Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up

[Beaussie]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

[azif]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

Well , 75% of the NRL world ( including myself..... loudly) were decrying the initial push , the concept ... the Government involvement
& everything leading up
Rugby League , our regions biggest sport ... was a victim of its own success
Our Government using sport , the only sport in this region that could be used
to play GEO political games

The whole idea left a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths

But Albanese made an offer to the NRL that could not be refused of 600 million finance , backed up by the PNG govt forgoing income tax for this franchise's players
guaranteeing , financial stability for at least 10 years & the zero income tax , a huge incentive in an attempt to see it competitive on the field from day one which I think will work.

The article is essentially moot , as both teams are in

In 2038 we will see if this PNG team pays off.

[leeroy*NRL*]

PNG have also offered a further $150million to team Plus Stadium Upgrades on top of that. 25k stadium

I really hope no NRL players go to PNG and the whole team are locals built from the ground up

[azif]

PNG have also offered a further $150million to team Plus Stadium Upgrades on top of that. 25k stadium

I really hope no NRL players go to PNG and the whole team are locals built from the ground up

They wouldn't win a game for the 1st 5 years , there is not enough quality there
It'll be all Aussie , Kiwi & PI players to start , by 2038 it will be 50/50 with PNG players

[makingnrlfansgowacko]

PNG have also offered a further $150million to team Plus Stadium Upgrades on top of that. 25k stadium

I really hope no NRL players go to PNG and the whole team are locals built from the ground up

so its a money pit and disaster waiting to happen paid for by the tax payer of both countries

[makingnrlfansgowacko]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

Well , 75% of the NRL world ( including myself..... loudly) were decrying the initial push , the concept ... the Government involvement
& everything leading up

Rugby League , our regions biggest sport ... was a victim of its own success

Our Government using sport , the only sport in this region that could be used
to play GEO political games

The whole idea left a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths

B

ut Albanese made an offer to the NRL that could not be refused of 600 million finance , backed up by the PNG govt forgoing income tax for this franchise's players
guaranteeing , financial stability for at least 10 years & the zero income tax , a huge incentive in an attempt to see it competitive on the field from day one which I think will work.

The article is essentially moot , as both teams are in

In 2038 we will see if this PNG team pays off.

Rugby League , our regions biggest sport ... was a victim of its own success

in the eyes of a very limited people

But Albanese made an offer to the NRL that could not be refused of 600 million finance , backed up by the PNG govt forgoing income tax for this franchise's players
guaranteeing , financial stability for at least 10 years & the zero income tax , a huge incentive in an attempt to see it competitive on the field from day one which I think will work.

basically a salesman and a clueless champagne socialist leader in Albo and cabinet of art students who have never left the public sector who just want to be liked and buying votes

[leeroy*NRL*]

PNG have also offered a further $150million to team Plus Stadium Upgrades on top of that. 25k stadium

I really hope no NRL players go to PNG and the whole team are locals built from the ground up

They wouldn't win a game for the 1st 5 years , there is not enough quality there
It'll be all Aussie , Kiwi & PI players to start , by 2038 it will be 50/50 with PNG players

time will tell, the players are there, the coaching and resources are not..
pathways can come quickly once money comes along.

i don't expect them to be a powerhouse club on the field for at least 10 years

[Terry]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

A pretty stupid article really. Pretty much pointed out the obvious. But the mention of Mary Fowler was laughable?? And a leagues club in PNG???? The joints been gifted $600M from the Australian government. They sure as hell don't need the backing of a licenced club.

Everyone knows this franchise is a gamble. But as long as both the Aus and PNG Govt's back it it will push ahead. And being the 19th team won't hurt the NRL's bottom line one bit. Infact even if the whole thing falls over it won't effect the NRL. It's basically a government enterprise.

[makingnrlfansgowacko]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

A pretty stupid article really. Pretty much pointed out the obvious. But the mention of Mary Fowler was laughable?? And a leagues club in PNG???? The joints been gifted $600M from the Australian government. They sure as hell don't need the backing of a licenced club.

Everyone knows this franchise is a gamble. But as long as both the Aus and PNG Govt's back it it will push ahead. And being the 19th team won't hurt the NRL's bottom line one bit. Infact even if the whole thing falls over it won't effect the NRL. It's basically a government enterprise.

leagues clubs, gaming licences and the tax payer has bee the near sole life blood of the NRl for decades! so whats stopping the NRL putting in a leagues club in PNG!

[Terry]

Interesting analysis regarding PNG expansion that sounds very risky for the NRL and the Australian taxpayers.


Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
HUGH PIPER

Perth’s NRL plan spotlights the risks of a Papua New Guinea franchise.

Published 16 May 2025 Australia Papua New Guinea

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-inter ... -don-t-add

With the National Rugby League (NRL) talking up the advantages of a Perth-based rugby league franchise following this month’s expansion announcement, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the new west coast team is an insurance policy against the risks posed by the Papua New Guinea-based club launched late last year.

The fundamental calculus for the NRL is financial: getting from the current 17 teams to 18 is the overriding objective. This means nine games each week, up from the current eight and on par with rival code, the AFL. Negotiations are imminent for the next TV rights deal, which will start in 2028. NRL Chair Peter V’landys and CEO Andrew Abdo know that the best way to grow their revenue is by putting more on the negotiating table: an extra two hours of content each week.

That makes who (or, perhaps more accurately, where) that 18th team is a secondary consideration.

The Perth-based Bears are set to enter the competition in 2027 – one year ahead of the promised PNG franchise, who will then be the 19th team. Viewed purely in terms of broadcast revenue, this arguably makes the PNG franchise surplus to the NRL’s immediate financial interests in upcoming negotiations – at least until a 20th team becomes a reality, a prospect which for now is over the horizon of the next TV rights deal.

The NRL’s rush to announce the Perth team for a 2027 entry to the competition (and announce an inaugural CEO) can thus be understood, in part, as a means to reassure broadcasters that nine games per week will be guaranteed for the next rights deal. This is especially important amid speculation that PNG’s entry will be pushed back to 2029 (or beyond) by the exceptional difficulties of establishing the first fully professional sports franchise in Port Moresby.

Thinking through the stark differences between the Perth and PNG teams only reinforces the urgency for the NRL of reintroducing the Bears.

Let’s start with the teams and clubs. One of the most compelling factors for the Bears is their longstanding brand, identity and fanbase as a club originally founded in Sydney in 1908. Its supporter base will now span Australia’s largest and fourth-largest cities. Perth has also hosted a rugby league franchise before: the Western Reds from 1992 to 1997. By contrast, the PNG team remains unbranded and an unknown commercial entity. While rugby league is PNG’s national sport, the extent to which this will translate to strong and financially significant support for the franchise is unclear.

Many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club supporting them.

The club infrastructure sitting behind the team is also critical. As with the Bears, many of the NRL’s most financially stable franchises have junior talent pathways and a large leagues club (community enterprises, generally, with revenue streams in hospitality, gambling, and property holdings) supporting them. Though the North Sydney Bears were booted from the top flight in 1999, the club has continued to operate a second-tier team and a string of commercial ventures. The PNG Hunters have played in Queensland’s second-tier competition since 2014, but they lack the institutional backing of a major organisation like a leagues club.

The interest from players and coaches also says a lot. Even before the Bears were officially announced, multiple players and coaches were linked to the club, indicating a strong baseline interest in heading west. Apart from some wildly optimistic speculation that Matilda Mary Fowler’s Papuan ancestry will induce her partner, Panthers star Nathan Cleary, to join the PNG team, few players and coaches have shown real enthusiasm about moving to Port Moresby.

The contrast in player interest goes to a more profound difference between the two franchises: their locations. The per capita gross state product of Western Australia is A$146,423; PNG’s GDP per capita is about A$5,666. Perth has established sports infrastructure with multiple professional franchises calling the city home; Port Moresby has no such pedigree. Perth is a highly developed and very safe city; Port Moresby has limited infrastructure, remains deeply unsafe and experiences endemic corruption. Players, staff, and their families will be largely restricted to a A$150 million “NRL Village” to be built in Port Moresby to ensure their safety and living conditions, sweetened by tax breaks for relocating players.

The respective commercial environments are important too. A substantial media and business scene in Perth promises a strong supply of sponsorship and promotional opportunities. The extent to which such support materialises in PNG is less certain.

Perhaps the only thing Perth and Port Moresby do have in common is that their franchises will receive substantial government support: A$65 million from the WA government and A$600 million over ten years from the Australian government, respectively.

But even here, the different motivations are telling. In Perth’s case, the expenditure is driven by an intrinsic desire of the host government to boost economic activity. In PNG’s case, however, the money comes from a foreign government with geopolitical – but ultimately contingent – purposes. The WA government’s business case is unlikely to change quickly, but if the last decade has taught us anything it’s that the operating environment for Australian foreign policy can change quickly and unexpectedly.

