Central Coast Bears - Stand Aside

[Beowulf]

Annesley might make a speech about the Bears in the NSW state parliament when he resigns from the NRL and becomes a State MP in 6 weeks time..

Because Annnesley is leaving he can be a bit more open than David Gallop can be. Those two are at the same meetings with the Bears every time. John Brady is there often also as is the CFO. They are all on the same page.

I expect David Gallop to say nothing re this as he doesn't want to dishearten other bidders, but there's still 1 slot open, so go for it!

 

[BuffaloRules]

Getting Gallop on side wont do any bid much good...

The Independant Commissioners will decide who gets in, but unfortunately no one knows who they are at the moment...

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The hate is strong in some of these blind dweebs.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

The knights are in huge debt hence the $100m price tag. The CCBears have no physical team and have equity. No debt and no worries. Plus it's community owned and has revenue streams from many different avenues. Unfair to compare the knights buy out and the ccbears buy out.

 

[skeepe]

I note Annesley didn't even consider Ipswich worthy of mention or comparison with the Reds and CQLD behind the Bears. So man up all you Bear-haters and congratulate the Bears on a great job. The focus now switches to Perth v CQLD for licence 18.

Actually, if you'd read it properly you'll notice that there are no quotes from Annesley at all. Just what someone associated with the Bears bid said that he said.

Funny how hearsay is taken as absolute gospel at times, and treated with utter contempt at others.

 

[skeepe]

The knights are in huge debt hence the $100m price tag. The CCBears have no physical team and have equity. No debt and no worries. Plus it's community owned and has revenue streams from many different avenues. Unfair to compare the knights buy out and the ccbears buy out.

Why?

From the known facts, the Knights are only $3 million in debt. Now, that's a f**king lot of money, but not really when we're talking about the amounts at play here.

Tinkler is looking to buy the Knights, pay the debts, and guarantee a revenue stream of $10 million per year. This is $3 million per year more than they are getting now from sponsorships, if the figures in the media are to be believed.

Mortgage House are going to pay $10 million in total to own the Bears.

Even through my Knights hate I can see which is the far superior deal.

 

[BDGS]

so they are basically buyng an NRL license (if Bears get one) for $10mill? Seems cheap compared to what Tinkler is willing to pay? Buying the club for $10mill is a heck of alot different to what they originally said which was that they are sponsoring the club to the tune of $10mill. And if that includes shirt naming rights for Mortgage House (worth $1mill a year on avg in NRL) are they actually paying anything fo the CCBears club?

No, i do not think Mortgage House is buying the Bears for $10 million dollars, kind of like financial security. They are underwriting the Bears for that much, anything else Mortgage House pays is sponsorship dollar which is around $3 million (correct me if i am wrong Beowulf or Red and black Bear) and the team/club itself will be community owned with members and residents having the right to buy into the club.

That is my understanding of it.

Tinkler wants to buy the club and run it, Ken Sayer is not buying the club but is on the board.

I agree with that point. I just wish more people would be willing to accept a merger of some of the teams in Sydney which is over saturated. I would be first to sign up if the Dogs merged with another team. It would create an unbeatable super team.

Touche.

These post shows why you are an idiot. No idea where the game is at.

 

[Alex28]

Lets face it - the Bears have given away the franchise. For the sum of $10 Million - or what they could have got for 10 years major sponsorship they have given up the ownership of the licence.

The Knights will get in 2 years ($3.5 Million increase in sponsorship plus $3 Million debt payout) what the Bears will get fullstop.

No...you are right Red&BlackBear...it is a good deal. For the guy buying it. For the cost of 10 years major sponsorship he gets the ownership of the licence, all of the income from the club, access to the 5,000 members to flog his mortgage broking business to, and if he decides he doesn't want to sponsor the club he can sell that too so it will cost him nothing!

 

[adamkungl]

so they are basically buyng an NRL license (if Bears get one) for $10mill? Seems cheap compared to what Tinkler is willing to pay? Buying the club for $10mill is a heck of alot different to what they originally said which was that they are sponsoring the club to the tune of $10mill. And if that includes shirt naming rights for Mortgage House (worth $1mill a year on avg in NRL) are they actually paying anything fo the CCBears club?

Yeah, this seems like an odd step to take. Can someone elaborate on this?

 

[PB]

OK, where to start...
1. There may be an over-saturation in SE Sydney, but the central coast is a regional centre of NSW. There are 2 regional QLD teams and only 1 regional NSW team if you want to play that game.
2. Sponsorship announcements due soon from the Bears will refute that opinion in spades. They want access to the Central Coast market.
3. Hence the use of the Bear logo and history to entice corporates from the nationally huge corporate areas of Noth Sydney and Nth Ryde - combined they are larger than many capital cities.
4. Expansion offers opportunities to talent otherwise overlooked plus with the appreciation of the AUD many of the English based players are desperately scrambling for NRL Clubs. We could easily fill 18 teams now and 20 in another 7 or 8 years.
5. The NRL will expand by 2 therefore almost certainly there will be a team interstate???!
6. New Academy of Excellence to be built will attract players for the top training facilities. You obviously haven't visited Avoca, Terrigal, Shelley Beach, where all the players will live. Average property prices on the beaches are well over $1 million. And re the IC, they, in conjunction with the NRL administrators, will make all strategic decisions on the game. The two most important people to have on side are David Gallop and the CFO of the NRL.

