WA BEARS

[Colk]

Townsville might aswell be a 3rd world country

Haha it can be a bit rough. Same as Mt Druitt though or parts of the Hunter . Nevertheless not many people in Australia would only be earning $50 a week.

PNG and the Pacific Nations would a dream. But let’s make sure it can not possibly fail before doing it.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Perth 2027
Adelaide 2032
Brisbane Southside 2035

only way the NRL does not become a second grade comp behind AFL in Australia in the next 2 decades..

And relocate Bulldogs to Christchurch. Offer them a $50m payment to make the move.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Correct

A perfect affiliation. Green, Blue & White

Green jersey with blue & white trim Qld jersey

Royal Blue with green & white trim NSW Jersey

Ipswich Jets don't want to be affiliated with a NSWRL club.

 

[Perth Red]

Coming back to the topic, an amalgamation with NS and one of the WA consortium could fast track a perth club by 2-3 years Id say. Would need to be under the right conditions but still worth a serious look if bears are willing to concede some conditions.

 

[Diesel]

Coming back to the topic, an amalgamation with NS and one of the WA consortium could fast track a perth club by 2-3 years Id say. Would need to be under the right conditions but still worth a serious look if bears are willing to concede some conditions.

Not sure if the Bears are willing to conceed. Perth shouldn’t accept anything less than 11 home games if they almalgamate with the Bears, because they’ll want one at NSO.
Then there’s the magic round which is a hand out.
Any WA Bears consortium should be getting Sydney teams to play a “home” game at NSO (or Allianz)

 

[Perth Red]

Not sure if the Bears are willing to conceed. Perth shouldn’t accept anything less than 11 home games if they almalgamate with the Bears, because they’ll want one at NSO.
Then there’s the magic round which is a hand out.
Any WA Bears consortium should be getting Sydney teams to play a “home” game at NSO (or Allianz)

I could live with ten games in Perth and 2 at NSO. As long as NS LC buys them and puts money into the pot for it. It will cost a Perth team to move games given the lack of corporate facilities and the reduction of membership value to Perth fans. $500k a game and NS LC gets to keep the revenue they can generate from the games.

 

[The Penguin #6.]

When I posted on here that one of the ` for`s ` of bringing back the Bears in some guise was that we may see the re-engagement with big-end-of-town financial sector sponsors it was pointed out that this wasn`t a reason for bringing back one club but rather something that the NRL itself should be looking to remedy.
For the record, sponsors are largely tied in with the perceived socio-economic profile of their fan-base. The Bears had a fan-base that was perceived by those type companies as worth getting behind and having their name on the Bears shirt-front. This is a rarity in League, this improves the status of the whole competition ( by having those type sponsors involved ) and therefore I believe makes the whole competition more attractive for sponsors and as a whole broadens our appeal as a game to other sectors of society. Something badly needed in Rugby League.
I`m not saying we bring back the Bears out of NS, but I am saying that the Bears may bring with them externalities far greater than just being a foundation club.

 

[Perth Red]

When I posted on here that one of the ` for`s ` of bringing back the Bears in some guise was that we may see the re-engagement with big-end-of-town financial sector sponsors it was pointed out that this wasn`t a reason for bringing back one club but rather something that the NRL itself should be looking to remedy.
For the record, sponsors are largely tied in with the perceived socio-economic profile of their fan-base. The Bears had a fan-base that was perceived by those type companies as worth getting behind and having their name on the Bears shirt-front. This is a rarity in League, this improves the status of the whole competition ( by having those type sponsors involved ) and therefore I believe makes the whole competition more attractive for sponsors and as a whole broadens our appeal as a game to other sectors of society. Something badly needed in Rugby League.
I`m not saying we bring back the Bears out of NS, but I am saying that the Bears may bring with them externalities far greater than just being a foundation club.

Yes for sure there may be sponsor opportunities they can bring to the table. There are a number of strengths they can bring to a partnership, no doubt about it. The problem for a WA Bears partnership is WA is pretty strong on its own and wont be dictated to on certain terms from the Bears who up to now have been pretty vocal about what they will and wont accept in a partnership.

Where games are played, brand and ownership are obviously the critical three.
I'd suggest ownership is the really key one. The other two lessor so.
If we don't get the ownership bit right then it will in all likelihood be a disaster in the medium to long term. There is little interest in the West in supporting NS Sydney Bears playing in Perth.

