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

[Jamberoo]

don’t know about that, grassroots looks bigger than league in melbourne

https://sa.rugby/

Historically, Union has always been more popular than League in the ‘non-rugby’ states. Still are in regards to participation.

 

[Perth Red]

ARL Commission boss Peter V’landys has warned there will be no rescue packages for the NRL’s 17th team as pressure builds on the three prospective franchises to prove their financial viability.

The Firehawks, Jets and Dolphins have begun formulating their bid documents since the NRL’s call for expressions of interest last week and V’landys revealed there will be no financial aid if Brisbane’s second team is launched in 2023.

V’landys has made it clear he is ready to “declare war” on the AFL in a sporting turf war in Queensland, but the NRL’s 17th licence aspirants must source their own ammunition to keep the rival code at bay.
While the AFL tipped in more than $100 million to help their expansionary club the Gold Coast Suns in their first seven years, V‘landys said the NRL will not be bailing out a second Brisbane NRL team.

The NRL’s most recent expansion team, the Gold Coast Titans, went bankrupt after just five years and had their licence taken back by the governing body to keep the club alive.

“There will be no handouts or extra subsidies,” V’landys said.

“A second Brisbane team will have to show to us that they can stand on their own two feet.

“It is our objective to dominate the Queensland market but if we proceed with expansion, a new team will not be subsidised.”
The NRL currently gives the 16 team around $13 million each in funding annually and V‘landys is adamant the code’s expansion push will not jeopardise club funding.

“We will not be cutting funding to the clubs,” V’landys said.

“I have given them my word that expansion will only go ahead if the numbers stack up and I will honour my word and commitment to the 16 clubs.”
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...l/news-story/a7547ec6691713c0114341db9bb89070

 

[cumbrian Mackem]

So will Brisbane2 not be receiving $13 million annually?

 

[MugaB]

So will Brisbane2 not be receiving $13 million annually?

That's all they'll be getting, if they mess up after that, there's no handout etc

 

[Jamberoo]

In terms of a financially sustainable model, is it fair to rank the bids...
1 Dolphins


Daylight


3. Jets
4. Firehawks

 

[The Great Dane]

In terms of a financially sustainable model, is it fair to rank the bids...
1 Dolphins


Daylight


3. Jets
4. Firehawks

No that’s not fair at all lol.

Financially the Dolphins have the most money and assets, but the difference between them and Easts is pretty insignificant in real terms.
Let’s put it this way, if either Redcliffe or Easts get the license they’ll be one of richest clubs in league from day one.

Without getting a good look at their backers nobody knows exactly what is going on with the Jets/Bombers bid, however it’s safe to assume that they are well off as well.

However money isn’t everything, and the last thing the NRL needs is another failure of a football club that they can’t get rid of because their owners can afford to fish them out of the fire whenever times get tough.

 

[Perth Red]

In terms of a financially sustainable model, is it fair to rank the bids...
1 Dolphins


Daylight


3. Jets
4. Firehawks

based on what? Do you know what the respective bids revenue is from LC and other sources and how much of that will be available to put towards the nrl club? Do you know which bids have big money backers willing to put money on the table to help start up? All I’ve heard about the dolphins is they have decent asset base, ask Cronulla how useful that is if you dont have spare cash coming through.


I’m more interested in which bid has the potential to be a self sustaining club from football operations, not just another nrl club that only exists due to pokie machines,

 

[titoelcolombiano]

based on what? Do you know what the respective bids revenue is from LC and other sources and how much of that will be available to put towards the nrl club? Do you know which bids have big money backers willing to put money on the table to help start up? All I’ve heard about the dolphins is they have decent asset base, ask Cronulla how useful that is if you dont have spare cash coming through.


I’m more interested in which bid has the potential to be a self sustaining club from football operations, not just another nrl club that only exists due to pokie machines,

They own a stadium that has paying tenants (Brisbane Roar)
They own a shopping centre with Coles as an anchor tenant
They own a fitness centre
They own a successful leagues club

They are all revenue generating assets, so I think they've got the 'spare cash coming through' part covered.

 

[MugaB]

They own a stadium that has paying tenants (Brisbane Roar)
They own a shopping centre with Coles as an anchor tenant
They own a fitness centre
They own a successful leagues club

They are all revenue generating assets, so I think they've got the 'spare cash coming through' part covered.

They have a great deal of assets, a solid brand,mascot, and lots of success in QCup, plenty of space to spread as an area without any massive overlap from bronx or titans, all great things but do they have the management to take on a 1st grade side, can they get a coach with the sort of pull that can attract marquee talent, and can they produce talent through their own junior systems?
We've seen the spin from the firehawks bid, all hush hush, cant show details of how to win over the brisbanites, or brisbanians... what has the other two bids have in terms of a press conference

 

[Perth Red]

They own a stadium that has paying tenants (Brisbane Roar)
They own a shopping centre with Coles as an anchor tenant
They own a fitness centre
They own a successful leagues club

They are all revenue generating assets, so I think they've got the 'spare cash coming through' part covered.

you think, oh well give them the license now then lol.
Yes they have some revenue generating assets but we don’t know if they have borrowed to create them, if they are turning a profit or how much the LC is making in profit, you’d be surprised how low the margins often are. You might be right but seeing as dolphins don’t produce an annual report youre just guessing.

