To me it’s nothing about the $600 million , which after all is $60 million a year.
Oh sure it would be better spent on blah , blah & blah.
Yes it’s political , but shouldn’t be.
For me , another franchise should only be about the following.
1) creating more content for the TV broadcasters so they’ll pay more in the rights fee.
2) if possible creating another time slot for a further live game as all games need to be live.
3) the franchise should be able to pay for itself with sponsorship , membership and already have that in play before the licence is granted.
4) the area chosen should be about “ growing the game “ but have a minimum of a grass roots situation already existing.
So let’s consider what were the contenders
a) Perth
b) NZ South Island
c) central Queensland
d) third Brisbane team
e) PNG
For me Perth is a standout and mainly for the additional live time slot , 9.30pm on a Saturday night , then equally b) or c) with both having great potential to grow the game , a third Brisbane team ,in this massive market , possibly the Ipswich Jets , would be a real winner the SEQ area is huge and a third team would work very well.
And at the very bottom of the list is PNG, which really only fits with item 1.
So forget the money , forget politics , it’s just a dumb decision ( in my opinion ).
I'll have a stab at replying to this properly.
What you have said logically makes sense however, you seem to have overlooked some key issues.
1) creating more content for the TV broadcasters so they’ll pay more in the rights fee.
I disagree based on the previous broadcast deals signed. As per NRL.com's 2022 broadcast deal announcement (
Explainer: What broadcast deal means for the game) the following can be deduced.
The
2012 deal (2013-2017) was worth
$1.195bn in today's money.
The
2015 deal, (2018-2022) was worth
$1.97bn in today's dollars.
The current
2022 deal, (2022-2027) is worth over
$2bn.
The fact is that the broadcast rights value have not increased with an additional team (The Dolphins). Peter V'landys and Andrew Abdo were heavily criticized for this deal due to 'leaving money on the table' after the AFL announced their deal.
After Todd Greenburg was sacked Peter V'landys was appointed chairman and promptly finalised the deal for a lower amount than Greenburg was negotiating for. The game is still controlled by broadcasters, given this and the practical gift given to Foxtel for pennies on the dollar it kinda invalidates the whole argument in my opinion.
2) if possible creating another time slot for a further live game as all games need to be live.
The NRL and broadcasters do not care about timeslots as much as they care about content. Add the emergence of sport betting and frankly I can't see any matches not being shown live.
3) the franchise should be able to pay for itself with sponsorship , membership and already have that in play before the licence is granted.
Yes, but this is not a commercial venture. There is no question regarding the viability for PNG as they were the only bid who actually fulfilled the criteria. There are also clauses in their license for any situations where issues arise allowing the NRL to cut ties at no cost, the NRL are straight profiting from this whatever happens.
The $600m is more value than an entire seasons broadcasting revenue ($400m p.a.). Now divide that by the amount of team and PNG will still be bringing
triple the value of current teams (approx. $21m p.a. vs $60m p.a.) based on the current deal.
4) the area chosen should be about “ growing the game “ but have a minimum of a grass roots situation already existing.
I get your point but where exactly fits that criteria and doesn't already have an NRL team? The national sport of PNG is rugby league and a significant portion of this money is going towards grass roots development and creating pathways.
As far as your other potential contenders of Perth, NZ South Island, Central Queensland, a third Brisbane team the only commercially viable one that comes close to meeting the criteria is Perth. They'll be the next team admitted after the NRL finishes playing hardball with the WA government over funding... sound familiar?
In summary is PNG's situation perfect? No, far from it. Do I think it'll work out long term? Definitely not. Do I think a PNG NRL team will be detrimental to the competition if it doesn't work out? Nope. Fundamentally I agree that placing a professional sports team in one of the most violent, undeveloped and dangerous countries in the world is objectively stupid if you're trying to establish a successful sports franchise, thankfully that's not what this is about.
It
is a dumb decision in the context of rugby league as a sport, I can think of 600 million reasons why it's not so bad for the NRL as a business though. In the grand scheme of things it's chump change to the government as far as buying influence goes, and the inherent risk remains with them. I'd rather 'pay' for a dingy NRL team now than whatever it would cost to counter a Chinese presence in the Pacific later.