Daily Telegraph Article Today - Gallop For Expansion

[Twizzle]

although its positive news, it still seems a long way off

 

[Twizzle]

although its positive news, it still seems a long way off

 

[thommo4pm]

At least we are now starting to talk positive instead of negative.
Gallop used to say expansion is not on the horizon.
Now he is talking about areas (of significant size) where the game can and will expand too.

 

[Perth Red]

although its positive news, it still seems a long way off

mate when you've been waiting 12 years it doesn't!

 

[Loudstrat]

All you have to do now is kill off the CC bid and convince Gallop that a 17 team comp is the way to go. Of course, it would be easier to go 18 teams..........

 

[Loudstrat]

Using this argument, perhaps we should bypass the Central Coast and expand the NRL by putting a brand new "expansion" club into Blacktown.... since it has the most populous Local Government area in NSW. Addtionally it is under some threat from GWS and the potential to connect Parramatta with Penrith must surely be the final piece in the Sydney jigsaw.

I reckon the new "Blacktown" teams membership, merchandise and crowds would also double the GWS nuff nuffs, especially since they would be in direct combat, plus the government has declared it will build a state of the art 40k stadium in the local council zone. But I don't think at this early stage it needs a "Guaran-f*cking-tee".

What I will add in all seriousness however is how surprised I am by what some on this forum regard as "expansion". The Central Coast is more "consolidation" than serious expansion. Smart consolidation would be to strategically move current Sydney clubs to area identified for consolidation, but we all have our loyalties and I can't see this being acheived in my lifetime. Actually in hindsight, I'm amazed teams ever merged at all.

Blacktown is already in Penrith's catchment. The eastern third of the LGA is Eels territory.

What makes money? People or acerage?

How will GWS threaten League in Blacktown? Should we make the Storm train in Collingwood so it kills off AFL's most supported team? You idiot!

 

[Eels Dude]

Get CC and Perth in there at the same time. Have 18 side comp with a top 8 system still.

 

[lockyrulz]

And how many people on the CC already support an existing team? Attend games? Buy their merchandise? Watch the matches on TV?

CC should be a relocated team. That is what is best for the game, not rehashing a team that when it was last in could barely scrape 6000 bums on seats.

 

[Loudstrat]

And how many people on the CC already support an existing team?

Doesn't matter. People in Newcastle, Gold Coast, Brisbane, NQ, Canberra and NZ supported other teams before the locals came in. The point is they already supported the code. And in the CC/North Shore, most supported the Bears.

Attend games? Buy their merchandise?

Enough to suggest there should be a team there fulltime.

Your comment suggest you know nothing about the area. It's like Manly in that the population is mainly commuters to work in Sydney and suburbs. They don't want to commute again on weekends, so generally stay in the area. Most residents are ex Sydneysiders who chose to sacrifice living closer to work so they cold live near the water - and there is stacks of it in the CC. For many years there was good cheap land within a short stroll of one of the many lakes up there. People moved with the idea that coming home on Friday night was like going away every weekend. I doubt there are many that would travel back to Sydney to watch footy - just like people from Manly don't.

Maybe you need to learn and think before you comment.

Watch the matches on TV?

A sh*tload more than in Perth.

CC should be a relocated team.

And should Perth be a relocated team too?

That is what is best for the game, not rehashing a team that when it was last in could barely scrape 6000 bums on seats.

Like rehashing the Gold Coast?

From 19-98 Norths averaged between 10-15k. These are in years when the codes average was a fair way below what it has been in the last few years. Granted in 1999 their 8k average was poor - but half their home games were played elsewhere as they expected Gosford to be completed early in the season, but it wasn't. The worst crowd that year was at Lang Park when Norths played NQ. Going by your logic, that stat means there was no market for a side in Brisbane, but the local side proved otherwise, as it will at Gosford.

But yes, lets abandon/ignore a ready made League area of some 600 000 people just because the postcode is wrong.

 

[smithie]

All you have to do now is kill off the CC bid and convince Gallop that a 17 team comp is the way to go. Of course, it would be easier to go 18 teams..........

No problem. Add in 2nd Brisbane team.

