Why little mention of the CQ NRL bid?

[CQ Italia]

ing

Well of course they're going to sell it. Why would they have two stadiums in the city. If you're going to play the "we were here first card", I'll just play the "NQLD has a team first, and are hoping for future representative matches hence the need for a new stadium," card.

You said you were taking away the Mackay Cutters when you included them in your representative region. If you aren't planning on using the Cutters as your feeder team, they are not your region and their population is not included in your catchment area. You can't have it both ways.

How many plays from Mackay are included in the Cowboys squad is entirely irrelevant. And the article is one that you posted on this forum, because apparently you thought it was something to brag about.

If you're expecting to find a full squad of NRL-quality players in such a small area, then you'll be an incredibly poor team.

Sell out - meaning when DFS reaches consistent 25k+ crowds.

The bid haven't released anything about the Cutters nor have I asked about it. It will be up to the Cutters and what entity benefits them the most.

Just like the (former) CQ Comets (now re-named Capras) switched from Cowboys to Broncos and in the late 90's they may have a had short tenure with Parramatta Eels apparently.

 

[CQ Italia]

CQ NRL Bid Chairman Blasts “Ill Informed” SEQ Expansion Comments



http://www.cqnrlbid.com.au/2012/05/cq-nrl-bid-chairman-blasts-ill-informed-seq-expansion-comments/

 

[CQ Italia]

CQ NRL bid boss slams rival’s ‘ignorant and rude’ comments on TV rights

More articles by Tony Harper »
Written by: Tony Harper
Tags: expansion, spotlight


Share

1
inShare​

Print





The chairman of Central Queensland’s bid for an expansion NRL team, Geoff Murphy, has hit out at “outlandish” claims by rival bid chairman Craig Davison of the Brisbane Bombers.
“Ignorant, rude, selfish and dismissive are just some adjectives people are using to describe recent comments from a promoter of a third NRL Club for the South East of Queensland,” Geoff Murphy said in a statement Wednesday.
“I just can’t understand how parties with vested interests can make so called informed comments about TV ratings and public perceptions of a very complex and crowded sports media market without any evidence to back up these outlandish statements.”
Although he did not name the source of his ire in the statement, Murphy appeared to be responding to comments by Davison, who told AAP last week: “It’s a no-brainer. You have to have a rugby league game on in Brisbane every weekend.”
He said the big television audience tuning in to watch the Broncos play every Friday night was irresistible proof Brisbane rugby league followers wanted more.
The ARL Commission is in negotiations with host broadcasters Channel Nine and other interested parties for a new 10-year TV rights deal tipped to bring a $1 billion revenue windfall.
Channel Nine and Fox Sports are reported to like the idea of a game being played in Brisbane every weekend to cash in on rugby league’s enormous popularity in Queensland.
As it stands, Sydney rugby league fans get more than 100 NRL games a season, while Brisbane fans get just 12 live home games to attend, the same as Townsville, Melbourne and Canberra.
“Sydney have 108 games and Brisbane have 12. Fans need more games and we need another side in Brisbane,” Davison said.
“This is not about the Bombers, this is about the need for another team because quite simply, 12 games in a city whose population is heading towards three million by 2030 is not enough.”
Murphy, a property millionaire who is funding the CQ bid, has a report from the NRL’s consultant on TV rights Colin Smith which Murphy says “absolutely debunks the so called “need” for a third NRL club in the South East of Queensland and in fact details the serious detrimental consequences to the game and its current participants of any such implementation.”
Murphy told SBI last week that Smith, of Global Media & Sports, concluded in the report that a CQ bid would have the highest level of public and local sponsorship support of any bid and that the TV rights impact would be the same whether a team was based in South East Queensland or CQ.
Murphy believes that SE Queensland’s high concentration of sporting franchises and the past failure of SE Queensland Crushers when they failed to survive in a city dominated by the Broncos are warning signs that the ARLC can’t iggnore.
“I am more than a little annoyed that elements in the south east of our state can even suggest a third NRL club when a region like CQ that provides so much of the state’s wealth and prosperity and has remained loyal to the wonderful game of Rugby League for over 100 years is not considered in some commentary,” said Murphy on Wednesday.
“I am prepared to release elements of this (Smith) report to prove once and for all that CQ has the ability, the avid Rugby League population, the will and most of all the means to establish a very viable and successful NRL club in CQ that will not impinge on the current NRL Club structure and that will add significantly to the NRL, and its media partners.”
The ARLC has yet to make a decision on if and when it might expand from 16 to 18 teams.


