Perth Red
Post Whore
- Messages
- 73,290
Why do you ask an unanswerable question?But are they interested in joking the board of a NRL club?
Why do you ask an unanswerable question?But are they interested in joking the board of a NRL club?
The point to keeping mind.It's not a privately owned club like the Storm ,they appoint major shareholders & local business people.The majority are NSW based board members, for a WA club that's not great, imo.
NS have 3 reps WA RL only 2. Again is this a Perth club or not?
Dicko makes total sense and no problem at all with him on the board.
The Nauru island fumble ball club.What's the biggest sports club in Australia?
lol. yeh if only that had been an option!The point to keeping mind.It's not a privately owned club like the Storm ,they appoint major shareholders & local business people.
Perth has the NRL as the major backer ,so they are entitled to nominate the people, they believe will do the job and if that means people they have close ties with , so be it.Bear in mind the NRL are putting their chin out financially so they want this to be a success.
One minute the NRL are hopeless not brining in Perth, the next when they do( and throw money in substantially) , it's nepotism because some big bad boys from the East are n the board.
I mean if Perth had a private consortium prepared to throw the cash in whatever the annual figure is , by all means have a winegrower from Margaret River on the board.
That's only fair, but I question why norths get 2 appointments for $0 investment.The point to keeping mind.It's not a privately owned club like the Storm ,they appoint major shareholders & local business people.
Perth has the NRL as the major backer ,so they are entitled to nominate the people, they believe will do the job and if that means people they have close ties with , so be it.Bear in mind the NRL are putting their chin out financially so they want this to be a success.
One minute the NRL are hopeless not brining in Perth, the next when they do( and throw money in substantially) , it's nepotism because some big bad boys from the East are n the board.
I mean if Perth had a private consortium prepared to throw the cash in whatever the annual figure is , by all means have a winegrower from Margaret River on the board.
The investment in pathways is their contribution, plus the bears IP and colours I believeThat's only fair, but I question why norths get 2 appointments for $0 investment.
Yeah, the things that Perth never asked for. LOL.The investment in pathways is their contribution, plus the bears IP and colours I believe
Fair enough. I guess the pathways are at least useful, you'd need a partner initially anywayYeah, the things that Perth never asked for. LOL.
It wasn’t a sustainable option. The business case/model was inherently defective. Sure there was start up funding but there was no long term financial planning, nor contingency had the club struggled. It relied too heavily on promises and verbal guarantees.lol. yeh if only that had been an option!
Your WA Government asked for it. In fact; they conceptualised it, proposed it.Yeah, the things that Perth never asked for. LOL.
Technically, it’s 3 appointments.That's only fair, but I question why norths get 2 appointments for $0 investment.
You'd need a feeder, agreed.Fair enough. I guess the pathways are at least useful, you'd need a partner initially anyway
Pretty fitting for someone that runs CashConverters…It wasn’t a sustainable option. The business case/model was inherently defective. Sure there was start up funding but there was no long term financial planning, nor contingency had the club struggled. It relied too heavily on promises and verbal guarantees.
It was flawed. Therefore whilst it might have been presented and submitted as a formal bid, it was never an option.
You have had 8 months to digest that info, still you fight it.
Yeah, the things that Perth never asked for. LOL.
Your WA Government asked for it. In fact; they conceptualised it, proposed it.
Still a better deal than what the Brisbane Bears got when they merged with Fitzroy. In that scenario the Fitzroy side got 3 board positions for at least the first 10 years whilst the Bears side had to pay $1.25m of the Lions debt to the Nauru Insurance Corporation.That's only fair, but I question why norths get 2 appointments for $0 investment.
It wasn’t a sustainable option. The business case/model was inherently defective. Sure there was start up funding but there was no long term financial planning, nor contingency had the club struggled. It relied too heavily on promises and verbal guarantees.
It was flawed. Therefore whilst it might have been presented and submitted as a formal bid, it was never an option.
You have had 8 months to digest that info, still you fight it.
Your WA Government asked for it. In fact; they conceptualised it, proposed it.
May 14th, 2022 at Magic Round. I was present in the room when it was presented and discussed.
Technically, it’s 3 appointments.
IP & Brand is the investment. In the commercial world, IP and franchise brands is the strength. Of course here so is the geographical location ie Perth, WA.
In rugby league, the geographical locations did provide the foundations for the franchise brands to grow and become the invaluable asset that they are today. We need to acknowledge that without those locations, the brands might not have been recognised and bear the strength, commercially, that they currently do.
However in today’s world; Broncos is the brand, not Brisbane. Cowboys is the brand, not North Queensland. Dolphins is the brand, hence no need for a geographical titled location in their club title. Panthers is a brand, not Penrith hence why they are controlled by the over arching Panthers Group and not Penrith Group and so on and so forth. At some point the brand, all brands, outgrows the location.
This is why US Sports franchise brands can and do willingly relocate locations. The that world; the brand is more powerful than the location. I acknowledge that it’s different circumstances in this case but still, is it that different?
Brand and IP = commercial attachment and selling point. Commercial attachment = investment.
Of course this was all discussed ad nauseam on the original WA Bears thread; so I’m not quite sure why months later it’s ruffled feathers here. I quite literally stated in that thread how this was going to play out, Lo and behold; here we are.