I sometimes think the FFA line is more an excuse .... My reading of the tea leafs is FFA wanted improvements across a range of issues that can be measured i.e crowds, ratings, NZ exposure etc.
The Nix management would have presented their plan to met the agree target numbers.... I doubt very much FFA would have had any involvement on day to day operational decisions and key marketing strategies or had any involvement in developing the plan ... moreover they would have been presented a workable plan to analysis and determine if it was possible..
I feel very much for Nix fans as the Mariners also move games and it does hit you in the gut... The key difference eeerrrr maybe to strong to say key difference but certainly a difference has been reactions in both areas... on the Coast people said more than two and we walk away ... While accepting the financial position many formed the view when is a club no longer a club ... moving games meant it was no longer a club.
It is fuelled in many ways by when Manly and North Sydney RL clubs merged to form the Northern Eagles playing half their games at Gosford and half at Manly. History shows the Northern Eagles lasted less than two years and Manly moved back to Manly.. Feeling run deep that to be a local club you have to play local ... this could explain the difference in reactions.
But back to my main point my guess is FFA would have approved the plan rather than been involved in the development of home game schedule.