NZ Expansion

[UNION TROLL]

Here's the bigger questions

1) Will the Warriors ever get the crowds they got during their early years of the competition (in 1995, they averaged 26k or so at home), getting 20k+ regularly?

2) What crowds would you expect a 2nd NZ team to get in their inaugural year (assuming they will be based out of Wellington)?

1) The Warriors need to get away from Mount Smart and into a new stadium. The Council aren't interested in spending on Mt Smart, so it's time to look for a new home. Ideally, not too far from their supporter base in South and South West Auckland, but they need either buy Mt Smart and develop it or get out. It's an awful place to watch RL when the weather isn't good. The Warriors are proactive when it comes to selling merchandise (how many shirts can one club have designed each season???) but they aren't brilliant at retention. It's always safe to say that towards the end of the year, 4 game match pack and discounted tickets will be available and their demographic fan-base will hang on for the bargain and pick their matches before that carefully. We're about 2,500 down on last year so far but with Wellington and special offers, they'll be back to 17k again by the end of the season...and they were the 5th best supported side last year.
2) I already said, 20k average across games in Wellington, Christchurch and 2 on the road in maybe Dunedin and Rotarua. 30,000 members is the target year 1.
Crowds are a key part of the entire proposed ownership and financial model of the club, with the community owning it and being encouraged to support it. In return, the club will engage the community on every level through social, community, sporting, charitable and business processes. I am led to believe that we have a major naming sponsor lined up.

 

[undertaker]

1) The Warriors need to get away from Mount Smart and into a new stadium. The Council aren't interested in spending on Mt Smart, so it's time to look for a new home. Ideally, not too far from their supporter base in South and South West Auckland, but they need either buy Mt Smart and develop it or get out. It's an awful place to watch RL when the weather isn't good. The Warriors are proactive when it comes to selling merchandise (how many shirts can one club have designed each season???) but they aren't brilliant at retention. It's always safe to say that towards the end of the year, 4 game match pack and discounted tickets will be available and their demographic fan-base will hang on for the bargain and pick their matches before that carefully. We're about 2,500 down on last year so far but with Wellington and special offers, they'll be back to 17k again by the end of the season...and they were the 5th best supported side last year.
.

Do you believe that North Harbour Stadium or Eden Park - two other venues which have hosted top-tier RL matches in the past - are suitable venues for the Warriors if they move away from Mt Smart Stadium?

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Do you believe that North Harbour Stadium or Eden Park - two other venues which have hosted top-tier RL matches in the past - are suitable venues for the Warriors if they move away from Mt Smart Stadium?

No to both.

North Harbour is a half developed stadium at the far northern end of the city miles from the Warriors south Auckland fan base, with facilities no better than Mount Smart and plagued by serious traffic access issues.
Eden Park is centrally located but has lousy stand placement due to also being a cricket venue, and terrible atmosphere with crowds below 25K or so. It also lacks parking and has issues with the number of night games that can be played due to being in a residential area.

Mount Smart is in a good location and has perfect capacity and is a proper rectangular footy ground, it also has good grandstands on both sides so doesn't need major structural upgrades. If it was in Sydney it'd probably be rated behind parramatta in terms of stadium quality and ahead of all the other suburban grounds. However it definitely needs some modernising and there is the problem that's the council are trying to rationalise their stadium infrastructure and currently don't want to spend the $$ on Mt Smart. I'd rather see them get rid of North Harbour, or be properly ambitious and sell off Eden Park and build a proper state of the art stadium downtown somewhere.

 

[ZEROMISSTACKLES]

On the topic of Wellington and the rest of NZ getting a team, I believe that the Southern Orcas will be the name should we get a team and that we will play matches in Christchurch, Wellington and 2 other on the road games each year.
HQ'd in Wellington, the club will be self sufficient from day 1 with a target of 30,000 members (15k in each major centre) and a 20k average attendance figure in both Wellington and Christchurch.

Sorry but I disagree to New Zealand being able to produce a second competitive team in the NRL and having it well supported.

I live in Wellington and League is ok here but not booming. There's only 10 clubs here and I think only 6 of those clubs have a premier side. 3 of those clubs have only 1 team and there 1 team is not in the premier grade. Despite the Wellington district being the home to some good NRL talent like Tamou, Matulino and Tagataese etc there really isn't much else due to the enticement of Union at College.

Now if League was the only game in New Zealand and there was no Rugby, well then NZ would have 6 teams in the NRL and those 6 teams will be in the top 8 at the end of every year IMO. That's if though.

