What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

"It’s very realistic to say that we’ll have a second team in Brisbane in 2023": V'landys

Diesel

Coach
Messages
15,769
So, is it safe to assume we'll get a decision in mid-late October (after the Grand Final)?

That timing seems about right to me, as it won't overshadow the playoffs but give whoever is chosen as much prep time as possible.. especially if 2023 is still the target. (Though I strongly suspect that's cutting it extremely close)
It was confirmed this arvo as Brisbane on a October 3
 

Perth Red

Immortal
Messages
44,341
If they had any marketing nouse they'd have a big announcement during HT of the GF. Imagining blacking the lights of the stadium and having the big screen with a dramatic video, music blaring ....'introducing Brisbane's new NRL club the Brisbane ............. Get your memeberships and merchandise at the marquee outside the stadium. '

Instead they'll announce it in the off season when it will get little coverage or notice as the fans have clocked off.
 
Messages
3,728
If they had any marketing nouse they'd have a big announcement during HT of the GF. Imagining blacking the lights of the stadium and having the big screen with a dramatic video, music blaring ....'introducing Brisbane's new NRL club the Brisbane ............. Get your memeberships and merchandise at the marquee outside the stadium. '

Instead they'll announce it in the off season when it will get little coverage or notice as the fans have clocked off.
That's funny and / or sad because it's most likely how it will play out
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
722
Firstly wouldn't Melbournites attend because it's an event and there is nothing else on that weekend? Isn't it the ''sporting capital of the world''? Why would they not attend?

Secondly, I don't have the figures for the number of people that travelled to the Brisbane Magic Rounds but you would imagine that there were a fair few travellers. To boost that number, market the shit out of it with travel and ticket packages. Then you have the local RL fans, then you have the casual sports fans, then you have the ''event goers''.

Thirdly, the Victorian Govt would absolutely fund it with tourism dollars just like they do for Origin and any potential GF up for grabs.

Finally, the MCG is a shit ground for watching RL sure, but AAMI doesn't make the statement you'd want to make with this event. With a bit of effort, we could have a massive annual RL event with huge attendances at the country's biggest stadium, right in the middle of AFL heartland. It just takes vision and effort and it wouldn't be that hard to pull off.
Storm average around 16k, So, why would someone who doesn't attend Storm games go to watch other teams? You can't compare to SOO which is the highest level of the sport. We already have the best club team in the world playing here every second week.
Anyway, I did some research and 24K travelled to the last Magic Round. So, call it 30K as some will also come from Qld. Not 30K will go to all games, so perfect size for AAMI. I was at the MCG in 2000 when Storm played the Dragons, and whilst the 70 - 10 scoreline was terrific, the MCG had very little atmosphere with 23K. Sitting 100m away from the sideline in an empty MCG is no way to introduce new fans to RL.
 
Messages
3,728
Storm average around 16k, So, why would someone who doesn't attend Storm games go to watch other teams? You can't compare to SOO which is the highest level of the sport. We already have the best club team in the world playing here every second week.
Anyway, I did some research and 24K travelled to the last Magic Round. So, call it 30K as some will also come from Qld. Not 30K will go to all games, so perfect size for AAMI. I was at the MCG in 2000 when Storm played the Dragons, and whilst the 70 - 10 scoreline was terrific, the MCG had very little atmosphere with 23K. Sitting 100m away from the sideline in an empty MCG is no way to introduce new fans to RL.
To answer your question, they wouldn't go to watch other teams, they'd go to an ''event'' though.

Anyway, I might be wrong and it might be a terrible idea to hold it in Melbourne, I'd like to see them try on an AFL free weekend though.
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
722
To answer your question, they wouldn't go to watch other teams, they'd go to an ''event'' though.

Anyway, I might be wrong and it might be a terrible idea to hold it in Melbourne, I'd like to see them try on an AFL free weekend though.
The thing is, they wouldn't go a a non Storm RL games just because you call it an 'event'. Plenty of 'events' here already. No one here has ever heard of magic round, you can't compare it to SOO. I would have no interest in going to any club RL games @ MCG that did not involve Storm. If the AFL did not own Marvel, that could work, the atmosphere at the first SOO game there was electric.
 

MugaB

Bench
Messages
3,725
What happened to the proposed 17th NRL team super bid?

