Financial fragility of the game

[betcats]

Relocation is only one of many ways you can go about it, but yeah I meant replacing current clubs.

Whether you accept it or not, it can be a form a expansion.

I disagree. It’s just moving a club or withdrawing their license and killing it completely and creating an entire new club. We definitely lose fans doing that, it’s a big assumption to say that will expand the game. It’s not the same thing at all.

 

[The Great Dane]

I disagree. It’s just moving a club or withdrawing their license and killing it completely and creating an entire new club. We definitely lose fans doing that, it’s a big assumption to say that will expand the game. It’s not the same thing at all.

Firstly, there're almost a dozen different ways that you can replace a current club with a new one, and most of them don't include intentionally killing the club.
As an aside, if we are being frank 95% of the fans that you lose in most forms of rationalisation aren't much of a loss and are easily replaceable given time. People don't want to hear that, but the fact of the matter is that if all of the clubs fans were patrons of the clubs that consistently spent money on their favorite clubs then we wouldn't be talking about rationalisation at all.

Secondly, I don't want to go into depth, and you can disagree all you like, but nobody in their right mind would say that the Swans moving to Sydney or (to a lesser extent) Fitzroy merging with the Brisbane Bears wasn't expansion.

Expansion doesn't just mean growth of the number of teams in the competition it's self, it means growth of the competition as a business into a new market in some meaningful way.

 

[Quicksilver]

Firstly, there're almost a dozen different ways that you can replace a current club with a new one, and most of them don't include intentionally killing the club.
As an aside, if we are being frank 95% of the fans that you lose in most forms of rationalisation aren't much of a loss and are easily replaceable given time. People don't want to hear that, but the fact of the matter is that if all of the clubs fans were patrons of the clubs that consistently spent money on their favorite clubs then we wouldn't be talking about rationalisation at all.

Secondly, I don't want to go into depth, and you can disagree all you like, but nobody in their right mind would say that the Swans moving to Sydney or (to a lesser extent) Fitzroy merging with the Brisbane Bears wasn't expansion.

Expansion doesn't just mean growth of the number of teams in the competition it's self, it means growth of the competition as a business into a new market in some meaningful way.

It's not as easy to replace people as you might think.

There are millions of things competing for our attention these days, watching a new (often boring) sport won't rank high going forward.

 

[betcats]

Firstly, there're almost a dozen different ways that you can replace a current club with a new one, and most of them don't include intentionally killing the club.
As an aside, if we are being frank 95% of the fans that you lose in most forms of rationalisation aren't much of a loss and are easily replaceable given time. People don't want to hear that, but the fact of the matter is that if all of the clubs fans were patrons of the clubs that consistently spent money on their favorite clubs then we wouldn't be talking about rationalisation at all.

Secondly, I don't want to go into depth, and you can disagree all you like, but nobody in their right mind would say that the Swans moving to Sydney or (to a lesser extent) Fitzroy merging with the Brisbane Bears wasn't expansion.

Expansion doesn't just mean growth of the number of teams in the competition it's self, it means growth of the competition as a business into a new market in some meaningful way.

The original comment you quoted of mine I was 100 percent talking about expanding the number of teams, it was pretty clear. I don’t care what you think it means.


You take a clubs license away you kill them as nrl team and for sure lose fans. But yeah sure NRL fans are easy to replace, you’d do really well running the comp with that attitude hahaha what rubbish.

A team going under is a completely different thing again you are going way off topic and just waffling on.

You made a half decent point about it possibly not costing the nrl as much as I was making out to bring in a new team, the rest of the stuff you are going on with I was not talking about at all. You’re talking about the swans and having a go at fans for not patronising clubs, tangent much?

 

[The Great Dane]

The original comment you quoted of mine I was 100 percent talking about expanding the number of teams, it was pretty clear. I don’t care what you think it means.

You don't get to redefine words when it's convenient for your argument, and you are attempting to reduce the definition of expansion down to a point that nobody else would agree with your definition anymore.

You take a clubs license away you kill them as nrl team and for sure lose fans. But yeah sure NRL fans are easy to replace, you’d do really well running the comp with that attitude hahaha what rubbish.

You are being reductionist and creating a false dichotomy. You don't necessarily have to take a clubs license away to rationalise the competition and even if you do take their license for a competition away it doesn't necessarily kill them.

