Team 20 - Who? Adelaide or Queensland 5?

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

18 - Perth
19 - Adelaide
20 - Melbourne 2 or New Zealand 2 (Wellington)

Brisbane is covered. Central QLD is too small. PNG is too unstable.

I think Brisbane needs a third team in the future and Sydney needs to get rid of two or three. There's just not enough rugby league fans or businesses in Sydney to prop up nine clubs.

We had the Sharks generating just $4m in sponsorship last year vs the Cowboys' $8.9m. A small regional city like Townsville, that is further away from Brisbane than Sydney is, shouldn't be more commercially lucrative to the corporate sector than one from Australia's largest city. The reason businesses don't want to invest in all nine Sydney clubs is because they'll never get good market share when they're competing with eight other teams for media coverage.

 

[MugaB]

I think Brisbane needs a third team in the future and Sydney needs to get rid of two or three. There's just not enough rugby league fans or businesses in Sydney to prop up nine clubs.

We had the Sharks generating just $4m in sponsorship last year vs the Cowboys' $8.9m. A small regional city like Townsville, that is further away from Brisbane than Sydney is, shouldn't be more commercially lucrative to the corporate sector than one from Australia's largest city. The reason businesses don't want to invest in all nine Sydney clubs is because they'll never get good market share when they're competing with eight other teams for media coverage.

Ok ...trolling alert

 

[docbrown]

I think Brisbane needs a third team in the future and Sydney needs to get rid of two or three. There's just not enough rugby league fans or businesses in Sydney to prop up nine clubs.

We had the Sharks generating just $4m in sponsorship last year vs the Cowboys' $8.9m. A small regional city like Townsville, that is further away from Brisbane than Sydney is, shouldn't be more commercially lucrative to the corporate sector than one from Australia's largest city. The reason businesses don't want to invest in all nine Sydney clubs is because they'll never get good market share when they're competing with eight other teams for media coverage.

I wouldn't put another team in Brisbane until both the Broncos and Dolphins are consistently pulling 30k+ crowds year in year out.

As for Sydney the Dragons are mostly targeting the Illawarra now so it's closer to 8 teams. I agree that Sharks are a small team. Same with Manly. Panthers are also small but have a junior base and will benefit from the swell of population growth. But you also have to consider that Sydney teams aren't 100% relying on local enclave based support any more. Yes that's an important factor but demographics have changed. Fans of clubs that were inner-west and city based are now spread out across the city as suburbia shifted. You also have fans of Sydney clubs right across New South Wales. It's not that there aren't enough corporates to sponsor these clubs, it's that clubs - and also the NRL - haven't done enough to court sponsors.

 

[Colk]

I wouldn't put another team in Brisbane until both the Broncos and Dolphins are consistently pulling 30k+ crowds year in year out.

As for Sydney the Dragons are mostly targeting the Illawarra now so it's closer to 8 teams. I agree that Sharks are a small team. Same with Manly. Panthers are also small but have a junior base and will benefit from the swell of population growth. But you also have to consider that Sydney teams aren't 100% relying on local enclave based support any more. Yes that's an important factor but demographics have changed. Fans of clubs that were inner-west and city based are now spread out across the city as suburbia shifted. You also have fans of Sydney clubs right across New South Wales. It's not that there aren't enough corporates to sponsor these clubs, it's that clubs - and also the NRL - haven't done enough to court sponsors.

You raise very good points Doc.

You don’t want to make the same mistakes as Sydney did with South East QLD. At this stage the Dolphins haven’t kicked a ball and the GC are still struggling with support (there is potential in that area of course but they are still in quite a fragile position)

Until as you say the Broncos, Dolphins and the Titans are all drawing really good support then we shouldn’t be desperate for another side in that area, notwithstanding the natural growth in that area.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I wouldn't put another team in Brisbane until both the Broncos and Dolphins are consistently pulling 30k+ crowds year in year out.

As for Sydney the Dragons are mostly targeting the Illawarra now so it's closer to 8 teams. I agree that Sharks are a small team. Same with Manly. Panthers are also small but have a junior base and will benefit from the swell of population growth. But you also have to consider that Sydney teams aren't 100% relying on local enclave based support any more. Yes that's an important factor but demographics have changed. Fans of clubs that were inner-west and city based are now spread out across the city as suburbia shifted. You also have fans of Sydney clubs right across New South Wales. It's not that there aren't enough corporates to sponsor these clubs, it's that clubs - and also the NRL - haven't done enough to court sponsors.

