Brisbane2 Bid News

[applesauce]

WTF is he smoking? How are we to get a massive increase in the TV deal without the addition of a 9th game?

"What I don't want to see happen with three rival bidders coming out of Queensland is for them to pull down the Broncos temple.

If any future team was able to "pull down the Broncos temple" that would make them the new no.1 sporting franchise in the country. That isn't going to happen there is more than enough room in Brisbane and surronds for an alternative to the Broncos.

"Rugby league has shown itself to be sustainable in a challenging marketplace like Queensland."

... I am speechless ... QLD is dying for additional teams and the marketplace is not challenging fror RL.

 

[Rockin Ronny]

"The Titans have shown since we first came into the league in 2007 that we are built on a sustainable business model.


"Not once have we asked for a handout from the NRL,

Really?
It was this year that Searle asked for a "loan" from the NRL to pay wages. Not great evidence of a sustainable business model.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

The NRL could almost start a second division with all these bids.

 

[Vic Mackey]

Someone needs to tell Michael searle that he isn't the defining voice of rugby league.

 

[applesauce]

There is nothing wrong with competition and it shows how many people across Australia are desperate for a piece of the NRL.

TBH the more bids there are the more likely they will be to expand (if Searles "opinion" is the truth).

 

[Big-Steve]

Someone needs to tell Michael searle that he isn't the defining voice of rugby league.

This is sooooooo needed LOL.

 

[BunniesMan]

Misleading headline. I admire a lot of things about Searle but this is plainly BS. Every club will obviously have a NIMBY (not in my back yard) attitude because each CEO has to think of their club first. But all of that is meaningless. The NRL will be stupid not to take advantage of the new tv rights deal with an extra game. Two new teams will be in the comp in 2013. It's as simple as that. It's not a matter of "if" anymore, it's just a matter of choosing which 2 teams.

 

[Bluebags1908]

I'm not saying people wouldn't watch, I'm saying they won't be more popular than the existing big drawing teams like St George, Parramatta, Canterbury, and so on. There's always a popular Sydney club playing good football to keep people interested. But with only one team in Brisbane currently, when the Broncos are not playing well, the ratings in Queensland drop. A second Brisbane team would help this.

Fair enough. I agree, it will open up more opportunities for TV networks to play around with their TV scheduling in SEQ because there is only one Brisbane team at present.

But it doesn't mean the Bears won't rate in NSW either, despite there being more NSW teams... it will just have a lesser impact on TV scheduling timeslots. Thanks for the considered answer.

Nice colours.

But the Diehards nickname is uniquely Valleys, and would be a mistake to try and usurp this history.

What rubbish. Are you saying the TV networks would rather see the Bears get a franchise ahead of QLD? Channel nine would love to have an extra QLD game for their schedule.

I have read most of your posts and 99% of them are rubbish. All I am saying is that it is pointless saying "the Bears won't rate" and because in NSW and even in Queensland they clearly will rate. So on that score there is no difference between the Central Coast bid or 2nd Brisbane. So what I am saying is that the perceived disadvantage to the Bears is overstated.

Where the difference is however is that 2nd Brisbanme will bring better timeslot options for broadcasters in SEQ. There is a difference between saying 'a team will not rate' and whether bringing in a new team will bosst scheduling opportunities in a specific region for TV networks.

 

[BDGS]

Couldn't you just put this into one of the already existing expansion threads?

 

[Bluebags1908]

Where the fish are. That's what David Gallop said when talking about expansion to QLD.

Yes, fish where the fish are - Bears for 2013!

 

[BDGS]

I think his article is a fair call in regards to the Queensland bids and the need for careful and consideried expansion in the backyard of an existing club, but probably a little less relevant for the CC Bears bid for obvious reasons

I do also think he is correct in that we need to thoroughly entrench our two existing expansion clubs in Melbourne and the Gold Coast, before we focus so agressively on even further expansion. The Titans are still doing it pretty tough on a liquidity of funds level, and Melbourne, which has always lost heavily despite overwhelming on field succes, is about to face its toughest period in the history of the club, so if Searle is worried about shoreing up those efforts as a first priority, then I do support him in that

I agree Kool87, i have been saying this for a while now. The QLD Sports market (particularly South East Queensland) has changed a lot in the past 5 years, lots of new teams in a lot of different sports. It is less relevant to teams outside of Queensland.

The journalist who the article is misleading the public, unfortunately this has been down to play on peoples emotions. Below is the quotes out of that story from Searle only:

"With seven potential suitors, from Port Moresby, Rockhampton, Ipswich, Central Coast, Perth, Wellington, New Zealand and now Brisbane, it is hard to frame a market in such a congested field," he said. "But they will have to be in it for the long haul and have a real passion for the game.

"What I don't want to see happen with three rival bidders coming out of Queensland is for them to pull down the Broncos temple.

"The Titans have shown since we first came into the league in 2007 that we are built on a sustainable business model.

"Not once have we asked for a handout from the NRL, while the AFL is propping up the Suns and the Giants in western Sydney with $20 million handouts.

"Rugby league has shown itself to be sustainable in a challenging marketplace like Queensland."

Now, that is a lot different to what the article and the headline lead the reader to believe. This is nothing less then poor journalism.

 

[BDGS]

There is nothing wrong with competition and it shows how many people across Australia are desperate for a piece of the NRL.

TBH the more bids there are the more likely they will be to expand (if Searles "opinion" is the truth).

