The introduction of the ARL Indpendent Commission (IC) will certainly change rugby league in Australia forever. While there are plenty of negative aspects to the IC, one significant attribute these successful business-people will bring is a more strategic approach to expansion.
The current leadership – or lack thereof – has eroded to a point where the focus of expansion discussion is on the quality of independent bids currently being proposed by businessmen.
Moreover, these bids, the Central Coast Bears in particular, have been developed in isolation of any strategic intent of the ARL.
This is not to suggest there is not support within the bureaucracy, just that any such support has not been derived from a deliberate strategy on the part of the ARL.
What the ARL IC should deliver is a more deliberate strategy for expanding the NRL, linked to the intent for rugby league grassroots development more broadly. And this strategic thinking will look at the opportunities each market holds and, moreover, will view weaknesses as issues to be overcome, not reasons to avoid expansion into those areas.
Professional sports management in Australia has come a long way since the parochial geographic isolation of the last century. Indeed, a more strategic approach has given soccer a much greater profile and a significantly broader supporter-base since tackling issues such as the ethnic-identity of clubs as well as the geographic spread of the A-League clubs.
While the hardcore supporters preferred the former arrangements, strategic thinking knew changes were required to expand the game further.
Similarly, the AFL hasn’t expanded according to where any independent businessman had a great proposal – they expanded into new areas strategically in order to reduce Melbourne clubs and to take a long-term view in non-traditional areas such as Western Sydney and the Gold Coast.
It is not that the AFL is ignorant to the challenges of establishing a team in a rugby league stronghold, but that they have embraced the challenge as a strategic goal.
The ARU tell a similar story – not focusing on independent proposals, but applying a strategic management approach to expansion into Perth and Melbourne.
The new ARL IC is tipped to include some impressive business minds.
It is not likely that their decisions on expansion will be made without a strategic mindset, and it increasingly unlikely that they will be swayed by polished presentations by independent businessmen peddling their offer if it doesn’t offer the best strategic advantage to the game.
Therefore, the Central Coast Bears bid is far from a done deal.
The backslapping from the current bureaucracy is meaningless as savvy Independent Commissioners will certainly not be convinced to take quick, rash decisions. With the current density of the NRL within two hours drive from the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it is extremely unlikely the Bears bid will tick all their boxes.
For the Central Coast Bears, the question is whether their model, even if perfected, offers enough strategic benefit to rugby league. Certainly, highlighting their North Sydney heritage does not provide them with any advantage in a strategic ARL IC world.
For the ARL IC, the question is how they can quickly establish sound management teams in other geographic locations so that expansion can occur wisely, quickly, and strategically.
Perth Red
Guest
Outrageous that we should be looking at either Q'land or NSW for expansion, after all didn't Glebe and the Crushers fail? ;) Sorry Bears fans but the AFL TV deal will be the kick in the backside for the IC to choose best value adding teams and that is Perth and Brisbane I'm afraid.
Perth Red
Guest
LOL YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THE rl SCENE IN pERTH IN 2011. kEEP LIVING IN 1997 IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL MORE SECURE!
GoGWS
Roar Guru
mick...wake up mate... NRL clubs have been, and always will be, leaning on pokie revenues and private backing...were you paying attention when the NSW government raise pokie taxes?..did you notice the squealing and moaning that came from the NRL clubs?...and why?...because NRL clubs are directly affected that's why - otherwise pokie taxes would have been a non-issue (which they are not)..... there is no professional sport so hooked into gambling revenue,apart from horse racing (if that counts as a sport)... and Cronulla?...why even bring that up?....it hardly helps your argument...Cronulla are a chronically loss-making football operation...if allowed, they are about to sell some of the farm (i.e. land they own) in vain attempt to stay afloat...it's real 'sticking a finger in the hole in the dyke wall' kinda stuff....Cronulla are a terminal case unless they mobilise local support..selling off land is just a stop gap....they are a sinking ship...