8 Sep, 2021

Joel Spreadborough

The race to claim the NRL's 17th license almost took a dramatic turn last week, when two rivals briefly considered putting aside their differences to unite against the third player in the highly anticipated showdown. But just as the juicy prospect of a powerhouse merger had pundits up and down the east coast reconsidering their bid favourites, it abruptly fell over. It seems the Brisbane Jets and the Firehawks bid teams, while open to having some chats around the possibilities, ultimately couldn't get on the same page.

So what unfolded behind closed doors to prompt the various powerbrokers to scrap the idea, mere days after enthusiastically announcing it?


"Not quite war and peace, but definitely some feedback," Brisbane Jets CEO Nick Livermore tells ESPN, hinting at some robust back and forth on the proposal's finer points. He's well placed to assess such things, having earlier this year presided over a successful merger between the former Brisbane Bombers and Ipswich Jets bids.

"There are so many complications, individual personalities and varying agendas and goals - it's just a complex process."


The Jets and Firehawks announced plans to begin talks and 'consider the benefits associated' with a merger that would double the offering being tabled against the asset rich Redcliffe Dolphins.

Just one day later, reports began to emerge that talks had stalled. The Jets and Firehawks would be staying the course with their respective bids, rather than pooling resources. Despite all the hype, the idea had swiftly been canned. What remained unclear was whether it was a mutual decision, and indeed who had made the final call. At first, pulling at the threads around the reasoning produced some pretty docile results.

"The two parties had fundamental differences in the ownership model," Firehawks chair Steven Bullow confirmed via an impressively vague media release on August 31.

"'The Firehawks have submitted a very good bid to the ARLC Committee.'"

Hints of differences, but who pulled the trigger to kill the idea, and what about the ownership model was in dispute? Direct follow ups with the Brisbane (Easts) Tigers backed Firehawks produced an additional series of flat bats, with bid consultancy firm Rich Digital CEO Brent Richardson reluctant to offer further insights.

"In terms of the questions you have outlined I have been instructed by the team to point you towards our media release based on our latest merger stance,'" Richardson said when probed on the matter, implying the August 31 media release was the best source of information in a situation where the Firehawks appeared to be united in non-disclosure.

As the boss of the bids marketing and commercial approach, it was clear Richardson had deemed the finer points not worth reflecting on, let alone advertising. This provided the first proper hint that the merger rejection came from the Firehawks, and any subsequent discussion was simply not worth their time.

To be fair, the much vaunted August 31 media release did indeed summarise the Firehawks position, outlining the primary concerns of bid backers the Easts Tigers. To paraphrase;

a) a Jets merger would fail to serve the Tigers carefully cultivated pool of 40 thousand members.

b) they already have a thriving club base, and a slew of existing/planned infrastructure to house NRL expansion.

c) the Firehawks are only interested in growing both participation and viewership of the game.



Decent enough reasons, but surely the growth and participation agenda is at least one ambition shared by the Jets. One couldn't help but wonder; was there more to the story? Something not being shared that was scandalous enough to torpedo what appeared a pretty compelling merger opportunity?

Thankfully, the Jets, through Livermore, are far more willing to share some insights, beginning with the origins of the now defunct superbid. It all began when Shane Richardson reached out to an old friend, in the form of Scott Sattler.

"The guys have been connected since Scott was at Penrith," Livermore says.

"They opened the discussion, and we offered a 50-50 partnership with the Firehawks- which wasn't able to be reached."

Richardson (Former South Sydney football GM, father of Brent and co-founder of Rich Digital) represents the interests of the Firehawks, while Sattler is the GM of rugby league for the Jets. According to Livermore, it was a matter of assessing which footprint would prove better suited to tackling the challenge from the Dolphins.


"Shane has experience beyond most people in the game and recognises where their (Firehawks) growth corridor lies. At this stage we have parked discussions given the importance of the Western (Jets) corridor and having a team based in the region."

A friendly reach-out ultimately leading to nothing, based on an east and west divide, and differences over where the merger would hang its hat. In current Intrust Super Cup terms, Firehawks are focused on the Easts Tigers patch of turf, while the Brisbane Jets are firmly committed to the corridor currently occupied by Ipswich. Thankfully for non-Queensland based fans, Livermore offers a Sydney based geographic comparison to explain the situation.

"The team needs to be based West of Brisbane," he says.

"(We can't have) the equivalent of the Sydney Roosters trying to grow and manage the game in Penrith. We have stated for a long period of time that it is the heartland of growth through West Brisbane, Ipswich and Toowoomba."


The Firehawks clearly disagree on that point, and Livermore is quick to praise the business merits of his rivals, while leaving the proverbial ball firmly in their court.

"They have an incredible footprint as the former Easts Tigers and successful backing," he says.