Also whether you like it or not it turns out that fans are extremely easy to replace, I mean most sports leagues around the world, particularly North American and European ones, are largely built on chopping and changing clubs where it's beneficial and replacing fan bases when they do it. I think that we can both agree that most of the major sports organisations around the world, all of whom do run their comps with that attitude, are much better run than the NRL. But you are right this is a tangent.

A team going under is a completely different thing again you are going way off topic and just waffling on.

I never bought up clubs folding.

You made a half decent point about it possibly not costing the nrl as much as I was making out to bring in a new team, the rest of the stuff you are going on with I was not talking about at all. You’re talking about the swans and having a go at fans for not patronising clubs, tangent much?

It's not only a half decent point, it's totally accurate. If they play their cards right, there're multiple ways that the NRL could expand and it not cost them very much, or it even be very profitable for them.
For example the A-league has been supplementing their income by selling licenses to the highest bidder for a over a decade now. Not that I'm suggesting that the NRL should do that.

Bringing up the Swans and Lions wasn't a tangent, it was an example used to make a point, a point that you are trying to ignore.

 

[greenBV4]

The way a majority of Sydney fans support their clubs you could probably secretly move the team to Perth and they wouldn't even notice since they only ever watch on TV

 

[Perth Red]

The way a majority of Sydney fans support their clubs you could probably secretly move the team to Perth and they wouldn't even notice since they only ever watch on TV

most clubs only have around 25-30k active fans, part of the reason they are in financial messes.

 

[The Great Dane]

most clubs only have around 25-30k active fans, part of the reason they are in financial messes.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a few of them have even less than that.

 

[Quicksilver]

The way a majority of Sydney fans support their clubs you could probably secretly move the team to Perth and they wouldn't even notice since they only ever watch on TV

which is the same for clubs outside Sydney too....

 

[betcats]

You don't get to redefine words when it's convenient for your argument, and you are attempting to reduce the definition of expansion down to a point that nobody else would agree with your definition anymore.

You are being reductionist and creating a false dichotomy. You don't necessarily have to take a clubs license away to rationalise the competition and even if you do take their license for a competition away it doesn't necessarily kill them.

Also whether you like it or not it turns out that fans are extremely easy to replace, I mean most sports leagues around the world, particularly North American and European ones, are largely built on chopping and changing clubs where it's beneficial and replacing fan bases when they do it. I think that we can both agree that most of the major sports organisations around the world, all of whom do run their comps with that attitude, are much better run than the NRL. But you are right this is a tangent.

I never bought up clubs folding.

It's not only a half decent point, it's totally accurate. If they play their cards right, there're multiple ways that the NRL could expand and it not cost them very much, or it even be very profitable for them.
For example the A-league has been supplementing their income by selling licenses to the highest bidder for a over a decade now. Not that I'm suggesting that the NRL should do that.

Bringing up the Swans and Lions wasn't a tangent, it was an example used to make a point, a point that you are trying to ignore.

What the f**k are you on about? The definition of ‘expansion’ has nothing to do with adding clubs or moving clubs! You are trying to define it and telling me what it means hahah ffs you are one long-winded full of shit merkin.

What you said about the fans is horseshit IMO. I’m talking about nrl clubs and fans here. What other sports can do on vastly more populated continents is completely irrelevant. North America and Europe, Thats just another dumb tangent from yourself.

 

[The Great Dane]

What the f**k are you on about? The definition of ‘expansion’ has nothing to do with adding clubs or moving clubs! You are trying to define it and telling me what it means

The definition of expansion definitely matters when you are talking about expansion, and I'm not the one that tried to redefine it from what it means in common parlance...

You can't say expansion is a pipe dream, then when somebody says 'you could expand these ways' unilaterally decide that those ways of expanding aren't expansion, especially when most everybody else would agree that what you said wasn't expansion is in fact expansion.

hahah ffs you are one long-winded full of shit merkin.

It's attitudes like this that lead to meaningless sloganeering like 'Make America Great Again' being able to fundamentally change geopolitics for the foreseeable future.

Some ideas can't be, even shouldn't be, imparted in a sentence. Detail matters, never forget it.

