the area is growing both in wealth and population.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
64,648
Well the one million extra people in wa won’t be rugby league fans

maybe we need more teams in Brisbane and nsw to attract big national sponsors like twiggy ?
They won’t be without a club to follow.

Maybe if he was opening an lpg terminal somewhere other than Wollongong he would lol
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
20,261
They won’t be without a club to follow.

Maybe if he was opening an lpg terminal somewhere other than Wollongong he would lol
Yep he had no mines in wa does he

the man keeping rugby union alive in wa and a Sydney club has brought him to our game

maybe central coast should get a new twiggy owned lpg plant as a way to get the bears back In
 
Messages
11,729
Agreed.

I am very sceptical about PNG and obviously more pro Perth and NZ 2 than you are but ultimately the game is in better shape than it has been for a while

I think Christchurch will provide a better return than Perth.

The FTA TV ratings in Perth for the Eagles, Dockers and interstate clubs are abysmal for a city that idolises fumbleball. It's a significant concern because every Eagles and Dockers match is broadcast live and free into Perth via Ch7. I'd be surprised if the uptake of Kayo and Foxtel in Perth [for fumbleball fans] is as high as it is in Brisbane and Sydney [for rugby league fans]. Especially amongst older fans. There was plenty of concern amongst Western Australians when AwFuL proposed not airing every Eagles and Dockers game on FTA. Politicians intervened.

If a Perth-based NRL team doesn't add much value to the FTA broadcast rights, then why do people keep saying we need a presence in all five metro areas?

A Perth-based team will be lucky to draw 5 or 8 games on FTA each year. If these games are drawing just 15-30k viewers in Perth then they're not going to command a significant increase in spending from the game's sponsors -- especially if they lead to 30k or more fewer viewers from Brisbane and Sydney tuning in.

It's fanciful to think a Perth team is going to help every game generate more money from a 30-second commercial on Ch9. Melbourne isn't providing much value with its 12k average for all NRL games. They do average 30k when the Storm play, but that number drops to 8k when they're not televised. The addition of the Storm has only improved the overall FTA ratings in Melbourne by 4K. I would be astonished if Perth saw a significant increase. The Eagles and Dockers generate less FTA viewers in Perth than an NRL game in Brisbane that doesn't feature a Queensland team.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
33,572
I think Christchurch will provide a better return than Perth.

The FTA TV ratings in Perth for the Eagles, Dockers and interstate clubs are abysmal for a city that idolises fumbleball. It's a significant concern because every Eagles and Dockers match is broadcast live and free into Perth via Ch7. I'd be surprised if the uptake of Kayo and Foxtel in Perth [for fumbleball fans] is as high as it is in Brisbane and Sydney [for rugby league fans]. Especially amongst older fans. There was plenty of concern amongst Western Australians when AwFuL proposed not airing every Eagles and Dockers game on FTA. Politicians intervened.

If a Perth-based NRL team doesn't add much value to the FTA broadcast rights, then why do people keep saying we need a presence in all five metro areas?

A Perth-based team will be lucky to draw 5 or 8 games on FTA each year. If these games are drawing just 15-30k viewers in Perth then they're not going to command a significant increase in spending from the game's sponsors -- especially if they lead to 30k or more fewer viewers from Brisbane and Sydney tuning in.

It's fanciful to think a Perth team is going to help every game generate more money from a 30-second commercial on Ch9. Melbourne isn't providing much value with its 12k average for all NRL games. They do average 30k when the Storm play, but that number drops to 8k when they're not televised. The addition of the Storm has only improved the overall FTA ratings in Melbourne by 4K. I would be astonished if Perth saw a significant increase. The Eagles and Dockers generate less FTA viewers in Perth than an NRL game in Brisbane that doesn't feature a Queensland team.
So an Australian based team won't work because of cherry picked TV ratings, so the solution is a team in Christchurch?

Excuse Me Wow GIF by Mashable
 

Tigerlaird

Juniors
Messages
74
Where's the info that they're officially calling themselves Queensland Firehawks? What a lame name.

Brisbane Jaguars would be 10000x more awesome. Closest thing to a Tiger.
 

Pippen94

First Grade
Messages
5,858
Where's the info that they're officially calling themselves Queensland Firehawks? What a lame name.

Brisbane Jaguars would be 10000x more awesome. Closest thing to a Tiger.

Last media appearance from richo said they'd be qld firehawks. Earlier this year there were news articles saying they would ditch that branding.
In 2021 survey of fans of Brisbane bids preferred dolphins & jets to firehawks..
 
Messages
11,729
Would they be allowed to call themselves the Queensland Firehawks?

There's a netball team called the Queensland Firebirds.

Despite filing their own trademark last year, the 'Brisbane Firehawks' are also in a spot of bother.

Netball Queensland Limited has provided a notice of intention to oppose the Firehawks application on the grounds it is "likely to deceive or cause confusion" and "is similar to a trademark which has acquired a reputation in Australia".

While not actually named in the documentation, it is likely the opposition is to protect the IP of the Queensland Firebirds, who will need to provide evidence in support of their opposition before a hearing, decision and outcome.

 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
64,648
Would they be allowed to call themselves the Queensland Firehawks?

There's a netball team called the Queensland Firebirds.

Despite filing their own trademark last year, the 'Brisbane Firehawks' are also in a spot of bother.​
Netball Queensland Limited has provided a notice of intention to oppose the Firehawks application on the grounds it is "likely to deceive or cause confusion" and "is similar to a trademark which has acquired a reputation in Australia".​
While not actually named in the documentation, it is likely the opposition is to protect the IP of the Queensland Firebirds, who will need to provide evidence in support of their opposition before a hearing, decision and outcome.​
Well that was 3 years ago and looks like they failed in their attempts.
The Brisbane Firehawks is still trademarked to Easts. Interestingly there has been no registering of queensland firehawks.
 

Latest posts

Top