 

[Quidgybo]

CC would get better long term crowds than Perth and Wellington. Look at what underlines "expansion" - money. The CC would rake in money at least equal to the other two - and you don't have a long battle to get crowds from converted fans of more entrenched competitions.

Crowds don't pay the majority of the bills, television does. CC offers nothing extra to television networks when the game already has 10 other clubs within 100km. If this is a money decision, it'll be which teams improve our television contract the most, not which gets 2,000 more people at the ground than the other. I'd suggest based purely on television benefit, a fourth Queensland and a second New Zealand side would provide the biggest monetary return (which is not to say I don't support having teams on both the Central Coast and in Perth - I support both, CC thru relocation and Perth as a loss leader investment).

Leigh.

 

[Loudstrat]

A team on the CC however means an extra game per week.

That said, if you think the potential CC audience would already be current viewers - how the f*ck would a QLD team be any different?

As for going to an area where you would have to attract new viewers because of another code's dominance - just plonking a team there doesn't mean people will suddenly buy subscription. Example - put a team in Perth (something I am all for). If people adopt the code with a passion, they are most likely to be game attenders - and revel in the atmosphere, the cameraderie with fellow supporters etc - as is the Melbourne model, and was the Perth and Adelaide models last century. You won't get any more new subscriptions than the CC would drag in. Two reasons why:
1) In Perth for example - any existing League fan would already have Pay TV to watch the NRL.
2) Fans converted from other codes - say AFL - or those fans of other codes inclined to start watching the Reds would, of course, already have Pay TV subscription

Foxsports Ltd signed the big AFL deal because it had bugger all penetration in WA and SA - and by showing live AFL in those markets it got it's penetration. It's already there!

The only way your argument would work is if a club was put into an area that didn't have Pay TV, and Foxsports would use that club to open the market up. PNG is the only spot that fits that bill - and I doubt there would be many Kumuls that could afford $70 AUS per month on watching footy, American Chopper and crap movies.

No problem. Add in 2nd Brisbane team.

No probs. Tell us about the bid first........

 

[lockyrulz]

Doesn't matter. People in Newcastle, Gold Coast, Brisbane, NQ, Canberra and NZ supported other teams before the locals came in. The point is they already supported the code. And in the CC/North Shore, most supported the Bears.
Enough to suggest there should be a team there fulltime.

Of course it matters. I'm not suggesting it shouldn't have a team, I'm suggesting it should be one that is relocated from Sydney, a financial black hole.
Fix two birds with one stone.

Your comment suggest you know nothing about the area. It's like Manly in that the population is mainly commuters to work in Sydney and suburbs. They don't want to commute again on weekends, so generally stay in the area. Most residents are ex Sydneysiders who chose to sacrifice living closer to work so they cold live near the water - and there is stacks of it in the CC. For many years there was good cheap land within a short stroll of one of the many lakes up there. People moved with the idea that coming home on Friday night was like going away every weekend. I doubt there are many that would travel back to Sydney to watch footy - just like people from Manly don't.

Maybe you need to learn and think before you comment.

Your comment shows you know next to nothing about the financial problems facing Sydney league, or the importance of television to the finanacial growth fo the game. CC offers next to nothing in regards to an increase in ratings. A relocation offers offers substantially more to league than resurrecting the bears to a NRL team.

And should Perth be a relocated team too?

Relocating the sharks to Perth is a great idea. Should have happened years ago.

Like rehashing the Gold Coast?

The gold coast makes money. The gold coast entered a market not already saturated with National league clubs and added more to television rating the CC would.

From 19-98 Norths averaged between 10-15k. These are in years when the codes average was a fair way below what it has been in the last few years. Granted in 1999 their 8k average was poor - but half their home games were played elsewhere as they expected Gosford to be completed early in the season, but it wasn't. The worst crowd that year was at Lang Park when Norths played NQ. Going by your logic, that stat means there was no market for a side in Brisbane, but the local side proved otherwise, as it will at Gosford.

You pick a lang park game where the local side didn't play? I'll let you ponder how that neither follows my logic nor makes any sense whatsoever.

But yes, lets abandon/ignore a ready made League area of some 600 000 people just because the postcode is wrong.

Relocating a team there isn't abandoning the CC. Take your own advise and think before you type your usual unique brand of gibberish.