Ideally we want the strength of the Bears adding to the strength of the WA consortium and Govt to create a club that hits the ground running and is a powerhouse in the NRL. But it absolutely must be a WA club first and foremost.

 

[The Penguin #6.]

Yes for sure there may be sponsor opportunities they can bring to the table. There are a number of strengths they can bring to a partnership, no doubt about it. The problem for a WA Bears partnership is WA is pretty strong on its own and wont be dictated to on certain terms from the Bears who up to now have been pretty vocal about what they will and wont accept in a partnership.

Where games are played, brand and ownership are obviously the critical three.
I'd suggest ownership is the really key one. The other two lessor so.
If we don't get the ownership bit right then it will in all likelihood be a disaster in the medium to long term. There is little interest in the West in supporting NS Sydney Bears playing in Perth.

Ideally we want the strength of the Bears adding to the strength of the WA consortium and Govt to create a club that hits the ground running and is a powerhouse in the NRL.

If done right it could be a match made in heaven.
As we saw with the SOO women and aflw there`s a real dilletante crowd in North Sydney that could make a couple of judiciously timed W.A. Bears games throughout the year a real event, in fact they probably won`t be able to fit them all in. But I agree this has to be first and foremost a western Oz team with due deference to their NS roots.
And hopefully bring some of them big-end of town sponsors with them.

 

[Iamback]

It does actually, all you seem to care about is bottomline for cash in pocket, instead of giving a license to an area thay actually plays Rugby League, not dots on a fkn map aka Adelaide

Pretty much this, Just put dots on a map with him.
Then wonder in 5 years time why x team is a basket case

 

[Perth Red]

If done right it could be a match made in heaven.
As we saw with the SOO women and aflw there`s a real dilletante crowd in North Sydney that could make a couple of judiciously timed W.A. Bears games throughout the year a real event, in fact they probably won`t be able to fit them all in. But I agree this has to be first and foremost a western Oz team with due deference to their NS roots.
And hopefully bring some of them big-end of town sponsors with them.

Maybe one solution to the game split could be in my suggestion of NS LC buying games. We know some Sydney clubs sell games to whoever will pay.
If WA Bears had 11 home games in Perth and the Manly home game at NS, then the NS LC bought 2-3 games from other Sydney clubs to play at NS Oval and kept that revenue from those games it might be a way of appeasing both fanbases?

If NS are confident they can sell out NS Oval and get corporates to the game then paying $300-400k for a game from another club should be break even at worse for them. Other advantage of that is fans of those clubs get another game in Sydney they can go to at one of their suburban dumps they all seem to love so much.

WA Bears can get a share of the Sydney Membership $'s that include those games.

 

[Perth Red]

Pretty much this, Just put dots on a map with him.
Then wonder in 5 years time why x team is a basket case

haha the old dots argument. Like I said before if it raises $200mil extra stick the dots on ffs!
The only dot on a map argument would be Adelaide that currently has very little demand, grassroots or investors. But sht if it is what is needed to match AFL deals then make it work with the Bears.
Everywhere else makes good sense for numerous different reasons.

 

[Perth Red]

Ideally we would have a new company formed - West Coast Bears Ltd.
An 80-20 ownership split with WA consortium owning the 80%. Constitution that enshrines the NS partnership, branding, 1 game a year in NS, license never to leave WA, board seat for NS director and a NRLWA director along with the private investors. Only way I see it working.

 

[The Penguin #6.]

Maybe one solution to the game split could be in my suggestion of NS LC buying games. We know some Sydney clubs sell games to whoever will pay.
If WA Bears had 11 home games in Perth and the Manly home game at NS, then the NS LC bought 2-3 games from other Sydney clubs to play at NS Oval and kept that revenue from those games it might be a way of appeasing both fanbases?

If NS are confident they can sell out NS Oval and get corporates to the game then paying $300-400k for a game from another club should be break even at worse for them. Other advantage of that is fans of those clubs get another game in Sydney they can go to at one of their suburban dumps they all seem to love so much.

WA Bears can get a share of the Sydney Membership $'s that include those games.

I like the idea in theory. It would bother me though if all the financial risk is put on the NS side of the venture to host a couple of ` home ` games and they may well at baulk at the idea of having pay or effectively on-sell the right to have a home game. I don`t think they`ll like that.
But if it could be done effectively and they knew it was a winner financially they might agree. It would certainly give them the say 4 ` home ` games spread throughout the year to keep the NS side of the venture happy.

