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

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
Arlc wants the bears

location is still up in the air

bears in the nrl will get 10k easy members
You know that's f**k all right?

Only having around 10k members would make them one of the smallest sides in the league. I mean every club that supplied their membership numbers last year had more than 10k, with Cronulla and Manly being the smallest at about 13k.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
You know that's f**k all right?

Only having around 10k members would make them one of the smallest sides in the league. I mean every club that supplied their membership numbers last year had more than 10k, with Cronulla and Manly being the smallest at about 13k.
The deluded old fool thinks there’s 10k people in Sydney that would become members of a wa, Adelaide, Wellington, png, insert location here, bears lol.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,765
You know that's f**k all right?

Only having around 10k members would make them one of the smallest sides in the league. I mean every club that supplied their membership numbers last year had more than 10k, with Cronulla and Manly being the smallest at about 13k.
10k in Sydney plus whatever they can get in Perth or png etc
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,765
It shows a total lack of commitment to their 'location partners', and strong partnerships aren't built off a lack of commitment.

It also reaffirms that their target audience isn't the new market, but their old fanbase.

It's basically a bad look all round.
Why would they have any commitment to any area when that area can miss out on an nrl space

their commitment is to an nrl license
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
The deluded old fool thinks there’s 10k people in Sydney that would become members of a wa, Adelaide, Wellington, png, insert location here, bears lol.
IDK, to be honest I can believe that they could sell 10k memberships to people in Sydney, NSW, and other "heartland" markets, if they went about it the "right" way. But almost all of those memberships would be cheap ticketless memberships that exist only to cynically pump numbers up, and I'm not sure that's the sort of thing that the NRL should be encouraging.

It's definitely not the sort of thing they should be looking for in new clubs. They should be looking to build clubs capable of selling at least 15k+ season tickets or higher value memberships, and the old Bears fanbase wasn't capable of pulling those sorts of numbers in their prime, let alone these days.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,765
IDK, to be honest I can believe that they could sell 10k memberships to people in Sydney, NSW, and other "heartland" markets, if they went about it the "right" way. But almost all of those memberships would be cheap ticketless memberships that exist only to cynically pump numbers up, and I'm not sure that's the sort of thing that the NRL should be encouraging.

It's definitely not the sort of thing they should be looking for in new clubs. They should be looking to build clubs capable of selling at least 15k+ season tickets or higher value memberships, and the old Bears fanbase wasn't capable of pulling those sorts of numbers in their prime, let alone these days.
@Perth Red
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
Make sure you don’t lose the bid or we aren’t interested
The area wouldn't be the ones losing the bid though, it'd be the Bears...

What the Bears are trying to do is to get the NRL to tell them where to go and then bid from there. You'd think that if they were to lose to another bid in that situation, that that other bid would be bidding from the same preferred location.

In other words, it's more likely than not that the "Perth Bears" would lose to another bid from Perth.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
21,765
Being capable of selling roughly 10k $10-30 ticketless memberships isn't something to be proud of...

It's a pretty poor reflection on your fanbase actually.
Well your mate thinks it’s stupid to suggest it

now I wanna see his response that YOU agreed with me
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
10k in Sydney plus whatever they can get in Perth or png etc
Being connected to the Bears would hurt their draw power in Perth, and other similar expansion markets, for at least a generation or two. Which wouldn't exactly be great when the goal of a side in an expansion market should be to grow support and market share in said market, not to sacrifice some of that growth to appease some dying men on the other side of the country/Tasman.

PNG just isn't sustainable, and the value of their products would have to be way below the NRL average for the average Papuan to be able to afford it. I guess having them paired with the Bears would mean that the club has somewhere natural to fallback on when the inevitable happens and the side falls over because the government funding was cut. But is it really sensible to be planning for an expansion club to fail and be forced to relocate to Sydney and/or the CC...
 
Last edited:

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,723
Blah blah blah

come and visit planet earth one day
Tell us again how PNG, a county where 40% of the population lives under the poverty line, is going to be a giant success, but Perth and Adelaide will fail unless they commit to carrying the dead corpse of the Bears around.

Next you'll be telling us that there're 10k Dirty Reds fans in Sydney just waiting for the opportunity to support their club in the big leagues again by buying a membership.
 
Top