WA BEARS

[Wb1234]

Must be why they are paying more than the last deal eh?

It’s funny you talking down the nrls tv broadcasters and the arlc ability to get more money from them

because without them Perth has zero chance at a team lol

 

[Pippen94]

It’s going the same way as the western reds

Haha

 

[Perth Red]

It’s going the same way as the western reds

Hark at you smartarse

 

[Perth Red]

It’s funny you talking down the nrls tv broadcasters and the arlc ability to get more money from them

because without them Perth has zero chance at a team lol

It’s not funny, it’s quite sad that despite expanding the competition we got no extra money from it. Hopefully they can do better with an extra game slot to sell.

 

[Pippen94]

It’s not funny, it’s quite sad that despite expanding the competition we got no extra money from it. Hopefully they can do better with an extra game slot to sell.

..then team must be Brisbane or nz2

 

[Vee]

Do the people so opposed to a 11/1 or 10/2 Perth/Sydney split also oppose the idea of NZ2 playing in Wellington AND Christchurch?

Very different circumstances.

 

[Wb1234]

It’s not funny, it’s quite sad that despite expanding the competition we got no extra money from it. Hopefully they can do better with an extra game slot to sell.

Well if the dolphins have no value for broadcasters as you assert then Perths value must actually be negative for tv ?

 

[Perth Red]

Well if the dolphins have no value for broadcasters as you assert then Perths value must actually be negative for tv ?

Yes we will have to pay tv to show a perth team.

 

[Perth Red]

..then team must be Brisbane or nz2

Nah another Sydney team makes most sense

 

[The Great Dane]

some times you have to adapt to the environment your in.

Merging with the Bears wouldn't be adapting to the environment, it'd be receiving a wish from the monkey's paw...

Or that we shouldnt worry if we dont get team 18, even if means waiting 20 years plus for another chance. Personally I think that would be a disaster for the game here for numerous reasons.

You know what would be even worse for the game in Perth than waiting a decade or two longer?

The inevitable power struggles for control over the club. The 50/50 chance that Perth would lose said power struggle then be stuck with a team that uses and abuses them but doesn't really represent them. The chance that things could really sour and the Bears end up with the license and Perth without a team...

Another dysfunctional merger isn't in any bodies interest, and to pretend otherwise is just nonsense.

 

[bad boy bubby]

Merging with the Bears wouldn't be adapting to the environment, it'd be receiving a wish from the monkey's paw...

You know what would be even worse for the game in Perth than waiting a decade or two longer?

The inevitable power struggles for control over the club. The 50/50 chance that Perth would lose said power struggle then be stuck with a team that uses and abuses them but doesn't really represent them. The chance that things could really sour and the Bears end up with the license and Perth without a team...

Another dysfunctional merger isn't in any bodies interest, and to pretend otherwise is just nonsense.

I think that is why PR has said numerous times that unless a signed off protocol is in WA's favour he will not support it.

 

[The Great Dane]

He provided a link before saying the bears are happy with one game a year at nso

No he didn't. You obviously didn't listen to the interview lol.

Dickson didn't even come close intimating that the Bears would be happy with a single game a year, let alone outright say that they were happy with it.

Frankly, PR was just hearing what he wanted to hear.

you fabricate the most outlandish scenarios none of which ever happen

Which scenarios would those be lol.

 

[Perth Red]

Merging with the Bears wouldn't be adapting to the environment, it'd be receiving a wish from the monkey's paw...

You know what would be even worse for the game in Perth than waiting a decade or two longer?

The inevitable power struggles for control over the club. The 50/50 chance that Perth would lose said power struggle then be stuck with a team that uses and abuses them but doesn't really represent them. The chance that things could really sour and the Bears end up with the license and Perth without a team...

Another dysfunctional merger isn't in any bodies interest, and to pretend otherwise is just nonsense.

