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!

Why is perth bid so secretive?!

Iamback

Referee
Messages
21,840
No they aren't a sponsor, they fully fund them.

NRL sides most definitely aren't funded to educate they're players.

A elite few getting scholarships is not the purpose of RL or the NRL team.

It's a poorly thought out idea, that will never make money, and send the NRL broke when the govt pulls their seed funding.

So they already fund them now. No difference to Bears or Brisbane Easts backers offering to put it what is needed for a team.

So what do you welfare officers do at clubs? All the players doing courses etc aren't paying from their own pocket. It is part of ensuring players have a decent life away from football

Far from elite. Only need to look at any Hunters or NRLW player from PNG to see it is the poor ones it will help.

Even more so when facilities are upgrades so they aren't playing in dirt pits.
 
Messages
14,822
not really, already pointed out that PNG is a money pit and won't generate revenue for the game.
If you're worried about the amount of money a club will generate then there's only one contender?

Out of all the bids, the Brisbane Tigers will generate the most revenue from sponsorship, corporate hospitality, ticketing, merchandise and broadcast revenue. Only a delusional moron would think there's another bid in the country that can generate more revenue.

Do you not see the irony of a Canberra Raiders fan whinging about how much revenue the 18th club will generate?

Without pokies and property developments the Raiders would be one of the poorer clubs. A Perth-based team will have neither of these revenue streams to fall back on.

The Perth market is so worthless it was axed by News Ltd when they held a 50% stake in the game. It hasn't been taken seriously as an option during recent negotiations. We've had the ARLC Chairman state to the press that "no money will be wasted on rusted-on AFL states" when asked about Perth s prospects of getting the 17th licence.

I suppose you'll claim that was a "throw away line"?
 
Messages
14,822
The latter moved to Melbourne and still hasn’t recovered

maybe some of the money from the png team can go too fixing up the water in cairns
The drinking water in Melbourne led to Dan Andrews getting re-elected and has tens of thousands of idiots worshipping fumbleball at the G every weekend.
 

mongoose

Coach
Messages
12,574
If you're worried about the amount of money a club will generate then there's only one contender?

Out of all the bids, the Brisbane Tigers will generate the most revenue from sponsorship, corporate hospitality, ticketing, merchandise and broadcast revenue. Only a delusional moron would think there's another bid in the country that can generate more revenue.

Do you not see the irony of a Canberra Raiders fan whinging about how much revenue the 18th club will generate?

Without pokies and property developments the Raiders would be one of the poorer clubs. A Perth-based team will have neither of these revenue streams to fall back on.

The Perth market is so worthless it was axed by News Ltd when they held a 50% stake in the game. It hasn't been taken seriously as an option during recent negotiations. We've had the ARLC Chairman state to the press that "no money will be wasted on rusted-on AFL states" when asked about Perth s prospects of getting the 17th licence.

I suppose you'll claim that was a "throw away line"?

1. As usual you have no proof the Tigers will make more money than any other bid, just guesswork.

2. WHile the Raiders don't make lots of money from football operations, they still make some and have potential to make more. Why? because people in Canberra can f**king afford to pay to attend games, pay for TV, buy merchandise and buy the shit products that are advertised on TV. 99% of people in PNG can't

3. your anti-perth arguments are just baseless crap - "News have no interest in Perth 'cause they see it as a waste of money...... The storm are worthless even though News invested millions into them over several years"
 
Messages
14,822
1. As usual you have no proof the Tigers will make more money than any other bid, just guesswork.

A Brisbane expansion hopeful has declared they would instantly become one of the NRL’s wealthiest four clubs and could field a side before the 18th team’s 2027 inclusion.


The Brisbane Tigers will average anywhere between 20-30k at Lang Park with 30k or more members. Companies will be queueing up to sponsor them.

There's 1.6 million people living on the south side.

Arguing that a third Brisbane team isn't guaranteed of making money is as dumb as the doom and gloom predictions about the Dolphins in the lead up to their entry. Now the know-it-alls who said the Dolphins would have no fans or money are backtracking.

2. WHile the Raiders don't make lots of money from football operations, they still make some and have potential to make more. Why? because people in Canberra can f**king afford to pay to attend games, pay for TV, buy merchandise and buy the shit products that are advertised on TV. 99% of people in PNG can't

Canberra is a small market.

You want the NRL to be like the AFL, NRL, BBL and A-League.

Those leagues have zero teams in Canberra.

Why waste a valuable licence on such a small market?

3. your anti-perth arguments are just baseless crap - "News have no interest in Perth 'cause they see it as a waste of money...... The storm are worthless even though News invested millions into them over several years"

News Ltd cut the Reds in 1997. That's a documented fact.

No one influential from the game's broadcast partners have openly embraced Perth. Journalists have speculated about a Perth-based team for years, but we've never heard CEOs and Chairman from these companies state they want one.

The last time Ch9 wanted a team in Perth was in the early 90s. Packer paid zero dollars for the inclusion of the Reds in 1995. He held the FTA and PTV rights.

Key stakeholders from Ch9 have publicly advocated for Brisbane 2 and 3.

The only people from Perth who've expressed an interest in a Perth-based team are Puddy and Cumins.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
73,609
new year same denial lol

There is a consortium of very successful businessman in Perth who are also passionate rugby league people that are working behind the scenes and doing lots of ground work,” Sackson said.
“I believe Western Australia can present a very very compelling if not irresistible case in it’s own right without partnering up with a club on the east coast in a joint venture situation.”

 

Pippen94

First Grade
Messages
7,935
new year same denial lol

There is a consortium of very successful businessman in Perth who are also passionate rugby league people that are working behind the scenes and doing lots of ground work,” Sackson said.
“I believe Western Australia can present a very very compelling if not irresistible case in it’s own right without partnering up with a club on the east coast in a joint venture situation.”


Nowhere does that say there's a bid..
 
Top