NZ has only 4 million. Only a percentage of that are male athletes that choose to play League and that's narrowing it down quickly. Basically put, NZ League playing numbers is lackluster.

 

[joshreading]

I don't think many are suggesting Wellington get it's own team but a Southern Team encompassing Christchurch and possibly games in Dunedin/Taranaki/Palmy etc could have merit.

For arguments sake the Southern Orcas could be based out of Wellington for training/administration (or frankly nearby where local Councils/Business might actually bid to host the team) but play

Wellington - 5 games
Christchurch - 5
Dunedin - 1 game
Taranki - 1 game
Palmerston North - 1 game

An area is not only chosen for it's initial junior capacity, which with South Island and Southern North would be quite significant but for growth potential. Wellington presently has the playing strength of Melbourne (maybe stronger) and that is without the presence of a team to lift the profile and incentive to play the game. Having a local under 20's (or junior NRL rep presence) increases the chances of local Union players trying RL over RU)

Additionally, the advantage of having a team play out of different regional Cities is that when it is played in Wellington, there is still quite a TV draw card for the rest of the South.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

I don't think many are suggesting Wellington get it's own team but a Southern Team encompassing Christchurch and possibly games in Dunedin/Taranaki/Palmy etc could have merit.

For arguments sake the Southern Orcas could be based out of Wellington for training/administration (or frankly nearby where local Councils/Business might actually bid to host the team) but play

Wellington - 5 games
Christchurch - 5
Dunedin - 1 game
Taranki - 1 game
Palmerston North - 1 game

An area is not only chosen for it's initial junior capacity, which with South Island and Southern North would be quite significant but for growth potential. Wellington presently has the playing strength of Melbourne (maybe stronger) and that is without the presence of a team to lift the profile and incentive to play the game. Having a local under 20's (or junior NRL rep presence) increases the chances of local Union players trying RL over RU)

Additionally, the advantage of having a team play out of different regional Cities is that when it is played in Wellington, there is still quite a TV draw card for the rest of the South.

I like it As long as there is not too much division between these areas, especially in RU, that would negatively impact on cohesion between fans.

 

[The Great Dane]

I don't think many are suggesting Wellington get it's own team but a Southern Team encompassing Christchurch and possibly games in Dunedin/Taranaki/Palmy etc could have merit.

For arguments sake the Southern Orcas could be based out of Wellington for training/administration (or frankly nearby where local Councils/Business might actually bid to host the team) but play

Wellington - 5 games
Christchurch - 5
Dunedin - 1 game
Taranki - 1 game
Palmerston North - 1 game

An area is not only chosen for it's initial junior capacity, which with South Island and Southern North would be quite significant but for growth potential. Wellington presently has the playing strength of Melbourne (maybe stronger) and that is without the presence of a team to lift the profile and incentive to play the game. Having a local under 20's (or junior NRL rep presence) increases the chances of local Union players trying RL over RU)

Additionally, the advantage of having a team play out of different regional Cities is that when it is played in Wellington, there is still quite a TV draw card for the rest of the South.

Add to that that the NRL is quickly gaining much more financial clout then the NZRU and you'll start to see more players that in the past would have played RU choosing to play RL for the money.

 

[ZEROMISSTACKLES]

As long as Union and Soccer is around and now Playstation, Wellington down will not have the athletes left over after the others are done with the orchid.

I like the idea of a Southern/Wellington Orcas, the opportunity it brings for the young guns but they might as well change the name to Southren Useless 'cos I seem them struggling reflecting the struggling numbers they were picked from.

 

[The Great Dane]

As long as Union and Soccer is around and now Playstation, Wellington down will not have the athletes left over after the others are done with the orchid.

I like the idea of a Southern/Wellington Orcas, the opportunity it brings for the young guns but they might as well change the name to Southren Useless 'cos I seem them struggling reflecting the struggling numbers they were picked from.

Unlike Super Rugby the NRL has no restrictions on how many "imported" players a team can have and it is very unlikely to ever introduce one otherwise the competitiveness of every other RL nation would drop significantly, so NZ wouldn't have to provide all the extra talent for the team anyway.

Besides as I said before with the club would come a large influx of cash for players coming from the NRL that local RU will not be able to match, so many players that historically would have chosen to play RU will choose to play RL for the cash.
In other words the NZRU will face the same problem that the ARU has faced in the last 20 years since they went professional and got rid of the shamateurism (though admittedly still on a much smaller scale), they wont be able meet the NRL's average pay rate for players.