I don’t disagree with you at all In the second part,
its hard to know exactly what’s afoot tbh. The WA govt isnt bidding for an nrl club so either the Bears change their bid to focus on Perth and bid on their own, or one of the other previous WA businessmen who’ve said they want to own a club forms a partnership with the Bears And puts in a joint bid if the opportunity arises.

the former I would totally agree would be a disaster.

the latter has potential to work IF the Bears agree to conditions that ensure the clubs is first and foremost a WA club. If they can’t then that’s ok, no hard feelings off you go back to being Roosters feeder team. Then all we can do is hope there is a decent bid that Vlandys finds compelling without the bears. If not the games screwed in WA Which would be a great shame given the potential it has.

would I rather wait another twenty years in the hope we get a club one day or see a club in 4 years time that’s branded as west coast bears, has jnr pathways in WA and NS and plays 10 or 11 games in perth? Personally I’d take the latter option

 

[The Great Dane]

I think that is why PR has said numerous times that unless a signed off protocol is in WA's favour he will not support it.

Which the Bears would never, ever, agree to. So why even continue with the idea that the merger is a possibility?

Because things aren't a simple as they seem.

 

[bad boy bubby]

Which the Bears would never, ever, agree to. So why even continue with the idea that the merger is a possibility?

Because things aren't a simple as they seem, that's why.

Mate, I will get you my first post in this thread. I agree with you, I'm pretty sure PR agrees with you if they go that Norths-centric way.
I totally respect your views, you are actually are/were a Norths supporter, so is my mate who posted here earlier @Special K , now a Sharks supporter. You two know way better than the rest of us what the Norths club was/is like.

 

[Perth Red]

Which the Bears would never, ever, agree to. So why even continue with the idea that the merger is a possibility?

Because things aren't a simple as they seem.

you don’t know that, your presuming it. there is literally nothing to lose by exploring it lol. If they do agree to it your wrong and it could fast track a guaranteed perth as club 18.
If your right we’ve lost nothing, we walk away and hope Vlandys gives the other bidders an opportunity to make a case for the Reds, Pirates or bloody Quokkas lol

 

[The Great Dane]

I don’t disagree with you at all In the second part,
its hard to know exactly what’s afoot tbh. The WA govt isnt bidding for an nrl club so either the Bears change their bid to focus on Perth and bid on their own, or one of the other previous WA businessmen who’ve said they want to own a club forms a partnership with the Bears And puts in a joint bid if the opportunity arises.

The Bears aren't relocating to Perth, nor would they launch an independent bid from Perth.

The only way they'll do it is if there's a local partner or entity that is willing to come to the table and offer them incentives to do so. There's no reason why the WA gov couldn't offer such incentives.

the former I would totally agree would be a disaster.

the latter has potential to work IF the Bears agree to conditions that ensure the clubs is first and foremost a WA club. If they can’t then that’s ok, no hard feelings off you go back to being Roosters feeder team. Then all we can do is hope there is a decent bid that Vlandys finds compelling without the bears. If not the games screwed in WA Which would be a great shame given the potential it has.

would I rather wait another twenty years in the hope we get a club one day or see a club in 4 years time that’s branded as west coast bears, has jnr pathways in WA and NS and plays 10 or 11 games in perth? Personally I’d take the latter option

That's not what will be on offer. The deal will come with significantly more baggage than that.

 

[bad boy bubby]

@The Great Dane
this was my first post, I dont know why its skewed now, maybe because threads were merged or something

There is a lot of egos that have been bent out of shape with North's. I highly doubt they'll only want 3 x games at Nth Sydney Oval. They'll want to be "THE MAN" in the relationship.

I'd prefer that WA has its own identity.

 

[The Great Dane]

you don’t know that, your presuming it.

I'm not presuming anything, for twenty years now the club has stated time and time again that they'll never enter such an arrangement again.

When other similar deals have come up in the past, such as the GC and Brisbane for example, they've always approached it the same way; the brand is not for sale and they won't accept any changes to the brand, they must have say in the running of the club, and an ironclad ownership agreement.

 

[The Great Dane]

BTW, this was sent to fans yesterday-

Gives a pretty good idea of where the club's thinking is at.