WA BEARS

[ThornlieBear]

Why was it poor? 6 very succesful business people, some with a history of supporting local wa rugby league, one with a history of running a successful prof sports club, willing to invest $30mill and pay a $20mill license fee and put up guarantees and bank protections. Stop believing the haters rhetoric.

The haters rhetoric would be the anti-PVL discourse.

You’d have thought after the nsw stadiums debacle he’d have learnt state premiers are not push overs and don’t appreciate their business being played out in the media. It would seem not.

That didn’t take long. Anywho, I’m sure PVL has had more success dealing with state premiers than anyone on here.

 

[Canard]

How many links can I show you? Then it's all in my imagination? No , that's trolling.

So you think one article saying "we have 350 million to invest" requires no critical thinking at all?

 

[Canard]

Kids won’t need to leave chch when there’s a local team

They will just slot into the under 16 to reserve grade sides

Wa clubs are participation award

Like afl uses Auskick numbers in qld

They won’t produce elite rugby talent like South Island does

You're making out that SI is producing League juniors in huge numbers.

Taree has produced more NRL talent than the SI regions combined.

 

[Perth Red]

The haters rhetoric would be the anti-PVL discourse.


That didn’t take long. Anywho, I’m sure PVL has had more success dealing with state premiers than anyone on here.

You didn’t answer the question.

 

[Canard]

The haters rhetoric would be the anti-PVL discourse.


That didn’t take long. Anywho, I’m sure PVL has had more success dealing with state premiers than anyone on here.

So let me get this straight, your a WA based Bears fan, who goes balls deep for V'landys?

 

[Gobsmacked]

So you think one article saying "we have 350 million to invest" requires no critical thinking at all?

Until I have evidence to the contrary.

Remember when you disregarded the existence of an Auckland big, with no evidence.. how did that turn out?

I guess it's all bs until Canard says.

 

[Canard]

Until I have evidence to the contrary.

Remember when you disregarded the existence of an Auckland big, with no evidence.. how did that turn out?

I guess it's all bs until Canard says.

Yeh it was all bullshit to.

What a way to live life.

I believe everything I read, with no critical thinking.

 

[Brutus]

I'm really disappointed. Would love to see the WA Bears be the next team.

PVL needs to get his arse into gear and make sure it happens.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Are you aware of the SL war? Only a very short time ago, Rugby League went all out on expansion and it went broke.

Souths , 100 years of history- gone.
WA - gone
SA- gone
SEQ crushers- gone
GC- gone
Balmain- gone
Magpies- gone
Manly- gone
St George Dragons- gone
Illawarra steelers- gone
North Sydney Bears- gone

Absolutely devastating to the game, what? 27 years ago?

We're only just back on our feet.
I know, let's just blow the f**king lot again....

We've got Souths back.
We got GC back.
We got having a second team in Brisbane back.

We're only just coming back and if we want to expand again, we better be sure as shit it's guaranteed to work!!!

Sydney lost a lot of clubs! To carry on like they're being to protective is incredibly insensitive.

So WA needs to get it's shit together! Big time! It can't be a drag! It needs top notch facilities and funding!

The WA government has been well short of the mark and we all know why!!!

It's a good point. As we've seen from the WA media over the past couple of months, aa Perth RL team is going to have a tough job ahead of it. The NRL may as well make sure it's well funded with incredible facilities. Current state of Perth rectangular venue vs Optus is just not going to cut it. A 30k state of the art rectangular stadium at least gives them a chance

 

[Gobsmacked]

It's a good point. As we've seen from the WA media over the past couple of months, aa Perth RL team is going to have a tough job ahead of it. The NRL may as well make sure it's well funded with incredible facilities. Current state of Perth rectangular venue vs Optus is just not going to cut it. A 30k state of the art rectangular stadium at least gives them a chance

Once the NRL gives WA a team, it looses that bargaining chip and we may never see a decent stadium in Perth.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I think you hit on a point many are missing - Christchurch (and Dunedin as a secondary market) have the huge outlay from Government (local and central) ALREADY in the form of decent enclosed stadiums. It might not matter that there's little else to add-in.

Sure the business case for a team needs to operationally stack-up (including more value from TV), BUT as far as stadium infrastructure goes, they're more than just acceptable & on the way to upgrades - NZ 2 will be top-tier for their very first home game.