I disagree.

Cronulla got just $4m in sponsorship last year, compared to $8.9m and $12.7m for Cowboys and Broncos. That's a huge discrepancy for a team that's from Australia's largest market.

Cronulla's fans didn't travel to Kogarah to watch them play.

The numbers don't lie. Sydney cannot support nine clubs.

 

[Perth Red]

We shouldnt need Brisbane3, but alas poor decisions and all that.

Perth
NZ2
Brisbane3

the only obvious choices for the next 3 teams at this time.

 

[Perth Red]

I wouldn't put another team in Brisbane until both the Broncos and Dolphins are consistently pulling 30k+ crowds year in year out.

As for Sydney the Dragons are mostly targeting the Illawarra now so it's closer to 8 teams. I agree that Sharks are a small team.

Disagree, Dragons are still a Sydney club as they are still attracting fans and corporates from Sydney in competition with the other clubs. Unless that changes they still need to be considered in the over saturation of Sydney. Im in Wollongong at moment and I cant see how the city could support a FT NRL club, simply not enough big business here.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

We shouldnt need Brisbane3, but alas poor decisions and all that.

Perth
NZ2
Brisbane3

the only obvious choices for the next 3 teams at this time.

If we're lucky then Broncos and Dolphins will cover all of Brisbane, but will Dolphins being on the northern outskirts and no team south of the river it means there is a large segment of the city unrepresented.

The Lions and Bullets are based south of the river.

 

[Perth Red]

If we're lucky then Broncos and Dolphins will cover all of Brisbane, but will Dolphins being on the northern outskirts and no team south of the river it means there is a large segment of the city unrepresented.

The Lions and Bullets are based south of the river.

tbf this is the small minded NRL thinking that created the sydney mess. Two clubs for a city of 3mill should be more than enough to cover it as long as they both do their jobs properly.

 

[MugaB]

I disagree.

Cronulla got just $4m in sponsorship last year, compared to $8.9m and $12.7m for Cowboys and Broncos. That's a huge discrepancy for a team that's from Australia's largest market.

Cronulla's fans didn't travel to Kogarah to watch them play.

The numbers don't lie. Sydney cannot support nine clubs.

Numbers only tell the story you fudge them to be

 

[Perth Red]

Numbers only tell the story you fudge them to be

Most clubs operate on $25-30mill budgets. They get $15mill from NRL. That some of them can only just cover the rest (and still require millions from the pokies) shows how poor performing they are in terms of fanbase and corporate revenue. That's not limited to Sydney by the way and the ARLC has to take some of that blame in failing to grow the popularity of the sport.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

tbf this is the small minded NRL thinking that created the sydney mess. Two clubs for a city of 3mill should be more than enough to cover it as long as they both do their jobs properly.

Broncos at Red Hill and Firehawks at Coorparoo would have been perfect. West vs east and north vs south. The river could have been the natural divide between the two teams.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Most clubs operate on $25-30mill budgets. They get $15mill from NRL. That some of them can only just cover the rest (and still require millions from the pokies) shows how poor performing they are in terms of fanbase and corporate revenue. That's not limited to Sydney by the way and the ARLC has to take some of that blame in failing to grow the popularity of the sport.

Imagine how f**ked the Sydney clubs would be if the wowsers who want to do away with pokies get their way?

The wowsers aren't going away and their support is getting stronger. Watch this space as it could be a disaster waiting to happen for the NSWRL clubs who are still living in 1963.

 

[docbrown]

I disagree.

Cronulla got just $4m in sponsorship last year, compared to $8.9m and $12.7m for Cowboys and Broncos. That's a huge discrepancy for a team that's from Australia's largest market.

Cronulla's fans didn't travel to Kogarah to watch them play.

The numbers don't lie. Sydney cannot support nine clubs.

I've never said that Sharks aren't one of the smallest clubs in the league. They are. Honestly, I would've had them merge with Illawarra back in the 90s. But again your thinking is based on the mindset that clubs only get their support from their local suburbs. You're applying an 80s/90s mindset. Do you really think AFL clubs like Hawthorn only gets their fans from Hawthorn? No, that club is supported by racists all over Victoria. Sharks have fans outside of the shire and in regional/rural NSW.

