If I was Tinkler I'd propose an AIS team that shared games with Canberra, even the government would put in some $$$ for that.

Anon: When did you hear that?

Flames11: If history has taught us anything, it's that Newcastle interests and Canberra teams don't mix.

melbourne before newcastle man these nbl board members are crazy

I might also add that Newcastle is Australia's fastest growing city, according to the Herald Sun a few weeks back. I've never been there but I don't see how the NBL could turn down this opportunity if this guy is as rich as Wikipedia says he is

Strategically, Newcastle would be a bad call. Growth should be planned, not just happen because of opportunity.

(North Queensland and Gold Coast both came to the A-league as "opportunities" - both have been disastrous for the a-league as well.)

Brisbane is much more important to the NBL for TV, and growing TV ratings to something sustainable for a broadcaster to want to retain the product must be the NBL's #1 priority.

Newcastle does not tick that box in any way. A Brisbane team and a Melbourne team (in that order) do however.

I agree, but I also think the more teams the better. Another one in Melbourne, then Brisbane, Newcastle, Hobart and maybe even Perth. There are too many good Australians in college and abroad to have 9 teams

Its a good argument John, but IMO the talent pool is simply not that deep. Very few returning College players make the grade, and the money needed to pay our European quality players to return will need to come from a major TV rights deal - which is nothing more than a pipe dream atm.

I would like to see the business model if they had one.

A capital city team makes sense because you have the population there. Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide, Auckland and Sydney tick that box and within that population, you can find supporters.

Regional support is different. From what I can tell, Cairns and Gold Coast budget on tourists to fill seats, Wollongong is a funny old steel town, but has the history, and Townsville - am I missing something here? They must be basketball fanatics.

Newcastle (or the Hunter) has got about 500-600,000 people and is growing fast, but every Nova Castrian I have met prays to the rugby league gods and is more interested in surfing than basketball. I think they like to fish for flatheads in the Lake in their spare time. They have the people, but do they have the support now and into the future? Just because is has the population doesn't mean you'll get the support.

Tinkler would be well advised to understand why the previous Hunter team failed and what he will need to do differently to sustain a team into the future.

If it's about population stick a team in Jakarta (pop 7 Million).

Melbourne probably could support a second team, but you've got to ask at what point will people who aren't tigers supporters in victoria still support yet another team in Melbourne.

If you named them the stags though (an Australian word for a buck), the S could stand for Saints/Spectres/Supercats, the T for the Titans, the A for and & the G for Giants/Geelong S for South Dragons/SE Melbourne and thereby incorporate all ex Melbourne teams in one.

flaemes11 - appreciate your facetiousness, but on a more serious note, its my firm belief that the Melbourne basketball public are very polarised - those that support the Tigers (a small group really) and those that will support a team opposed to the tigers (pretty much the rest!).

The Tigers have a poor reputation as both a senior and junior club imo, and it flows through to their NBL support.

Any second melbourne team would garner good support i think, unless it is seen to be Knox association based - which would again polarise the basketball community.

^^ HO is 100% on the money.

In business there is always a place for opportunism, however it still has to fit in with the overall strategic plan.

I'm not quite sure that Newcastle fits in in the greater scheme of things.

It's an interesting discussion and I am kind of along the lines of HO but with a much bigger asterisk.

Newcastle: Ordinarily I would just say no to a Newcastle bid. However, in this case it is very well backed by someone who is very committed to the host city and who has the influence and money to market the club. If there is a sound business plan and the bidder is willing to make some sort of real commitment that will ensure he is still backing the club in 10 years then I swing in favour of it.

Brisbane: For me, Brisbane, Melbourne and Wellington would all be better expansion locations than Newcastle, but I dont think there is any point holding off on an excellent bid (if there is indeed one) waiting for another city. A Newcastle team brings more potential TV viewers and adds interest to the important NSW market.

Standard: I think expansion is good for the league in terms of the on-court product. Most teams are 9 or 10 deep as it is and there are some middle of the range players who arent in the league that could be brought back in with the extra dollars on offer. Just as importantly though, it will create more playing opportunities for young players.

Dillon, Brebner, Blanchfield, Trueman, Garlepp, C Cedar, Cooper, Demos, Dann, Lewis, Walker, Anthony, Webster, Madgen, Dowdell etc were all on the fringe of the league this year and a chance to not to get a contract or just sit on the bench. All of these guys have shown they can contribute and them getting a few extra minutes a game due to expansion isnt going to hurt the standard of the league. There are other young guys out there who could also make an impact of some sort off the bench.

Spectacle: I also think reducing more teams to 8-9 deep will help the spectacle. At the moment the intensity of the defence is incredibly high due to the depth in the league. It makes the games very physical, and while scoring has only dropped slightly the last couple of years there have been more games where the defence has been on top.

In the stadium this makes little difference to the spectacle, but in terms of attracting tv viewers it does and I think reducing teams' depth could be a good thing. The good players will stand out more and imports will have a better chance of showing their athleticism. I would be prepared to cop a slight drop in standard to increase the spectacle and tv freindly nature of the league.

