"Too many NRL teams in Sydney "Gallop.

[flamin]

Looking at those figures, Parramatta have pretty poor sponsorship deals in comparison to the other Sydney teams, especially considering theyre one the most popular.

 

[gong_eagle]

Melbourne

End of October 2006
Total revenue: $14,098,000
Sponsorship: N/A
Gate takings: $549,000
News Limited grant: $13.11 million


Good old NEWS LTD, where would the Storm be without them

 

[gr8_1]

Melbourne

End of October 2006
Total revenue: $14,098,000
Sponsorship: N/A
Gate takings: $549,000
News Limited grant: $13.11 million


Good old NEWS LTD, where would the Storm be without them

On the Central Coast.

 

[gong_eagle]

On the Central Coast.

thats about right too

 

[donkey|rope]

I said it in another thread about this subject:

Relocate Cronulla to Perth, and bring the Bears back as Central Coast.

You can't move a western Sydney team right now because it will be dire for Rugby League. We do have an overkill of teams out west, but as a game, we need to maintain our strangle hold on the largest base in the country. We need to have a new developmental structure and a vision for the game going forward before we can move any of those teams.

Cronulla is the easiest team to move because of how marketable the licence is potentially in anywhere around Australia. The club itself is a clean slate (see. trophy cabinet) and a new market can feel as though they are investing a virtually new franchise. They have roots in the Shire, but compared to other teams in Sydney they don’t have as much history (see. Souths, Roosters), nor do they have the corporate or the populace support base out that way. Those "mom-&-pop" business that prop the club up aren't going to be paying for third party contracts, they aren't going to be successful in pushing or kicking in for redeveloping Shark Park and they aren't lining up for corporate hospitality.

The Bears are the best licence to bring back to the competition, and particularly to the Central Coast area. There was and is a grassroots movement with a fair amount of support to have the Bears re-enter at the Central Coast. Geographically it makes sense and from what I understand of the bid, the proposal was quite good.

People always bring up that clubs like the Roosters, Souths and Melbourne don't have their own junior base, and it’s a fair criticism. However as I foreshadowed early in this post, this developmental structure is detrimental to the game in the present environment. We need to evolve. Clubs develop players from a young age and can't hold on to them once the mature under the salary cap, and it will get to the point where clubs don’t see it as a sound investment anymore. Additionally, clubs who don't have large bases are punished for not having a geographical competitive advantage. And we will always have a situation where not every club can produce the same junior numbers. The NRL needs to move away from clubs developing junior talent. It should be done through an independent body and/or a independent developmental competition (i.e. the under 20 competition).

 

[ManlyFan07]

From the link provided:

Melbourne
End of October 2006

Total revenue: $14,098,000

Sponsorship: N/A

Gate takings: $549,000

News Limited grant: $13.11 million

Loss: $781,798


North QLD
End of October 2005

(latest available)

Total revenue: $12,126,000

Sponsorship: $5,431,000

Gate takings: $3.13 million

Leagues club grant: $2,818,000

Loss: $776,568


I see that Melbourne's sponsorship is listed as N/A and that it isn't included in their total revenue. But don't Melbourne have one of the largest sponsorship deals of Australian sporting clubs?

I wouldn't place too much faith in these figures........ some clearly don't add up.

Cowboy's sponsorship, gate and leagues club = $11.379mill and total revenue is listed as $12.126mill - what happened to the NRL Grant of $3.35mill ?

Same for the Storm - or is the SMH trying to stick it to News Ltd and the Storm by counting the NRL $3.35m grant as part of the News Ltd grant ??


As for sponsorship numbers - again, difficult to compare because different club's do it differently. Some clubs call everything "Sponsorship Revenue", while other Clubs split it into Sponsorship revenue, Advertising revenue (eg signage at grounds), Corporate Hospitality revenue (Corporate Boxes and Suites) and Events revenue etc. No way Parra's total revenue from Sponsorship, Advertising signage, Corp Hospitality and Events is only $2mill. $2mill is probably just one of the components.

 

[scuzzi]

f**k Perth. they should be the last priority behind extra teams in NZ, QLD and central coast NSW.

Move sharks to central coast. Merge parramatta and penrith. Move souths to Queensland (south Brisbane/queensland rabbitohs) and add an extra NZ team like welington or whatever.

or if melbourne can't improve its popularity within a few years, move them to brissy and leave souths as they are.

...here comes the hate mail

 

[NGR]

souths arnt moving moving for at least another 5 years so just forget about us for a while...

 

[RL1908]

Even if one of the Sydney clubs moves out (or indeed falls over), it won't automatically mean that the remaining Sydney clubs will be in a better position financially:

1. The biggest drawing games in Sydney (and pay tv in Sydney) are when Sydney clubs play against each other.

2. As with Norths & the mergers, disillusioned RL fans/sponsors in Sydney do not automatically transfer their loyalty/investment to one of the remaining Sydney clubs - if anything, they use it as an excuse to go follow another code.