 

[Perth Red]

The number of NZ players in nrl and SL would suggest the country is producing plenty enough talent for two teams. Now if a southern based team can generate $20mill income is the real question? Union is a more popular sport yet the Wellington union team has poor crowds and is in financial strife.
Personally I think more of the $20mill a year nrl gets from NZ TV should be going back into nzrl and wouldn't be amiss if a second NZ team got extra nrl funding like Melbourne.

 

[Te Kaha]

Besides as I said before with the club would come a large influx of cash for players coming from the NRL that local RU will not be able to match, so many players that historically would have chosen to play RU will choose to play RL for the cash.

Will any NRL team EVER be able to pay a 23 year old a Million a year? European Rugby clubs are paying that for young fringe All Blacks. or 2 mill for an aging over the hill player such as Carter? How much NZ Rugby can spend has very little to do on who wants to play what code. If it was purely money then Rugby would win hands down. Especially among the PI descendent population.

In other words the NZRU will face the same problem that the ARU has faced in the last 20 years since they went professional and got rid of the shamateurism (though admittedly still on a much smaller scale), they wont be able meet the NRL's average pay rate for players.

They cant even match European Club Rugby rates yet they still maintain a competitive team. You discount the fact that Young players actually WANT to play rugby.

The number of NZ players in nrl and SL would suggest the country is producing plenty enough talent for two teams. Now if a southern based team can generate $20mill income is the real question?

Talent is not the issue, has never been. Wellington has the League talent easily. Money will always be an issue in a city so small.

Union is a more popular sport yet the Wellington union team has poor crowds and is in financial strife.

Poor Crowds maybe, although this year they are considerably up. But it is far from "financial strife". You do know they don't have to play payer wages don't you?

Personally I think more of the $20mill a year nrl gets from NZ TV should be going back into nzrl and wouldn't be amiss if a second NZ team got extra nrl funding like Melbourne.

The NZRL needs more money for sure.

 

[undertaker]

Another mistake. This will be the new titans, the next titans with support dwindling after the shine of a new team wears off.
Auckland need a derby, like Brisbane. You create massive interest by having two teams playing out of the one stadium every weekend. Creating a Wellington will just create another gold coast, a team in the middle of faking nowhere, with fake-all support, and stuck in a round lifeless stadium, in the cold, in the heart of winter with no cover.

This bid has failure written all over it, while we could have a team in Auckland, and lobby the government with a bit of cash to build a new stadium, (or better still invest with their own money(the NRL) to build a decent stadium in Auckland for our code.)
With massive derbies, a support base that can grow, and the bonus of a stadium for our code to call home in NZ.

We need vision, not the same old mistakes. Wellington is a mistake, i dont care how many millionaires are on board.

:lol:
"Dear oh dear oh dear!" I don't know where to start and finish with what you wrote here

The only time Wellington should ever get a team is if a Sydney team relocates, or they bring in promotion relegation..

Promotion/Relegation will never be introduced in any Australian sport. Unlike the UK, we don't have the multitude of teams below first-grade level which could potentially make the step-up to that level. UK also has nearly triple the population of Australia.

If the Titans moved to Logan, then i would say bring in Wellington, and the NRL would have to prop them up, because it costs around 20 million and rising to run a NRL team. One bad year and your on the ropes.

Titans moving to Logan? That will do me:lol:

NZ needs a second team to keep bringing in the fans that are getting swept up in league with the success of the national team.
.

I agree with the part in bold. If NZ's national side continues to be a strong, dominant side over the next few years, the NRL needs to capitalise on that with a second NRL side in NZ no later than the end of the next tv rights deal at the very latest (assuming tv rights deal will be 5yrs, that will be end of 2022). Because NZ has a population of only 4.5 million, competition between sports organisations to win kids over to playing their sport will intensify and many of especially the Polynesians/Maoris that could make it in league will be led over to Union.

NZ2 is my top pick for expansion, marginally ahead of Perth.

