Central Coast Bears, 2013.

[Quidgybo]

But this requires throwing money at new non-viable clubs in the HOPE that one day they might be sustainable.

We can subsidise them until doomsday if television networks continue to value them significantly more than the so called viable alternatives. Television keeps teams sustainable in every major professional league in the world. No one pays multi million dollar salaries to sportsmen without television dollars essentially underwriting it.

Haven't we tried and failed at this enough?

We haven't failed anywhere yet. We've had several efforts killed off by the most extraordinary upheaval in the game's history, a war that caused unprecedented destruction even in the game's heartlands let alone on the frontier. Now, in better times, we have one effort in progress, well established and paying its way via TV income (again and again the networks re-iterate that a Melbourne team must be part of the comp, some of our biggest ratings have been from games involving the Storm, including our biggest Grand Final rating).

If a team costs half as much to run (ie: because they have their own sponsorships and are self-sustainable, and the NRL is not having to dip in and prop them up), then they don't need to bring as much to the TV rights.

But the difference in television income could still be of such magnitude as to outweigh the cost difference. In the simple example I used above, a team bringing $7m to the table and increasing the TV deal by $8m gives every club an increase in grant of $400k with nothing left over. A team bringing $5m to the table and increasing the TV deal by $24m could give every club an increase in grant of $1m ($18m), cover the difference in club generated revenue with a subsidy of $2m ($20m), and still leave an extra $4m for the grass roots. That'd be the financially stronger bid for the game. Even if they brought in only $3m of their own revenue (less than half the competing bid), the game overall would still be better off financially.

And that aside, an $8m increase? Surely you jest? I would contend that ANY new game per week should add at least $25-30m to the overall package, just on increased content alone.

$8m per year for a bump of $40m to the overall five year package. Contrasting against $24m per year for an increase of $120m to the overall package (in the billion dollar range). But the numbers are just plucked from the air to illustrate a point. The point is not the numbers themselves but the possible difference between them for teams in different locations. Whether the difference is enough to push one location way ahead of another remains to be seen and is the $64m dollar question.

Leigh.

 

[BuffaloRules]

This whole theory - a new region means more value to the TV rights - is crap.

You really are not the full quid are you?

 

[age.s]

I doubt any fan would throw their hand up to see their team culled for the greater good of the game, even if that was a guaranteed outcome of them being punted, nor should they!

So why are there certain posters posting nothing but reasons why CCB shouldn't be in the competition in this thread, then going on like it will be the death of the league with post after post about how it being the wrong decision? People behind this bid are simply stating the case for their team, because they will likely never get another chance to do so in the future.

It would be trolling if people posted hundreds of posts in the Sharks forum about why another Brisbane team would add more value than them and how they shouldn't be in the league because of it, and I don't see why doing it in the thread for the CC bid is any different.

The forum needs a thread (or subforum) for expansion because all of the merited discussion on where the next team(s) should be seems to happen in this thread.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Gee considering barely anyone in here is actually connected to the CCBears bid, you guys sure make alot of uneducated assumptions about the bid itself. Maybe it's time for some of you to take a break from here, pick up a book and educate yourselves alittle bit? Either that or like i've been ranting for years now, actually shoot the bid an email and get properly informed. Otherwise keep your assumptions to yourselves because alot of you are way off the mark in regards to the CCBears bid. If it's due to simply being lazy or being a born naysayer I don't know.

 

[Knightmare]

It's all good to bring in the Bombers (for instance) and get the TV money up front, but that money is going to disappear pretty quickly if hardly anyone can be bothered watching them, either at the game or on TV. I think even a traditional QRL team like Redcliffe or Wynnum-Manly would bring more to the Brisbane/ SEQ market than a manufactured entity. Those clubs have an established history and fan-base.

The Bombers have nothing but a logo, a bunch of big promises from Craig Davidson and a couple of journos blowing smoke up his arse and death-riding the Bears every second week. I am yet to hear of/ meet a single person who is (or would become) a Bombers fan if they came in.

