I think you're 100% correct.
That's why this brain fart of an idea from gambling Pete is unworkable
And these imaginary juniors aren't going to Perth.Norths will increase their spend on juniors once they get their team back in
And those juniors will provide the team actual nrl players unlike Perth
My guess is the nrl will own a chunk of it at first with wa and Sydney investors the restIm still trying to figure out why he doubled down on the members owned club statement if it it will largely be owned by investors, just different ones to the original perth bid consortium?
Thats not what he said, in fact he specifically said NRl wont own any of it but will be responsible for appointing the board for first few years then members will appoint the board. No mention at all of investors in his statement.My guess is the nrl will own a chunk of it at first with wa and Sydney investors the rest
Once the club is established the nrl share will go to members
As lambuck says like souths
Turning away investors would be crazy and the nrl owning a club will be something the other clubs would hate
He said a lot of thingsThats not what he said, in fact he specifically said NRl wont own any of it but will be responsible for appointing the board for first few years then members will appoint the board. No mention at all of investors in his statement.
“Any new organisation will be a club governed by members and in the first couple of years we (the ARLC) will appoint the board, not the members,” V’Landys said.
“Once the club is established the members will appoint the board, so a Perth club will be owned by the members.”
yeh thats the bit I cant make sense of! someone's got to front up start up costs.He said a lot of things
Perth members arent going to be coming up with the 50 million set up costs
And these imaginary juniors aren't going to Perth.
The so called mythical wonder brand is the North Sydney Bears. Not the WA Bears. No rich kid from Mosman is dreaming of moving to Perth to play for the bears.
Anyone who believes that is an imbecile, on meth or has been dropped on their head.
If you think this whole ridiculous idea is a good one at least come up with a rational reason why rather than this fantasy.
Unless the nrl pays for it themselvesyeh thats the bit I cant make sense of! someone's got to front up start up costs.
But then they havent got anything to sell to recoup costs? Can you really see NRL dropping $50mill on a club?Unless the nrl pays for it themselves
Which is why I ignored that article as bs it doesn’t make sense to be wholly member owned
I think in the past two weeks everything pvl has been saying is bs to impact the wa govt and the nz bid teams
Souths model does make sense where it’s 75 percent ? Private investors and members keeping 25 percent
Same with nz is he going to pass on the bids which have already found investors for a members owned club ? Cant see it
FMD it’s eerie when me and you are thinking the same thing about a topic independently lolBut then they havent got anything to sell to recoup costs? Can you really see NRL dropping $50mill on a club?
That would kind of make sense but there is no way members get to choose the board in that sort of ownership split. The power lies with the investors. No tto mention would you as an investor drop $50mill of your money into a new start up that you had no control of the initial board set up?