Part = 1-99%
if you sell a share in the club to another club in Australia, what is the end game? It's that club taking over our license. There is no way that an Aussie club buying a share in the Phoenix is doing it for any other reason other than it's a back door into the A-League.
Normo's coming home
Part = 1-99%
Totally agree with Bullion here.
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
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 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.
which report are you talking about? I'm talking about the one that said 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.
https://thejourneyfan.blogspot.co.nz/
New Zealand Football Media Association Website of the year 2015 & 2016
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 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.
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 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
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.
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 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.
There was certainly truth in the articles, but it claimed a lot of things that aren't true as well.
Part = 1-99%
if you sell a share in the club to another club in Australia, what is the end game? It's that club taking over our license. There is no way that an Aussie club buying a share in the Phoenix is doing it for any other reason other than it's a back door into the A-League.
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 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
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
https://thejourneyfan.blogspot.co.nz/
New Zealand Football Media Association Website of the year 2015 & 2016
Part = 1-99%
if you sell a share in the club to another club in Australia, what is the end game? It's that club taking over our license. There is no way that an Aussie club buying a share in the Phoenix is doing it for any other reason other than it's a back door into the A-League.
But isn't this only an issue if:
a) WelNix are actively looking to sell a share to a club in Australia; and/or
b) they actually tried to, and it was blocked.
But neither of these is true, or even inconsistent with what WelNix have said to date - which is, they are willing to look at other potential investors to help out (and unfortunately, there's not a lot of those in NZ lining up). So they received an offer from a potential investor, considered it, and decided it wasn't the right fit and rejected it. There's nothing more to it than that.
Part = 1-99%
if you sell a share in the club to another club in Australia, what is the end game? It's that club taking over our license. There is no way that an Aussie club buying a share in the Phoenix is doing it for any other reason other than it's a back door into the A-League.
Not wanting this to be the situation that plays out is part of why Welnix rejected it.
It seems crazy to me that they would turn down that offer.
50% for just 3 games, which has often been the case anyway, in which they could wear a black and white away kit, seems like a pretty crazy offer to turn down.
There must be more to it. Was the compensation mentioned? Maybe the sponsors insist on 2 Auckland games as well, amking the reality 5 games? And of course what Patrick said above ^
[/quote] 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
It looks like the goalposts are shifting. A few days ago it was "Welnix are selling us to SW Sydney and lying about it". Now that the truth is out, the same people are saying "Welnix have not been transparent about their moves seeking investment in the club".
The second statement is fair enough. But it is not the same as the first statement.
Dislike Welnix all you like, although I think if you dislike them so much you'd welcome them selling up. But don't be so desperate for more ammo against them that you believe outright furphies.
It seems crazy to me that they would turn down that offer.
50% for just 3 games, which has often been the case anyway, in which they could wear a black and white away kit, seems like a pretty crazy offer to turn down.
There must be more to it. Was the compensation mentioned? Maybe the sponsors insist on 2 Auckland games as well, amking the reality 5 games?
It seems crazy to me that they would turn down that offer.
50% for just 3 games, which has often been the case anyway
If you think 3 games in Oz is the same as 3 games around NZ, then you and I will totally have to differ.
It seems crazy to me that they would turn down that offer.
50% for just 3 games, which has often been the case anyway, in which they could wear a black and white away kit, seems like a pretty crazy offer to turn down.
There must be more to it. Was the compensation mentioned? Maybe the sponsors insist on 2 Auckland games as well, amking the reality 5 games?
Cheers Patrick, sorry I just noticed after I posted
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 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.
There was certainly truth in the articles, but it claimed a lot of things that aren't true as well.
Because the club would not respond to media requests!
They could have refuted the incorrect details immediately when NZ journalists reached out to get clarification on the SMH report. Because the club stayed silent local journalists decided to trust the SMH's (and the SMH's sources') integrity.
It seems crazy to me that they would turn down that offer.
50% for just 3 games, which has often been the case anyway
If you think 3 games in Oz is the same as 3 games around NZ, then you and I will totally have to differ.
If I thought that, I would have said it in my post
Maybe go elsewhere for your next argument
Again, if people are going to trust Dom Bossi's integrity given his track record as a dumpster for FFA disinfo, then...
