Time to crack out Arko's ARL blueprint

[The Great Dane]

But surely it would be better to have both lots. Not tear down one for the sake of the other.

Honestly, if a club isn't sustainable, it's a drain on everybody else in the game, and it's not of any strategic value, then frankly if you can replace it and it's fans with a club that is sustainable and better supported, then you'd be mad not to do it.

I look at it no different then any other business. If a McDonald's franchise was failing McDonald's wouldn't prop it up and keep it open because the owners and patrons of that McDonald's would be hurt by the decision, they'd close it and open a new one somewhere where it'll be a profitable business. Sure they may lose some customers from that, but they'll replace them and more and they won't have the burden of an unsustainable business on their hands.

Look at American sports and try to tell me honestly that, with a few notable exceptions, they miss the clubs they've relocated and replaced.

Hell, try to tell me honestly that RL misses Annandale, Glebe, Cumberland, Newtown, NS, etc. Sure their loss was sad, but we're better off for it, and we'd be better off for it if a few of the current smaller Sydney clubs were replaced with big city clubs in some new markets.

 

[tri_colours]

Honestly, if a club isn't sustainable, it's a drain on everybody else in the game, and it's not of any strategic value, then frankly if you can replace it and it's fans with a club that is sustainable and better supported, then you'd be mad not to do it.

I look at it no different then any other business. If a McDonald's franchise was failing McDonald's wouldn't prop it up and keep it open because the owners and patrons of that McDonald's would be hurt by the decision, they'd close it and open a new one somewhere where it'll be a profitable business. Sure they may lose some customers from that, but they'll replace them and more and they won't have the burden of an unsustainable business on their hands.

Look at American sports and try to tell me honestly that, with a few notable exceptions, they miss the clubs they've relocated and replaced.

Hell, try to tell me honestly that RL misses Annandale, Glebe, Cumberland, Newtown, NS, etc. Sure their loss was sad, but we're better off for it, and we'd be better off for it if a few of the current smaller Sydney clubs were replaced with big city clubs in some new markets.

Maybe you should be looking at it differently because likening a hamburger joint , that you've been eating at for years to a football club that some ones been following for years is a very poor analogy.

The club that we are most likely talking about, Manly is not unsustainable - far from it. Its very successful on the field and bring more to the business than some shiny new franchise in Perth or NZ. Ditto Cronulla or whatever Sydney club your aiming to get rid of.

Those clubs you mentioned from100 years ago are a whole different story. And yes, I Know plenty of fans that still miss Norths and even 40 + years on the Blue Bags.

Souths were once told they were unsustainable - How did that work out?

 

[Perth Red]

Maybe you should be looking at it differently because likening a hamburger joint , that you've been eating at for years to a football club that some ones been following for years is a very poor analogy.

The club that we are most likely talking about, Manly is not unsustainable - far from it. Very successful on the field and bring more to the business than some shiny new franchise in Perth or NZ. Ditto Cronulla or whatever Sydney club your aiming to get rid of.

Those clubs you mentioned are a whole different story. And yes, I Know plenty of fans that still miss Norths and even 40 + years on the Blue Bags.

Souths were once told they were unsustainable - How did that work out?

manly avg’d less than 9k couple of seasons ago, they only keep afloat due to a local rich guy tipping in, their stadium is an embarrassment. Tbh the only thing they offer is a direct pathway for a healthy local jnr scene. Nrl is first and foremost a business, if you’ve not learnt that in this current scenario you never will.

souths were unsustainable, they hit lotto by having a Hollywood Star as a fan with a billionaire mate. They fluked it, not sure that’s a great business model to hang your hat on.

 

[tri_colours]

manly avg’d less than 9k couple of seasons ago, they only keep afloat due to a local rich guy tipping in, their stadium is an embarrassment. Tbh the only thing they offer is a direct pathway for a healthy local jnr scene. Nrl is first and foremost a business, if you’ve not learnt that in this current scenario you never will.

souths were unsustainable, they hit lotto by having a Hollywood Star as a fan with a billionaire mate. They fluked it, not sure that’s a great business model to hang your hat on.

The point being they keep afloat. Didnt Penn knock back $18m for the club just last year.

