On the subject of the licence criteria, Bruce wrote in the northern leagues thread/topic...
I also would favour the federation model, and think it is really bold of Wanderers to put their hand up to run solo, given the long-term prescription for mandatory men's women's youth and futsal teams.
And this brings me back to the point I was clumsily trying to make earlier: that it is primarily the federations' responsibility - as i see it - to foster player development (as opposed to trying to control or run it) across all genders and ages, and to foster the development of a sister sport like futsal, but running a national league club is a very different kettle of fish. In other words, clubs are probably better suited than franchises to run a national league operation; but federations, with their broader outlook, are more likely than clubs to ensure development opportunities across a wider remit.
Yet I wonder if NZF have conflated the role of club and federation by including futsal development in the criteria for a national club licence. Isn't the development of a sport like futsal the responsibility of the federation, rather than a single club? I know futsal want a true national league of their own for men and women but there is not one single club, in Christchurch at least, even close to being capable of such a feat. (Side note: I did hear some Cash Tech board members discussing futsal not that long ago; coincidence?)