Why the NRL’s numbers don’t add up
Posted: Wed May 21, 2025 9:05 am
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.
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.