http://sportbizinsider.com.au/news/...vals-ignorant-and-rude-comments-on-tv-rights/

 

[Perth Red]

Seriously what a whinge! Did he miss the statement by Ch9 of the value of a 2nd Brisbane team, hardly outlandish claim when one of the key TV bidding agencies is putting a huge value on a 2nd Brisbane team.

Also how do they know this?
Murphy told SBI last week that Smith, of Global Media & Sports, concluded in the report that a CQ bid would have the highest level of public and local sponsorship support of any bid
I am pretty sure the other bidding teams have not shared their confidential corporate partner opportunities with this guy so that is pure speculation I would assume

Murphy's new media spin team need to work on his photo pose, bad body language in that one!

 

[CQ Italia]

Breaking News


May 3, 2012


0 comments »


CQ bid orders new report from NRL media rights consultant to counter Bombers claims

More articles by Tony Harper »
Written by: Tony Harper
Tags: expansion, spotlight, tv rights


Share

1
inShare​

Print





The Central Queensland NRL expansion bid has commissioned an updated report from the ARLC’s media rights expert Colin Smith as the gloves come off in the increasingly testy battle for a place in the national competition.
CQ are seething over comments made last week by the chairman of the Brisbane Bombers bid, one of three, along with CQ and Ipswich, seeking to become a fourth Queensland team in an expanded 18 team competition. Bombers boss Craig Davison told AAP that the ARLC “needed” more games played in Brisbane city, a suggestion CQ says has no substance.
The Bombers have previously upset Ipswich’s bid, with Davison dismissing it as: “Ipswich is a good little city, but I don’t think it has the strength of numbers to make it (NRL admission) work.”
The CQ bid released to SBI on Thursday a report prepared by Smith’s Global Media & Sports company in August 2011, comparing the CQ bid to all others looking for a berth when the competition expands. They are Brisbane, Ipswich, Perth, Darwin, Central Coast and Papua New Guinea.
Smith is working as a consultant to the ARLC as it negotiates a new TV deal estimated to be in the region of $1.4 billion.
The 2011 Smith report concluded that CQ had the best local support and sponsorship potential of any bid and said the TV viewing figures and potential rights income was the same as it would be for the other Queensland bids.
“Given the propensity for Queenslanders to support their NRL teams, television audiences for a new expansion franchise in Brisbane or Ipswich or Central Queensland will not vary,” the report said. “likewise Pay TV subscription growth is not expected to vary depending on location of the new franchise.
“The choice of location for an expansion team should be based on the success of the new team. The success of the new team will be determined by local support of fans and business. The survey shows fans’ support will be highest for a Central Queensland expansion team.”
The actual location of an expansion team in Queensland will have a minimal impact on overall TV audiences or Pay TV subscriptions,” Smith concluded.
CQ business and community development manager Walson Carlos also revealed Thursday, “We have just re-engaged Colin Smith to undertake a further study that will update the current report and compile specific data relevant to the effects of expansion on other NRL clubs, the NRL and specific media outlets.”
Smith’s company Global Media & Sports was contracted to deliver his first report last year and surveyed 1,240 fans in spread through city and rural areas of Queensland (781) and New South Wales (451) and studied NRL TV broadcast ratings from 2008-11.
The key findings in the report, released to SBI today, were:

• Queenslanders support Queensland teams as their first, second and third choice above outsiders and this is reflected in stated preference and ratings data.​
• While Queenslanders marginally prefer to watch their local team play on TV over other Queensland teams, audiences in Queensland fall significantly for games between outsiders.
• Based on an analysis of audiences, an expansion franchise located anywhere in Queensland will draw similar TV ratings and the location of a Queensland-based franchise will have “minimal effect on overall TV audience size or additional Pay TV subscriptions” .
• While the survey found an overall majority support for the NSW Central Coast bid, based on a split of the vote in Queensland and a strong NSW vote, figures show audience levels drop in both states for Knights and Canberra Raiders games, indicating a regional team in New South Wales may not add to NRL audiences.
• There is a strong appetite for expansion – 75 percent of respondents believe in expansion with most saying it should be two teams or four.
• Central Queensland was the clear top choice of all Queensland respondents as the preferred location for expansion, and was second for Brisbane-based respondents.

Although a timeframe for expansion has yet to be confirmed, an NRL source said in February that bidders were expected to be told in July if they remained in contention.


http://sportbizinsider.com.au/news/...-back-arlc-consultant-smith-for-a-fresh-look/

 

[CQ Italia]

Seriously what a whinge! Did he miss the statement by Ch9 of the value of a 2nd Brisbane team, hardly outlandish claim when one of the key TV bidding agencies is putting a huge value on a 2nd Brisbane team.

Also how do they know this?
Murphy told SBI last week that Smith, of Global Media & Sports, concluded in the report that a CQ bid would have the highest level of public and local sponsorship support of any bid
I am pretty sure the other bidding teams have not shared their confidential corporate partner opportunities with this guy so that is pure speculation I would assume

Murphy's new media spin team need to work on his photo pose, bad body language in that one!

A journo also said recently that TV executives have also hinted that WA wouldn't add much for Pay TV subscriptions, without fully knowing what the Reds may have to offer.

ARLC Consultant is backing CQ for combined - fan support and business support/substance, which says something. We'll see what the new report says.

I also have a quote from the CQ Bid they have proven financial viability WITHOUT NRL grants (profitable)

 

[Perth Red]

Actually lets get it correct, A CQ bid funded consultant, who is now working for the ARLC said it. I have yet to meet a consultant who you pay a lot of money to produce a report that is not favourable to its paymaster. The WARL also commisioned a report in 2010 that said similiar things, so whose is right? I guess there is probably elements of truths in both but don't be so naive as to believe that a report funded by a vested interest is going to be even close to objective. As I said before how does he know that the corporate support is more than any other bid? Unless he has been privy to other bids info on support it is pure speculation. Alos noted how you and the bid have skirted the question about Ch9's statement of the value of a 2nd Brisbane team rather than another Q'land team.

I have to say I am getting very disappointed in the way CQ are turning their campaign into a negative one. The media will always rather print the controversial bits but the CQ bid at the moment is "attacking" the other Q'land bids a lot and won;t be winning them many friends.

By the way I don't disagree that the value of the Reds bid does not lie in value to Pay TV, due to crappy FTA coverage RL fans in WA are already signed up to Fox. Our value lies in many other areas.

 

[Perth Red]

I also have a quote from the CQ Bid they have proven financial viability WITHOUT NRL grants (profitable)

Really? They are going to raise $16million a year without NRL grant? How exactly are they going to do that? That would put them on par with Brisbanes revenue streams and I very much doubt they are going to avg 30K+ crowds.

 

[adamkungl]

Personally I love how the QLD bids are attacking each other. Implode!

 

[CQ Italia]

Actually lets get it correct, A CQ bid funded consultant, who is now working for the ARLC said it. I have yet to meet a consultant who you pay a lot of money to produce a report that is not favourable to its paymaster. The WARL also commisioned a report in 2010 that said similiar things, so whose is right? I guess there is probably elements of truths in both but don't be so naive as to believe that a report funded by a vested interest is going to be even close to objective. As I said before how does he know that the corporate support is more than any other bid? Unless he has been privy to other bids info on support it is pure speculation. Alos noted how you and the bid have skirted the question about Ch9's statement of the value of a 2nd Brisbane team rather than another Q'land team.