Regarding the potential timeslots and subsequent ratings this adds to the tv rights deal, Perth slightly has the upper hand in that regard and offers more to the tv broadcasters in terms of ratings. Say for example the current timeslots stay the same, Ch9/Fox retain the rights and the 9th game is on Sunday evening. A Perth side gives:

- Ch9 the flexibility of scheduling a live double-header on Friday night when Perth plays at home, with the Perth side playing in the second/late match. This would be ideal if Perth played the Broncos or the Sydney teams that obtain high FTA ratings, as Ch9 love scheduling the Broncos on Friday night
- Fox Sports the flexibility of scheduling a live triple-header on Super Saturday in primetime, with the Saturday 3pm game (which doesn't rate well) shifted to Saturday 9:30pm EST when Perth play a home game on Saturday night
- Fox Sports the flexibility of scheduling a Perth home game on Sunday 6/6:30pm EST, which is another "day" game on Sunday at 4-4:30pm in Perth.
- Fox Sports the flexibility of scheduling Perth on Monday Night Football on Easter Monday or Queen's Birthday Holiday at 7pm EST (which would be 5pm in Perth, and 4pm during daylight savings for the Easter match). Those would be the only two Mondays, more so Easter Monday, where I would schedule Perth to play a home game on MNF and get the monopoly with no other sports being played in Perth on that day.

So, a Perth team opens up three timeslots in primetime (Friday 9:30pm, Saturday 9:30pm, Sunday 6/6:30pm if a Sydney team doesn't want to play on Sunday evening in the cold of winter). A NZ team would only allow one: an extra Sunday game at 12pm EST.

 

[The Great Dane]

Will any NRL team EVER be able to pay a 23 year old a Million a year? European Rugby clubs are paying that for young fringe All Blacks. or 2 mill for an aging over the hill player such as Carter? How much NZ Rugby can spend has very little to do on who wants to play what code. If it was purely money then Rugby would win hands down. Especially among the PI descendent population.


They cant even match European Club Rugby rates yet they still maintain a competitive team. You discount the fact that Young players actually WANT to play rugby.

The NRL club wouldn't be trying to sign 23 year old fringe All Blacks or ex-All Blacks though, they'd be signing the kids when they're 14-16 years old with deals that RU in the Southern hemisphere simply can't match in that age group and developing them into NRL quality talent.

Sure some kids and their families will still choose for them to play RU and a fair chunk of them will be poached by both domestic and international RU later on in their careers (which is also the case in Australia + the AFL that can match the NRL's budget for juniors), but RL will still get first dibs on many of them and it'll be up to the NRL club to pick and choose which ones that the want to try to keep in the game most heavily and which to let go to RU.

Talent is not the issue, has never been. Wellington has the League talent easily. Money will always be an issue in a city so small.

It's a good thing then that no serious NZ2 bid is relying on Wellington alone to support them financially.

The NZRL needs more money for sure.

This is true, however if the ARLC/NRL is the one making the investment then they should be the ones getting the return for their investment.

 

[Te Kaha]

The NRL club wouldn't be trying to sign 23 year old fringe All Blacks or ex-All Blacks though, they'd be signing the kids when they're 14-16 years old with deals that RU in the Southern hemisphere simply can't match in that age group and developing them into NRL quality talent.

Sure some kids and their families will still choose for them to play RU and a fair chunk of them will be poached by both domestic and international RU later on in their careers (which is also the case in Australia + the AFL that can match the NRL's budget for juniors), but RL will still get first dibs on many of them and it'll be up to the NRL club to pick and choose which ones that the want to try to keep in the game most heavily and which to let go to RU.

Again you make the assumption that paying them will be enough. They may not want to play League at all. Just having a big bank balance isn't enough.

It's a good thing then that no serious NZ2 bid is relying on Wellington alone to support them financially.

And where ever has a team without a "home ground" to play most of their games at ever been successful? You might get away with two grounds, but more than that, as is being suggested, and you will lose "local" support.

This is true, however if the ARLC/NRL is the one making the investment then they should be the ones getting the return for their investment.

If that was the case NZ2 would never get off the ground. The juniors are already there for teams to pillage, and they wont get any big increase from TV rights in an already mature TV market.

 

[Perth Red]

At least it gives choice, since starting an SG ball side and giving kids in WA a pathway to nrl we have seen many choose RL over Union. Blake and Rona would now be playing for the Force if it wasn't for this pathway.

A southern team could work as long as its main base was Wellington and it had close linkages and 1-2 games a year in Christchurch and Dunedin to drive memberships in those cities. They could then try and entice Sydney teams to take their home game against them to those cities as well.

I guess only sky NZ can answer the last point, is having two NZ nrl teams attractive enough to drive up the TV rights they are willing to pay, only they know that. You would have to look at the Warriors TV audience v an all Australian game audience in NZ to see if it makes much difference.

 

[flamin]

Will any NRL team EVER be able to pay a 23 year old a Million a year? .

That's already happening. :?