Overall: I think if it is an outstanding bid from Newcastle go for it, we need more jobs in basketball in Australia - it has to be a near perfect bid and business plan though. If it is just a solid bid tell them it needs to be much better to be considered.

Interesting thoughts Paul, particularly on reducing depth so as to improve the on-court spectatcle.

What are your thoughts on TV scheduling. This year there was a huge amount of criticism of the domination of Sydney in the schedule, and as you know ratings dived as the season progressed.

Do you reckon the pro-sydney orientation of the tv schedule maybe backfired on the league?

And, more to the point here, what would the addition of Newcastle do to ratings overall? Does anyone know back in the day if Newcastle ever had an independent TV deal - I know at one point Perth, Adelaide and maybe townsville did...

Good points about depth. Some of the names listed might be 9th-11th but could serve as reasonable 8th men (e.g., Blanchfield) in a broader league. If you were a Rashad Tucker, you'd be getting naturalised in a hurry too. Maybe even CJ Massingale could finally get an NBL job - imagine that.

But I do think everyone would prefer that big-money man to be pushing for a Brisbane team or second Melbourne team than Newcastle.

How could they guarantee long-term commitment? Maybe a $1m guarantee that is lost if the club exits the league within the first five years?

The thing that killed the NBL this year was that, naturally, Ten wanted to show as many Sydney and Melbourne games as possible, but they were both absolutely terrible at the start of the year and in fact turned people off the broadcast - it was like aperfect storm.

Ratings dropped significantly after a great start and then steadied at what you might say is the core audience. You have to find a balance between good match-ups and big markets though, because the core audience wont keep the NBL on TV, not without paying for it anyway. And while Sydney's crowds were great, the audience numbers in Sydney werent.

Hopefully this year Sydney and Melbourne will have their act together from the start so it wont be an issue, but the old saying is dont put all your eggs in one basket, so keep a good spread, no way there should be game after game of Sydney like there was this year. I would like to see more Perth games as they play up-tempo and many of their road games are quite close.

I dont think Newcastle would have a massive impact on TV ratings, but with the league needing to probably double its audience every new set of eyeballs helps, expecially if they have a ratings box!!

Very good points Paul.

I have never thought about the depth of the league as it stands from this past season and I can see your points on what furher exapansion could do from a spectator point of view but also from a marketing perspective with the primary focus on each team on fewer players (or that essence in any case).

As Isaac was alluding to, how do you get someone to commit for say 10 years to backing the team? It would have to be some kind of financial penalty, but I'm not quite sure $1m is enough in this particular case. the league has been hurt significantly by team collapses in the past and this needs to be avoided at all costs. I would argue the negatives associated with these teams disappearing has cost the league far more than $1m in costs, damage to image and reputation. Probably too hard to put a figure on it...but you get my drift.

Regarding tv audiences and what causes them to switch on or off, I have always been fascinated by the NBA which - I believe - has a fan night or fan week.
Whichever game receives the most votes for being televised is televised.

Certainly that kind of element could be a huge advantage for ONE HD trying to maximise viewers and therefore advertising revenue.

refering to Newcastle and ratings, my thinking would be they would cause on overall decline.

Ten was obviously reluctant to show games not featuring a Big City team this year so adding a regional side increases the chance of more undesirable tv match-ups.

I don't think adding a new team and therefore a theoretical 4000 "hard fans" increases the likelihood of more viewers overall. The market is so small, and fan support so poor, that it appears only those who go to games support the product on tv.

i remember seeing somewhere in the last year or so that Collingwood has close to a million "fans" as opposed to 50k or so members - basketball just has nothing like that.

maybe the ratio of fans to crowd (not members) in the NBL would be more like 2:1 rather than 20:1.

Yes - Newcastle did indeed have an independent TV contract with NBN (not the National Broadband Network) but a regional affiliate of 9 (now anyway). I suspect they were probably the first NBL team to be televised locally (back in the Bob Turner days which preceded even my time in Newcastle).

Tinkler (the moneyman) has agreed to under-write the Knights (NRL) to the tune of $10 million/year for the next ten years so I suspect dropping a million to walk away is not going to deter him.

In terms of market impact the addition of Newcastle will have between 0 and 1 nationally on a scale of 1-10.

There is a small but keen local basketball community which has been very effectively disenfranchised over the past ten years or so through the take-over of the Albury mob of the Falcons (which led directly to the demise of the Falcons) and then the well-intentioned but poorly-funded Hunter Pirates. Newcastle basketball has done little to show it is keen to move forward in the past few years so in my humble opinion it would need to be a red-hot, iron-clad guaranteed bid to get a start.

I think rather than penalties make it a guaranteed contribution to the team for 10 years or something like that, regardless of retaining ownership.

Obviously there is the risk of bankruptcy, but that a strong business plan (with other sponsorship) and guaranteed contribution from the owner early in the piece help reduce the risk.

