GG
I'll take your word for it but I am very surprised FFA would get to the level of planning you have posted... that FFA set metric's there is no doubt and that they drove a hard bargain was for all to see ... I have no doubt they would have been very demanding and wanting as much as possible data supporting plans put forward... However as I said I'll take your statement at face value that FFA were heavily and actively involved in the planning and development stages.. that is a huge step for the governing body..
Is there a plan moving forward to reduce the number of home games played away..
At the Mariners Charlesworth [Mariners owner] has held a number of public forums and a fans pod cast were no question was off limit and to his credit he did answer all questions and argued his case. He explained how we loose money below a certain crowd number on game day, so moving a couple of games means we have a club and maybe some extra money to spend on players.... further he said FFA will not save us and he feels if we fell over it may suit FFA ... our saviour is and will be the COE... FFA would never be forgiven if the COE fell into NRL or AFL ownership ..
Charlesworth has said if we can lift crowd averages and show the home games played away will get closer to break even we will play all games on the Coast..
Back to the Nix's it will be interesting to see growth in key areas. How the plans made all connect ... I would also love to know what the metric's are.
As a side issue like others have said before, if the new 12 K stadium had been approved there would most likely never have been an issue.