The case for a Perth team in the NRL is strong. But in driving this message home, the NRL has only highlighted the deficits that must be overcome with its new PNG team. And if the NRL is already taking measures to protect itself against the risks posed by a team in Port Moresby, then the Australian government and taxpayers should be worried too.

A pretty stupid article really. Pretty much pointed out the obvious. But the mention of Mary Fowler was laughable?? And a leagues club in PNG???? The joints been gifted $600M from the Australian government. They sure as hell don't need the backing of a licenced club.

Everyone knows this franchise is a gamble. But as long as both the Aus and PNG Govt's back it it will push ahead. And being the 19th team won't hurt the NRL's bottom line one bit. Infact even if the whole thing falls over it won't effect the NRL. It's basically a government enterprise.

leagues clubs, gaming licences and the tax payer has bee the near sole life blood of the NRl for decades! so whats stopping the NRL putting in a leagues club in PNG!

You're very persuasive Wackjob. Now that you say it I reckon it's a goer. Yep. Put a dirty big leagues club slap bang in the middle of downtown Port Morseby and hey presto all the problems are solved. The teams gonna be a winner. Their money will be endless. Players and supporters will flock to 'em.

Praise be to leagues clubs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Praise be to Wackjobwhowouldntknowifabuswasuphim for the time and effort he puts into making Rugby League the success it is.

Well done all.

[makingnrlfansgowacko]

A pretty stupid article really. Pretty much pointed out the obvious. But the mention of Mary Fowler was laughable?? And a leagues club in PNG???? The joints been gifted $600M from the Australian government. They sure as hell don't need the backing of a licenced club.

Everyone knows this franchise is a gamble. But as long as both the Aus and PNG Govt's back it it will push ahead. And being the 19th team won't hurt the NRL's bottom line one bit. Infact even if the whole thing falls over it won't effect the NRL. It's basically a government enterprise.

leagues clubs, gaming licences and the tax payer has bee the near sole life blood of the NRl for decades! so whats stopping the NRL putting in a leagues club in PNG!

You're very persuasive Wackjob. Now that you say it I reckon it's a goer. Yep. Put a dirty big leagues club slap bang in the middle of downtown Port Morseby and hey presto all the problems are solved. The teams gonna be a winner. Their money will be endless. Players and supporters will flock to 'em.

Praise be to leagues clubs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Praise be to Wackjobwhowouldntknowifabuswasuphim for the time and effort he puts into making Rugby League the success it is.

Well done all.

its been that way for the unskilled version of the two rugby codes for decades so why not just continue it!

[azif]

leagues clubs, gaming licences and the tax payer has bee the near sole life blood of the NRl for decades! so whats stopping the NRL putting in a leagues club in PNG!

You're very persuasive Wackjob. Now that you say it I reckon it's a goer. Yep. Put a dirty big leagues club slap bang in the middle of downtown Port Morseby and hey presto all the problems are solved. The teams gonna be a winner. Their money will be endless. Players and supporters will flock to 'em.

Praise be to leagues clubs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Praise be to Wackjobwhowouldntknowifabuswasuphim for the time and effort he puts into making Rugby League the success it is.

Well done all.

its been that way for the unskilled version of the two rugby codes for decades so why not just continue it!

but we're not talking about union you jibbering twat

[makingnrlfansgowacko]

You're very persuasive Wackjob. Now that you say it I reckon it's a goer. Yep. Put a dirty big leagues club slap bang in the middle of downtown Port Morseby and hey presto all the problems are solved. The teams gonna be a winner. Their money will be endless. Players and supporters will flock to 'em.

Praise be to leagues clubs!!!!!!!!!!!!! Praise be to Wackjobwhowouldntknowifabuswasuphim for the time and effort he puts into making Rugby League the success it is.

Well done all.

its been that way for the unskilled version of the two rugby codes for decades so why not just continue it!

but we're not talking about union you jibbering twat

Any half wit knows league is the simplified repetitive version of the two rugby codes eg the unskilled version! Lol

[Beaussie]

Interesting to read. Without Channel 7, I guess it’s down to Channel 9 and maybe the financially struggling Channel 10 for NRL on free to air?


What Stokes really said​


Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes. Picture: Supplied

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 1748217582

Now, let’s get this straight once and for all: Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes has absolutely nothing against the National Rugby League competition expanding its national footprint.

He just reckons the NRL just shouldn’t bother trying to expand its national footprint on the continent’s west coast.

For those who missed it, the billionaire media magnate met with the NRL’s boss Peter V’landys and the Australian Rugby League Commission during their flying visit to the west coast capital to launch the comp’s latest expansion outfit, the Perth Bears, this month.