 

[Loudstrat]

Of course it matters. I'm not suggesting it shouldn't have a team, I'm suggesting it should be one that is relocated from Sydney, a financial black hole.
Fix two birds with one stone.

Financial black hole? Yeah? Tell me how Newcastle is going?, Tell me how the Raiders compete to attract big names with Manly, Easts and Canterbury? Tell me where 4 of the current Top 5 clubs are from? Tell me the Gold Coast is raking it in when a few months ago there were strong rumours of it edging close to bankruptcy.

There is a perception that all Sydney clubs are scraping the financial barrell, and all Non Sydney clubs are financially secure. Only an idiot would swallow that.

Your comment shows you know next to nothing about the financial problems facing Sydney league, or the importance of television to the finanacial growth fo the game. CC offers next to nothing in regards to an increase in ratings. A relocation offers offers substantially more to league than resurrecting the bears to a NRL team.

Bears or Cronulla - how would Cronulla relocating offer more to the game than the revenue an extra game per week bringing the dough in? A game is worth what - around $200k? You reckon Cronulla would bring the code $200k more each week if it was in Gosford than the Bears would?

And what extra ratings would a second Brisbane side bring in that the CC Bears wouldn't? Having the Broncos there doesn't make people watch pay TV?

Relocating the sharks to Perth is a great idea. Should have happened years ago.

Neither Skarks fans or Perth fans want it. Cronulla got bigger crowds in 96 and 97 than Perth did - almost double in 97. Currently they are averaging 11k at home and 15k away. Not bad for a struggling club you want to throw elsewhere.

The gold coast makes money.

The Gold Coast is struggling. Yes, it will be strong, but it's early days. But to suggest the CC Bears won't also be as strong is ridiculous. Remind me what happened to the Giants, the Seagulls and the Chargers - the other 3 GC clubs that went bust?

The gold coast entered a market not already saturated with National league clubs and added more to television rating the CC would.

How did it add more? Did it convert any fans to League? Were the people of the Gold Coast not into League?

And how is the CC saturated with clubs? As I explained, the residents of the CC spend anything up to 20 hours commuting per week, and don't travel on weekends. You make it sound like all 250k of them pile down to Kogarah Brookie or Parramatta each weekend - the traffic on the F3 is DEFINITELY Sydneysiders travellling north on weekends. There is a pool of 250k people who don't go to Sydney to watch games apart from Timmah - and add to that at least 4-5000 old Norths fans that would head north.

Give us some stats on how many people from the CC attend games in Sydney each weekend.

You pick a lang park game where the local side didn't play? I'll let you ponder how that neither follows my logic nor makes any sense whatsoever.

It was a Bears home game - you reckoned their crowds were crap and I explained why - something you struggle to comprehend.

Relocating a team there isn't abandoning the CC. Take your own advise and think before you type your usual unique brand of gibberish.

Why not relocate a team to fill the second Brisbane spot then? How would the Ipswich Sea Eagles be accepted? The locals hated the Crushers - a team born and bred in Brisbane - what chance has a relocated team got?

The point - you are so happy to throw a relocated team into the CC or Perth - if it wouldn't work in Brisbane why would it work elsewhere? Besides, the CC people have already accepted the relocated Bears, and will do so in 2013 when they return.

 

[lockyrulz]

Financial black hole? Yeah?

Yep.

Tell me how Newcastle is going?

Sod ordinary, but there aren't 8 other Newcastle teams to compete with, or 8 other Canberra teams for the Raiders to compete with. the answers for those clubs therefore lie elsewhere.

Tell me the Gold Coast is raking it in when a few months ago there were strong rumours of it edging close to bankruptcy.

Well only an idiot would swallow that

Bears or Cronulla - how would Cronulla relocating offer more to the game than the revenue an extra game per week bringing the dough in? A game is worth what - around $200k? You reckon Cronulla would bring the code $200k more each week if it was in Gosford than the Bears would?

Relocating a Sydney team means other Sydney teams will pick up the support of that team over time. I'm not suggesting this will happen instantaneously, but the game needs to look to the future.

And what extra ratings would a second Brisbane side bring in that the CC Bears wouldn't? Having the Broncos there doesn't make people watch pay TV?