All that remains is checking-off the business case adds-up (including an acceptable entry fee, where the level of acceptable is solely determined by the NRL), and making sure pathways are going to be nurtured (so they generate their fair share - or more - of talent going into the player pool), and NZ2 is set.

Another NZ team is pretty unique in that it will probably get funded by sources outside of the team itself as you've eluded to in the form of Infrastructure already built and NZ TV providing additional cash.

 

[taipan]

That’s just the stadium and is ignoring the $136mill the afl committing to put into grassroots there.

I'm talking stadium only.If the cost rises to $1bn they(AFL)pay no extra toward the stadium.Extra activities codes pay certain figures.The money they are spending is in an AFL state with no other code to compete with them.Their costs are not wasted.
I'm sure if the NRL gets a big TV deal they will up the ante on extras in new areas.

The AFL will get a bigly new stadium in Brisvegas for the OPS.Are they going to contribute toward that bigly?

 

[Maximus]

So what’s happened is the terms and conditions within the prior made in-principle agreement were broken by WA Gov. This applies to the stadium funding.

What was agreed to last year and pre-election wasn’t upheld when the parties met on Thursday. The numbers that the NRL asked never changed.

NRL went into the meeting believing it was a simple chat of how they’d announce the new franchise, instead were blind side by the WA Gov pulling out stadium upgrade funding. The grassroots funding was right in the money though.

It isn’t over and isn’t the end. Just pushed back a few months. It gives NRL time to finalise the broadcast deal and it’ll give WA time to reassess their stadium upgrade commitment.

How many times have you predicted that the deal is done and will be announced in a few weeks, only for something to go wrong so you've got a convenient excuse for why it didn't happen as you predicted?

 

[Maximus]

I would laugh …

I was thinking last night …. Do the Perth NRL team actually need a renovated stadium from Day 1 ? I didn’t hear too many complaints about the stadium when they played a game there last year …it’s more of a “nice to have “ and I’m sure they would get around to upgrading it eventually…

I suspect that there is more to the story then just this , and this may just be a convenient excuse …. Unlike PNG where all the clubs got $3m each … there is no payoff here immeadiately and the clubs would need to be patient for their money waiting until the NRL eventually sold the team

Yep good chance the teams wanted a payoff and Vlandys went back hand out demanding more money.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

How does she over rule Cook on this ? I’m not buying that it still wasn’t Cook’s decision at the end of the day

It’s literally her job as a treasurer to account for the states budgets, funding and investments. It’s also her job as sports minister to ensure the right calls are made in the states sporting landscape.

Therein lies the problem. Her treasurer mindset wasn’t aligning with her sporting minister mindset in this instance. She doesn’t over rule Cook but at the end of the day these ministers are appointed to do a specific job and advising the premier of what those jobs entail is part of it.

If the NRL were being “greedy” or if the WA Gov hadn’t committed to certain things prior to then neither party would have made it this far.

I know you didn’t bring this point below up.
But the record the NRL were prepared to put in costs at around or near by the vicinity of $30m per season for the prospective club. Until such time it was sold. That would be $18m club grant and a further $12m to match the Waa grassroots investment. In the course of a decade the difference between WA Gov investment and NRL funding would have only been $20m or so. $300m NRL vs. $320m WA Gov.

Norths were also prepared to put in a further 10% or 25% or 49% investment of total operational costs into the prospective club which was up to NRL discretion to greenlight what they deemed satisfactory.

There’s a lot of stuff that wasn’t reported previously on or hadn’t been reported on yet.

 

[Maximus]

I know you didn’t bring this point below up.
But the record the NRL were prepared to put in costs at around or near by the vicinity of $30m per season for the prospective club. Until such time it was sold. That would be $18m club grant and a further $12m to match the Waa grassroots investment. In the course of a decade the difference between WA Gov investment and NRL funding would have only been $20m or so. $300m NRL vs. $320m WA Gov.

Nope that's not how it works. If the team was not NRL owned, they'd still have to pay out the $18m club grant, so no it's not NRL investment into the team.

 

[Wb1234]

It’s literally her job as a treasurer to account for the states budgets, funding and investments. It’s also her job as sports minister to ensure the right calls are made in the states sporting landscape.

Therein lies the problem. Her treasurer mindset wasn’t aligning with her sporting minister mindset in this instance. She doesn’t over rule Cook but at the end of the day these ministers are appointed to do a specific job and advising the premier of what those jobs entail is part of it.

