What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

WA BEARS

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,624
A market that already has full exposure, wa offers a new market for existing sponsors and brands that so far has had little penetration into the wealthiest population in the country.
That’s why they couldn’t get wa investors involved and had to turn to Sydney people

Bc the new market had so many people clamouring to invest in a league team
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
Because the WA Consortium wanted complete control over the bid. They rejected Bears people investment. They were content with using the Bears brand and IP while WA Consortium controlled all aspects of investment and finances with absolute power. It was autonomous.

Hence why there were no direct Norths involvement with the consortium from a bid team aspect. The parts of Norths mainly concerned with brand protection and usage which WA Consortium still tried to stray it miles of course from what was agreed to. Hence the disgraceful logo they proposed and which was rejected (I have posted it twice here now, taken it down. Snooze you lose).

The other aspect Norths provided was pathways and junior development via the programs and systems already in place.

WA Consortium chose to engage Freshwater Strategy to complete the bid document.

WA Consortium chose to put $0 down as a license fee.

There is a myriad of things that you can point the finger at Norths and blame them for, rightfully so. This isn’t one of them and if you paid any attention to any of the interviews with Cumins himself, that would present itself to be evidently clear.

End of the day Norths are still working with the relevant parties to make this happen. It’s a WA team for WA people and yes it does bring Bears supporters on board too.
Who are these rejected investors from norths? WHat did they offer and what did they want for what they were offering?
Why aren’t norths themselves fronting up with a proposition? If the money is in norths why isn’t Vlandys bringing them in to offer a rival bid? Surely between the pokie den and the rejected investors they can find $50mill? No? Really?
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
That’s why they couldn’t get wa investors involved and had to turn to Sydney people

Bc the new market had so many people clamouring to invest in a league team
$26mill + $450mill from wa investors, what do you mean couldn’t get them involved?
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
The license fee has nothing to do with security or protecting the clubs long term viability. That is what a bank surety would do. The NRl arent taking this $20mill and sticking it in the bank just in case they need it if the club falls over in a few years time. Where people have that idea from I dont know.
Then why did Western United have to pay $18m upfront to get into the A League ? A firm commitment that they mean business and long term security.
The licence fee represents an iron clad commitment for the long term in an area that is not heartland.
A Bank guarantee naturally requires either cash, property or other assets to secure the guarantee. If assets are minimal when we are talking about a club in a high profile sporting code, what sort of guarantee moneywise would they cover and for how long.
What does the club have in terms of cash on hand, property such as a licensed club or undeveloped residential land .Who else( high profile business) apart from Cummins is prepared to throw in loot ?
Then two guys suddenly arrive out of left field ,to be involved without letting the NRL know.It's frigging amateur hour.
I understand PVL was not keen on licensing back in 2021 , some dark stuff hit the fan now and he has reacted with an opposing view.

NRL policy is to fund clubs, development etc and purchase bricks & mortar assets to ensure long term viability for the code, not just individual clubs.Whatever licence fee is paid,I doubt it would not be sitting in a bank account earning 4% but used for assisting clubs who would face competition for players with a new club and looking at money making assets.
We had SFA assets when PVL took over ,now there are 3 hotels on their asset register.
And one more for the dummies ,I want an NRL club in Perth. LONG TERM.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
No they aren’t

You said yourself they don’t want to own a rugby league club

If the fee is truly 50 million then pvl has hit it out of the park
eh? They are investing $450mill to make the clubs as successful as possible, and the game to grow in WA. If they arent an investor in this what are they? You do understand the difference between an owner and an investor dont you? cuckoo cuckoo
 

Red&BlackBear

First Grade
Messages
5,425
Who are these rejected investors from norths? WHat did they offer and what did they want for what they were offering?
Why aren’t norths themselves fronting up with a proposition? If the money is in norths why isn’t Vlandys bringing them in to offer a rival bid? Surely between the pokie den and the rejected investors they can find $50mill? No? Really?
Geez dude you’re defending Cumins like you’re his lover or something. Dude dropped the ball, move on. You’re coming across as whiny and petty now.

WA Consortium wasn’t prepared to share board seats and control. They wanted it all. Do you remember you harping on about it time and time again?

Why do you need to know the investors by name? Are you wanting to call them or something?