Is the NRL's biggest threat AFL? Yes. That is surely beyond argument.

The AFL are SIGNFICANTLY ahead of the NRL in terms of expansion, nationally. Not only have they got at least two teams in every state now, they also have academies (not generic academies for multiple sports), their own AFL academies in Cairns, Darwin and other major regional centres - many traditional league territories.

So they are ahead of the game in terms of being more attractive to sponsors and they are developing more players in new/different regions protecting the quality of the game long into the future.

What does putting a new team on the Central Coast do to aid the NRL in becoming a national product and drawing new juniors?

"The Bears" may have got some commitments in principle from some sponsors, but that is so short term, the NRL needs to look at Illawarra and Newcastle, two regional cities with significantly bigger populations and their own industries and they see that in the long term, they were not sustainable without private ownership (a whole other debate) - Without private ownership, the Cowboys would be dead as well! If the NRL wants to be around in 20 years it isn't good enough to have 15,000 average crowd attendances, it needs to be 30,000. That, IMO rules the Central Coast out.

Two new teams won't see an influx of players coming back from the UK. Most players go there for one of two reasons. 1. they aren't up to NRL standard anymore or 2. they can make more coin in the uk (sometimes both). Any new team won't mean 25 players coming back form the UK! It will mean one or two players may come back who can now earn more money than they are worth without having to leave the country. In other words diminishing the quality/standard of the game.

re the IC, they, in conjunction with the NRL administrators, will make all strategic decisions on the game.

To date the NRL has made "zero" strategic decisions. Have you seen their strategic plan? I doubt it, no one has because to the best of my knowledge, it doesn't exist. Table Tennis has a strategic plan! So going forward i do not imagine David Gallop, whatever his position may be, will have some but very little say in strategic direction. This will be done in the main by the IC and expert consultant brought in to complete the plan.

I do travel to the Central Coast through my work from time to time, but i don't stop at the houses of "all the players" who live there, (so i'd love to hear about all of them!). and in the sport i work in, yes we are looking into development on the C-Coast, but it is just one of many, many dots we have on the map.

 

[Alex28]

No, i do not think Mortgage House is buying the Bears for $10 million dollars, kind of like financial security. They are underwriting the Bears for that much, anything else Mortgage House pays is sponsorship dollar which is around $3 million (correct me if i am wrong Beowulf or Red and black Bear) and the team/club itself will be community owned with members and residents having the right to buy into the club.

Read the article again:

THE Central Coast Bears have emerged as front runners to become the seventeenth NRL club - the board accepting a $10 million deal in principle with Mortgage House to underwrite the Bears' desired return to the competition in 2013 in a private ownership arrangement.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport.../story-e6frep5x-1225991360752?from=public_rss

It doesn't really matter how you word it - he is underwriting the Bears on the basis that he owns the licence. Simple.

 

[BDGS]

Read the article again:



It doesn't really matter how you word it - he is underwriting the Bears on the basis that he owns the licence. Simple.

I fail to understand how this can be a privately owned club as well as being open to the community to buy shares into the club. (which the bears have been promoting for some time now).

Unless they have given that away, there are a few things that the Bears are doing that i do not agree with however they have the best bid.

 

[adamkungl]

Beowulf? Red&Black? What's the deal with the private ownership thing?

 

[dgsfan]

Oh god lol This just gets better and better!

 

[BDGS]

Oh god lol This just gets better and better!

It does, the Central Coast NRL Bid has been labelled superior to all other bids, now seeming i have been out of action all week we are just waiting for the two that are inside the bid to tell us what is going on with it.

 

[Red Bear]

Dont really like the look of this to be honest. Is this a case of Mortgage house underwriting us, ie we have that 10 mil to fall back on, or just buying the license?

 

[Alex28]

I can't see how it can be underwriting when they now own nothing to underwrite?

It is mere wording to disguise that they have sold the licence to private ownership and that the club is now no longer in public hands.

 

[macavity]

Dont really like the look of this to be honest. Is this a case of Mortgage house underwriting us, ie we have that 10 mil to fall back on, or just buying the license?

I think it is a case of the Bears have sold something they don't have....

 

[skeepe]

Dont really like the look of this to be honest. Is this a case of Mortgage house underwriting us, ie we have that 10 mil to fall back on, or just buying the license?

Without any more information other than what was in the article, looks like the Bears ideals of a community owned club went out the window the first time someone flashed the cash.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Private ownership is in place. What Ken Sayer is doing is basically being a majority owner not out right owner as some would assume.