WA BEARS

[wb2027]

Except there won’t be Bears board members.

Assuming that's because you can't serve on both at once, nothing is preventing a current Bears board member from withdrawing from the NS board to be appointed on the WB board.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Ive not seen that rumour anywhere other than the pure speculation on here.

It’s not speculation. Easy to join the dots.

 

[Perth Red]

I said if

Like I said its pure speculation with not much basis for thinking it will happen given there has been no mention of it from anywhere, and no previous precedent of it.
There's a lot of 'ifs' you could hypothesise about pointlessly.

 

[Wb1234]

Like I said its pure speculation with not much basis for thinking it will happen given there has been no mention of it from anywhere, and no previous precedent of it.
There's a lot of 'ifs' you could hypothesise about pointlessly.

You are the king of hypotheticals lol

Maybe the other post about the makeup of the board not being determined is also true

 

[Perth Red]

It’s not speculation. Easy to join the dots.

Of course it is, and given no one has talked about it anywhere other than fans on here and its never happened before, even with clubs that have gone bust and be sold on, theres not much evidence it will happen. Closest more likely to be a seat for the NRLWA GM to ensure linkages with grassroots NRL work and a direct line back to NRLHQ..

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Assuming that's because you can't serve on both at once, nothing is preventing a current Bears board member from withdrawing from the NS board to be appointed on the WB board.

Truth is. As a Bears member and fan I don’t want any current board members on the Western Bears board.

I commend them on a job well done in realising this is the way forward and putting in the work but same time, start fresh. I’d have Billy Moore as brand consultant though. He has access to media and regardless of people thoughts on him - that’s valuable.

There won’t be current Norths board members as Western Bears board members. Bears people though, that’ll eventually happen.

 

[wb2027]

Truth is. As a Bears member and fan I don’t want any current board members on the Western Bears board.

Even though this current board would be made up of the ones who got it done?

 

[Perth Red]

Assuming that's because you can't serve on both at once, nothing is preventing a current Bears board member from withdrawing from the NS board to be appointed on the WB board.

There is nothing to stop people serving on two, or more, boards at same time. Many NRL club board members also serve on the LC Boards.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Of course it is, and given no one has talked about it anywhere other than fans on here and its never happened before, even with clubs that have gone bust and be sold on, theres not much evidence it will happen. Closest more likely to be a seat for the NRLWA GM to ensure linkages with grassroots NRL work and a direct line back to NRLHQ..

Not true. We have direct evidence and comparison with Storm and News Ltd. Team in a non rugby league heartland and owners of the game at the time. This isn’t unprecedented.

Not really bothered if you believe it or not. End of the day it’s happening and it’s a good thing that it’s in place.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Even though this current board would be made up of the ones who got it done?

Yep, even that. ARLC is as responsible, if not more to getting the deal done. The current board almost fluffed it and trust me when I say that a few Bears people with a lot of money were not happy with the board whilst the fluffing was happening.

Commend their work though and reality of it. But it was made harder than it needed to be.

 

[Perth Red]

Not true. We have direct evidence and comparison with Storm and News Ltd. Team in a non rugby league heartland and owners of the game at the time. This isn’t unprecedented.

Not really bothered if you believe it or not. End of the day it’s happening and it’s a good thing that it’s in place.

Thast nothing akin to this. News ltd owned the Storm, and also owned 50% of the game. They didnt just get a seat on the board to ensure they did well.

We shall see.

 

[Perth Red]

Yep, even that. ARLC is as responsible, if not more to getting the deal done. The current board almost fluffed it and trust me when I say that a few Bears people with a lot of money were not happy with the board whilst the fluffing was happening.

Commend their work though and reality of it. But it was made harder than it needed to be.

It seemed from the outside a game of chicken was being played with both sides demanding ownership. In the end WA threatened to go it alone and the Bears conceded ownership. Smart move.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Thast nothing akin to this. News ltd owned the Storm, and also owned 50% of the game. They didnt just get a seat on the board to ensure they did well.

We shall see.

What do you mean? They helped establish the franchise and made sure it was run well. Whether they owned it or had any autonomy over it isn’t the point.

ARLC might not own any clubs but they own the game that the clubs play in. Similarities are there.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

It seemed from the outside a game of chicken was being played with both sides demanding ownership. In the end WA threatened to go it alone and the Bears conceded ownership. Smart move.

Not how it went but sure.

 

[wb2027]

The current board almost fluffed it and trust me when I say that a few Bears people with a lot of money were not happy with the board whilst the fluffing was happening.

Did they really almost fluff it or was the NRL just not holding talks on expansion at the time?

 

[Perth Red]

What do you mean? They helped establish the franchise and made sure it was run well. Whether they owned it or had any autonomy over it isn’t the point.

ARLC might not own any clubs but they own the game that the clubs play in. Similarities are there.

They owned the franchise, in a very different RL time. thats a world of difference away from the WB situation.

If the ARLC felt the need to have more control over a club surely they would have sat on the Titans and Knights boards for a while to ensure they didnt get back into the mess they had just come out of?

But as you say we are all guessing, time will tell.

 

[Perth Red]

Did they really almost fluff it or was the NRL just not holding talks on expansion at the time?

Reading Cumins comments it seems very much like they nearly fluffed it and it was only at the 11th hour they gave up some of the points that were unacceptable to WA.

 

[Wb1234]

They owned the franchise, in a very different RL time. thats a world of difference away from the WB situation.

If the ARLC felt the need to have more control over a club surely they would have sat on the Titans and Knights boards for a while to ensure they didnt get back into the mess they had just come out of?

But as you say we are all guessing, time will tell.

That’s a good point about knights and titans

 

[Red&BlackBear]

Did they really almost fluff it or was the NRL just not holding talks on expansion at the time?

Both sides almost fluffed it.

Anyone here notice that when the WA team is brought up PVL mentions the WA premier Roger Cook all the time and rarely mentions the WA consortium or NRLWA chairman?

From my understanding in the bits and pieces I’ve been told, there was an ultimatum.

Broadcasters (who pay for the game) had little faith in WA Consortium stand alone. The consortium has no IP, assets, big enough general public support (in their eyes). But they have location and a time slot of said location. There’s a pay off if it succeeds but no collateral to mitigate risk.

Bears have IP, assets, general public support but have no location. There is also risk and there is collateral but it’s useless without having somewhere to actually conceptualise it from.

If they didn’t unify then WA consortium would not have gotten the license and probably would be waiting another 10 years + until a more firm consortium came about. Bears alone would never get the license either.

So in the best interests of all the business men involved they were told get together and make it work or neither of them would be looked at with any real consideration in the immediate future.

Prior to all this WA Government had initiated talks with Bears long before the WA consortium was a genuine thing. There was always a contingency. That’s not to say WA Government would have pulled the strings and gone at it alone without consortium or bears or even with Bears but the money for that isn’t there. WA was always getting a team but the time line has increasingly shortened.

In short both were told to make it work or f**k off. That’s the offer.

Then after that came the deep negotiations between WA Consortium and Bears of the how’s, when’s, why’s, what’s etc etc.

Whatever was finalised was for the benefit of WA. ARLC were heavily involved in how it matured.

 

[Wb1234]

A Perth standalone team has basically no value for Aussie tv companies

Foxsports have said many times they want the bears back in