3. Sydney is the largest population/business centre in the nation - each of the Sydney clubs occupies a region bigger than Canberra, Newcastle, Gold Coast or Townsville.

Seems to me the problem is not that Sydney has too many clubs, but that the current Sydney clubs just don't maximise the markets within which they exist. They've been relying on Leagues Clubs - and now that cash-cow has dried up they seem bereft of ideas.

Take Manly for example - with no Bears in the NRL, the Sea Eagles effectively have more than a third of Sydney all to their own - a corporate/sponsor area that covers from Pennant Hills in the north-west, down to Nth Sydney, and up to Palm Beach. There is more money to be made in that region than moving anywhere.

Even beyond the argument in the paragraph above, any Sydney club can go anywhere it wants in Sydney to find sponsors & undertake promotions to maximise its earnings & fan base. The notion of districts is over.

 

[The Fruit Pickers]

Bulldogs
Sponsorship: $3.7 million
Profit: $261,467

Cronulla
Sponsorship: $4.28 million
Profit: club lost about $400,000).

Manly
Sponsorship: $2.9 million
Loss: $1.1 million last year; estimated loss $250,000 this year.

Parramatta
Sponsorship: $2.13 million
Profit/loss: nil

Penrith
Sponsorship: $3,136,000
loss: nil

Dragons
Sponsorship: $5.3 million
Profit: $500,000

South Sydney
Sponsorship: $5.5 million
Profit: not available

Roosters
Sponsorship: $4.02 million
Profit: $1350

Wests Tigers
Sponsorship: $4.3 million
Profit/loss: nil

Looks like an easy decision who to relocate, anyone in red.

and the only 2 sides you have in the black both received massive funding from their leagues clubs to keep them above water, $4 million and $5 million respectively, cut that funding back and both would be in massive trouble…


Brisbane - Profit: $1.8 mil
Newcastle - Profit: $813,000
Dragons - Profit: $500,000
Bulldogs - Profit: $261,467
Gold Coast - Profit: $100,000 estimate
Roosters - Profit: $1,350
Wests Tigers - Profit/loss: nil
Parramatta - Profit/loss: nil
Penrith - Profit/loss: nil
Canberra - Loss: $127,000
Cronulla - Loss: $286,000
Warriors - Loss: estimated at $600,000 a year.
North Qld - Loss: $776,568 (To end 2005)
Melbourne - Loss: $781,798
Manly - Loss: $1.1 million (2006) - estimated loss $250,000 (2007).
Souths - Profit: not available

 

[HHH]

the most intersting thing about the article is clubs such as brisbane, newcastle and the cowboys recieve huge money from gate takings especially brisbane, thus asking the question why dont the sydney clubs try to maximise this source of income. i mean its not like they wouldnt wine and dine there sponsors to keep them happy, why wouldnt they spend a little more on marketing to increase the crowds.if each club increased they attendance by 1500 a year they'be makin a profit, and big one in 5 years

 

[colonel_123]

the most intersting thing about the article is clubs such as brisbane, newcastle and the cowboys recieve huge money from gate takings especially brisbane, thus asking the question why dont the sydney clubs try to maximise this source of income. i mean its not like they wouldnt wine and dine there sponsors to keep them happy, why wouldnt they spend a little more on marketing to increase the crowds.if each club increased they attendance by 1500 a year they'be makin a profit, and big one in 5 years

Brisbane, Newcastle and North Queensland don't have leagues clubs as revenue streams so they need to maximise gate takings to ensure financial stability.

Now that the Sydney clubs are losing Leagues club support because of new laws and taxes they're looking to diversify their revenue streams.

 

[mark123]

remember that "talk about it in the media" post i put up not just last week?

Well seems someone is listening to me.

Its a coincidence however.

But magazines and newspapers and companies like Ford/Holden regularly scoure the FordAustralia forums....

interesting.

I am glad this story has been brought to light none the less.

I am not glad a great aussie icon like the Inline 6 engine has to go (australian built and practically engeneered and its the best aussie engine ever and best 6 in australia atm) but thats progress. If having a competitive ford that imports american made engines means we still have a falcon in 10 years, fine. They are doing some amazing things with direct injection and twin turbo in V engines atm.

Progress. Surivial and optimizing states of being....adapation while being the best.

I firmly beleive that the great game of rugby league is what draws people to the game first and foremost, and i believe when eventually there are less teams people wont mind truly deep down when they know they still have rugby league to watch.

 

[t-ba]

Take Manly for example - with no Bears in the NRL, the Sea Eagles effectively have more than a third of Sydney all to their own - a corporate/sponsor area that covers from Pennant Hills in the north-west, down to Nth Sydney, and up to Palm Beach. There is more money to be made in that region than moving anywhere.