But what hasn’t been revealed is what was said over dinner … until now.

Diary is reliably informed that Mr Stokes was complimentary towards the NRL throughout the convivial repast … before politely – yet matter-of-factly – informing Mr V’landys that Perth is an Aussie Rules town, and it’s going to stay an Aussie Rules town.

Now, naturally, Mr Stokes has a vested interest in that position, given that Seven retains the $1.5bn broadcast rights to the AFL … and that sort of comment could be seen as an inflammatory warning shot from a protective media proprietor.

But we’re assured it was not.

It was purely his pragmatic evaluation.

It’s hard to fault Mr Stokes’s logic, given that the expansion appears to be largely driven more by the NRL’s desire to sell the television rights to a game in yet another timezone – and timeslot – and less by any thought of whether the club would actually appeal to local sports fans.

And despite all the hype and fervid speculation that the move might tempt Seven to make a wild play to win the NRL rights – and bump up the price – we hear the network isn’t all too fussed.

Several well-placed senior Seven executives told Diary the channel might look at buying a State of Origin or one-off match somewhere but that the network simply can’t afford to have a stab at any more than that – and quite frankly, it didn’t want to.

Indeed, Seven spent much of the off-season poaching just about all of Nine’s top AFL talent, from its Footy Classified show’s star presenters Kane Cornes, Caroline Wilson and Craig Hutchison to Eddie McGuire’s Melbourne-based sports reporter son Xander McGuire.

It seems Seven is an Aussie Rules channel and, as Mr Stokes might say, it’s going to stay an Aussie Rules channel.



Channel 10/Paramount submitted a serious bid for the AFL with more dollars than Channel 7/Fox offered, but were knocked back from memory, due to concerns about their streaming capabilities and quality. Soccer fans have long complained about broadcasts on Paramount. Would the NRL seriously consider such a bid, if similar just for more cash?

[azif]

Interesting to read. Without Channel 7, I guess it’s down to Channel 9 and maybe the financially struggling Channel 10 for NRL on free to air?


What Stokes really said​


Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes. Picture: Supplied

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 1748217582

Now, let’s get this straight once and for all: Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes has absolutely nothing against the National Rugby League competition expanding its national footprint.

He just reckons the NRL just shouldn’t bother trying to expand its national footprint on the continent’s west coast.

For those who missed it, the billionaire media magnate met with the NRL’s boss Peter V’landys and the Australian Rugby League Commission during their flying visit to the west coast capital to launch the comp’s latest expansion outfit, the Perth Bears, this month.

But what hasn’t been revealed is what was said over dinner … until now.

Diary is reliably informed that Mr Stokes was complimentary towards the NRL throughout the convivial repast … before politely – yet matter-of-factly – informing Mr V’landys that Perth is an Aussie Rules town, and it’s going to stay an Aussie Rules town.

Now, naturally, Mr Stokes has a vested interest in that position, given that Seven retains the $1.5bn broadcast rights to the AFL … and that sort of comment could be seen as an inflammatory warning shot from a protective media proprietor.

But we’re assured it was not.

It was purely his pragmatic evaluation.

It’s hard to fault Mr Stokes’s logic, given that the expansion appears to be largely driven more by the NRL’s desire to sell the television rights to a game in yet another timezone – and timeslot – and less by any thought of whether the club would actually appeal to local sports fans.

And despite all the hype and fervid speculation that the move might tempt Seven to make a wild play to win the NRL rights – and bump up the price – we hear the network isn’t all too fussed.

Several well-placed senior Seven executives told Diary the channel might look at buying a State of Origin or one-off match somewhere but that the network simply can’t afford to have a stab at any more than that – and quite frankly, it didn’t want to.

Indeed, Seven spent much of the off-season poaching just about all of Nine’s top AFL talent, from its Footy Classified show’s star presenters Kane Cornes, Caroline Wilson and Craig Hutchison to Eddie McGuire’s Melbourne-based sports reporter son Xander McGuire.

It seems Seven is an Aussie Rules channel and, as Mr Stokes might say, it’s going to stay an Aussie Rules channel.



Channel 10/Paramount submitted a serious bid for the AFL with more dollars than Channel 7/Fox offered, but were knocked back from memory, due to concerns about their streaming capabilities and quality. Soccer fans have long complained about broadcasts on Paramount. Would the NRL seriously consider such a bid, if similar just for more cash?

Ch 7 will look at Origin
its a perfect fit for them.....
If they offer the right $ , PVL will split it away from the club scene & tell 9 to match it or they lose it

upshot
winner winner NRL