"So it's an opportunity to move forward on if we can reach a 50-50 partnership, but ultimately we've left them with this opportunity."

Mystery solved. While it was Firehawks who initially reached out, the Jets made a partnership offer based on occupying their proposed patch of turf. This was rejected, but the Jets- possibly realising it represents their best chance, remain keen, albeit with no current intention to compromise on the whole patch of turf situation.

As for the NRL itself, Livermore concedes a degree of frustration with the delays in the bid process, and a lack of clarity of when- if successful- the Jets would be entering the league.

"Any delay in growing the game isn't good for participation, viewership and attendance," he says.

The recent final pitch meetings, held via video link with NRL hierarchy, allowed the bids to take advantage of some rare face time with the governing body. Details of the Jets pitch offer some further clarity on why the superbid idea went cold, with Livermore admitting the opportunity presented a stark reminder of the primary criteria the three bids need to tick off on to keep the big bosses happy down south.

"Peter (Vlandys) understands what it is the Brisbane Jets can bring to the game," Livermore says. "We recognise that financial sustainability is paramount to the process."

At this point, the reality is topics such as the various corridors resided in and represented- while crucial- are simply not at the top of the NRL's checklist. "We aren't backed by Leagues clubs, nor do we want to be - what we had from Peter is an hour and a half discussion for the first time in a decade," Livermore continues.

"We understand what we need to do to assure the west of Brisbane and the greater region of South-East Queensland for 2023/24 and into the long-term future."

Brent Richardson and co have also said the Firehawks remain open to further talks, but are clearly confident they have enough clout behind their own solo bid, and don't have to compromise to survive. Simply put, the Firehawks give the impression they simply don't need what the Jets bring to the table, and the same isn't true in reverse. It's now difficult to see that changing, unless the Jets agree to some geographical reconsiderations. Going back to that Firehawks media release from August 31:

"We are financially strong, our marketing plan will bring new fans and sponsors to our game, we have a very good pathways and participation model, and an excellent business plan."

So does the fall of the superbid, and the NRL's primary desire for financial security, leave the cashed up and super resourced Dolphins in the box seat?

"We're incredibly pleased to have successfully presented our case to the ARLC," enthuses Dolphins bid chief Terry Reader.

"(We're) delighted with the movement towards hopefully announcing a successful party."

Reader's tone is more reflective of someone who feels they've aced a job interview, and not someone who bombed out. After watching the bulk of Redcliffe's $100 million asset stockpile being showcased on the national stage on a near weekly basis since July, on account of the NRL's Queensland relocation, he exudes a confidence which is backed by his degree of interest (zero) in the failed merger between the Jets and Firehawks.

"The Dolphins are not concerned with the decisions of other bids," Reader says, calmly reminding ESPN that the Dolphins have never felt compelled to change what they're offering.

"We have maintained a professional and consistent bid from day one and have respected the desired process. The Dolphins are taking nothing for granted, (but) we are confident our pitch provides the necessary stability and confidence for the NRL."

Over to you, Mr V'landys.

 
Last edited:
Messages
3,728
The thing is, they wouldn't go a a non Storm RL games just because you call it an 'event'. Plenty of 'events' here already. No one here has ever heard of magic round, you can't compare it to SOO. I would have no interest in going to any club RL games @ MCG that did not involve Storm. If the AFL did not own Marvel, that could work, the atmosphere at the first SOO game there was electric.
The two issues you raise 1) no one ever having heard of Magic Round and 2) it being seen as a bunch of RL games and not an ''event'' are simply marketing and game day experience issues.

No one in Australia had heard of the NRL Magic Round until they hosted the first one and 30k people travelled to it. It's not just the Storm that would be a draw either, the Warriors would draw well. But if you build an atmosphere around the day out (music, food, etc) and build a festival out of it, it becomes an interesting event to attend for the curious casual sporting fan and event goer.

I do take your point on the MCG though, the individual sessions may have too sparse a crowd for a stadium so big which means we'd lose the atmosphere. Maybe we could sell-out AAMI for a Friday night headlined by the Storm, a Saturday headlined by the Warriors. Sunday would be the question with neither present, but again, marketing and an atmosphere around the ground other than just the games could be a draw especially with no other sport on.