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
$300m suggests they may be in with a chance.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
GoGWS LOL. Maybe you should ask Cronulla fans that one,as they get very little from the club in the form of grants .That is why they are looking outside the square with their development. You make assumptions and generalisations at times that could come out of the pen and mouth of Caroline Wilson. Do you understand that the League's clubs are not the so called cash cows they once were ,or are you srpruiking from a distant planet. You continue to ignore the fact NRL clubs are reducing their dependence on that funding,and keep bugling from the past.Keep up to speed. You continue to ignore the value of the next Tv deal.You continue to ignore the fact the NRL will not subsidise clubs should they get into difficulty,that they must stand on their own merits,hence the requirements for a sold financially sound bid. There are clubs that get grants from Leagues clubs,but these clubs cannot keep feeding the few,when they are taxed highly,and have other facilites to maintain.Maybe you should check with the Tigers who have lost the Balmain club,due to a development stuff up. .There is no guarantee therefore of continuous club backing.That is why the Titans model works,as does the Broncos and no doubt the Knights and Bears ones.Are you suggesting the Titans that are not dependent on poker machines are doomed. The privatised teams that are on borrowed time?Please advise me what calculus you are using for establishing Perth's losses? Please support that with evidence. Interesting as one investor left Manly,another one took up his share.The club remained the same old club.The same will happen with the Broncos. And tell me why then if these NRL clubs in non heartland areas without a league's club are supposedly on borrowed time,when the same should apply exactly to GWS.Money does not buy you love as the Swans have found on FTA TV.Last reports Tv monies is important in the biggest market.The AFL is putting the money into establishing the new clubs,the NRL will not being doing so. You can also look at it another way.Should the NRL not proceed with expansion,the additonal monies(TV) available to all clubs, will further ensure little need for grants from the clubs or much less.the additonal monies will be pumped into grassroots development into areas such as Melbourne.Thereby further cementing their position in the Sthn Capital. If they decide to expand,they will do so in area such as CC and Perth,areas vacated before, due to SL,and Bears suppporters will have something to cheer about instead of or in addition to the Swans. Either way,the game will benefit in some way. The AFL yes is in a very different situation at present,but the sun will be shared by another code in 2013 where the situation and competitiveness ,will be a whole new ball game. And if you think putting $20m a year and maybe getting little in return after 10 years would thrill Vlad ,you are kidding. I have to laugh at your comment that Perth is too small,with over 1m people,yet the AFL no doubt will be looking at Canberra down the line (about 300,000).Hardly a megatropolis. Funny Masters has been historically correct and factually accurate more than 95% of the time. Yet we are expected to bow to the supreme deluded knowledge and inacccuracies(I won't call them lies) of Caroline Wilson the rose coloured glasses girl,Baum,and Smith .They tend to insult the intelligence of anyone who follows rl,or even has a passing knowledge of the game.Wilson's knowledge of rl,would hardly fill a postage stamp,yet she projects expertise. I sense that unease that Gould may be correct,stop the world GOGWS wants to get off.Love him or hate him,Kerry Packer and his son seem to think he had his head screwed on.
GoGWS
Roar Guru
Why have a Leagues club at all - of course the NRL clubs that have Leagues ALL use them as a cash cows!!... Geez Crosscoder you're the one in fantasy land mate.,.. and the teams that rely on private backers are on borrowed time - they can't leach off private backers indefinitely... and if you think they can then good luck to you ... Yes I do realise no Leagues back Perth, Melbourne, Auckland... this is precisely why they have no long term future... possibly the IC might say - "let's keep Melbourne because of the size of that market - it has no Leagues club but we'll indefinitely subsidise them"...and "Perth has no Leagues club and the market is too small to keep picking up the losses".... I could see this sort of conversation going on..... pokie revenues and RL go hand in hand mate,,.. there's no point denying it.... and yes expansion teams, by definition, must be 'uncoupled' from that traditional sources of pokie revenue funding but something else must be in place ... private backing (if you can) or indefinite subsidy from the NRL (which existing NRL clubs may not have the stomach for given their weaker financial positions)....NSW NRL clubs will forever have the advantage over 'expansion' teams because of their Leagues clubs backing...... the AFL is committed to long term subsidies for GC and GWS - it can afford it, and the AFL clubs are willing to support it...the AFL is in a very different situation to the NRL.... Gould/Masters...well Masters is a chronic fibber who pumps out semi-literate, boring, repetative drivel....it genuinely amazes me that Masters is a journalist. My ten year old writes more coherently, and more entertainingly for that matter. And Gould? - well he is a carping know-nothing when it comes to the direction of the NRL.... for commentary on the NRL, and its direction, they will both be proved very wrong in the coming years, as always - surer than night following day....to see what will NOT happen with the NRL tune into Masters/Gould...