I advocated a second Brisbane team when?

Neither Skarks fans or Perth fans want it.

Please, you know this categorically do you? Fine drop the sharks to the nswrl and bring in the reds.

Cronulla got bigger crowds in 96 and 97 than Perth did - almost double in 97. Currently they are averaging 11k at home and 15k away. Not bad for a struggling club you want to throw elsewhere.

Perth has the potential to get 30 or 40 k to a match and vastly increase television ratings. Might take a long time, but the potential exists. Sure as hell doesn't for a side that has existed since the 70's and can barely crack 12k to a game.

How did it add more? Did it convert any fans to League? Were the people of the Gold Coast not into League?

Probably did. For one thing is ensured more games in South East Queensland. Not a problem faced in Sydney.

The Gold Coast is struggling. Yes, it will be strong, but it's early days. But to suggest the CC Bears won't also be as strong is ridiculous. Remind me what happened to the Giants, the Seagulls and the Chargers - the other 3 GC clubs that went bust?

Again I am not suggesting the CC not have a team, they should. The opportunity should be taken to reduce the Sydney strain. Sydney should be the power house of league. With better structuring it would dwarf Queensland. Qld sucess is because it has a sensible ration of NRL to QRL teams.

It was a Bears home game - you reckoned their crowds were crap and I explained why - something you struggle to comprehend.

I don't give a f**k if it was a bears home game your analogy is moronic. All it suggests is that Brisbane cared about as much about the spastic bears as the people in Sydney who seemingly couldn't be arsed watching them either. None of that indicates as you attmepted to suggest that brisbane doesn't give a sh*t about league, which numbers to broncos games amply support.

Why not relocate a team to fill the second Brisbane spot then? How would the Ipswich Sea Eagles be accepted? The locals hated the Crushers - a team born and bred in Brisbane - what chance has a relocated team got?

Doesn't take an Einstein to fathom that the sort of antipathy you will get from Qld based supporters to a NSW team will be vastly different from Perth's. Again, I have not suggested a secodn brisbane team anyway. IF An Ipswich/Logan team is certainly progressive, but not for another 10 or 15 years when growth in the area justifies it. We wont help leagues development by making brisbane another Sydney.

The point - you are so happy to throw a relocated team into the CC or Perth

Sure am.
i

f it wouldn't work in Brisbane why would it work elsewhere?

a. that is nothing but an assumption on your behalf
b. I've already explained the uniqueness of the situation born form origin antipathy.

Besides, the CC people have already accepted the relocated Bears, and will do so in 2013 when they return.

Yay, another NSW team destined for crowds averaging 15k, and giving sfa to the tV rights deal and a continued struggling market in Sydney that just waits around for clubs to die.

Brilliant plan!

 

[anjado]

Next two expansion teams should be Perth and the Central Coast.

Perth already has a decent junior base better then Melbourne's, Being 3 hours behind Sydney is also an advantage when it comes to TV. I think Perth should be brought in and stuck with they should be a success.

Central Coast whilst picking another NSW might be seen by some as overkill and not proper expansion. They really should never have been kicked out of the comp in the first place. North Sydney can be regained they should play 2-3 games at North Sydney oval also.

Both teams have strong enough junior bases whilst Brisbane does also i think there may be too much of a divide between the QRL clubs at the moment but it should be right by the next expansion.

After the next two teams within 5-7 years after i would expect to see Another Brisbane side and maybe Wellington to come in.

Then 10 years plus it would be PNG, Central Queensland or Sunshine Coast, Adelaide.

Before admitting these teams i would allow them to compete in the Toyota Cup under 20's competition. Especially PNG and Wellington and then once they are over 20 allow each side in the NRL to have 2-3 per team in there squads but only on loan until these teams are up and running.

I think especially with PNG they need an under 20's first to prove if it is safe to send a team up there to play. I think if it all goes well it will put Rugby League in a strong position for years to come. One day 24 teams for 24 rounds of the season everyone gets one bye and don't change the draw just switch the home and away's.

 

[Quidgybo]

A team on the CC however means an extra game per week.

That said, if you think the potential CC audience would already be current viewers - how the f*ck would a QLD team be any different?