Disagree, Dragons are still a Sydney club as they are still attracting fans and corporates from Sydney in competition with the other clubs. Unless that changes they still need to be considered in the over saturation of Sydney. Im in Wollongong at moment and I cant see how the city could support a FT NRL club, simply not enough big business here.

St George-Illawarra will be fine. They're one of the biggest clubs in the competition and they have supporters all over NSW and even QLD. Feel free to write your detailed analysis of their woes to the club CEO. I'm sure they'll file it in the appropriate recycling bin.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I've never said that Sharks aren't one of the smallest clubs in the league. They are. Honestly, I would've had them merge with Illawarra back in the 90s. But again your thinking is based on the mindset that clubs only get their support from their local suburbs. You're applying an 80s/90s mindset. Do you really think AFL clubs like Hawthorn only gets their fans from Hawthorn? No, that club is supported by racists all over Victoria. Sharks have fans outside of the shire and in regional/rural NSW.



St George-Illawarra will be fine. They're one of the biggest clubs in the competition and they have supporters all over NSW and even QLD. Feel free to write your detailed analysis of their woes to the club CEO. I'm sure they'll file it in the appropriate recycling bin.

Dragons control the area of Southern Sydney to the north of the Georges River. South of Sutherland is Wollongong /Illawarra, which is Dragons territory.

It doesn't matter how many fans Cronulla have in rural NSW if they're too far away to attend matches. Clubs need active fans buying ticketed memberships and corporate memberships, not people who only watch the game on Ch9 and Foxtel. Fans watching on TV don't make clubs rich.

 

[docbrown]

Dragons control the area of Southern Sydney to the north of the Georges River. South of Sutherland is Wollongong /Illawarra, which is Dragons territory.

You obviously missed the part where I said BACK IN THE 90s. Not now...

It doesn't matter how many fans Cronulla have in rural NSW if they're too far away to attend matches. Clubs need active fans buying ticketed memberships and corporate memberships, not people who only watch the game on Ch9 and Foxtel. Fans watching on TV don't make clubs rich.

It's all important. I don't know why you would deride the television viewing base when it is essentially the largest chunk of funding for rugby league in this country by far dwarfing all forms of memberships. Without viewers those grants to clubs don't grow. If fans only supported clubs based on immediate local geography the NRL would have collapsed years ago. It hasn't because it's not the reality. It's only one aspect of fan support.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

You obviously missed the part where I said BACK IN THE 90s. Not now...


It's all important. I don't know why you would deride the television viewing base when it is essentially the largest chunk of funding for rugby league in this country by far dwarfing all forms of memberships. Without viewers those grants to clubs don't grow. If fans only supported clubs based on immediate local geography the NRL would have collapsed years ago. It hasn't because it's not the reality. It's only one aspect of fan support.

Have you not kept track of broadcast deals over the last decade?

Foxtel and Ch9 are less interested in our game and the gap between us and AwFuL is widening.

Ch9 demanded we give them a discount in 2020, then used the money we gave back -- about $100m -- to buy the rights to rugby union. We're getting just $115pa in cash from Ch9, who bid $500m pa for AwFuL just a few weeks ago.

Foxtel gave us no increase when V'landys signed a terrible deal, then used the money it didn't give us to AwFuL.

AwFuL will get $643m pa in cash and contra between 25-31, whereas we will only get $402 pa in cash and contra. Take out contra and it is $573m vs $370m pa.

Not having a national footprint is starting to really hurt our game.

 

[docbrown]

Not having a national footprint is starting to really hurt our game.

I haven't argued otherwise. I was literally arguing the importance of television rights to the game and clubs above everything else, whereas you said:

not people who only watch the game on Ch9 and Foxtel. Fans watching on TV don't make clubs rich.

So really you're only proving my point. Thank you.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I haven't argued otherwise. I was literally arguing the importance of television rights to the game and clubs above everything else, whereas you said:


So really you're only proving my point. Thank you.

Why is the gap between NRL and AwFuL growing wider?

$402m vs $643m.

The broadcasters are not paying by the viewer. They care about where the viewers are from.

Plus a fan from rural Australia doesn't mean shit to commercial broadcasters who are only permitted to operate in Australia's five metro markets.

 

[footy75]

Adelaide and Perth. Surely both.