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I think the 20 minutes comment was in jest TBH.That being said there has been a growing number of WA born players having played or plying their trade in the NRL,in addition to the under 20s. When the Broncos were established, Brisbane and surrounds had a much smaller population than at present. Now the Titans have come on board on the GC ,and when both play at Suncorp 40,000 plus is the norm,and a packed house at Robina.Times have changed, as has the population. Brisbane can handle at least another side,the new bid already has sponsors on board.What many non rl people forget,is in Brisbane there are many southern expats who fiollow other Sydney clubs and in fact former Crusher fans.the SL war got a not insignificant number of rl fans offside,who dislike the Broncos intensely. In fact the current CEO of the Broncs,has admitted they could live with the opposition now. As far as stadiums are concerned I think you are being a bit unfair,as the majority of clubs play in modern arenas.Bulldogs,Souths,Easts,Tigers on occasions at ANZ,Parramatta,Newcastle,Canberra,Melbourne,Suncorp,Titans.It is only the clubs such as Penrith,Manly,Tigers at Leichardt(where they get 20,000) st george who are updating and the Sharks who will update with the new development)pending approval). It has to be the case,because Sydney is so widespread ,our transport and road system is ordinary,so suburban upgraded /modern grounds will in the main be the norm. What extra vakue does the NRL have?I suggest dominating in the country;s largest market,dominating in the country's 3rd largest marketplace,having ratings bonanza for SOO, the occasional international and the dominance on pay Tv are pretty good starters. On Foxtel the idea when that company paid more ,was to seduce new southern subscribers and obviously influence Tv ratings for that medium.Judging by the continuing rl dominance and the tajke up in subs,it has hardly been the resounding success expected. Yes but as we know Wookie, Roy Masters is full of BS according to AFL people,so why use him as a reliable source.One minute he says the NRL is worth more. The AFL indeed has more members,more live supporters,but TV relies on ratings (eyeballs).Ask the advertisers.You want to reach the largest numbers of people.If Pay Tv has a larger number of subscribers watching NRL ,then they have to stand up and take notice.It is hardly a flash in the pan,but a continuous fact. According to most experts the nRL will receive substantially more ,and that is not taking into consideration the strong posssibility of extra teams ,meaning extra slots. Again 3 FTA Tv stations have indicated they want to bid for the nRL,only 1 was genuine last time. The more bids ,generally means a better price. No one really knows how many people on the Nth side and ;elsewhere will come back to watching rl,when the Bears get back.No doubt many were lost to the game,according to gallop 40,000 one way or another. The cost of running an NRL club ,as has already been established is far cheaper than an AFL one.That being the case a much bigger Tv deal for the code ,will give it far greater opportunities,than it ever had previously.Do not exclude the Sky TV contract monies as part of the mix
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
M1tch Correct.Many opponents of their existence forget that about money expended.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
GoGWS . I I stated that not all clubs rely on multi million dollar handouts,and gave you examples.So conversely it is dishonest of you to generalise by lumping them all in the one basket.The use of multi meaning what $5m $10 m.Yes there are clubs that receive up to a couple of million dollars,but as I stated there are ones that do not (and the Bears when they get in will be one).Then you change it to very significant.Stick to the script. How solid a foundation!.Maybe you should ask the Broncos,one of (if not) the most successful privately owned clubs in this country.,or even the Titans.I suggest the solidity and member involvement is rock solid,even when they are down the ladder.News ltd have stated they are not going to offload the Storm until the club has the financial stability necessary. Please do not compare the A league private ownership model with either full privatised or partially privatised model of the NRL.Please note not all clubs want to follow the privatisation model eg Cronulla. Du you understand that there is no league's club backing in Auckland,an expansion area and Melbourne and Perth. Whilst melbourne ATM has its obvious problems,they have laid down some roots in that city,in fact more so than GWS by simply having had a team in the NRL for 13 years. And where do you think a fair swag of the code's income arises? From Tv contracts.And where is a location that has financial support,govt backing,grassroots support and a TV timeslot that enhances the Tv contract monies? Perth Do you actually realise the bids made by the various