Pissing off thousands, causing people to march against you sound like poor business to me. Getting rid of your better money spinners also sounds like poor business to me. And how is having influential backers a negative thing?

I guess we both must have a different opinion of just what is good business is.

 

[The Great Dane]

Maybe you should be looking at it differently because likening a hamburger joint , that you've been eating at for years to a football club that some ones been following for years is a very poor analogy.

It's a perfectly fine analogy, you are just in denial.

The club that we are most likely talking about, Manly is not unsustainable - far from it. Its very successful on the field and bring more to the business than some shiny new franchise in Perth or NZ. Ditto Cronulla or whatever Sydney club your aiming to get rid of.

I'd actually do everything in my power to keep Manly around in some form, the NRL needs a club in Northern Sydney for strategic reasons, and losing Manly would just complicate the situation up there. But that is an aside.

If you think that Manly is sustainable then you're in denial. They're a f**king shit show that have totally failed to move with the times, or make any necessary changes to grow their business, despite the writing being on the wall for almost 20 years now.

The only reason that they aren't talked about as total failures, in the same breath as your Titans of the world, is because their on field success has been allowed to gloss over their massive underachievement and outright failures as a business.

Those clubs you mentioned from100 years ago are a whole different story. And yes, I Know plenty of fans that still miss Norths and even 40 + years on the Blue Bags.

It's not a whole different story, it's literally the exact same mechanisms that go into clubs failing and rationalisation today.

Manly are failing for almost the exact same reasons that Glebe did. Honestly their situations are almost carbon copies of each other.

Souths were once told they were unsustainable - How did that work out?

It's extremely unlikely that any other clubs will be as lucky as Souths were to find a multi-millionaire Hollywood actor and his rich mates willing to prop up the clubs up.

I believe that Hugh Jackman was/is a Manly fan, so maybe Manly should hit him up lol.

 

[The Great Dane]

The point being they keep afloat. Didnt Penn knock back $18m for the club just last year.

Pissing off thousands, causing people to march against you sound like poor business to me. Getting rid of your better money spinners also sounds like poor business to me. And how is having influential backers a negative thing?

Keeping your head above water doesn't mean that you are sustainable, and by no measure is Manly a "money spinner" (most of the NRL clubs aren't).

And honestly it's better to have 10s of millions of dollars in your pocket and a few thousand people pissed off at you, then to not have 10s or millions of dollars in your pocket.

Serious question, do you honestly believe that American sports would be better off if they hadn't chopped and changed where necessary?
Would the AFL be better off with Fitzroy and South Melbourne over Brisbane and Sydney?

I guess we both must have a different opinion of just what is good business is.

You aren't interested in good business practice or what is best for the sport as a whole, you are totally driven by your emotional investment into a club and are scared that good business practice will effect that club, so you are desperately trying to deny the realities of the situation that the NRL and clubs are in as businesses.

It's actually an incredibly selfish position where you put your interests before that of the sport as a whole, and it's attitudes like yours that have prevented RL from growing outside of it's tiny regions while other similar sports are conquering the world.

 

[tri_colours]

It's not a whole different story, it's literally the exact same mechanisms that go into clubs failing and rationalisation today.

Manly are failing for almost the exact same reasons that Glebe did. Honestly their situations are almost carbon copies of each other.
l.

Those clubs were broke - Manly isn't! There's a big difference there in my book. And trying to dehumanise a football sport by saying there little difference between a McDonalds outlet and a football team is just - well - sad.

 

[Perth Red]

The point being they keep afloat. Didnt Penn knock back $18m for the club just last year.

Pissing off thousands, causing people to march against you sound like poor business to me. Getting rid of your better money spinners also sounds like poor business to me. And how is having influential backers a negative thing?

I guess we both must have a different opinion of just what is good business is.

there’s a difference between have money backers putting money in to help you grow your sustainability and asset base ala politis, and owners that are just having to put in year on year to keep you a viable business, pay the bills and cover your annual losses.

 

[The Great Dane]

Those clubs were broke - Manly isn't! There's a big difference there in my book.

That's simply not true.