It looks like the goalposts are shifting. A few days ago it was "Welnix are selling us to SW Sydney and lying about it". Now that the truth is out, the same people are saying "Welnix have not been transparent about their moves seeking investment in the club".
The second statement is fair enough. But it is not the same as the first statement.
Dislike Welnix all you like, although I think if you dislike them so much you'd welcome them selling up. But don't be so desperate for more ammo against them that you believe outright furphies.
It isn't the same as the first statement, but it still squares with it. The lack of clarity in their statements, and their glacial pace in publicly responding to certain things has suggested to me, at least, that there was more to the story than they were admitting, which we now know is true. They didn't lie, per se, but they were very economical with the truth, which raised suspicions. Many of us synthesised the available information and thought 1 was true as a result of 2.
Question for a journo if the chance arises: Have Welnix really exhausted all NZ investment possibilities? Both within and external to the football community? When is the last time Rob had a heart to heart with Ivan Vuksich for example; someone who knows something about building a football club.
Kotahitanga. We are one.
Whether or not all these stories are agenda driven bullshark (and in my opinion they are), it's apparent that the Phoenix management/ownership view of the media is so toxic that it is hurting the club. They are very much cutting off their nose to spite their face in throwing a tantrum and hiding in the bunker rather than responding to the allegations. Even if you ignore the Aussie media, i'm sure Voerman, Hyslop, Piney for example would all give a responsible reporting of the Nix position on these issues each time speculation mounted.
By bunkering down, getting pissy and not responding to media enquiries all they have left is the original story, and the media will quite happily print someone else's point of view, and that doesn't help fans left hanging for a week of silence after FFA puts out their latest round of potential bullshark to their eager repeaters.
Is Rob Morrison related to Stacey Morrison?
I like Stacey Morrison...
"Ive just re-visited this and once again realised that C-Diddy is a genius - a drunk, Newcastle bred disgrace - but a genius." - Hard News, 11:39am 4th June 2009
Part = 1-99%
if you sell a share in the club to another club in Australia, what is the end game? It's that club taking over our license. There is no way that an Aussie club buying a share in the Phoenix is doing it for any other reason other than it's a back door into the A-League.
But isn't this only an issue if:
a) WelNix are actively looking to sell a share to a club in Australia; and/or
b) they actually tried to, and it was blocked.
But neither of these is true, or even inconsistent with what WelNix have said to date - which is, they are willing to look at other potential investors to help out (and unfortunately, there's not a lot of those in NZ lining up). So they received an offer from a potential investor, considered it, and decided it wasn't the right fit and rejected it. There's nothing more to it than that.
I understand the explanation now, and it's good to have the "facts" out there (so to speak). I struggle with the idea of sending games outside NZ - it feels like a complete lack of confidence in the club's identity.
Normo's coming home
Question for a journo if the chance arises: Have Welnix really exhausted all NZ investment possibilities? Both within and external to the football community? When is the last time Rob had a heart to heart with Ivan Vuksich for example; someone who knows something about building a football club.
Remember - the club isn't for sale?
Normo's coming home
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 completely wrong (if el G is correct).
1) It wasn't a 100%sale (one report)
2)It was only 2-3 games not half (the other report)
3) WE TURNED IT DOWN NOT THE FFA!!
It's a massive difference between the two stories.
Sorry just dont get it. We have coped some seriously bad press lately across all mediums print,tv,radio social media. Welnixs answer give talk to some from YF. Sorry shows a serious lack of understanding of who their fans are.
Gotta say having just been to my emails expecting an update from the Phoenix. I was well pissed off that they have spoken to YF before they demmed a paying member was worthy of being told what was going.Pretty much says it all about their disconnection with all but a select few of their fans.
I didn't scrawl through the last 100 messages - what YF member was told what by the board?
https://www.yellowfever.co.nz/blogs/to-the-last/bl...
And yes, it's a ridiculous way for the Nix to get their message out.
Sorry just dont get it. We have coped some seriously bad press lately across all mediums print,tv,radio social media. Welnixs answer give talk to some from YF. Sorry shows a serious lack of understanding of who their fans are.
Gotta say having just been to my emails expecting an update from the Phoenix. I was well pissed off that they have spoken to YF before they demmed a paying member was worthy of being told what was going.Pretty much says it all about their disconnection with all but a select few of their fans.