If the NRL were being “greedy” or if the WA Gov hadn’t committed to certain things prior to then neither party would have made it this far.

I know you didn’t bring this point below up.
But the record the NRL were prepared to put in costs at around or near by the vicinity of $30m per season for the prospective club. Until such time it was sold. That would be $18m club grant and a further $12m to match the Waa grassroots investment. In the course of a decade the difference between WA Gov investment and NRL funding would have only been $20m or so. $300m NRL vs. $320m WA Gov.

Norths were also prepared to put in a further 10% or 25% or 49% investment of total operational costs into the prospective club which was up to NRL discretion to greenlight what they deemed satisfactory.

There’s a lot of stuff that wasn’t reported previously on or hadn’t been reported on yet.

The bit about the nrl matching the wa state govt contribution is very interesting

As is the proposed contribution by norths

 

[Perth Red]

It’s literally her job as a treasurer to account for the states budgets, funding and investments. It’s also her job as sports minister to ensure the right calls are made in the states sporting landscape.

Therein lies the problem. Her treasurer mindset wasn’t aligning with her sporting minister mindset in this instance. She doesn’t over rule Cook but at the end of the day these ministers are appointed to do a specific job and advising the premier of what those jobs entail is part of it.

If the NRL were being “greedy” or if the WA Gov hadn’t committed to certain things prior to then neither party would have made it this far.

I know you didn’t bring this point below up.
But the record the NRL were prepared to put in costs at around or near by the vicinity of $30m per season for the prospective club. Until such time it was sold. That would be $18m club grant and a further $12m to match the Waa grassroots investment. In the course of a decade the difference between WA Gov investment and NRL funding would have only been $20m or so. $300m NRL vs. $320m WA Gov.

Norths were also prepared to put in a further 10% or 25% or 49% investment of total operational costs into the prospective club which was up to NRL discretion to greenlight what they deemed satisfactory.

There’s a lot of stuff that wasn’t reported previously on or hadn’t been reported on yet.

Why would it need an extra $12mill to run the club over the grant?

if wa govt was going to put in $12mill for grass roots only where is the $45mill+ for the training centres coming from? Nrlwa cure t operate on $1mill a year, you honestly think that budget is going up to $12mill ayear?

When you say % of operational costs for ns what do you mean? If ns are so flush with cash why does norths only fund the rl club $300k a year?

in 2023 norths lost $3.6mill, where are they getting millions a year from to fund an nrl club 49%?

 

[Red&BlackBear]

How many times have you predicted that the deal is done and will be announced in a few weeks, only for something to go wrong so you've got a convenient excuse for why it didn't happen as you predicted?

It was done buddy, but things got changed last minute. That’s business mate and if you’ve ever had any dealings with state governments sometimes that’s how it goes.

I have had successfully tendered government projects which were won at a certain value, changed during pre-construction or even live construction stages and then parts of funding removed which subsequently caused contract changes. Sometimes complete stoppages to stage it based on funding and other times complete stoppages without further progress.

This is quite literally happening in QLD right now with a few government hospital projects.

That’s just how it is. No one involved with this process is losing sleep over it. They’ll just start their chats back up when ready.

 

[BuffaloRules]

It’s literally her job as a treasurer to account for the states budgets, funding and investments. It’s also her job as sports minister to ensure the right calls are made in the states sporting landscape.

Therein lies the problem. Her treasurer mindset wasn’t aligning with her sporting minister mindset in this instance. She doesn’t over rule Cook but at the end of the day these ministers are appointed to do a specific job and advising the premier of what those jobs entail is part of it.

If the NRL were being “greedy” or if the WA Gov hadn’t committed to certain things prior to then neither party would have made it this far.

I know you didn’t bring this point below up.
But the record the NRL were prepared to put in costs at around or near by the vicinity of $30m per season for the prospective club. Until such time it was sold. That would be $18m club grant and a further $12m to match the Waa grassroots investment. In the course of a decade the difference between WA Gov investment and NRL funding would have only been $20m or so. $300m NRL vs. $320m WA Gov.

Norths were also prepared to put in a further 10% or 25% or 49% investment of total operational costs into the prospective club which was up to NRL discretion to greenlight what they deemed satisfactory.

There’s a lot of stuff that wasn’t reported previously on or hadn’t been reported on yet.

ok …thanks for the detailed response …and the new info …