HO, I dont think there is a genuine link between the location of teams and viewer numbers in the NBL's case, with the exception of playoffs. It certainly wasnt the case this year.

Newcastle obviously wouldnt get the largest number of games, but basketball fans who watch the game wont turn off just because the game on their screens is Adelaide v Newcastle instead of Adelaide v Wollongong, so I definitely dont agree that a team from Newcastle would decrease viewer numbers.

I think giving a new group of basketball fans a direct link to the NBL would increase viewer numbers, even if only slightly. Of course, if Newcastle had lot of games and were really bad that woulsd have an effect, but as we saw this year that happens with the big city teams too.

When I player rep basketball about 10 years ago it was always the Newcastle/Maitland teams that were stronger than the various Sydney teams on average. Dunno if this has changed lately.

paul, as in money that could run the team even if Tinkler lost interest?

ankles, I know it'd be a pittance to him, but the league could wear the embarrassment if they had a cash influx to spend on marketing, etc.

Yeah, an agreement with the league that guaranteed input for so many years. Effectively a league sponsorship but with the money going straight to the Newcastle club. Something along those lines anyway.

Newcastle will pack out the newcastle basketball stadium especially if they attract a really good import, i went to one of there games a while ago there and the atmosphere was pretty good and there was a whole section of people wearing fake mike helms afro's. Also newcastle have alot of talented Sudanese boys coming up. Basketball is growing alot in Newcastle especially since one hd has started.

It's my understanding that the NBL are very keen to do business with the Tinkler group, after the success they had in taking over the Knights and getting Wayne Bennett to the club. Yes, the NBL are prioritising Brisbane, but apparently they don't see it as an either/or situation, and in any case they still haven't found a backer for the Bullets. (For what it's worth, the A-League QLD expansion wasn't exactly opportunistic; there were two separate bids for both NQ and GC, and the league called for bids.)

As far as ensuring that it doesn't fall over, he's guaranteed funding for ten years for both the Jets and Knights; I would imagine it'll be the same for the Falcons, although they're still in the process of preparing the business plan. In the Knights' case that's backed up by a $20 million bank guarantee. From all reports he's genuine in his desire to be a Stan Kroenke-style figure; they're also bidding for a WNBL team.

That sounds promising. If it is done really well it is exciting, but as HO said if it isnt done well it is a small market sideline act the NBL doesnt need.

I look forward to hearing more about this prospect but still remain skeptical.

Joint ticket sales , I think is one of his ideas.
Perhaps if ya go to the rugby , you get entrance to soccer n basketball and vice versa , at concessional prices.

I think in the interim, it would be better for newcastle to apply for an abl licence to gain credibility and support from the community.
however from a national perspective, a second melbourne team and a brisbane team is what we really need. In saying that, the Hunter does need a team and maybe this is an avenue to look at. But is the bubble going to burst too fast. Has the current NBL clubs got the best out there? If so, its going to look like another 'Australia's got Talent' when the talent really isnt up to scratch. That makes it a B league in some respects or an EPL with the better clubs able to hold key players and train new guys at young ages, where the struggling clubs from the years gone by just want action. Guess its like AFL also but maybe stick with the capital cities having teams then branch out later

'If you were a betting man, you'd back Newcastle and Brisbane to be in 2012.'
I think Boti Nagy said that.
If it wasn't .. it was Diane Smith-Gander.

I thought LL myself.

Heard from a mining mate the other day that Tinkler dropped $100 million on a deal that didn't eventuate recently.

I hope the NBL aren't stunned by the bright lights and look at his body of work because nobody has made a 'super-club' work here and even in Europe, its my belief that the smaller sports in the mix (see basketball) miss out when push comes to shove.

You are all forgetting 1 thing, it was Newcastle that Started the NBL. Other clubs had 2 pay Newcastle to play in the league in the 1st few seasons. They are a foundation team. You have to bring the foundation teams back, all of them.

If they were to be back in the NBL, they could not play at the Entertainment Centre, costs are $20,000 before a ball is even bounced, they should play out of the Newcastle Basketball Stadium.

It's simple.
Imagine if you will, the stadium slowly turning, and roasting over a bed of hot coals. Yes, the delicious smell of Pork.

The local member promised $25M if (re)elected, and for once a pollie kept his promise. So they have $25M to spend, and will try to use every last cent.
Now yes, it could probably be better spent offering a smaller main stadium, and wider range of facilities, but then you have to factor in the phallic effect. Being able to say tha yours is bigger, is always desirable.

I just hope that it doesn't become yet another White Elephant/ Mill-Stone, and in 20 years become just another run-down pile of crap that local association can't afford to operate.

I would love to see the Falcons back in the league.

However its possible they would have to operate similar to the Hawks and Snakes. And they may be better off filling a 4k stadium, than losing money in something bigger.

Also, someone mentioned "gaps in the seating"? Is it possible they have allowed for future additions and/or temp seating??

A div 2 comp would be good, but then it gets down to $