WA BEARS

[Wb1234]

How would they throwing a billion dollars at it? Don’t exaggerate.

In any case, if they are giving existing clubs $200 million a year (some of whom don’t really deserve or need the amount of money coming their way) the argument that they don’t have the money for additional sides is risible.

It is a billion

afl has thrown in way more into the suns and gws

I’m sure if we spent a billion dollars we will become a solid minor sport in Adelaide and wa

But it won’t be money well spent

way way way better options for less investment

I mean look at the dolphins they have actually committed to 2 million pa In junior funding

 

[Colk]

It is a billion

afl has thrown in way more into the suns and gws

I’m sure if we spent a billion dollars we would will become a solid minor sport in Adelaide and wa

But it won’t be money well spent

way way way better options for less investment

I mean look at the dolphins they have actually committed to 2 million pa In junior funding

You keep throwing up the Suns and GWS. I agree with you, particularly about the Suns, although whether or not it is a good investment depends on not the amount that is spent but whether or not their revenue has exceeded their costs. Didn’t their TV deal go up significantly when they added those two sides?

The first thing, I would add, is that there is obviously a desire from corporates and the government from WA (at least) for a side. I don’t recall any interest from the Western Sydney or Gold Coast community for a fumbleball team - they were plonked in those areas by fumbleball.

The second thing is that the costs of running a League side pales in comparison to that of a fumbleball side. It’s essentially about half the costs.

 

[Wb1234]

You keep throwing up the Suns and GWS. I agree with you, particularly about the Suns, although whether or not it is a good investment depends on not the amount that is spent but whether or not their revenue has exceeded their costs. Didn’t their TV deal go up significantly when they added those two sides?

The first thing, I would add, is that there is obviously a desire from corporates and the government from WA (at least) for a side. I don’t recall any interest from the Western Sydney or Gold Coast community for a fumbleball team - they were plonked in those areas by fumbleball.

The second thing is that the costs of running a League side pales in comparison to that of a fumbleball side. It’s essentially about half the costs.

From the afl the non viable clubs cost them an extra ten million pa to keep them alive

and you still haven’t covered junior funding

nz2 and Brisbane 3 way ahead of afl states

I would put png ahead too for a 20 team comp

 

[Colk]

From the afl the non viable clubs cost them an extra ten million pa to keep them alive

and you still haven’t covered junior funding

nz2 and Brisbane 3 way ahead of afl states

I would put png ahead too for a 20 team comp

PNG? You honestly think that PNG wouldn’t be like a hundred times more to run and make right then a Perth side? Look, I would love one day for us to have a PNG side because that would mean they have become a developed country; however it is just not feasible or logistically possible in the forseeable future. PNG investment, would make AFL investment in the Suns or Giants seem like a drop in the ocean.

If we get to 20 sides, in my opinion, it will be Perth, a second New Zealand side and for a 20th team a toss up between a third NZ side (that would be awesome) or another Brisbane side (better or safer commercial option)

In a perfect world, I’d love us to have 3 NZ sides and Perth because of the flexibility it gives you with scheduling and to be frank that would also suggest we are going well against Union.

I don’t really see any viable options outside of Perth, NZ of Brisbane. You wouldn’t want another side in NSW, a team in the Pacific would require way too much investment and Adelaide is not showing any desire (at least openly at this stage) to enter a team.

 

[Perth Red]

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

WA Bears might be feasible if ownership was handed over to a Perth-based consortium and the club relocated permanently to Perth.

All connections with North Sydney would need to be cut.

AwFuL knew the Lions and Swans wouldn't work if they were based out of Melbourne and run by a narrow-minded dickhead like Dickson.

I'd prefer it if we went to a 24 teams spread across two divisions consisting of 12 teams each. Each division would be split into two conferences. Each conference has 6 teams that play one another twice over 10 rounds, then play the six teams from the other conference once to round out a 16 week competition.