More games per week involving a Queensland team equals more opportunity to maximise ratings in Rugby League's second biggest market. It's why Nine wanted two matches on Friday nights - so the network could show a match involving a Queensland team into Queensland. More Queensland teams means more likelihood that one of those teams will be going well and playing another team that is also going well - ie. better guarantee that there'll be attractive match each week to maximise ratings in Queensland. Maximised ratings equals more money from television.

Same argument applies for second New Zealand team. More matches involving a New Zealand team equals more opportunity to maximise ratings in Rugby League's third biggest market. If the Warriors are having a bad season (as they normally are) then there's a chance that the other team will be playing better - ie. better guarantee that there'll be an attractive match involving a local team each week to maximise ratings in New Zealand. Again, maximised ratings equals more money from television. At the moment all our ratings eggs are in one basket in New Zealand.

As you rightly point out it's all about money and television pays the money. An 11th team in the Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong corridor isn't going to do anything in itself to make the game more attractive to the television networks. We already have saturation in that region - ie. there's already always an attractive match to maximise ratings in NSW. But the Central Coast deserves a team, I have no argument there. I just don't think the television return justifies an expansion license. It should come out of the existing pool of 10 licenses already allocated to the Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong corridor.

Leigh.

 

[Loudstrat]

Yep.

Financial black hole? So all clubs are making losses? Are you that bloody stupid????

Sod ordinary, but there aren't 8 other Newcastle teams to compete with, or 8 other Canberra teams for the Raiders to compete with. the answers for those clubs therefore lie elsewhere.

Newcastle or Canberra are not in a city of 4.2 million either. Do the maths - the average fan base for each Sydney club is twice that of Newcastle and Canberra. I know these simple things confuse you.......

Well only an idiot would swallow that

Why? Disprove it!

Relocating a Sydney team means other Sydney teams will pick up the support of that team over time. I'm not suggesting this will happen instantaneously, but the game needs to look to the future.

And the same applies to fans in the CC adopting the Bears as their own over time. In fact more so. The North Shore is basically lost to League.

I advocated a second Brisbane team when?

Never to my knowledge. I used it as an example - you seem to think everywhere would reapo rewards for Pay Tv except the CC.

Please, you know this categorically do you?

I'd bank my house on it. Do a survey and find out.

Fine drop the sharks to the nswrl and bring in the reds.

Why? What is the dire need to drop the Sharks?

Perth has the potential to get 30 or 40 k to a match and vastly increase television ratings. Might take a long time, but the potential exists. Sure as hell doesn't for a side that has existed since the 70's and can barely crack 12k to a game.

You are f*cking dreaming. If Perth would do that, Melbourne should be getting 100k to a match!

You reckon Perth would outdraw the Broncos, or at least match their average home crowd?

Probably did.

Probably - meaning you have nfi what happened. Here's the story. In 1988 Gold Coast was a huge League area funded by a hugely sucessful Leagues club - Seagulls at Tweed Heads. When QLD introduced pokies - Seagulls came back to earth. The area however was already League mad, and besides that was pre Pay TV.

For one thing is ensured more games in South East Queensland. Not a problem faced in Sydney.

And more teams don't equal more TV audiences? You idiot - SEQ kill it's own teams. You bleat about Sydney clubs dying (two died in the last 30 years). How come 4 of 6 SEQ clubs died in the last 10?

Again I am not suggesting the CC not have a team, they should. The opportunity should be taken to reduce the Sydney strain. Sydney should be the power house of league. With better structuring it would dwarf Queensland. Qld sucess is because it has a sensible ration of NRL to QRL teams.

What Sydney strain? 4 of the top 5 sides are from Sydney.

I don't give a f**k if it was a bears home game your analogy is moronic. All it suggests is that Brisbane cared about as much about the spastic bears as the people in Sydney who seemingly couldn't be arsed watching them either.

Dickhead - when was the last Bears game to get 4k at NSO?

None of that indicates as you attmepted to suggest that brisbane doesn't give a sh*t about league, which numbers to broncos games amply support.

No I didn't - merely replying to your stupid rant that Norths struggled to get 6k at home, when the facts suggest something hugely different.