areas,are in fact business cases not something written on a whiteboard."A right to exist "a bit like GWS hey what.That could end up the biggest black hole in Oz sport.That model is to expend $20 pa on an area ,because we are here,therfore we expect you to follow.Especially as their fellow Sydney sider club ,gets dismal Tv raings when shown live on FTA. As you continue to ignore the effect of SL on the Reds,it is hardly worth commenting.As for adelaid agreed it was rushed by SL,and NB there was no bid coming from that area. No one me or you knows what the i.C will decide.As I stated it may well mean an increase to 20 teams ,should the Tv stations support it financially.You have no zot of an idea what the annual grants will be to each club,the idea to match the salary cap,the crowds for the Reds,the sponsorship,or the growth of the code should that area be included.you are making assumptions it appears based on your ambivalence toward the code. And finally do you know exactly the amount the nRL will receive in its TV negotiations in Australia and Sky NZ ? I certainly don't ,but I do know as do TV pundits on Fox and even FTA admit it will be a hell of a lot bigger than the prior one. Unfortunately ole chum,any man with half a brain,knows you have to grow the game nationally to grow the participation numbers and financial cake. The fact that you agree with Willy does nothing to strengthen your case,in fact it weakens it.He is concerned with one thing another Brisbane side,.It is called insularity.if some of them held held sway,therewould be no Canberra,Auckland, or even NTH Qld. The ARL had plans for Melbourne well before the SL war erupted. Oh and Gould and Masters are back on your agenda again.One thing I will say you are relentless in your dislike of those two.The funny thing is both have been spot on 95% of the time,as opposed to the fantasies of Caro Wilson and Patrick Smith and Greg Baum.. I detect a feeling of unease,that the NRl may encroach on home territory..
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
regional and junior development should never be at the clubs expense, except their own juniors. Otherwise who needs a governing body if the clubs do all the heavy work.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
The players do not handle negotiations around the salary cap.The CEO and financial honcho are the ones who either negotiate with the managers or keep tabs on the balance of funds available under the cap. The buck stops with the CEO,if he is unaware of what went on ,he should not be a CEO.He is hardly a fall guy.He is in fact a pinhead. In order of salary cap rot merit ,in descending order CEO,CFO,any others in the admin aware,player managers. You are making assumptions on whether no player investigations were carried out.I suggest the ATO may have been involved for starters ,re disclosure. The ratings for the Storm on Pay TV ,knocks your argument into the outfield.Pay TV is where rl is king in terms of Tv ratings.The Fox people continually bang on about it,as do the NRL.Who is the most cashed up media outlet?News./Foxsport Maybe the code should have a really good look at ch9.From my observations even in sydney,their attitude towards rl at times apopears to be benign.eg last night there was a Legends of Origin on,and the 4.40pm news,had stuff all about it. My point is ch 9 can't even promote the game in Sydney (the game's heartland),despite rl rights exclusivity. The fact they can't do any sort of job in Melbourne therefore,is hardly a scoop. That is why thenext TV contracts should insist a better timeslot. Ch10 and 7 at least show the AFL at decent hours,despite the dismal ratings in Sydney.They stick to their contracts.ch9 is a disgrace based on their efforts in Sydney and Melbourne.
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
You have any idea how many AFL players have come from the Riverina, ACT, Wagga or country QLD areas? The Broncos being King of the NRL in terms of income is primarily due to the clubs investment strategy, not to mention the NRL being afraid to put another team in the second most populous area in its "heartland". The amount required to run an NRL club is massively less for the most part due to the fact they play in stadiums that were built in the days of yore, whereas the AFL hasnt used suburban grounds for some time. Not to mention the salary cap being double the NRLs. Its for all these reasons that the AFL will likely never go to regional areas with populations of less than 500,000. What extra tv value does the NRL have? According to the last deal, and by most experts, the next TV deal, the AFL will recieve more per game? Even on foxtel where the NRL is the prime attraction, Fox paid less per NRL game than the AFL. Roy masters has pointed out that Advertisers that per game they prefer the AFL over the NRL on paytv and the rest of Australia, and they spend just as much per game as the NRL in Qld and NSW. In effect, the AFL has more members, more live followers, and more money per tv game.