NRL 1
Auckland Warriors
Brisbane Broncos
Canberra Raiders
Moreton Bay Dolphins
North Queensland Cowboys
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers
Melbourne Storm
Newcastle Knights
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Sydney Roosters
West Coast Pirates

NRL 2
Adelaide Sharks (Relocated Sydney Team)
Canterbury Bulldogs (Relocated Sydney Team to Christchurch)
Central Coast Sea Eagles (Relocated Sydney Team)
Gold Coast Titans
Illawarra Dragons
Ipswich Jets
Logan Tigers (Easts Tigers)
North Sydney Bears
PNG Hunters
Sunshine Coast Falcons
Wellington Orcas
West Sydney Magpies

 

[westerntiger]

View attachment 65212

Is that 2013, 14 or 15?

 

[Gobsmacked]

WA Bears might be feasible if ownership was handed over to a Perth-based consortium and the club relocated permanently to Perth.

All connections with North Sydney would need to be cut.

AwFuL knew the Lions and Swans wouldn't work if they were based out of Melbourne and run by a narrow-minded dickhead like Dickson.

I'd prefer it if we went to a 24 teams spread across two divisions consisting of 12 teams each. Each division would be split into two conferences. Each conference has 6 teams that play one another twice over 10 rounds, then play the six teams from the other conference once to round out a 16 week competition.

NRL 1
Auckland Warriors
Brisbane Broncos
Canberra Raiders
Moreton Bay Dolphins
North Queensland Cowboys
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers
Melbourne Storm
Newcastle Knights
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Sydney Roosters
West Coast Pirates

NRL 2
Adelaide Sharks (Relocated Sydney Team)
Canterbury Bulldogs (Relocated Sydney Team to Christchurch)
Central Coast Sea Eagles (Relocated Sydney Team)
Gold Coast Titans
Illawarra Dragons
Ipswich Jets
Logan Tigers (Easts Tigers)
North Sydney Bears
PNG Hunters
Sunshine Coast Falcons
Wellington Orcas
West Sydney Magpies

Yuk!
That's the most watered down b grade comp eva proposed. A whole bunch of relocations and promoted teams with no place in the professional space.
Absolute disaster

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Yuk!
That's the most watered down b grade comp eva proposed. A whole bunch of relocations and promoted teams with no place in the professional space.
Absolute disaster

It's where those teams belong and provides regions that aren't big enough to support a top tier team with something more prestigious than Queensland / NSW Cup until they're ready for NRL 1.

 

[Perth Red]

Is that 2013, 14 or 15?

Not sure, I was at them all so could have been any of them.

 

[Perth Red]

We just need to bring perth in, then start planning for nz2 then club 20, be that Adelaide or brisbane3. Achieve that by 2035.

 

[The Great Dane]

WA Bears might be feasible if ownership was handed over to a Perth-based consortium and the club relocated permanently to Perth.

The Bears would never agree to such a deal, and they state as much regularly.

Here's Billy Moore, who's a member of the board of directors, saying as much a month ago-

We are pragmatic and we understand our place in the game. We want to be re-admitted and we’ve got these very, very small number of non-negotiables: our colours; our badge; we want somewhere between two to four games at North Sydney Oval — one of those must be against Manly — and we want that the rights of the 18th licence will always sit with the North Sydney Rugby League Football Club.

Those non-negotiables make hopes of a relocation or a reasonable partnership impossible.

 

[Perth Red]

Rothfield discusses WA Bears. Hilarious he did the dad thing showing only top of his head lol.

 

[Colk]

Is that you Perth Red? Also, as an advocate I am sure you can concur with their thoughts on a second NZ side?

 

[carinashark]

WA Bears might be feasible if ownership was handed over to a Perth-based consortium and the club relocated permanently to Perth.

All connections with North Sydney would need to be cut.

AwFuL knew the Lions and Swans wouldn't work if they were based out of Melbourne and run by a narrow-minded dickhead like Dickson.