Annandale and in particular Glebe were in a relatively similar position to the one that smaller Sydney clubs are in today. They were small clubs that were hemmed in by bigger clubs and couldn't keep up with the competition, but if they were allowed to they could have kept their head above water by riding on the coattails of the rest of the competition. But because they were becoming a strain on the rest of the competition they were kicked out of the competition and their juniors split between neighbouring clubs.

That strengthened the neighbouring clubs and eventually lead to the NSWRL replacing them with the Dragons and Bulldogs respectively, both of which went on to become big and powerful clubs that were much stronger than their predecessors.

Are you honestly going to argue that the competition would have been better off with Glebe and the Dales over St. George and Canterbury!?

And trying to dehumanise a football sport by saying there little difference between a McDonalds outlet and a football team is just - well - sad.

Firstly, broadly speaking there isn't much difference between the NRL and McDonald's. They have a very similar franchising model that makes it easy to make analogies between them.

Secondly, you are the only person dehumanising anything.

It might not mean much to you and I if the local McDonald's goes tits up, and the impact may not be on the same scale as when a beloved sports team folds, but it still hurts the local community and economy.

The people working at McDonald's are not lesser than anybody else, they're just trying to make their way in life no different to anybody else.

 

[tri_colours]

Keeping your head above water doesn't mean that you are sustainable, and by no measure is Manly a "money spinner" (most of the NRL clubs aren't).

.

Manly have had two of the top half a dozen rating programs on PTV this year. And that type of thing is important to the NRL. There in the Semis more often than not and have been in two GFs in the past decade. So there a successful club. And having clubs like this is why the ARLC gets big tv money. So i'll continue to refer to them money spinners even if you dont.

 

[mongoose]

The Titans and Manly will be the teams that fall, if any. Two teams that the NRL needs as representation in their respective areas.

Pity both Cronulla and Easts will survive.

How do you know? they both have private ownership and yes the Penn family doesn't want to prop up Manly but they may be able to sell it to a buyer who will.

I hear all this hearsay about that some clubs are doomed but truth is no one knows which, if any clubs will be most affected.

 

[The Great Dane]

Manly have had two of the top half a dozen rating programs on PTV this year.And that type of thing is important to the NRL.

You can't attribute that solely to them, and they've also played two of the top teams in the league this year. Are those numbers so good if the play the Titans and Warriors, probably not right.

There in the Semis more often than not and have been in two GFs in the past decade.So there a successful club.

On field success doesn't mean a thing if you can't profit from it, and Manly has consistently failed to profit from it.

And having clubs like this is why the ARLC gets big tv money.

Having clubs like Brisbane, South Sydney, NZ, are why the ARLC gets big TV money.

You could drop Manly off a cliff tomorrow the effect on the broadcasting rights would be relatively minor. If you replaced them with a club from Brisbane, Perth, or even NZ or Adelaide, you'd definitely make a profit instantly.

So i'll continue to refer to them money spinners even if you dont.

If you want to refer to a club that has been flat broke for decades now, has one of the smallest fan bases, and loses money annually, as a "money spinner" that is your business, but all it does is make you look like a moron.

Really there's no point continuing the conversation because you've backed away from every point that you've made.

 

[greg]

Honestly, if a club isn't sustainable, it's a drain on everybody else in the game, and it's not of any strategic value, then frankly if you can replace it and it's fans with a club that is sustainable and better supported, then you'd be mad not to do it.

I look at it no different then any other business. If a McDonald's franchise was failing McDonald's wouldn't prop it up and keep it open because the owners and patrons of that McDonald's would be hurt by the decision, they'd close it and open a new one somewhere where it'll be a profitable business. Sure they may lose some customers from that, but they'll replace them and more and they won't have the burden of an unsustainable business on their hands.

Look at American sports and try to tell me honestly that, with a few notable exceptions, they miss the clubs they've relocated and replaced.

Hell, try to tell me honestly that RL misses Annandale, Glebe, Cumberland, Newtown, NS, etc. Sure their loss was sad, but we're better off for it, and we'd be better off for it if a few of the current smaller Sydney clubs were replaced with big city clubs in some new markets.

I miss Newtown, I miss Norths. Tell me you wouldn't miss Canberra if they folded. I appreciate you have an opinion but don't insult old supporters of some of these clubs.