Being honest though, Manly are hated on the North Shore. It's going to take a generation or so before the oldies start dropping off and we can tap into the area.

 

[HHH]

thats my point colonel why dont they start now. whats the incentive of being a season ticket holder we dont even know if we can turn up to every game because we dont know the draw. do we get a discount to other clubs games? not anymore. i just think it ridiculous that a professional comp has so many teams in financal trouble, yet do nothing about it but whinge about how they salary cap has to stay at this level because we cant afford it.this is a simple way to increase profits.
imagine next week parra vs the dogs at telstra a crowd of 30000k paying a minimum of $15 a head thats $450000 for just one game(minus running costs say $50000 max). surely with a bit of promo this sort of crowd would easily turn up, just look at the bunnies-dogs match in wet weather.

 

[kickback]

I say set a date of 2009 and if a Sydney club is still struggling with money and crowds they have to relocate or lose their license to Perth.

Perth in by 2011 (Sydney club move or lose)
Wellington 2013 (new)
Central Coast 2015 (Sydney club again)
Then we can look at Adelaide. Maybe even sooner because the interest is their according to TV ratings. Its rating are better than Perth.

I am also slightly torn with the other NZ side. I am starting to think lets inject some money into NZ and make it a National comp again. Take the Warriors out of the NRL.
Not sure???

Mate have you ever been to Perth? They dont even know the difference between league and union. The NRL is better off moving a team to the central coast or even another Brisbane team. Look at the market the broncos control, many people in brissy would love to have another team and the support would be there right up, cause dont think that every brisbane person goes to broncos games cause they love the broncos.

 

[mongoose]

merge the sharks and dragons with the tigers

they can be the wests st george illawarra sharks. What a team!

 

[t-ba]

merge the sharks and dragons with the tigers

they can be the wests st george illawarra sharks. What a team!

Merge Brisbane with Souths. We can call them the River City Ribotohs.

 

[mark123]

I'm prepared to debate with anyone about the following.

At this early stage one of the following are excess to requirements in sydney: Cronulla, Sydney City.

And before anyone thinks anyone will truly care except a few right-winged enthusiasts, you just have to look at their home crowds. The home fans "REALLY" know how to support their teams, dont they. By leaving them high and dry.

A lot of people like to whinge and march and then never back it up.

Try and destroy the broncos - I will organise a peacful possie of many 10's of thousands of people, and we will march to any point in the country, on any building, in any condition for OUR team. And then we will help pay for their inclusion and gaurantee high average crowds....no wait!

We would never let that happen to our team in the first place.

Do you see the difference? Its not that you are worse fans, it that there aint enough of you to support something that big....further, there is no focus on teams, no true stars in the quantities, the broncos hit home town like a whirlwind, sydney teams hit home town like a wimper. You dilute one another and cause weakness across the board.

If I said cut cronulla in 6 years time, how many people are really going to kick up a stink?

This is not Super League where the "enemy" (once friend) struck like a Blitzkreig and shocked everyone...this is a rational process and hopefully a willing one.

At the end, if its not willing, clubs will only be commiting suicide anyway.

Much of the early debate on here has turned attention to the profits clubs make, and thats great, but location is key too. Location, like a shop front, is perhaps the most important quality a club can possess. Image, another one. They are now out to make new revenue streams that league has neer traditionally had, well these things need to be thought of.

Cronulla/Roosters to go for mine. Anyone else, thats still probably too many. 4 million people get 60,000 fans to a weekend USUALLY.

60,000 FANS TO A WEEKEND?

NOT GOOD ENOUGH

Do the math! 60,000 * 15 = 900000 then give a share to each club equally 100000....

thats bugger all of bugger all....

if this was a community fish tank and the money meant food you'd all be floating at the top before long!!!!

thats people by average ticket price

i bring big attention to tickets because thats the easiest thing to raise....forget diversifying, most clubs wont be able to do it sufficiently for many years, if at all, there aint the nouse in sydney league.

look at politis, big bizzo he is, club runs like a ruckety boat. there isnt the nouse....

focus on tickets and the flow-on effect will be huge...

but none of you get it....its a grim outlook, not because sydney league sux, but because there are too many of you...do the sums people! there isnt enough know-how or oppertunities in sydney for the amount of clubs!!!!!
'
its time to start bopping people on the head, and to be nice and fair about it, its time to tell them to prepare for the short bit of pain that brings A LOT OF HAPPIENESS TO THE REST OF US!!!

OK, sanity prevailing, i hope that makes sense in some way to you's all.

 

[t-ba]

1.8 Million people averaging 16k a weekend isn't good enough either. No offence, but the Drongos, for a team in such a huge catchment, draw pathetic.