Expansion fee

[The Great Dane]

Isn't the license fee in the A League around 10 million? hence why they will happily let any team come into that competition... western united?

In the A-league they negotiate their fee as part of the biding process, which is a bad way to do it because it becomes a bit of a bidding war where the teams that can afford to offer the biggest licensing fee have a massive advantage even if their actual bid is crap.

I'm pretty sure that last time Macarthur paid somewhere between $10-15mil and Western United paid about $20mil, but there were other bid teams throwing around some really ludicrous numbers like in excess of $25mil. Which just goes to show you that the numbers being thrown around in the NRL are pretty reasonable.

Obviously it's a whole other ball game in America, but the NBA is looking to get US$2.5 Billion per-club next time they expand, which would be the largest licensing fee in the history of professional sport.

 

[The Great Dane]

Why would you pay $5mill for a business that’s going to lose money every year? Good luck with that sale!

Ask the people that bought A-league or NBL licenses, or ask the guys that bought NHL, NBA, of NFL licenses about 50 years ago, most of them either went broke or are now billionaires.

Depends, if you are advocating for a genuine franchise model for the nrl then I’d agree. That would also mean franchises could be bought and sold and moved at the whim of the owners.
As it is we don’t have that, we have a partnered business model. Now not many businesses expand their operations without investing extra start up cash and having allowance for losses in first phase of start up. Have we learnt nothing from 1995 and the Titans? Yes you can have the Aleague model where you are on your own, sink or swim. Or the afl model that invests long term in growing its footprint strategically.

I don't know of any league in the world where the owners have the right to sell their license/team or relocate without the approval of the league and/or ownership group. There're many a story of owners that have agreed to a sale or relocation that have been shot down by the league/ownership group for whatever reason.

Also the AFL seeks licensing fees when they expand.

 

[Diesel]

Money shouldn’t be going to the clubs, they get enough of a handout as it is thanks to Grant. Money should be going to grassroots if anything

 

[Perth Red]

Ask the people that bought A-league or NBL licenses, or ask the guys that bought NHL, NBA, of NFL licenses about 50 years ago, most of them either went broke or are now billionaires.

I don't know of any league in the world where the owners have the right to sell their license/team or relocate without the approval of the league and/or ownership group. There're many a story of owners that have agreed to a sale or relocation that have been shot down by the league/ownership group for whatever reason.

Also the AFL seeks licensing fees when they expand.

happens in nfl regularly, I haven’t heard of the nfl blocking a sale? Afl hasn’t done for last two expansion teams. I like their system they set up in WA though where the state league owns the licenses and the two clubs pay An annual fee to use them to be in the afl. Puts around $8mill a year back into local grassroots.
Interesting one in three English soccer clubs are now owned by overseas owners, allegedly as an offshore tax dodge for rich people!

 

[Perth Red]

Money shouldn’t be going to the clubs, they get enough of a handout as it is thanks to Grant. Money should be going to grassroots if anything

yeh you have to laugh when they say they should be compensated, errr half your revenue comes from a handout from the nrl every year lol

 

[The Great Dane]

happens in nfl regularly, I haven’t heard of the nfl blocking a sale?

The NFL ownership group famously blocked Donald Trump from buying multiple franchises in the 80s, with then Commissioner Pete Rozelle famously telling him “Mr. Trump, as long as I or my heirs are involved in the NFL, you will never be a franchise owner in the league.”.
That lead Trump to buy a USFL franchise, the New Jersey Generals, and promptly run the league into the ground in what many insiders speculate was a deliberate attempt to force a merger between the two leagues. The USFL is a whole other story though.

There're other good examples of them blocking sales as well, but you'd have to dig for them because I don't know enough about it.

They're also constantly blocking clubs in big markets from relocating, for example they blocked New England from moving to St. Louis and Seattle from moving to Anaheim in the 90s, but there're a ton of other examples.
I'm pretty sure that the last time was only a few years ago, when they blocked the Raiders from going back to LA and instead let them go to Las Vegas, but I could be wrong about that one.