I'm calling cheat, might sound juvenile but i'm calling it.

I think there is only one reason there is so many QLD bids and that is to sure up at least one spot (out of the two likely spots) for the state of QLD. Which overall will hurt the game.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Brisbane definitely needs a 2nd team. Just not sure of the timing of when to put them in. Only one team in Brisbane in ridiculous. If a 2nd Brisbane team comes it it should be "South Brisbane".

And I have to laugh at the CQ bid cheif and others that say "yeah but there's a lot of competition in Brisbane with A-League, AFL, Super 15's" - I say: who gives a stuff about the other codes? If anything, it shows how embarrsingly under-represented Rugby League is in SEQ where it is supposed to be the number 1 code. If anything, it tells me we should ADD more teams in SEQ to match the popularity of the game in SEQ. If anyone is going to suffer from the competition then let it be the other codes - time for Rugby League to show who is number 1.

 

[El Diablo]

Now, that is a lot different to what the article and the headline lead the reader to believe. This is nothing less then poor journalism.

it's typical News Ltd who own most of the Broncos

if Sydney can have two fumbleball teams then Bribane can easily have two NRL teams

 

[BDGS]

Brisbane definitely needs a 2nd team. Just not sure of the timing of when to put them in. Only one team in Brisbane in ridiculous. If a 2nd Brisbane team comes it it should be "South Brisbane".

And I have to laugh at the CQ bid cheif and others that say "yeah but there's a lot of competition in Brisbane with A-League, AFL, Super 15's" - I say: who gives a stuff about the other codes? If anything, it shows how embarrsingly under-represented Rugby League is in SEQ where it is supposed to be the number 1 code. If anything, it tells me we should ADD more teams in SEQ to match the popularity of the game in SEQ. If anyone is going to suffer from the competition then let it be the other codes - time for Rugby League to show who is number 1.

As long as it doesn't take anything away from the Broncos, and to the now crowd struggling titans, then i agree.

 

[Goddo]

I'm calling cheat, might sound juvenile but i'm calling it.

I think there is only one reason there is so many QLD bids and that is to sure up at least one spot (out of the two likely spots) for the state of QLD. Which overall will hurt the game.

lol you are a fruit loop.

Queenslands bids are a conspiracy to kill off the Bears? :lol:

No, it is simply a reflection of supply and demand in Queensland. WE MUST EXPAND THERE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Queensland can support around 5 clubs, 4 in SE Qld and the Cowboys.

The other areas where we need more clubs are Perth and New Zealand. There is no need for the Bears in the wider scheme of the game. The IC will see this.

We will get a Qld bid and Perth in 2014 - wait one more year for the more desirable locations. The NRL won't rush expansion in 2013 and bring in the Bears.

 

[Quidgybo]

Searle said the earliest a new team would be added to the competition would be 2017.

I'm sorry but I don't see anywhere in that article where Searle is directly quoted as saying there will not or should not be any expansion until 2017. I see only two reporters' (Brent Read and Peter Kogoy) interpretation of something Searle said in the sentence above. From the direct quotes that actually are attributed to Searle, I gather he meant there should be no expansion in SE Queensland until 2017, not a hold on expansion altogether. He seems to be talking about expansion in so far as it would affect the existing SE Queensland teams and how he thinks future expansion should be handled in this region. In relation to his comments on not expanding where it would cut into the market supporting an existing team, I generally agree with him, if not necessarily with his choice of word. "Temple" indeed. :lol:

Leigh

 

[Bulldog Force]

lol.

That is all.

 

[applesauce]

Just watched FSN and Rusty has come out and said the same thing with the addition of something along the lines of "If you have a business franchise and 14 of the 16 franchises don't make a profit do you expand?".

If the Brisbane team or a Perth team by themselves brings in an extra $40mill that is $2.2mill/club extra (including the 2 new expansion teams).

Sometimes you need to invest/take calculated risk/expand in order to become even more successful. Done right and for the correct price there is no weakness or stupidity in expanding the game while other clubs are struggling.

It is the new clubs in the right areas that grow the market, exposure and bring more $$ into the game that can help out some of the older clubs who are now suffering from a National competition rather than the NSWRL cup of old.

Rusty and Searle are just looking after their own interests instead of the games, something which has hurt the potential of RL in Australia for far too long.

 

[BDGS]

lol you are a fruit loop.

Queenslands bids are a conspiracy to kill off the Bears? :lol:

No, it is simply a reflection of supply and demand in Queensland. WE MUST EXPAND THERE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Queensland can support around 5 clubs, 4 in SE Qld and the Cowboys.

The other areas where we need more clubs are Perth and New Zealand. There is no need for the Bears in the wider scheme of the game. The IC will see this.

We will get a Qld bid and Perth in 2014 - wait one more year for the more desirable locations. The NRL won't rush expansion in 2013 and bring in the Bears.

When did i say that?

I haven't said that, infact the Bears aren't my first choice for expansion after-all. You would know that if you paid attention instead of jumping to hair brained conclusions.

Listen here you little sh*t, start taking what i say for what it is and stop implying other things.

I said, the amount of Qld bids is to most likely make sure that one position goes to Queensland, i didn't even mention the Bears.

But after-all everything that relates to expansion, the anti-bear posters bring up the bears anyway. My god, you are dumber then i thought you were. What a dipsh*t.

I'm also in favour of Queensland, having more teams. Most posters that pay attention know this.