I'd prefer it if we went to a 24 teams spread across two divisions consisting of 12 teams each. Each division would be split into two conferences. Each conference has 6 teams that play one another twice over 10 rounds, then play the six teams from the other conference once to round out a 16 week competition.

NRL 1
Auckland Warriors
Brisbane Broncos
Canberra Raiders
Moreton Bay Dolphins
North Queensland Cowboys
Parramatta Eels
Penrith Panthers
Melbourne Storm
Newcastle Knights
South Sydney Rabbitohs
Sydney Roosters
West Coast Pirates

NRL 2
Adelaide Sharks (Relocated Sydney Team)
Canterbury Bulldogs (Relocated Sydney Team to Christchurch)
Central Coast Sea Eagles (Relocated Sydney Team)
Gold Coast Titans
Illawarra Dragons
Ipswich Jets
Logan Tigers (Easts Tigers)
North Sydney Bears
PNG Hunters
Sunshine Coast Falcons
Wellington Orcas
West Sydney Magpies

Adelaide Sharks? No . The Cronulla Sharks are now well healed and powerful club and will absorb the Dragons in a few years .

 

[Colk]

Adelaide Sharks? No . The Cronulla Sharks are now well healed and powerful club and will absorb the Dragons in a few years .

What eat them whole? Are they going to at least digest the Dragons?

For your club, it all depends on what is happening with the stadium

 

[Perth Red]

Is that you Perth Red? Also, as an advocate I am sure you can concur with their thoughts on a second NZ side?

no not me. He does a great job interviewing all sorts of people from the game and usually brings in a discussion around Perths admission. You can find them all on youtube.

 

[Perth Red]

Adelaide Sharks? No . The Cronulla Sharks are now well healed and powerful club and will absorb the Dragons in a few years .

They're really not, they've spent most of the money clearing debts and buying more pokies. They've done nothing to address their key issue of lack of revenue from football operations. Getting more people to sit at pokies longer isn't a great long term strategy.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The Bears would never agree to such a deal, and they state as much regularly.

Here's Billy Moore, who's a member of the board of directors, saying as much a month ago-

Those non-negotiables make hopes of a relocation or a reasonable partnership impossible.

If they wish to remain "North Sydney" then they should continue plying their trade in the NSW Cup.

I cannot see the other Sydney clubs wanting to share the city's overstretched resources with another competitor.

Adelaide Sharks? No . The Cronulla Sharks are now well healed and powerful club and will absorb the Dragons in a few years .

Cronulla's financials are not strong at all. They've improved on where they were a few years ago, but they need to do more work generating revenue to guarantee their position in the NRL. If there was a reduction in the annual grant then Cronulla would be the most vulnerable club because the bulk of its income comes from the ARLC. It draws very little from gate receipts, sponsorship and merchandise. Shark Park will never be capable of pulling massive crowds and the club's fanbase is limited to the Sutherland Shire, which only has 220k residents, making it difficult to secure strong sponsorship deals because companies want their product to be seen by millions of people.

They're really not, they've spent most of the money clearing debts and buying more pokies. They've done nothing to address their key issue of lack of revenue from football operations. Getting more people to sit at pokies longer isn't a great long term strategy.

I cannot see Southern Sydney supporting two clubs with its small population. Dragons have a foot in Southern Sydney and Wollongong, so they've got more to offer the corporate sector. Plus the Dragons have more supporters around the country than the Sharks. I think the Dragons are better poised to become a powerful club that doesn't rely on pokies for survival. Dragons already have investment from Bruce Gordon due to its link with Wollongong, which is something it wouldn't have if it was still the St George Dragons.

 

[aarondoyle]

Billy Moore, in the latest episode of the Rad Footy podcast, reckons the Bears have basically got a deal stitched up with the NRL to return as the 18th club. 4 games at North Sydney Oval, including 1 against Manly, a year and they'll go wherever they need to.

Perth, Queensland, New Zealand, they'll go anywhere. Wherever the NRL want them.

Of course Billy might be full of shit, but it's still an interesting idea.

Edit: Just realised I'm repeating the article above