 

[tri_colours]

That's simply not true.

Annandale and in particular Glebe were in a relatively similar position to the one that smaller Sydney clubs are in today. They were small clubs that were hemmed in by bigger clubs and couldn't keep up with the competition, but if they were allowed to they could have kept their head above water by riding on the coattails of the rest of the competition. But because they were becoming a strain on the rest of the competition they were kicked out of the competition and their juniors split between neighbouring clubs.

That strengthened the neighbouring clubs and eventually lead to the NSWRL replacing them with the Dragons and Bulldogs respectively, both of which went on to become big and powerful clubs that were much stronger than their predecessors.

Are you honestly going to argue that the competition would have been better off with Glebe and the Dales over St. George and Canterbury!?

'I Seem to recall Annandale could no longer field a team. While Glebe no longer had a home ground and had been going backwards for years. Manly, Cronulla or any other Sydney clubs dont tick too many - if any, of these boxes.

And one of was suspected of cheating?

 

[tri_colours]

there’s a difference between have money backers putting money in to help you grow your sustainability and asset base ala politis, and owners that are just having to put in year on year to keep you a viable business, pay the bills and cover your annual losses.

Basically they put a football team on the field each year, Which is there job.

 

[The Great Dane]

I miss Newtown, I miss Norths. Tell me you wouldn't miss Canberra if they folded. I appreciate you have an opinion but don't insult old supporters of some of these clubs.

I haven't insulted any old fans or clubs, for one thing I am an old supporter of Norths.

I'm just being realistic about those club's situation and the situation of the competition as a whole, and with all due respect the NSWRL/ARL/NRL moved on to bigger and better things once they got rid of them and there're reasons why that is.

Also I'm not sure why you "miss" either of those clubs considering both are still around.

On the question of the Raiders, I can envision futures where the competition outgrows the Raiders, and if that happens it'll be a good thing and I hope the Raiders have the sense to know when it's time to move on. However that's a fair way away and it will never happen so long as Sydney is totally over-saturated.

 

[The Great Dane]

Basically they put a football team on the field each year, Which is there job.

What an incredibly reductive and stupid thing to say.

 

[tri_colours]

You can't attribute that solely to them, and they've also played two of the top teams in the league this year. Are those numbers so good if the play the Titans and Warriors, probably not right.

On field success doesn't mean a thing if you can't profit from it, and Manly has consistently failed to profit from it.

Having clubs like Brisbane, South Sydney, NZ, are why the ARLC gets big TV money.

You could drop Manly off a cliff tomorrow the effect on the broadcasting rights would be relatively minor. If you replaced them with a club from Brisbane, Perth, or even NZ or Adelaide, you'd definitely make a profit instantly.

If you want to refer to a club that has been flat broke for decades now, has one of the smallest fan bases, and loses money annually, as a "money spinner" that is your business, but all it does is make you look like a moron.

Really there's no point continuing the conversation because you've backed away from every point that you've made.

Games that are entertaining rate well. That's how tv works! And having games that rate well is the reason why the ARLC get its TV money .

 

[greg]

I haven't insulted any old fans or clubs, for one thing I am an old supporter of Norths.

I'm just being realistic about those club's situation and the situation of the competition as a whole, and with all due respect the NSWRL/ARL/NRL moved on to bigger and better things once they got rid of them and there're reasons why that is.

Also I'm not sure why you "miss" either of those clubs considering both are still around.

On the question of the Raiders, I can envision futures where the competition outgrows the Raiders, and if that happens it'll be a good thing and I hope the Raiders have the sense to know when it's time to move on. However that's a fair way away and it will never happen so long as Sydney is totally over-saturated.

You were a Norths fan but you don't mis them....says it all.

 

[tri_colours]

If you want to refer to a club that has been flat broke for decades now, has one of the smallest fan bases, and loses money annually, as a "money spinner" that is your business, but all it does is make you look like a moron.

Really there's no point continuing the conversation because you've backed away from every point that you've made.

You seem to be struggling with the term money spinner

www.collinsdictionary.com › dictionary › english › money-spinner
If you say that something is a money-spinner, you mean that it earns a lot of money for someone.

Does that help?
.