 

[Goddo]

^ the other question over the Queensland bid is: what will the long term stable make up of NRL clubs in Queensland look like?

Most people who have discussed this on this forum think 5 is probably the right number. The argument comes with where the 2 extra licences should go - Central Queensland, Sunshine Coast, Brisbane II, Ipswich, Redcliffe?

 

[Knightmare]

I would say the CQ bid is actually the strongest, then one of the QRL teams should form a bid. The QRL has teams in its' midst with close to 100 years of history, yet none of the Qld NRL teams has a history before 1988!

 

[Goddo]

I would say the CQ bid is actually the strongest, then one of the QRL teams should form a bid. The QRL has teams in its' midst with close to 100 years of history, yet none of the Qld NRL teams has a history before 1988!

But the QRL cup teams are the king makers in the current race for a licence - every one that isn't firmly in the Broncos or Titans camp is looking at alligning itself with the Western Corridor (Ipswich) or Brisbane Bombers bids:

* Easts Tigers (Storm Currently) and Brisbane Brothers* looked at starting their own rival Ipswich bid (why Ipswich? because they see the Western Corridor as the most likely location the NRL will want)

* Ipswich Jets (Titans Currently), Souths-Logan Magpies (Raiders Currently) and Toowoomba Clydesdales* have all been involved in the Western Corridor bid, but Souths-Logan were anounced as being aligned with the Bombers bid.

* Sunshine Coast Sea Eagles (unaligned), Redcliffe Dolphins (Broncos currently) and Souths Logan Magpies (Raiders currently) are all with the Brisbane Bombers.

* Central Comets are Central Queensland (Broncos currently) aligned

The rest are very firmly in the Broncos (Norths Devils, Wynumm-Manly Seagulls) or Titans (Burleigh Bears, Tweed Heads Seagulls) camps

EDIT: I forgot about Cairns and Mackay - both Cowboys clubs.

 

[docbrown]

So Souths Logan are with both the Bombers & West Corridor...?

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The Central Coast Bears membership drive continues tomorrow @

SATURDAY 13th AUGUST
EVENT: Lake Haven Shopping Centre Membership Drive
TIME: 9am - 2pm

EVENT: Westfield Hornsby Membership Drive
TIME: 9am - 12pm

 

[Goddo]

So Souths Logan are with both the Bombers & West Corridor...?

I know its a bit confusing... they were with Ipswich, but when the Bombers launched they were mentioned as being Bombers aligned, so I don't know where they are at now.

But this politics of QRL clubs is very interesting and will be very important parts of the bids.

EDIT:

With the NRL kicking Manly and Canberra out of Queensland, some current Q Cup clubs are in serious financial trouble in the ongoing. That and some former Q Cup clubs like Toowoomba want to get back in. The competition is massively out of balance and needs more NRL feeder relationships.

Something has to fill that gap. Queensland NEEDS at least 2 more clubs to support the junior/reserve structures of the game there. This is a little discussed issue which will be part of all of the Queensland bids, and yet another reason they are front runners.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Tweed Heads Seagulls) camps

You forget that this team and League's club is owned by Norths Group. Albeit not much has been mentioned on what will happen with them should the Central Coast Bears enter the comp. But I'd be thinking that they will be the Bears foot in the QLD-Cup door. To add to the North Sydney Bears and Central Coast side...

 

[Perth Red]

It's all good to bring in the Bombers (for instance) and get the TV money up front, but that money is going to disappear pretty quickly if hardly anyone can be bothered watching them, either at the game or on TV. I think even a traditional QRL team like Redcliffe or Wynnum-Manly would bring more to the Brisbane/ SEQ market than a manufactured entity. Those clubs have an established history and fan-base.

.

This wasn't the case with Fremantle when they expanded the Perth AFL market so i see no reason why it would be in Brisbane with the NRL. There is nothing to suggest that no one will watch a 2nd Brisbane team, in fact quite the opposite when you look at Q'land TV viewing figures when a Q'land team is playing compared to no Q'land team.

