You're yet to provide any evidence that it's "too soon" for a third Brisbane team. That's just a bullshit claim you've plucked out of your arse because you don't have an actual argument against a third Brisbane team.
You've also ignored the fact that the Brisbane Tigers have a far more advanced bid than anything coming out of New Zealand and Perth.
I'll say it again since it didn't get through the first few times. A third Brisbane team is hardly comparable to Sydney's nine. Only some one who doesn't understand basic maths and economics would say Brisbane 3 is equal to Sydney 9. On a per capita basis it's not even close to being equal. Financially, the Broncos and Dolphins are kicking the Sydney clubs' arses. You really don't have a reasonable argument, so just stop with the false equivalencies.
The odds of a Sydney club being relocated or wound up are slim to none. So too is the proposition of the ARLC creating a club in Perth or NZ from scratch and funding it for years, which is what will need to happen unless the WA or NZ Govs subsidises it. The odds of Perth or NZ2 being financially stable by 2028 without any assistance from the ARLC are slim to none. Either club will need to generate at least $10-15m from football operations because they won't have a pokie den to rely on.
I just scoured over the Dockers' annual report. In 2022 the club generated $8,192,514 in sponsorship revenue. In 2021 it was $5,663,438.
All on p30 of their report.
That's for an AFL team with 53k members in a parochial AFL city, playing its games out of a world class venue.
A Perth-based NRL team is not going to generate that sort of revenue playing out of Perth Oval in its current state, is it?
Get the WA Gov to upgrade Perth Oval and agree to sponsor a Perth-based NRL club for its first 10 years. Then it'll be a realistic contender for the 18th licence and an asset to the NRL. If we rush into Perth without attaining any assurances from the WA Gov and fail to upgrade Perth Oval then the club will struggle to survive. To be fair, the ARLC could have done all of this by now if they were diligent. They've sat on their arse and twiddle their thumbs despite the WA Gov being very supportive.
Do you really think it's realistic to expect the ARLC -- and the current 17 clubs that have a seat at the negotiating table -- to bankroll new teams from Perth and New Zealand?
Two things are certain.
1. The ARLC is not going to cull any clubs.
2. The ARLC is not going to prop up NZ2 and Perth like the AFL does with Gold Coast and GWS.
You say it's "not sensible" to bring in a third Brisbane team any time soon.
On what basis can you make this claim?
On every key point the Brisbane Tigers are head shoulders ahead of Perth and NZ2. What's not sensible is saying we should overlook the Tigers' better credentials just because you don't feel the time is right for a third Brisbane team. Thankfully, the ARLC will judge each candidate by the strength of their business operations and infrastructure. They won't give a f**k about your concerns over it being "too soon". Judging by the ARLC's reluctance to go against the wishes of the broadcasters, it's "not sensible" to think they're going to go with NZ2 or Perth when Ch9 has already thrown their support behind Brisbane 3.
