Central Coast Bears, 2013.

[Red&BlackBear]

Unfortuantely, it still adds nothing to the TV rights, so it should be overlooked.

Yes it does, it's an extra game. An extra club which HAS brought in new sponsors to the game. It'll bring back fans to the game both via. TV (Foxtel) and put bums on seats.

Plus there is no existing team in the region. It adds alot of value to the game. While a new team in an area which already has an existing team, which is successful BTW, will only drain that existing support. If it didn't then people who hate the Broncos would go for the Titans... yet the Titans crowds are dropping. Meaning people that don't go for the Broncos, Titans or an existing NRL club already must follow another sport altogether.

And if the Titans (whom are new) or the Broncos (whom are successful) can't convert those fans, then what makes you think another Brisbane team will? History has told us what happens when you put too many eggs in the South Qld basket. They crack.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The next Central Coast Bears membership drive is on tomorrow @

SATURDAY 7th MAY
EVENT: North Sydney Bears vs. Manly Sea Eagles
TIME & VENUE: From 3pm @ North Sydney Oval

 

[Goddo]

bla bla bla... you could plonk a team in Calcutta and Naru and it would be an "extra game"...

 

[Red&BlackBear]

bla bla bla... you could plonk a team in Calcutta and Naru and it would be an "extra game"...

Well Calcutta and Naru don't have corporate support, don't have sponsors, don't have community groundwork and backing, don't have equity, don't have a brand, don't have memberships, don't have a financial and business plan, don't have supporters and fans and don't have an empty stadium waiting for them or land acquired for a HQ/Sports Center...to help establish the extra club for the extra game:sarcasm:

But i'm sure all of that is meaningless to you. Call your own club and ask them how they would be running if they had none of those things either........ but I'm sure in your LALA land, TV rights can single handedly keep a club afloat indefinitely... memberships? corporate support? community support? equity? and real fans? who needs that..

 

[Beowulf]

Unfortuantely, it still adds nothing to the TV rights, so it should be overlooked.

By reconnecting with old Bear fans/sympathisers in northern Sydney and across Australia (and NZ) it does add to TV rights. Its the amount of increase that can be debated, however the opinion of the Bears brigade is that all the other pluses make the Bears the obvious choice.

The simple facts are the NRL need to expand in 2013 or at worst 2014 to max a TV deal. They will only go to franchises that can demonstrate a business model/fan base the NRL are confident will be there in 50 years+++. The Central Coast is part of the NRL's strategic vision, as is Perth, SEQ and possibly CQLD and NZ and PNG. So if they have the most advanced bid of the strategic targets, they're in.

Billy Moore, who is championing both Bears & Brisbane expansion, suggests Bears in 2013 and a Brisbane side in 2014. For other bids that aren't as advanced as the Bears, they will need an answer on expansion in the next few months to even contemplate a fast tracked 2013 entry. The Bears have most structures in place and are just awaiting a green light for staff recruitment, many of whom have already been sussed out. If the NRL stall a decision till even Sept or GF day, the Bears will still be able to make 2013. WA is the only other area capable of making a 2013 kickoff, given they like the Bears can answer most of the NRL's questions....

 

[Beowulf]

Unfortuantely, it still adds nothing to the TV rights, so it should be overlooked.

That's an extremely short term view considering the NRL has to plan where they think teams will thrive for the next 50 years based on demographic analysis. The NRL would know (and I'm sure the Bears bid keeps telling them) the Central Coast is one of the fastest growing regions of the State with a huge % of young families. Its population is booming, and these kids are growing up with no NRL team (as the nearest NRL Oval is well over an hour away in off-peak traffic) - just a soccer team.

The Bears have targetted the kids on the Coast deliberately, so family packages will be a big seller at Bluetongue. Additionally, it gives the NRL the option of sellout crowds at 4.30 or 5.30 or 6.30 timeslots on Saturday nts due to the Coast being so full of young families.

North of the Coast is secure - Newcastle will be one of the strongest teams in the comp within 2 years.