 

[Perth Red]

I like the idea in theory. It would bother me though if all the financial risk is put on the NS side of the venture to host a couple of ` home ` games and they may well at baulk at the idea of having pay or effectively on-sell the right to have a home game. I don`t think they`ll like that.
But if it could be done effectively and they knew it was a winner financially they might agree. It would certainly give them the say 4 ` home ` games spread throughout the year to keep the NS side of the venture happy.

yeh I suppose so but if they want more games in Sydney and we dont want to dilute the WA impact then it may be only way.

Spitballing
WA consortium $2mill investment a year
NS Consortium $1mill a year investment (NS LC+the comedian bloke)
NRL grant $13mill
Sponsorship $8mill (this is where clubs like NQ are so should be achievable)
Game day and fan revenue $6mill

That puts revenue at the $30mill a club needs. Then the WA govt support though Id suggest that is likely to be more in kind than cash, like CofE, grassroots funding, HBF Park upgrades etc.

NS to fund elite pathways in Sydney, WA Bears to fund WA elite pathways in conjunction with NRLWA and WA Govt.

 

[Colk]

Pretty much this, Just put dots on a map with him.
Then wonder in 5 years time why x team is a basket case

That’s a slightly disingenuous argument. Doesn’t matter where you decide you want to put the next side there will be challenges.

NZ 2 - Challenging Rugby Union, lack of corporates. Question mark over support.
PNG - third world country (are you giving free tickets away etc) lack of corporates, massive difficulty to recruit, lack of security
Brisbane 3 - massive resistance from Broncos/Titans. Titans haven’t bedded themselves in yet. Question mark over support.
CC - 10 other sides in NSW so financial strength/security would be a massive question mark, are you bringing in new supporters (question mark over support)
Perth - lack of player talent, question mark over support
Adelaide - ditto, question mark over support

Whatever option you choose there are big question marks over whether something will work. But that is the same with any investment - nothing is a guarantee. The only guarantee is the game will never grow beyond what it is if you do nothing

 

[Perth Red]

That’s a slightly disingenuous argument. Doesn’t matter where you decide you want to put the next side there will be challenges.

NZ 2 - Challenging Rugby Union, lack of corporates. Question mark over support.
PNG - third world country (are you giving free tickets away etc) lack of corporates, massive difficulty to recruit, lack of security
Brisbane 3 - massive resistance from Broncos/Titans. Titans haven’t bedded themselves in yet. Question mark over support.
CC - 10 other sides in NSW so financial strength/security would be a massive question mark, are you bringing in new supporters (question mark over support)
Perth - lack of player talent, question mark over support
Adelaide - ditto, question mark over support

Whatever option you choose there are big question marks over whether something will work. But that is the same with any investment - nothing is a guarantee. The only guarantee is the game will never grow beyond what it is if you do nothing

Like you've said before you cant blame customers for not buying a product if it isn't for sale!

 

[Colk]

Like you've said before you cant blame customers for not buying a product if it isn't for sale!

It is a very interesting argument put forth albeit very dissonant

 

[Perth Red]

It is a very interesting argument put forth albeit very dissonant

Its one of the dumber arguments I've heard on here, and thats saying something!

No one follows NRL in Perth
but there is no nrl club in perth

yeh but its because no one follows it
yeh but they cant follow it as there isnt any team there

yeh but no one follows it so why put a team there
yeh but they have got decent crowds when the opportunity has arisen

yeh but they are one offs
yeh but thats all that available

yeh but they wouldnt follow a club regularly
yeh but you cant have followers if they have nothing to follow

and so it goes on!

 

[Colk]

Its one of the dumber arguments I've heard on here, and thats saying something!

No one follows NRL in Perth
but there is no nrl club in perth

yeh but its because no one follows it
yeh but they cant follow it as there isnt any team there

yeh but no one follows it so why put a team there
yeh but they have got decent crowds when the opportunity has arisen

yeh but they are one offs
yeh but thats all that available

yeh but they wouldnt follow a club regularly
yeh but you cant have followers if they have nothing to follow

and so it goes on!

It’s born from a lack of imagination and anchoring logic. Thus they repeat a line without thought.

It’s a line that they were probably given to by somebody else and they don’t have the ability to critically analyse the holes in that statement