What you said about the fans is horseshit IMO. I’m talking about nrl clubs and fans here. What other sports can do on vastly more populated continents is completely irrelevant. North America and Europe, Thats just another dumb tangent from yourself.

All the evidence is completely contrary to your opinion, and it's not only happened overseas.

I mean take the SL war. RL lost thousands of fans because of it, yet twenty years later the NRL, is bigger than it's ever been. Almost by accident the NRL more than replaced those fans lost as a result of the war, imagine what they could have done if they had had a plan.
There are a few other Australian examples of whole fan bases being totally replaced, the Swans and Lions are the best example though.

Also, you keep saying that examples used to support a point are tangents, so frankly I don't think you know what a tangent is.

 

[betcats]

The definition of expansion definitely matters when you are talking about expansion, and I'm not the one that tried to redefine it from what it means in common parlance...

You can't say expansion is a pipe dream, then when somebody says 'you could expand these ways' unilaterally decide that those ways of expanding aren't expansion, especially when most everybody else would agree that what you said wasn't expansion is in fact expansion.

It's attitudes like this that lead to meaningless sloganeering like 'Make America Great Again' being able to fundamentally change geopolitics for the foreseeable future.

Some ideas can't be, even shouldn't be, imparted in a sentence. Detail matters, never forget it.

All the evidence is completely contrary to your opinion, and it's not only happened overseas.

I mean take the SL war. RL lost thousands of fans because of it, yet twenty years later the NRL, is bigger than it's ever been. Almost by accident the NRL more than replaced those fans lost as a result of the war, imagine what they could have done if they had had a plan.
There are a few other Australian examples of whole fan bases being totally replaced, the Swans and Lions are the best example though.

Also, you keep saying that examples used to support a point are tangents, so frankly I don't think you know what a tangent is.

Mate. Now you’re using Trumps slogans and talking about geopolitics WTF, I know that is another dumb tangent... far out you can pull it out can’t you? The SL war hurt us immensely and it was not easy for the game to recover, it was one of the low points in the history of the sport in this country. Your other examples are “north America” and “europe” well done.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

The way a majority of Sydney fans support their clubs you could probably secretly move the team to Perth and they wouldn't even notice since they only ever watch on TV

I had a hypothetical dinner discussion with extended family (about 20 odd) who are all Saints fans back in 2016 (It was Benjis last season).

They're not members.
They settle in to watch the Dragons on TV. Don't go to games until September. Staunch RL people though.

Saints averaged 10,000 at Kogarah give or take. A couple of bigger games at SCG with Souths and ANZAC Day. Couple 15k vs Dogs and Tigers at ANZ.

My argument was...
They could take Saints to Adelaide. Sure people would kick up a stink. Social media outrage that would die down. Most whingers probably don't go to games or watch Better Homes& Garden.
New market. New fans - you'd argue they'd get 10k per week. New sponsors. New corporate.

The Sydney fans would still watch their beloved Dragons on TV live from Adelaide.

Then NRL sweetens it by having a draw where Dragons play in Sydney vs Rabbits, Dogs, Easts, Wests, Sharks, Manly, Para and Penrith for 5-10 years. Sell the Sydney fans a membership for 'Sydney' and encourage the 10,000 who would go to go to these 'away' games to support the (Adelaide) Dragons. Most fans go to 2-3 games a year on average anyway. The diehards will still go. And the others still watch TV.

The argument was expected. Oh but Saints oh but dragons splutter splutter.

Go to games? No
Got membership? No
Then do that, then argue. Otherwise you're a tv consumer and wgaf if they play in Adelaide.

Food for thought anyway.

You could substitute Souths, Tigers, Bulldogs, Roosters in the argument.

 

[TheDalek079]

I had a hypothetical dinner discussion with extended family (about 20 odd) who are all Saints fans back in 2016 (It was Benjis last season).

They're not members.
They settle in to watch the Dragons on TV. Don't go to games until September. Staunch RL people though.

Saints averaged 10,000 at Kogarah give or take. A couple of bigger games at SCG with Souths and ANZAC Day. Couple 15k vs Dogs and Tigers at ANZ.

My argument was...
They could take Saints to Adelaide. Sure people would kick up a stink. Social media outrage that would die down. Most whingers probably don't go to games or watch Better Homes& Garden.
New market. New fans - you'd argue they'd get 10k per week. New sponsors. New corporate.