They're even cases where the league has manipulated negotiations to try and force a club to relocate or stay put when they haven't had the power to actually force to do it for whatever reason.
Like the time they undermined Robert Krafts' attempt to move over the boarder from Massachusetts to Connecticut, despite the fact that technically he had every right to do so because Connecticut was in his market (or something like that). Or the stuff that Al Davis tried to sue the NFL over in the 90s (you've gotta be carful believing the Al Davis stuff though, he was a little bit insane).

My favourite examples come from the NHL though: did anybody ever tell you about the time the owners of the Edmonton Oilers and Toronto Maple Leafs almost swapped markets? I'm not kidding that almost happened.

Afl hasn’t done for last two expansion teams. I like their system they set up in WA though where the state league owns the licenses and the two clubs pay An annual fee to use them to be in the afl. Puts around $8mill a year back into local grassroots.
Interesting one in three English soccer clubs are now owned by overseas owners, allegedly as an offshore tax dodge for rich people!

Only because they were owned by the AFL. That'd be like asking the AFL to pay it's self a licensing fee, and I'm not really sure how that would work.

And technically if/when those clubs are sold that will kind of be the equivalent of their licensing fee in a way, won't it?

 

[Perth Red]

Only because they were owned by the AFL. That'd be like asking the AFL to pay it's self a licensing fee, and I'm not really sure how that would work.

And technically if/when those clubs are sold that will kind of be the equivalent of their licensing fee in a way, won't it?

I actually think that’s a better model. Sure it could be argued there is conflict of interest and potential bias but for new areas where it’s not an established second tier club getting the expansion license, then the nrl start up the club and retain ownership for first 5 years to ensure club is well run and has investment needed to build a solid foundation, then put it up for sale and recoup the investment plus a profit. It would be a much less risky way of expanding the game Into new areas and attract stronger external investors into the game if they can see a return on their investments.

 

[The Great Dane]

I actually think that’s a better model. Sure it could be argued there is conflict of interest and potential bias but for new areas where it’s not an established second tier club getting the expansion license, then the nrl start up the club and retain ownership for first 5 years to ensure club is well run and has investment needed to build a solid foundation, then put it up for sale and recoup the investment plus a profit. It would be a much less risky way of expanding the game Into new areas and attract stronger external investors into the game if they can see a return on their investments.

Nothing wrong with it as a method of expansion, but I think it's a horses for courses thing.

I can see it being a great way of starting up a club in a place like Adelaide, where there seems to be little interest in bidding, but in other places it probably wouldn't be a great fit.

 

[MugaB]

I actually think that’s a better model. Sure it could be argued there is conflict of interest and potential bias but for new areas where it’s not an established second tier club getting the expansion license, then the nrl start up the club and retain ownership for first 5 years to ensure club is well run and has investment needed to build a solid foundation, then put it up for sale and recoup the investment plus a profit. It would be a much less risky way of expanding the game Into new areas and attract stronger external investors into the game if they can see a return on their investments.

Only issue i see is when the gameplay and refs calls get involved, then the winning streak, all positive things but unfortunately when the league is owning them OF COURSE THEY WIN.
nah im sure when the league had Knights and Titans, they both weren't im good spots off and on field so ir wouldn't matter..

I don't think its a sound idea for NRL to be expanding into an area without an actual local bid, even if the bid needs help or such what happens when they step aside? I feel that they need to look at a 3rd SEQ team, which is possible with the current bids, then Perth and NZ2 to me preferably near Auckland as a nearby rival to run a game out of mt.smart every week (ala the suncorp excuse)
As for Perth, if there was another bid lets say the WAbears alone, working against the pirates, i reckon then we'd be looking there too, as it stands currently their in the box seat if the NRL decided they even wanted to expand there, whereas in Brisbane they are all outbidding each other to show why they should be picked there is a real want from those bids, i know the west coast bid also had that same want, but your not up against it in the same turf, thats what makes this expansion interesting

 

[flippikat]

V'Landys isn't keen on an expansion fee.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sp...sion-licence-fee-20210214-p572d0.html?ref=rss

 

[Perth Red]

That’s why participation in Queensland is imperative and what expansion is going to do is improve participation. You’re going to get the Cameron Smiths, Billy Slaters and Mal Meningas ... otherwise you’ll be reading about them in AFL.”


haha, yeh I could see Mal meninga playing afl! So nrl can’t hold brisbane with one club but thinks afl can take over with one club? Such a sht argument for why we need to expand! I do agree with no fee though, I’d rather see that money going to help establish the new club than topping up the current failing ones!