South, the Bears have no impact on Manly due to the fact the buffer zone, northern Sydney, is part of the NSDRL zone and RL fans in general there want the Bears back or are disinterested in league. The corporate pool in northern Sydney is enormous - 3rd largest commercial zone in Australia, so it can accommodate Manly & Bears. Trouble is, Manly have had unfettered access to this region for 10 years and still can't secure sponsors, whereas it took the Bears all of 3 months to fill the books with more on the waiting list.

So if you were a commercial organisation, which the NRL is, would you deny a clearly succesful product that is ripe for introduction, when it has no dilution effects on your other products??!!!! Of course not, you rush it in ASAP......2013!

 

[adamkungl]

imo the TV advantage of Brisbane over CC is low to medium at best.

Also, there are many other things you could do to add or detract value to the TV deal. Expansion isn't the only influence. Bring back the Bears

 

[Perth Red]

TV Deal: Perth > Brisbane >>> CC
Quality of bid so far: Bears >> Reds >>>>>>> Brisbane

Will be interesting to see what the IC's priority is.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

TV Deal: Perth > Brisbane >>> CC
.

I think that is a misconception. Broncos rate very well due to their success over a sustained period of time. Gold Coast Titans and NQ Cowboys rate as well as a Dragons, Bulldogs and Rabbitohs. Also having the advantage of playing every other Friday night also helps the Broncos. Their numbers and crowds are due to their brand more so then being a qld team, otherwise Titans and Cowboys wouldn't be far behind them. I think what Brisbane provides or CC provides are going to be similar. Community support and financial viability become important, otherwise all the money a new franchise makes via tv rights will just straight into propping them up and there is little profit made. Many things have to be taken into considerstion. I don't think it's as simple as this dot on a map will make this much...

 

[adamkungl]

I would think more people in Australia are more interested in watching the 100+ year old Bears than soulless Brisbane2 ring ins.

Apparently come finals time QLD will get behind another QLD team in bigger numbers...big whoop. I think the difference between Brisbane and CC TV-wise has been massively overstated.

 

[clarency]

I would think more people in Australia are more interested in watching the 100+ year old Bears than soulless Brisbane2 ring ins.

Apparently come finals time QLD will get behind another QLD team in bigger numbers...big whoop. I think the difference between Brisbane and CC TV-wise has been massively overstated.

You mean Sydney...

 

[Beowulf]

You mean Sydney...

No, Australia - Bear memberships are coming in from not just NSW but across Australia & NZ, but mainly QLD....the advantage of a much-loved brand by almost all followers of the game, and multi-generational supporters.

Contrast that with other bids and you have a reason why there is minimal TV value difference btw the bids.

 

[Perth Red]

TBF I doubt most people under 30 would be nostalgic for the Bears return. I don't have the stats re how Q'land teams rate but it seems fairly consistent from most posters that a game involving a Q'land team rates much higher in Q'land than 2 NSW teams. It could be a furphy I agree as I haven't seen any statistical evidence one way or another.

 

[CC_Roosters]

TV Deal: Perth > Brisbane >>> CC
Quality of bid so far: Bears >> Reds >>>>>>> Brisbane

Will be interesting to see what the IC's priority is.

More like Bears>>>>Daylight>>Perth>>>Qld bids

 

[Scarves]

All this talk about expansion. At the moment we can't even find enough good halfbacks to fill the important position across all 16 current clubs. That little picture is concerning. Further concerns surround the spread of talent spreading thinner because of expansion.

What history has shown me is that Rugby League has had two zenith type eras... the early nineties and today. Both times we've had 16 teams. Some may say this is a coincidence. Best of luck to those some.

TV doesn't only want extra games... that isn't the only priority. Quality is a priority, maintaining quality is paramount. TV is taking massive notice of league due to increased ratings which are influenced by the quality of our game. Personally I'd hesitate to stuff around with the standard of our quality, especially when the game doesn't have much in the bankand even more especially when our administration is in a state of flux.

I think we can get a fantastic TV deal without expansion when we have sorted ourselves out, right now I think expansion in 2013 is too early and our game will still be settling into the IC era. Before we start on expansion, I'd like to see what the TV deal and IC format is. I don't want a situation where we again pander to these TV companies which continually suck up to AFL. When the TV deal is on the table, then we can start discussing windows for expansion and target areas, instead of putting the horse before the cart.

