AlwaysGreen
Immortal
- Messages
- 49,935
I prefer Berth Pears.
yep they do, and that isnt the issue. The issue is if you have an expectation of a significant sum like $20mill then make it a stipulation of applying, not ask if someone might pay something then get shtty when they say no. Like I said how many submissions do you think they would have received if they had made their intentions clear in the tender criteria?
no he didnt, not according to the consortium. They had a casual conversation a few months ago on that topic. The bid obviously felt it was offering enough in terms of value and $480mill investment. Not an unfair assumption I suppose.Beattie told them twice they had to pay 20 millon
How many times do you want me to repeat this
20 million for a team that will lose 3 to 5 million a year or 20 million for a team that will at least break even if not make decent profitsMany sports charge these…
The Auckland A League team paid $20m so this is a bargain
were really not, its a significant point of discussion if you are going to reject a massively strong opportunity on something that wasn't even a strict criteria requirement until AFTER the event! Why not put it in the bid criteria if they want $20mill? I think we both know why.Going around in circles now ..,
The article yesterday said they were told twice they had to pay a significant sumno he didnt, not according to the consortium. They had a casual conversation a few months ago on that topic. The bid obviously felt it was offering enough in terms of value and $480mill investment. Not an unfair assumption I suppose.
Why have an open question like: how much would you pay in license fee? if you have a $20mill expectation. Its farcical for a tender to do that then base the outcome on that one issue that wasn't even a set criteria. Amateur hour by the NRL.
Bloody hell, PVL needs to go see this guy!!Many sports charge these…
The Auckland A League team paid $20m so this is a bargain
Its not $20 mill though, its a $50mill investment.20 million for a team that will lose 3 to 5 million a year or 20 million for a team that will at least break even if not make decent profits
And cumins said it was only discussed casually with Beattie well before the bid went in. So do you believe a journos take or the bloke involved? Dont bother I know your answer.The article yesterday said they were told twice they had to pay a significant sum
And despite that they put in zero
Plus introduced new investors without telling the arlc, one of whom had been sacked previously from the nrl
Cummins has nobody but to blame but himself
He dropped the ball big time
The a league side will be losing 4 million pa that needs to be coveredIts not $20 mill though, its a $50mill investment.
If you make $1mil a year profit (and if the license stays at $50mill value, given others have sold for $2mill thats very fanciful) does that sound like a good investment to you? If it does would you like to invest in my crypto scheme? I can tell you where to send your money lol.
So Cummins admits it was discussedAnd cumins said it was only discussed casually well before the bid went in. So do you believe a journos take or the bloke involved? Dont bother I know your answer.
yeh casually months ago. If you ask someone, how much would you pay and they say nothing as we are already spending X and bringing this much value then that isnt unreasonable response. What is unreasonable is to make something in a tender optional then afterwards say you was expecting something totally different. Its a cash grab, done in a very immoral way, just admit it.So Cummins admits it was discussed
lol thanks
Nothing, but you think between them they would come up with $50mill? Maybe that is Vlandys Plan F lolWhat’s to stop the nrl from approaching kind and Sydney kings guys to invest in their bid together with comedian Jeffries
With norths leagues ? EasyNothing, but you think between them they would come up with $50mill? Maybe that is Vlandys Plan F lol
So now he is aware of the requirement why not just agree to pay ityeh casually months ago. If you ask someone, how much would you pay and they say nothing as we are already spending X and bringing this much value then that isnt unreasonable response. What is unreasonable is to make something in a tender optional then afterwards say you was expecting something totally different. Its a cash grab, done in a very immoral way, just admit it.
He gave it up, according to the article.
It's both. No one has ever been asked before, and they weren't told it was A) a requirement and B) how much it was. I think we can lock in Brisbane3 over NZ2 if $20mill is now the going rate for an NRL license.With norths leagues ? Easy
So now he is aware of the requirement why not just agree to pay it
He was crying about how unfair it was they had to pay it when the dolphins didn’t
So which excuse you wanna run with ? He don’t know or it’s unfair ?
By all definition Cumins is a boomer.He gave it up, according to the article.
The Bears have really dropped the ball here, some guy got on the beers and bought up all the Bears IP
Who is running them? Old Boomers with no idea?
And you said pvl is a bad negotiatorIt's both. No one has ever been asked before, and they weren't told it was A) a requirement and B) how much it was. I think we can lock in Brisbane3 over NZ2 if $20mill is now the going rate for an NRL license.
because just finding $20mill isnt like looking down the back of the couch! By all accounts they are now working to raise more funds and planning to sit down with the NRL again to find a compromise.