Sounds like smart business to me.
Also sounds like you have a grudge against Saggy. He hasn't done anything that would indicate he is bad for the sport... Not to me at least.
The line "we are not willing to spend a $ until the nrl announce Perth is definite" sums their bid up for me!
The NRL will call for bids from 2 specific locations. Perth is one of the two.So if the NRL come out and identify that they definitely want to expand into Perth and they call for bids from Perth (and presumably another location) then Sage'll start to spend money. Is that correct?
But if the NRL do no such thing and just ask for any bids from any location and they judge each bid on it's merits, then Sage will effectively have no bid. Without spending any money all he can present to the NRL is that he's rich and that he own's an under performing soccer team. He can't show community engagement, he can't show how his bid will improve Rugby League in the area, he can't even do market research on the area, he'd have to rely on publicly available research which is not client based and specific to his needs.
He'd be no hope.
The NRL will call for bids from 2 specific locations. Perth is one of the two.
There has been suggestions they may shortlist to 3-4 bids around July
The NRL will call for bids from 2 specific locations. Perth is one of the two.
I have reservations about the Reds long term being run by the WARL. Its ok for now as the WARL doesn't get a vote on the IC, but I can see a conflict of interest later once the Reds are well established (ie 20 years from now). I hope the ownership of the Reds evolves as time goes on, either into a member or private ownership model.
There has been suggestions they may shortlist to 3-4 bids around July
If that is the case then according to his quote he won't be spending any money. In those circumstances Perth aren't definitely getting a team.
Its what the ARLC is going to do. 2 locations will be called on to bid. A third might also be asked as the ARLC apparently has some apprehensions about Perth.I'm not so sure about that. I know the ARLC are doing things differently than what the NRL have done in the past, but I think specifically targeting area's which may or may not have good bids when another area may have a good bid is dangerous.
It's a good strategy if your like the AFL and you've got a war chest of money to pump into a team to ensure they don't fail. But we haven't got that, in the NRL any club that enter's has to be self sufficient from day 1.
Wrong. It is2nd brisbane
Bears
Perth
CQ
Thats not true. Due to TV rights its a Brisbane bid which is now a lock for licence 17.Perth are definites and have been for a number of years. It has always been a question of who will join them as the 18th team.
Wrong. It is
Ipswich
Brisbane Bombers
Perth Reds
Central Coast Bears
One of the first two will get in. One of the second two will get in.
Thats not true. Due to TV rights its a Brisbane bid which is now a lock for licence 17.
The NRL has some reservations about Perth, which is on paper the best choice for 18. But there will be a hard fought battle with Gosford for that licence.
Where are you picking up the reservations about Perth bit from? I have heard nothing from gallop or grant that would suggest there are any greater concerns about Perth than any other bid. Presuming th aw reds bid team have done their jobs in engaging corporates and putting a sound business case together we tick all the boxes.
Wrong. It is
Ipswich
Brisbane Bombers
Perth Reds
Central Coast Bears
One of the first two will get in. One of the second two will get in.
Thats not true. Due to TV rights its a Brisbane bid which is now a lock for licence 17.
The NRL has some reservations about Perth, which is on paper the best choice for 18. But there will be a hard fought battle with Gosford for that licence.