GoGWS
Roar Guru
Yes I know about the tax situation - who would not know about it given all the whining and media campaigns ...Leagues Club grants are still significant, and they remain an important part of an NRL team's funding.... and its a shame really that pokie revenues are so important... the teams you mentioned all lean on private backers without whom they'd be gonners...
Koops
Guest
bilbo said I know I would rather be a sport with a good TV value but a not so good live following, as opposed to a game which has a good live following (benefits being Membership and attendances), but not good TV audiences. Are you saying that the AFL does not have a good TV audience ? !!. I also would disagree with you that 20 min outside Brisbane and Sydney no-one knows about Australian football.
NF
Guest
I prefer to have good live viewing & tv value the best of both worlds would benefit League more than just focusing on tv.
bilbo
Guest
Regional centres are a big plus - the AFL have tried very hard to bring up a niche in Sydney and Brisbane, and they have a supporter base in the upper middle class inner city folk, but drive for 20 minutes in any direction from the city centre and no-one will know anything about AFL. NSW and Qld have many regional centres, unlike WA, SA and Vic, and therefore the AFL has a harder war to fight once it carves out its niche. And we all know that the best athletes come from the country! Another advantage is the amount required to run a club - AFL clubs cost approximately double that of NRL clubs, due to player lists, salary caps, extra coaches etc - so that explains why the Broncos are the kings of the NRL, with a turnover of 35k, whereas the Magpies are the kings of the AFL with a turnover of 60m. Another key advantage is the TV value of NRL games - going into the future where TV rights will be the big cash cow, I know I would rather be a sport with a good TV value but a not so good live following, as opposed to a game which has a good live following (benefits being Membership and attendances), but not good TV audiences.
bilbo
Guest
More than half. It amounts to millions, and the Storm's losses are never that much. Imagine if the Lions had to spend their money on AFL development in Qld, they would run in the red by a long way every year. But they dont. AFL Queensland put the money in, so the Lions can concentrate on lining Brendan Fevolas pockets.
bilbo
Guest
Willy - They got rid of Souths, they got St George to merge, they merged Manly and Norths and they got Balmain to merge. In hindsight, getting rid of Souths seems a little bit of a bigger deal than getting rid of Perth, but they did it because they brokered a deal that the league would be reduced to 14 clubs - this deal was necessary to merge the two competitions. It was an arbitrary rule and the weakest clubs at the time needed to go. The factors were support, juniors, finances, and a range of similar issues. At the time, the Reds werent the strongest. But if the war had have happened in the early days of the Lions, Swans, Knights, Raiders, a similar thing would have happened. No the Reds werent the strongest - but as an expansion team, they were an investment. They needed to be stuck by for at least 10 years before you could assess pass or fail, and the League would have been committed to do so, had it not been for a pretty remarkable event.
bilbo
Guest
The NRL not having a team in Australia's second largest city would be very silly. The team has only been there for 12 years - the Lions have been there for 23 and the swans 28, and they still dont make a profit most years. The Storm have made a profit in 2009, and were on track to in 2010 if not for the salary cap issues. Two players, Richie Kennar and Lucas Gretch, who are Melbourne born and bred, are setting the junior leagues alight, with Kennar going on the Junior Kangaroo tour last year. Gareth Widdop, who moved to Melbourne from England as a teen, is playing for England, all as a result of the Storm's junior system. The Storm had 15K average crowd last year, bigger than many teams and close to the NRl average. 400K people watched the Grand Final from Melbourne, without a Melbourne team in it - compare that with 600K from Sydney (for the AFL) where there is a much larger population, and you will see that the Storm are doing quite well. No matter how large the percentage of Central Queenslanders or Wellingtonites, you will never bring an additional 400K to watching the GF. Willy, if you love NRL, which you say you do, you would understand the need for the Storm in the game.
bilbo
Guest
The leagues club grants have diminished dramatically in the past few years, since the taxation structure was changed. Many clubs, such as parramatta, dont receive nearly as much as they used to. The Titans, Warriors, Melbourne dont have a leagues club. Not sure if you have kept pace in the last ten years, but pokie machine taxes have hit hard - hence the pursuit of memberships, further sponsorships, as well as playing games at bigger venues that dont draw crowds.