Move on and let’s wait to see how this plays out. There’s light at the end of the tunnel.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,624
eh? They are investing $450mill to make the clubs as successful as possible, and the game to grow in WA. If they arent an investor in this what are they? You do understand the difference between an owner and an investor dont you? cuckoo cuckoo
300 million is to improve their own asset which they will make money from various sports and bring in lots of tourist dollars
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
Then why did Western United have to pay $18m upfront to get into the A League ? A firm commitment that they mean business and long term security.
The licence fee represents an iron clad commitment for the long term in an area that is not heartland.
A Bank guarantee naturally requires either cash, property or other assets to secure the guarantee. If assets are minimal when we are talking about a club in a high profile sporting code, what sort of guarantee moneywise would they cover and for how long.
What does the club have in terms of cash on hand, property such as a licensed club or undeveloped residential land .Who else( high profile business) apart from Cummins is prepared to throw in loot ?
Then two guys suddenly arrive out of left field ,to be involved without letting the NRL know.It's feeding amateur hour.
I understand PVL was not keen on licensing back in 2021 , some dark stuff hit the fan now and he has reacted with an opposing view.

NRL policy is to fund clubs, development etc and purchase bricks & mortar assets to ensure long term viability for the code, not just individual clubs.Whatever licence fee is paid,I doubt it would not be sitting in a bank account earning 4% but used for assisting clubs who would face competition for players with a new club and looking at money making assets.
We had SFA assets when PVL took over ,now there are 3 hotels on their asset register.
And one more for the dummies ,I want an NRL club in Perth. LONG TERM.
Because the A league needs to use that cash to stay viable. Again they haven't put it in the bank for if that club has a rainy day!

I have no doubt the WA govt would have provided the bank surety. Dolphisn were asked for a bank surety for this exact occasion, no reason WA couldnt have been asked for the same if that was really the issue.

But again the NRL isnt asking for this fee as some sort of bond for a rainy day. Its a cash grab to give the other clubs when they start negotiations with them next month over the next 5 year license deal. effectively asking a new club to pay for the NRl to get a better deal from the clubs for the next 5 years.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,624
So if Norths do stomp up the entry fee will WA then be happy to give them a % ownership and a board seat?
Or do they throw it away rather than have Norths ownership?

I’m keen to see the resolution of this Western Bears impasse

It’ll be resolved soon

Option a is the wa govt stump up the funds bc broke ass Cummins doesn’t

Or

North leagues plus north investors plus Sydney investors come up with it
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
So if Norths do stomp up the entry fee will WA then be happy to give them a % ownership and a board seat?
Or do they throw it away rather than have Norths ownership?

I’m keen to see the resolution of this Western Bears impasse
If they have any sense and cant raise the $20mill or negotiate a diff deal with NRL then they should accept Norths $20mill for say 40% ownership. But so far Norths have shown zero interest in providing that, if they even have it as spare cash floating around?
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
300 million is to improve their own asset which they will make money from various sports and bring in lots of tourist dollars
Wont be happening if there is no NRl club. Its literally only on the table as an investment to give the NRl club a better facility to make it more successful. ergo its an investment in the club.
 

Red&BlackBear

First Grade
Messages
5,425
Offer was $480mill of investment in WA rugby league and the NRL club.
That is from WA Government investment. Not WA Consortium. WA Consortium raised the initial $30m start up capital which I applaud. Cannot bag Peter Cumins and the consortium in that regard as they did a good job there.

But the show shouldn’t have stopped there and if he (Cumins) states that there was only $4m to fall back on (from that $30m) then you know what? Offer that $4m as an initial fee and negotiate a number with ARLC that suits all parties.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,624
Wont be happening if there is no NRl club. Its literally only on the table as an investment to give the NRl club a better facility to make it more successful. ergo its an investment in the club.
It’s an investment in state infrastructure which they will derive huge benefits from and multiple sports will benefit from
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,537
That is from WA Government investment. Not WA Consortium. WA Consortium raised the initial $30m start up capital which I applaud. Cannot bag Peter Cumins and the consortium in that regard as they did a good job there.

But the show shouldn’t have stopped there and if he (Cumins) states that there was only $4m to fall back on (from that $30m) then you know what? Offer that $4m as an initial fee and negotiate a number with ARLC that suits all parties.
Both are an investment in the WA bid. The consortium raised the start up cash needed. The Govt has put up the infrastructure costs needed to give the club the facilities it needs plus grow Jnr RL here. Both are equally valuable and needed.

I guess that is probably whats happening now and what the news articles about WA wanting to sit down and negotiate are about. This is Vlandys MO, we all know that, put a public doom and gloom statement out, have everyone flurry around and eventually a deal gets done. We saw the worst of it during the RLPA negotiations. Like Ive said this a long way from over yet, for WA or the bid I suspect.
 

Latest posts

Top