 

[Goddo]

You forget that this team and League's club is owned by Norths Group. Albeit not much has been mentioned on what will happen with them should the Central Coast Bears enter the comp. But I'd be thinking that they will be the Bears foot in the QLD-Cup door. To add to the North Sydney Bears and Central Coast side...

I don't think the NRL would allow it though, regardless of the ownership structure. Manly were heavily involved in the Sunshine Coast, but they were still booted.

Just saying, its a complex weird mix that is hard to get the head around sometimes in Queensland, but what the NRL wants is a seperate Q Cup feeding Queensland teams, and an equally strong NSW Cup feeding NSW clubs, with interstate clubs playing on invitation in each.

I think there will be a lot of preasure from the QRL for the NRL to provide another licence to help fix the mess.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Why wouldn't the NRL allow it? Unlike Manly/Sunshine Coast or Canberra/Souths-Logan, this isn't an affiliation. Norths Group OWN it and therefore can do whatever they want since they not only OWN it but pour resources and finances into SeaGulls.

 

[Goddo]

It goes against what the NRL is trying to do with the QRL and NSWRL cups. It would be more likely that the Seagulls would play in the NSWRL.

 

[Beowulf]

Lets get back on track please, this is a Central Coast Bears bid page!

Spoke to Joe Hockey on the weekend who confirmed what Flo and others in the bid team have told me.....media reports are largely a smokescreen, generated by a minority of Sydney Clubs and their sympathisers at NRL headquarters who do not want the Bears in because they fear competition and that the Bears may weaken their clubs.

These anti-Bears know however that the decision will be made by the IC, not anyone on these forums, or the Clubs, or the NRL sub-Gallop, so the intention of these media pieces is to dispirit/disillusion potential corporate supporters and thus weaken the bid. Ignorance = fear, in other words.

Unfortunately, its not working! More good ownership & sponsorship news in coming weeks....

Its the Bears intention to alleviate any fears Manly (& possibly the Roosters) may have by proving they will add value to these clubs and the NRL, not diminish them. Once these Clubs/NRL and TV Execs (yes, TV) see their value rising with the Bears back, opposition will vanish as they are a long term zero risk strategy, which cannot be said of any other contender.

As to how they will be able to do this, I was privy to a briefing last week and its impressive...hope one day the bid document is released publicly so I can share the love!

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The NEXT Central Coast Bears membership drives are on @

SUNDAY 28th AUGUST
EVENT: Westfield Tuggerah Membership Drive
TIME: 10am - 3pm

EVENT: Westfield Chatswood Membership Drive
TIME: 10am - 3pm

 

[Rockin Ronny]

Its the Bears intention to alleviate any fears Manly (& possibly the Roosters) may have by proving they will add value to these clubs and the NRL, not diminish them. Once these Clubs/NRL and TV Execs (yes, TV) see their value rising with the Bears back, opposition will vanish as they are a long term zero risk strategy, which cannot be said of any other contender.

How ironic!

Manly used the Bears to beggar survival in 1999.
Now the Bears need to show how teh CC Bears inclusion will also benefit Manly.

One day - Manly are going to establish their own future without relying on the Bears.

Maybe the CC Bears can use some of their excess funds to upgrade Brokevale?

 

[Beowulf]

How ironic!

Manly used the Bears to beggar survival in 1999.
Now the Bears need to show how teh CC Bears inclusion will also benefit Manly.

One day - Manly are going to establish their own future without relying on the Bears.

Maybe the CC Bears can use some of their excess funds to upgrade Brokevale?

Agree re the irony! They needed us in 1947, 2000 (and the player pilfering in between) and will going forward.....they'll never admit it though - ego and stubborn pride!

At least Eagles fans want us back - they miss the derbies as much as we do....

Still, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger....and after having to jump through all these hoops we'll be one watertight organisation going forward.