 

[flippikat]

That’s why participation in Queensland is imperative and what expansion is going to do is improve participation. You’re going to get the Cameron Smiths, Billy Slaters and Mal Meningas ... otherwise you’ll be reading about them in AFL.”


haha, yeh I could see Mal meninga playing afl! So nrl can’t hold brisbane with one club but thinks afl can take over with one club? Such a sht argument for why we need to expand! I do agree with no fee though, I’d rather see that money going to help establish the new club than topping up the current failing ones!

Yeah, that "the players will all go to AFL" argument is somewhere between ropey & laughable. Still, nice to see him stand up to the clubs - even if an expansion fee going to something strategic and/or long-term (2nd tier competitions? Juniors? Development of grassroots in AFL states??) could have some positives.

I wonder if this "for the good of the game, not just the clubs" angle will manifest in other areas of decision making?

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

That’s why participation in Queensland is imperative and what expansion is going to do is improve participation. You’re going to get the Cameron Smiths, Billy Slaters and Mal Meningas ... otherwise you’ll be reading about them in AFL.”


haha, yeh I could see Mal meninga playing afl! So nrl can’t hold brisbane with one club but thinks afl can take over with one club? Such a sht argument for why we need to expand! I do agree with no fee though, I’d rather see that money going to help establish the new club than topping up the current failing ones!

The elite private schools in Brisbane and Sydney are pushing fumbleball, soccer and onionball. It's how they've increased participation in fumbleball and generates some interest in the Lions and Swans.

 

[Perth Red]

The elite private schools in Brisbane and Sydney are pushing fumbleball, soccer and onionball. It's how they've increased participation in fumbleball and generates some interest in the Lions and Swans.

And how's Brisbane2 going to change that? The only way that will change is if the NRL and QRL get off their backside and incentivises these schools to take up RL. That requires, grants, coaches, prestige school competitions with profile and dropping the out of date "working mans" game mentality and start appealing to all people.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

And how's Brisbane2 going to change that? The only way that will change is if the NRL and QRL get off their backside and incentivises these schools to take up RL. That requires, grants, coaches, prestige school competitions with profile and dropping the out of date "working mans" game mentality and start appealing to all people.

It'll push RU, soccer and AwFuL out of the media, which will make kids ask themselves why they should even bother playing those games. Kids like fads and prestige. Having another NRL team in Brisbane, or even a third one, will give our game even more credibility as no other sport has 2 pro teams in Brisbane. It's the only major market in the whole country that doesn't have 2 pro teams from the same sport.

 

[Bulldog2020]

Kurt Fearnley's podcast has a good interview with PVL. Talk of there being 18 teams in four years time.

 

[MugaB]

Kurt Fearnley's podcast has a good interview with PVL. Talk of there being 18 teams in four years time.

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podca...nd-peter-vlandys/id1450747449?i=1000509467860

Around the 3min mark the interview starts, around 35mins he gets asked about the future of Rugba leg, and they mention the possibility of an 18th club in four years or so

Great interview, you can see how he thinks about things, looks like he wants to beef up QLD before expansion into other states

 

[mongoose]

Kurt Fearnley's podcast has a good interview with PVL. Talk of there being 18 teams in four years time.

i'll believe that when I see it...

 

[MugaB]

i'll believe that when I see it...

Ill like this in 2025, and throw it back at your face when it happens,
with a "in yourface sucka"
Boyyyzzzz

 

[Perth Red]

It'll push RU, soccer and AwFuL out of the media, which will make kids ask themselves why they should even bother playing those games. Kids like fads and prestige. Having another NRL team in Brisbane, or even a third one, will give our game even more credibility as no other sport has 2 pro teams in Brisbane. It's the only major market in the whole country that doesn't have 2 pro teams from the same sport.

none of which will suddenly see private schools offering RL! And your kidding yourself if you think it will make any difference to media coverage of other sports.