Like I said though, I might be wrong and Melbourne might be the wrong place for it. But we need to have some sort of vision and strategy for growing the game in Melbourne and this could be a good vehicle. I agree that it doesn't compare to State of Origin (which has 40 years of history behind it) but maybe with 40 years of this event being consistently held in Melbourne on round 1 it could grow into something Melbournites are proud to call their own like the boxing day test.
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
722
The two issues you raise 1) no one ever having heard of Magic Round and 2) it being seen as a bunch of RL games and not an ''event'' are simply marketing and game day experience issues.

No one in Australia had heard of the NRL Magic Round until they hosted the first one and 30k people travelled to it. It's not just the Storm that would be a draw either, the Warriors would draw well. But if you build an atmosphere around the day out (music, food, etc) and build a festival out of it, it becomes an interesting event to attend for the curious casual sporting fan and event goer.

I do take your point on the MCG though, the individual sessions may have too sparse a crowd for a stadium so big which means we'd lose the atmosphere. Maybe we could sell-out AAMI for a Friday night headlined by the Storm, a Saturday headlined by the Warriors. Sunday would be the question with neither present, but again, marketing and an atmosphere around the ground other than just the games could be a draw especially with no other sport on.

Like I said though, I might be wrong and Melbourne might be the wrong place for it. But we need to have some sort of vision and strategy for growing the game in Melbourne and this could be a good vehicle. I agree that it doesn't compare to State of Origin (which has 40 years of history behind it) but maybe with 40 years of this event being consistently held in Melbourne on round 1 it could grow into something Melbournites are proud to call their own like the boxing day test.
You need to move it around the nation. People from NSW/Qld are not going to travel to Melbourne every year, but they might come here one year, then Perth the next, then Adelaide or NZ, like they do for SOO. Tourism is the reason state governments pay for events.
 
Messages
3,976
I think Sydney is probably the only pther place it would work, and if the GF ever goes on the road then would be another good event to alternate between Sydney and Brisbane. One of the furstrating things about the NRL's lack of interest in International RL is that these are also great events to have on other cities. The Aus v NZ test in Perth sold out HBF park weeks before the game.
Doubke headers can also be good ways of boosting games to event status. the double header in perth got 39k attending. The all stars game would be a good one to test in growth cities.

NRL Nines
Magic weekend
All stars
World Nines
Internationals
Origins

these are our signature event opportunities at the moment.
ARLC needs to create an RL Nines circuit to run during the pre-season. Hold events in PNG, Samoa, Tonga Fiji and maybe one in SE Asia. If each event is held over two days then that's five weekends of content for the broadcasters and a chance to grow the game.
 
Messages
3,976
I don't see why Ipswich being west of Brisbane is considered a plus. Its population is small compared to Moreton Bay and eastern Brisbane/Logan. Lumping Toowoomba in with Ipswich is a stretch as the two cities aren't even adjacent to each other. Scenic Rim and Lockyer Valley are stationed between the two. It would be even worse than the ridiculous Wests Tigers scenario.
 
Messages
3,728
I don't see why Ipswich being west of Brisbane is considered a plus. Its population is small compared to Moreton Bay and eastern Brisbane/Logan. Lumping Toowoomba in with Ipswich is a stretch as the two cities aren't even adjacent to each other. Scenic Rim and Lockyer Valley are stationed between the two. It would be even worse than the ridiculous Wests Tigers scenario.
I think it is just considered a plus to counter the AFL threat, but honestly. I can't see what the AFL can do with the Lions that we can't do in a rugby league city with the Broncos and Brisbane 2.
 
Messages
3,728
How is Brisbane Lions having their new training base in Springfield relevant to where a new RL team should be? Makes no sense.
It's not relevant, there is a narrative going around that the AFL will take over the Western Corridor which will be a big growth region in SEQ. There's nothing they are doing that the NRL can't do with a little effort.

Although I will say one thing... we are terrible at Govt lobbying. We are a RL state and they got a 10k stadium built at Springfield whilst the Ipswich Jets, that have been part of the fabric of their community for decades play in a local park that only holds 5.5k.
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
722
It's not relevant, there is a narrative going around that the AFL will take over the Western Corridor which will be a big growth region in SEQ. There's nothing they are doing that the NRL can't do with a little effort.

Although I will say one thing... we are terrible at Govt lobbying. We are a RL state and they got a 10k stadium built at Springfield whilst the Ipswich Jets, that have been part of the fabric of their community for decades play in a local park that only holds 5.5k.
Not really, they are getting a 600 seat stand, surrounded by an open hill that hold another 9k. Lions won't be playing there but their women's team will. It's just that the perimeter of an AFL Oval is twice as big as a rectangular field so a basic surrounding hill can take twice as many.
 

Latest posts

Top