 

[clarency]

No, Australia - Bear memberships are coming in from not just NSW but across Australia & NZ, but mainly QLD....the advantage of a much-loved brand by almost all followers of the game, and multi-generational supporters.

Contrast that with other bids and you have a reason why there is minimal TV value difference btw the bids.

It's a massive exaggeration to claim the majority of Australia are all supporting the Bears based purely on the spread of memberships. Every single one of your 6k members could be based in QLD and it still would not support your belief that the majority of QLD'ers prefer the Bears over their own side.

 

[adamkungl]

All this talk about expansion. At the moment we can't even find enough good halfbacks to fill the important position across all 16 current clubs. That little picture is concerning. Further concerns surround the spread of talent spreading thinner because of expansion.

What history has shown me is that Rugby League has had two zenith type eras... the early nineties and today. Both times we've had 16 teams. Some may say this is a coincidence. Best of luck to those some.

TV doesn't only want extra games... that isn't the only priority. Quality is a priority, maintaining quality is paramount. TV is taking massive notice of league due to increased ratings which are influenced by the quality of our game. Personally I'd hesitate to stuff around with the standard of our quality, especially when the game doesn't have much in the bankand even more especially when our administration is in a state of flux.

I think we can get a fantastic TV deal without expansion when we have sorted ourselves out, right now I think expansion in 2013 is too early and our game will still be settling into the IC era. Before we start on expansion, I'd like to see what the TV deal and IC format is. I don't want a situation where we again pander to these TV companies which continually suck up to AFL. When the TV deal is on the table, then we can start discussing windows for expansion and target areas, instead of putting the horse before the cart.

TV deal aside, expansion puts more money in the game so we can keep players from going to union, AFL and Super League.

2 more teams means $9million more money available for player wages in the comp. With the right recruitment choices (ie. focusing on overseas) 2 new teams should have a minimal effect on talent dilution.

A Perth team means we return to true national competition status, increases the reach and value of potential sponsorships.

 

[bobmar28]

By reconnecting with old Bear fans/sympathisers in northern Sydney and across Australia (and NZ) it does add to TV rights. Its the amount of increase that can be debated, however the opinion of the Bears brigade is that all the other pluses make the Bears the obvious choice.

The simple facts are the NRL need to expand in 2013 or at worst 2014 to max a TV deal. They will only go to franchises that can demonstrate a business model/fan base the NRL are confident will be there in 50 years+++. The Central Coast is part of the NRL's strategic vision, as is Perth, SEQ and possibly CQLD and NZ and PNG. So if they have the most advanced bid of the strategic targets, they're in.

Billy Moore, who is championing both Bears & Brisbane expansion, suggests Bears in 2013 and a Brisbane side in 2014. For other bids that aren't as advanced as the Bears, they will need an answer on expansion in the next few months to even contemplate a fast tracked 2013 entry. The Bears have most structures in place and are just awaiting a green light for staff recruitment, many of whom have already been sussed out. If the NRL stall a decision till even Sept or GF day, the Bears will still be able to make 2013. WA is the only other area capable of making a 2013 kickoff, given they like the Bears can answer most of the NRL's questions....

How would you know that? It's almost 2 years from now.

 

[bobmar28]

imo the TV advantage of Brisbane over CC is low to medium at best.

Also, there are many other things you could do to add or detract value to the TV deal. Expansion isn't the only influence. Bring back the Bears

Of course you would say that. Why don't we (the IC) ask the networks where a team should go?

 

[Beowulf]

It's a massive exaggeration to claim the majority of Australia are all supporting the Bears based purely on the spread of memberships. Every single one of your 6k members could be based in QLD and it still would not support your belief that the majority of QLD'ers prefer the Bears over their own side.

All I mean is that as the majority of Bear memberships from outside NSW are coming from QLD, it shows we have more of a national profile particularly in RL heartland than other bidders, nothing more. it's only natural given the amount of QLDers who played for the Bears in the late 80's and 90's in particular, and the good relations built up through this mutually successful recruiting process. Its a massive reason the Bears rates so well during this period and is a big positive re TV regotiations. Surely that can't be denied?!