apparently the new brisbane bid will have $20 million in investors capital
i like the idea of private ownership over the ipswich model

ive changed my mind now

if its up to me id make perth wait and admit this brisbane bid and also the bears

with the money behind them this brisbane bid will be massive

it will also mean the brisbane lions will start losing millions of money together with the millions the AFL team in surfers will lose, so the AFL will be forced to spend tens of millions a year propping these teams up

lets strengthen queensland with what is looking like a very strong bid, let AFL go broke in queensland

with 3 queensland bids in for expansion, and all of them very strong, will the NRL say no to all of them?

surely not

if the nrl really wants to grow the game itll put in 4 teams at once

TV companies have been telling the nrl they want more querensland product, lets give them 2 more teams to televise, which will lead to a massive ratings boost, increasing our TV deals

c'mon gallop 4 teams in

bears, brisbane, central queensland and perth

2 more games for TV including perth for its time slots, brisbane and central queensland for queensland TV ratings and bears for their growth in central coast and reviving RL in the north shore

ranking the current bids now :

1, brisbane
2. bears
3. reds
4. central queensland
5. ipswich

www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1a70m.html funny the response of ipswich and central queensland, clearly they know whose got the strongest bid ipswich saying they deserve a license cause of the floods - please - or their whinge that the timing is inappropriate whichever bid is the strongest is what matters, not who got flooded the most the article says winning bidders - if any - will be advised by the end of the year for entry in 2013 or 2014

www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1a70m.html funny the response of ipswich and central queensland, clearly they know whose got the strongest bid ipswich saying they deserve a license cause of the floods - please - or their whinge that the timing is inappropriate whichever bid is the strongest is what matters, not who got flooded the most the article says winning bidders - if any - will be advised by the end of the year for entry in 2013 or 2014

I see nothings changed, yet:
1. Bears/Reds (hard to say as we don't know key TV$ details)
2. Ipswich/Brisbane2 still not enough detail in either bid to make a fair judgement
3. CQ, simply not big enough at this time and no stadium
4. PNG, not a hope

I still see it looking like Reds & Bears/Brisbane2

of course if you believe Searle there will be no expansion!

Be interested in the name of the 2nd Brisbane team, Sth Brisbane Diehards seems popular on other forums.

Diehards were a team in the BRL and were the most succesful one at that.

As an old Valleys' supporter, it would be a damn good thing to see the Diehards name in a top-level comp. But alas I cannot see it happening.

Also, some original Diehards' supporters would have rage-induced heart attacks at the 'Sth Brisbane' bit, given FVRLFC's status as an inner-northside outfit! (Not me, mind you - not a northsider).

Most I spoken to love the idea as well. But you might get the odd 'diehard' (pardon the pun) that would be against it.

Colours would also be interesting as well