I have to say I am getting very disappointed in the way CQ are turning their campaign into a negative one. The media will always rather print the controversial bits but the CQ bid at the moment is "attacking" the other Q'land bids a lot and won;t be winning them many friends.

By the way I don't disagree that the value of the Reds bid does not lie in value to Pay TV, due to crappy FTA coverage RL fans in WA are already signed up to Fox. Our value lies in many other areas.

I have heard CQ in February were at a stage of choosing between two particular major sponsors. So the bid is very confident base on how comprehensive their business plan is and will NEED to cover every element being a regional bid to prove we are ready. I'll have a blog tomorrow about some of the matter.

Just from the media reports it is clear CQ is more advanced than any other QLD bid, but it does help with a little "inside knowledge"

Agree - all bids have value in some elements it's up to the bids to prove they are too hard to resist. Do they choose a bid that proves viability/great business ability/grassroots support or one that may have a slight advantage TV wise but appears to be rushed. It will be a challenge for the ARLC. Not privy to the information Colin Smith is aware of, we'll have to wait a few more months to see what happens!

 

[CQ Italia]

Really? They are going to raise $16million a year without NRL grant? How exactly are they going to do that? That would put them on par with Brisbanes revenue streams and I very much doubt they are going to avg 30K+ crowds.

Sorry it without top up grants. But still a bid that believes they will be profitable.

The whole bid team lead by Geoff Murphy and Denis Keeffee have strong business experience and many many contacts in QLD business, that is how and with the ability to utilize a strong CQ economy. There will be something out by the shortlist decision time.

 

[CQ Italia]

Beef Week (Australia), which is run by Geoff Murphy as Chairman (CQ NRL Bid Chairman) is expected to get over 75,000 in attendance. The NRL Bid will have a stall right at the front entrance so good exposure.

"Waits for the but Rocky region only has 120,000."

 

[docbrown]

Beef Week (Australia), which is run by Geoff Murphy as Chairman (CQ NRL Bid Chairman) is expected to get over 75,000 in attendance. The NRL Bid will have a stall right at the front entrance so good exposure.

"Waits for the but Rocky region only has 120,000."

Well regardless of that, if that's an annual thing it makes sense to have an NRL game there in the meantime.

 

[Perth Red]

on the cow paddock?

 

[docbrown]

on the cow paddock?

If that's what it takes.

 

[CQ Italia]

Browne Park (only 8000) is too small.
"The cow paddock" where the likes of Duncan Hall, Cyril Connell's, Rod Reddy, Wesser, O'Neil, Sing, Crear, etc have played on.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

on the cow paddock?

I've been to Browne Park, good little stadium

 

[CQ Italia]

The Spotlight – CQ to bring on challenges!



The VERY Crowded Sporting Landscape – South East Queensland has two NRL clubs and has a lot of risks associated with expansion.

"Walson Carlos (CQ NRL Bid Business and Community Development Manager) was asked by The Spotlight – how will Central Queensland achieve this, and states “we have a very robust business plan and would enter the NRL competition if granted a license as one of the most viable sporting franchises in Australia. This viability will be secure and constant through our major backers and not reliant upon top-up grants from the NRL. "

Community Ownership Model for CQ?


FULL Blog at http://www.cqnrlbid.com.au/2012/05/the-spotlight-cq-to-bring-on-challenges/

 

[Perth Red]

CQ any ideas which company this is and what the deal is wrth? Is it an independent sponsorship up one of Murphy's companies?

One of the most lucrative sponsorship deals in history for professional sports clubs in Australia will be the draw-card for an area that has rugby league flowing in their blood.

 

[Perth Red]

Again I ask how can the report come to this conclusion without intimate details of the other bids? The WA Reds bid have a number of "local" sponsors lined up including a 7 figure main sponsor (rumoured to be Cash Convertors) and the Bears have a massive sponsorship support already so how can they claim this without knowing what the other bids have lined up?

“CQ bid would have the highest level of public and local sponsorship support of any bid