Post history

History for The JourneyFan

Phoenix Ownership - Rob says FTFFA (Part 2)

Back to topic

Current version

Posted May 18, 2018 00:03 · last edited March 18, 2021 07:34

patrick478 wrote:
james dean wrote:
patrick478 wrote:
The JourneyFan wrote:
el grapadura wrote:
bennie99 wrote:
Doloras wrote:

Define "part". If you want to argue that an offer of "15% for a    W-League team and 1 home game" us essentially the same thing as "100% and it's now the Cabramatta Phoenix", then I can't do nuthin' for ya, man. You want to believe the worst of Welnix and that Aussie journos wouldn't publish fiction for attention, go for it.

Btw, sorry for offending some people. I'm not trying to claim that Welnix is a perfect management unit with a brilliant PR strategy. Just that believing unsourced gossip is not good for your health.

How do you know that's what the offer was though? I'd be stunned if only one home game was the offering, I'd expect 3-4 at the minimum. not disputing that the reports were woefully incorrect, but what you are suggesting seems to be the minimum amount possible for a 'part share'.

The offer was for 50% stake, 2-3 games in Campbelltown per season for the next 2 years, wearing black and white strip. WelNix turned down the offer.

so the "unsourced" newspaper report wasn't that far off the mark then?

It was way off the mark.

It reported that the offer was for 100% stake (it wasn't), that the club would relocate to SWS (it isn't), that FFA had rejected the proposal (there was never a full takeover proposal to reject) and that Welnix had accepted the offer (they didn't)

The final point being the biggest factually wrong claim the article made. Welnix turned down the offer.

Ok though, so going back to the previous articles, which the Phoenix rubbished, suggesting there was a proposal to "merge" on the table seems like it was bang on?  And the Phoenix's denial that there ever was an email or a call from SWS is clearly a lie.  

They are all over the place on this stuff

The previous articles were about mergers that hadn't been discussed. The first time Nix met with a club was Friday, when they talked about the Travelling Circus game proposal. The denials happened because they were true at that point in time ie there was zero discussion with Brisbane Strikers about them buying the Nix licence, despite articles to the contrary.

Yes the "no email or call from SWS" is a lie. I have no clue why the club thought saying that was a good idea when it was so easily disproved.

But these are all very different things to "Rob lied to us about the fact he wasn't selling the club". I don't know what else you want me to say.

I don't really want you to say anything I'd much rather hear Rob Morrison saying something

Previous versions

1 version
Unknown editor edited March 18, 2021 07:34
patrick478 wrote:
james dean wrote:
patrick478 wrote:
The JourneyFan wrote:
el grapadura wrote:
bennie99 wrote:
Doloras wrote:

Define "part". If you want to argue that an offer of "15% for a    W-League team and 1 home game" us essentially the same thing as "100% and it's now the Cabramatta Phoenix", then I can't do nuthin' for ya, man. You want to believe the worst of Welnix and that Aussie journos wouldn't publish fiction for attention, go for it.

Btw, sorry for offending some people. I'm not trying to claim that Welnix is a perfect management unit with a brilliant PR strategy. Just that believing unsourced gossip is not good for your health.

How do you know that's what the offer was though? I'd be stunned if only one home game was the offering, I'd expect 3-4 at the minimum. not disputing that the reports were woefully incorrect, but what you are suggesting seems to be the minimum amount possible for a 'part share'.

The offer was for 50% stake, 2-3 games in Campbelltown per season for the next 2 years, wearing black and white strip. WelNix turned down the offer.

so the "unsourced" newspaper report wasn't that far off the mark then?

It was way off the mark.

It reported that the offer was for 100% stake (it wasn't), that the club would relocate to SWS (it isn't), that FFA had rejected the proposal (there was never a full takeover proposal to reject) and that Welnix had accepted the offer (they didn't)

The final point being the biggest factually wrong claim the article made. Welnix turned down the offer.

Ok though, so going back to the previous articles, which the Phoenix rubbished, suggesting there was a proposal to "merge" on the table seems like it was bang on?  And the Phoenix's denial that there ever was an email or a call from SWS is clearly a lie.  

They are all over the place on this stuff

The previous articles were about mergers that hadn't been discussed. The first time Nix met with a club was Friday, when they talked about the Travelling Circus game proposal. The denials happened because they were true at that point in time ie there was zero discussion with Brisbane Strikers about them buying the Nix licence, despite articles to the contrary.

Yes the "no email or call from SWS" is a lie. I have no clue why the club thought saying that was a good idea when it was so easily disproved.

But these are all very different things to "Rob lied to us about the fact he wasn't selling the club". I don't know what else you want me to say.

I don't really want you to say anything I'd much rather hear Rob Morrison saying something