 

[ash the bash]

Was a rumour I think on Buzz's column or something, mentioning one of the Brisbane bids was having financial trouble. Bottom dollar he was talking about the Brisbane Jets. Mind you have not heard much from them.

I don't think there would be much of a difference from Easts Tigers Leagues and Redcliffe leagues as far as revenue generation goes. Think Redcliffe may have more assets on the books but we can't verify that without looking at annual reports for both Redcliffe and Easts leagues.

 

[Perth Red]

All the while the only way a nrl club can be viable is to rely on subsidising by pokies the game is always going to be stunted in its growth potential. Clearly Vlandys doesn’t believe the game should be investing in start ups and thinks unless there is a pokie empire there’ll be no license. Typical RL I suppose. Nothing much has changed in 60 years.

 

[flippikat]

All the while the only way a nrl club can be viable is to rely on subsidising by pokies the game is always going to be stunted in its growth potential. Clearly Vlandys doesn’t believe the game should be investing in start ups and thinks unless there is a pokie empire there’ll be no license. Typical RL I suppose. Nothing much has changed in 60 years.

It's typical that for every good aspect of this process there's at least 1 or two negatives or poorly thought out aspects.

Yes, the NRL should put the emphasis on cashflow/revenue of a new club.. and not just add a revenue-rich/cash flow poor club.. BUT the revenue streams need to be robust and able to grow - and pokies doesn't fit that bill.

I don't know the political climate in Australia, but here in NZ there's a growing appetite to introduce lowering caps on the number of pokies in many communities. Likewise in Australia would be very dangerous for some clubs.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.rnz.co.nz/article/1cc47702-7095-4664-ad80-3f1b5fb41f9a

 

[titoelcolombiano]

you think, oh well give them the license now then lol.
Yes they have some revenue generating assets but we don’t know if they have borrowed to create them, if they are turning a profit or how much the LC is making in profit, you’d be surprised how low the margins often are. You might be right but seeing as dolphins don’t produce an annual report youre just guessing.

Well the fact that they have a good asset base and are actually running a successful Rugby League club (have done so for decades) is certainly much more of a plus than a minus for them.

 

[reanimate]

It's typical that for every good aspect of this process there's at least 1 or two negatives or poorly thought out aspects.

Yes, the NRL should put the emphasis on cashflow/revenue of a new club.. and not just add a revenue-rich/cash flow poor club.. BUT the revenue streams need to be robust and able to grow - and pokies doesn't fit that bill.

I don't know the political climate in Australia, but here in NZ there's a growing appetite to introduce lowering caps on the number of pokies in many communities. Likewise in Australia would be very dangerous for some clubs.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.rnz.co.nz/article/1cc47702-7095-4664-ad80-3f1b5fb41f9a

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...cards-to-fight-poker-machine-money-laundering

This will prove a hit to poker machine turnover as well.

 

[Perth Red]

Well the fact that they have a good asset base and are actually running a successful Rugby League club (have done so for decades) is certainly much more of a plus than a minus for them.

never said it wasn’t, all Im saying is people are making big assumptions that because Dolphins have got assets they’ve got a spare $3-4mill a year to put into an nrl club. Hopefully they’ll have a full sponsorship portfolio 25k crowds and sold out corporate boxes so they can actually be self sustaining as a football club,

 

[MugaB]

never said it wasn’t, all Im saying is people are making big assumptions that because Dolphins have got assets they’ve got a spare $3-4mill a year to put into an nrl club. Hopefully they’ll have a full sponsorship portfolio 25k crowds and sold out corporate boxes so they can actually be self sustaining as a football club,

Like all the other NRL clubs do

 

[Jamberoo]

All the while the only way a nrl club can be viable is to rely on subsidising by pokies the game is always going to be stunted in its growth potential. Clearly Vlandys doesn’t believe the game should be investing in start ups and thinks unless there is a pokie empire there’ll be no license. Typical RL I suppose. Nothing much has changed in 60 years.

Or does it simply make sense to have deep pockets? Surely it is a good thing that the club has the financial means to run player development, have the best facilities, etc. Most NRL and AFL clubs rely on gambling money. Sad but true.

 

[Jamberoo]

based on what? Do you know what the respective bids revenue is from LC and other sources and how much of that will be available to put towards the nrl club? Do you know which bids have big money backers willing to put money on the table to help start up? All I’ve heard about the dolphins is they have decent asset base, ask Cronulla how useful that is if you dont have spare cash coming through.


I’m more interested in which bid has the potential to be a self sustaining club from football operations, not just another nrl club that only exists due to pokie machines,

You are usually better researched PR. Everyone is aware of what titoelcolombiano said. Dolphins are miles in front of the other bids. It won't be the only consideration, but they won't admit a team without a significant ongoing revenue stream not matter what else is offer. A club without deep pockets won't get past the other clubs either. I suggest PVL would already know who they want and may just be starting to soften up the opposition.

 

[The Great Dane]

Well the fact that they have a good asset base and are actually running a successful Rugby League club (have done so for decades) is certainly much more of a plus than a minus for them.

Define "successful football club", because I don't think a bunch of assets funded by the gambling industry and government subsidies equals a successful football club.

I don't think anybody in their right mind would argue that Redcliffe's current set up, nor their proposed NRL bid, could be sustained by their football operations alone either. Not that I'm suggesting that they have to be sustained by their football club alone, but the NRL's goal should be to build the biggest football clubs possible, not to have a bunch of clubs that only exist because they are bankrolled by operations in other industries.