Doesn't take an Einstein to fathom that the sort of antipathy you will get from Qld based supporters to a NSW team will be vastly different from Perth's.

Yeah? How so? WA is probably Australia's most parochial state you twit!

Again, I have not suggested a secodn brisbane team anyway. IF An Ipswich/Logan team is certainly progressive, but not for another 10 or 15 years when growth in the area justifies it. We wont help leagues development by making brisbane another Sydney.

You do realise that Sydneysiders are twice as likely to attend an NRL game as Brisbaneites, don't you.

Sure am.
i
a. that is nothing but an assumption on your behalf

You just said a relocated team wouldn't work in Brisbane!!!!!!!!!!

b. I've already explained the uniqueness of the situation born form origin antipathy.

Oh, now it wouldn't work again. FFS!!!!!!

Yay, another NSW team destined for crowds averaging 15k,

Not a bad figure. That's an extra 390000 fans through the gate per annum. And that's a bad thing?

Anyway, what is it? Average of 15k or 6k? Make up your mind dickhead! :lol:

and giving sfa to the tV rights deal

And extra 26 games is sfa?

and a continued struggling market in Sydney that just waits around for clubs to die.

Keep waiting sunshine - you'll be an old man before that happens. Last time 2 Sydney teams met in a semi final it outdrew 2 Origins. 4 of the top 5 teams are from Sydney.

Brilliant plan!

Thank you.

 

[Loudstrat]

More games per week involving a Queensland team equals more opportunity to maximise ratings in Rugby League's second biggest market. It's why Nine wanted two matches on Friday nights - so the network could show a match involving a Queensland team into Queensland. More Queensland teams means more likelihood that one of those teams will be going well and playing another team that is also going well - ie. better guarantee that there'll be attractive match each week to maximise ratings in Queensland. Maximised ratings equals more money from television.

Same argument applies for second New Zealand team. More matches involving a New Zealand team equals more opportunity to maximise ratings in Rugby League's third biggest market. If the Warriors are having a bad season (as they normally are) then there's a chance that the other team will be playing better - ie. better guarantee that there'll be an attractive match involving a local team each week to maximise ratings in New Zealand. Again, maximised ratings equals more money from television. At the moment all our ratings eggs are in one basket in New Zealand.

As you rightly point out it's all about money and television pays the money. An 11th team in the Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong corridor isn't going to do anything in itself to make the game more attractive to the television networks. We already have saturation in that region - ie. there's already always an attractive match to maximise ratings in NSW. But the Central Coast deserves a team, I have no argument there. I just don't think the television return justifies an expansion license. It should come out of the existing pool of 10 licenses already allocated to the Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongo'sng corridor.

Leigh.

As I have said ad nauseum - what do you reckon 26 extra games is worth per annum? Even on the current devalued income, that's an extra 12.5%. We could have that now.

And where are the SEQ or NZ bids? There won't be another SEQ side while the Broncos wield their power and influence. We could have the extra revinue now (well - for 2013). It would be 2017 at the earliest before other teams were added if they started now.

Anyway, you imply QLDers won'yt watch games without a QLD side - untrue. C9 do it's Friday Night coverage so it can maximise raings in each state by showing the home state's side earlier. Yet on Sunday night fta and Saturday QLDers still watch in droves. There would be no extra Pay TV for any new side.

It's funny how you reckon NSW is dying, yet it is the one place where TV viewership is at it's maximum......

 

[NRLMad]

Crowds don't pay the majority of the bills, television does. CC offers nothing extra to television networks when the game already has 10 other clubs within 100km. If this is a money decision, it'll be which teams improve our television contract the most, not which gets 2,000 more people at the ground than the other. I'd suggest based purely on television benefit, a fourth Queensland and a second New Zealand side would provide the biggest monetary return (which is not to say I don't support having teams on both the Central Coast and in Perth - I support both, CC thru relocation and Perth as a loss leader investment).Leigh.

Relocation is quite simply not going to happen. Which team would you relocate? It's a stupid suggestion. We need new teams in both Perth & North Sydney-CC.

North Sydney would need to get 2-3 home games. This pretty much locks in huge corporate/s from Sydney's other large CBD area. The merge between two bitter enemies (North Sydney & Manly) was never going to work on the CC.