You need to pay more. Once you unlock super platinum level you get an invite to Rob's WhatsApp group chat.
Sorry just dont get it. We have coped some seriously bad press lately across all mediums print,tv,radio social media. Welnixs answer give talk to some from YF. Sorry shows a serious lack of understanding of who their fans are.
Gotta say having just been to my emails expecting an update from the Phoenix. I was well pissed off that they have spoken to YF before they demmed a paying member was worthy of being told what was going.Pretty much says it all about their disconnection with all but a select few of their fans.
You need to pay more. Once you unlock super platinum level you get an invite to Rob's WhatsApp group chat.
Sorry just dont get it. We have coped some seriously bad press lately across all mediums print,tv,radio social media. Welnixs answer give talk to some from YF. Sorry shows a serious lack of understanding of who their fans are.
Gotta say having just been to my emails expecting an update from the Phoenix. I was well pissed off that they have spoken to YF before they demmed a paying member was worthy of being told what was going.Pretty much says it all about their disconnection with all but a select few of their fans.
You need to pay more. Once you unlock super platinum level you get an invite to Rob's WhatsApp group chat.
I'm more of a rocker than a Mod. Definitely not a mod.
Question for a journo if the chance arises: Have Welnix really exhausted all NZ investment possibilities? Both within and external to the football community? When is the last time Rob had a heart to heart with Ivan Vuksich for example; someone who knows something about building a football club.
Auckland City run off Trillian Trust and Club World Cup money. Neither of which is an option for Welnix.
It was only slightly a come to Allah meeting. There is no secret that Dave meets regularly with the club, from time to time other attend. This week instead of Domey (who is in Hong Kong) it's Rob. It's not rocket science boys.
Auckland City run off Trillian Trust and Club World Cup money. Neither of which is an option for Welnix.
It was only slightly a come to Allah meeting. There is no secret that Dave meets regularly with the club, from time to time other attend. This week instead of Domey (who is in Hong Kong) it's Rob. It's not rocket science boys.
Auckland City run off Trillian Trust and Club World Cup money. Neither of which is an option for Welnix.
I reckon we might be viewing ACFC insight into Auckland investment through too narrow a prism, ie existing ACFC funding model. I seem to recall ACFC were exploring possible A league expression of interest about 12 months ago. A different funding model would have been partying of that thinking. Time for Rob to revisit that thought with Ivan? Just wondering what NZ avenues have been explored.
Kotahitanga. We are one.
It was only slightly a come to Allah meeting. There is no secret that Dave meets regularly with the club, from time to time other attend. This week instead of Domey (who is in Hong Kong) it's Rob. It's not rocket science boys.
Auckland City run off Trillian Trust and Club World Cup money. Neither of which is an option for Welnix.
I reckon we might be viewing ACFC insight into Auckland investment through too narrow a prism, ie existing ACFC funding model. I seem to recall ACFC were exploring possible A league expression of interest about 12 months ago. A different funding model would have been partying of that thinking. Time for Rob to revisit that thought with Ivan? Just wondering what NZ avenues have been explored.
It was only slightly a come to Allah meeting. There is no secret that Dave meets regularly with the club, from time to time other attend. This week instead of Domey (who is in Hong Kong) it's Rob. It's not rocket science boys.
Auckland City run off Trillian Trust and Club World Cup money. Neither of which is an option for Welnix.
I reckon we might be viewing ACFC insight into Auckland investment through too narrow a prism, ie existing ACFC funding model. I seem to recall ACFC were exploring possible A league expression of interest about 12 months ago. A different funding model would have been partying of that thinking. Time for Rob to revisit that thought with Ivan? Just wondering what NZ avenues have been explored.
Well, here is facts on this - Auckland City received $432,437 from Trillian Trust between October 2017 to April 2018 (so, basically, for the 2017/2018 season). And that's not counting the grants to Central United, a few of which were also made in that period, and which take the overall amount easily over $500,000 (though I haven't bothered to tally it up). Add to that US $250,000 (which Mr Google tells me is $362,922.50 NZ) that they got from the Club World Cup, and somehow I think that Auckland City aren't exactly pressed for money to run a team in a league with significantly lower costs than the A-league.
And coincidentally, I suspect that Welnix would be prepared to pole dance their way through all the strip clubs in Wellington for $430k worth of sponsorship for one season.
This topic is locked.