 

[RoosTah]

Could Kiwis here see a city like Christchurch supporting an NRL team? I know League really is king in Auckland, but I'd love to see resources invested in developing the game in the South Island, because longer term that would then help build the case for a more tangible and tribal NZ Origin of North v South AND because it'd spread the game beyond its northern strong hold.

That said, I'm aware that population wise the Canterbury region only has about half a million people, and from an economics and demographics perspective it might be wiser to put a second side in the north.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Christchurch has been set back at least 5 years by the earthquake. Before that it mighty have rivalled Wellington as a candidate but now I really think Wellington, or better still a combined southern franchise incorporating both, would be the best bet.

 

[The Great Dane]

Again you make the assumption that paying them will be enough. They may not want to play League at all. Just having a big bank balance isn't enough.

I'm not making that assumption at all, as I said before

Sure some kids and their families will still choose for them to play RU

and they'll do it for a multitude of reasons, including simply disliking RL (though in my experience that reason is very rare and is only ever made by people that don't need the money), but often whether you like it or not the money and other things that each code is offering is the difference between a player joining the NRL, RU. AFL or whatever, especially for poorer families that really need the extra money.

And where ever has a team without a "home ground" to play most of their games at ever been successful? You might get away with two grounds, but more than that, as is being suggested, and you will lose "local" support.

If planned properly I've no doubt that it could work.

Most people are suggesting 2 regular 'home' cities (Wellington and Christchurch) that the vast majority of home games would be played out of, with the odd game chucked to other cities every year. So it's not like this new club would e a gypsy club that plays it's game at a different ground every week.

I've seen similar arrangements work on a local level, the trick is to share representation as evenly as possible, have neutral branding (for example call the team the Southern NZ whatever and don't use the traditional colour schemes of any individual area), Wellington gets five games, Christchurch gets five game and two other cities get the other two, one on the North Island and the other on the South Island, etc

As along as it's branded and marketed as a club that represents all of NZ outside of Auckland it should work.

If that was the case NZ2 would never get off the ground. The juniors are already there for teams to pillage, and they wont get any big increase from TV rights in an already mature TV market.

BS.

A second NZ club gives the NRL a weekly opportunity to exploit the advantages of scheduling a game in NZ once a week if they so choose, and their isn't only interest in a second NZ club in NZ, a second club would also boost interest in NZers living in Australia, which is a large number and a sizable market in of it's self.

 

[Te Kaha]

That's already happening. :?

Which fringe international players are on a million a year?

I'm not making that assumption at all, as I said before and they'll do it for a multitude of reasons, including simply disliking RL (though in my experience that reason is very rare and is only ever made by people that don't need the money), but often whether you like it or not the money and other things that each code is offering is the difference between a player joining the NRL, RU. AFL or whatever, especially for poorer families that really need the extra money.

The "other" things are more likely to make the difference. Professional sports people have a very short life span in sport. Just having a big bank balance will never be enough. And unless things change massively it will be "most" who still choose to play rugby over league.

If planned properly I've no doubt that it could work
Most people are suggesting 2 regular 'home' cities (Wellington and Christchurch) that the vast majority of home games would be played out of, with the odd game chucked to other cities every year. So it's not like this new club would e a gypsy club that plays it's game at a different ground every week.
I've seen similar arrangements work on a local level, the trick is to share representation as evenly as possible, have neutral branding (for example call the team the Southern NZ whatever and don't use the traditional colour schemes of any individual area), Wellington gets five games, Christchurch gets five game and two other cities get the other two, one on the North Island and the other on the South Island, etc

As along as it's branded and marketed as a club that represents all of NZ outside of Auckland it should work.

You aren't talking grounds in the same city, you are talking in different Islands! There will be two groups of fans will little to no crossover. Two different "home" atmospheres, still having to travel to play "at home" not being with the family, not sleeping in your own bed. different preparation routines. No matter what you say it is NOT two home grounds when they are in different cities.

BS.
A second NZ club gives the NRL a weekly opportunity to exploit the advantages of scheduling a game in NZ once a week if they so choose, and their isn't only interest in a second NZ club in NZ, a second club would also boost interest in NZers living in Australia, which is a large number and a sizable market in of it's self.

Assumptions again. It could, but it may not. And you are suggesting playing at grounds already in use. There may be many times when you cant have a game in NZ every week. There is no guarantee that adding NZ2 would offset the cost, and if that's all the NRL is looking at it wont get off the ground. The only way it will is if the NRL is serious about expanding the game and not worrying about the cost.