The Sydney fans would still watch their beloved Dragons on TV live from Adelaide.

Then NRL sweetens it by having a draw where Dragons play in Sydney vs Rabbits, Dogs, Easts, Wests, Sharks, Manly, Para and Penrith for 5-10 years. Sell the Sydney fans a membership for 'Sydney' and encourage the 10,000 who would go to go to these 'away' games to support the (Adelaide) Dragons. Most fans go to 2-3 games a year on average anyway. The diehards will still go. And the others still watch TV.

The argument was expected. Oh but Saints oh but dragons splutter splutter.

Go to games? No
Got membership? No
Then do that, then argue. Otherwise you're a tv consumer and wgaf if they play in Adelaide.

Food for thought anyway.

You could substitute Souths, Tigers, Bulldogs, Roosters in the argument.

Definitely food for thought. But if they are supporting the local team then that team is no longer the local team if moved to Adelaide. Even if they are just tv fans I think they still need a connection to the team, and that connection can be severed if the team relocates.

 

[greenBV4]

Definitely food for thought. But if they are supporting the local team then that team is no longer the local team if moved to Adelaide. Even if they are just tv fans I think they still need a connection to the team, and that connection can be severed if the team relocates.

If a team was relocated it could still be owned by/connected to the local/original leagues club, just based in another city

 

[siv]

Firstly, there're almost a dozen different ways that you can replace a current club with a new one, and most of them don't include intentionally killing the club.
As an aside, if we are being frank 95% of the fans that you lose in most forms of rationalisation aren't much of a loss and are easily replaceable given time. People don't want to hear that, but the fact of the matter is that if all of the clubs fans were patrons of the clubs that consistently spent money on their favorite clubs then we wouldn't be talking about rationalisation at all.

Secondly, I don't want to go into depth, and you can disagree all you like, but nobody in their right mind would say that the Swans moving to Sydney or (to a lesser extent) Fitzroy merging with the Brisbane Bears wasn't expansion.

Expansion doesn't just mean growth of the number of teams in the competition it's self, it means growth of the competition as a business into a new market in some meaningful way.

So no one would notice if they cull Canberra like they did in a few other sports

 

[Quicksilver]

I had a hypothetical dinner discussion with extended family (about 20 odd) who are all Saints fans back in 2016 (It was Benjis last season).

They're not members.
They settle in to watch the Dragons on TV. Don't go to games until September. Staunch RL people though.

Saints averaged 10,000 at Kogarah give or take. A couple of bigger games at SCG with Souths and ANZAC Day. Couple 15k vs Dogs and Tigers at ANZ.

My argument was...
They could take Saints to Adelaide. Sure people would kick up a stink. Social media outrage that would die down. Most whingers probably don't go to games or watch Better Homes& Garden.
New market. New fans - you'd argue they'd get 10k per week. New sponsors. New corporate.

The Sydney fans would still watch their beloved Dragons on TV live from Adelaide.

Then NRL sweetens it by having a draw where Dragons play in Sydney vs Rabbits, Dogs, Easts, Wests, Sharks, Manly, Para and Penrith for 5-10 years. Sell the Sydney fans a membership for 'Sydney' and encourage the 10,000 who would go to go to these 'away' games to support the (Adelaide) Dragons. Most fans go to 2-3 games a year on average anyway. The diehards will still go. And the others still watch TV.

The argument was expected. Oh but Saints oh but dragons splutter splutter.

Go to games? No
Got membership? No
Then do that, then argue. Otherwise you're a tv consumer and wgaf if they play in Adelaide.

Food for thought anyway.

You could substitute Souths, Tigers, Bulldogs, Roosters in the argument.

Yeah but people in Adelaide give even less of a f**k then your mates.

 

[Generalzod]

Once we see the end of this Coronavirus would it be a good opportunity for the NRL to be floated on the stock exchange And what will be a good share price..

 

[TheDalek079]

If a team was relocated it could still be owned by/connected to the local/original leagues club, just based in another city

Do you think having a leagues club in the original location is enough to ensure fans continue supporting the team if it relocates?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Once we see the end of this Coronavirus would it be a good opportunity for the NRL to be floated on the stock exchange And what will be a good share price..

17c