they seem to go into asministration etc fairly regularly. But then fans can step up and raise money to save the club, a wealthy backer can come in and take over, or they can form a new club and start again from the bottom.
None of which any of us have an opportunity to do. If the FFA wants us out, they can kick us out. It is incredibly shark.
An awesome article from UK website 90magazine Why is Australia killing off the Phoenix?
"The FFA doesn’t care. And neither will the world once the A League exposes itself as a money-grabbing anti-football establishment."
"Why should English fans, confronted with an orgy of international football from the bright lights of La Liga to the intriguing emergence of the MLS, pay any attention to a league that can wipe out a stable, well-liked club with barely a hint of thought for the ruins it leaves behind?"
The trouble is he starts with "English clubs fold all the time". Bollox. What was the last professional English team to go under? Not in my living memory, which is quite long. The rest of what he said was OK though.
Not English as such - but that's basically what happened to Rangers isn't it.
if you think a daily picture of Frank Lowy is porn you need some help.
"....head over heels...."
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
Not English as such - but that's basically what happened to Rangers isn't it.
More English than half the Premier League.
Oh yeah. Fiveyearstops is at it again.
http://fiveyearstops.blogspot.com.au/2015/11/again...
Jesus Fudgeing Christ.
Shirley Bright for Aus PM.
Makes me almost want to become one.
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
so if I'm understanding Gallops main issue with us correctly - we are "squatting" ie freeloading and costing the FFA nd giving nothing back. My response is two fold - if the nix go, what TV coverage in NZ does he expect, the pittance from Sky becomes zero! Secondly what is NZF doing to actually help in this scenario? are they offering to pay for the nix ie the players wage and taking the cost awy from the FFA, are they pushing hard to make NZ part of Asia, thereby removing the pressure on the FFA from AFC - no they are not, they are weakly "supporting the nix" by pissy little tweets and FB posts.
FFA props up clubs; philosophically I'm not comfortable with NZF financially propping up NZ clubs. However they do need to work with Welnix to see how they can best contribute. One simple concrete contribution from them would be to email the NZF database with a Nix membership offer. The database was used repeatedly for FIFA U20 World Cup tickets earlier this year. Needs to happen this week.
Except this concept is totally flawed anyway..
NZF do financially support the Phoenix and a number of the initiatives and academy services.
if you think a daily picture of Frank Lowy is porn you need some help.
I read it for the articles.
NZF do financially support the Phoenix and a number of the initiatives and academy services.
Yeah they said on the tv3 4-4-2 webcast thing that it was to the tune of a couple of hundred k.
An awesome article from UK website 90magazine Why is Australia killing off the Phoenix?
"The FFA doesn’t care. And neither will the world once the A League exposes itself as a money-grabbing anti-football establishment."
"Why should English fans, confronted with an orgy of international football from the bright lights of La Liga to the intriguing emergence of the MLS, pay any attention to a league that can wipe out a stable, well-liked club with barely a hint of thought for the ruins it leaves behind?"
The trouble is he starts with "English clubs fold all the time". Bollox. What was the last professional English team to go under? Not in my living memory, which is quite long. The rest of what he said was OK though.
Middlesbrough 1986.
A small town in Europe........looking to bounce straight back up....well that aint going to happen
An awesome article from UK website 90magazine Why is Australia killing off the Phoenix?
"The FFA doesn’t care. And neither will the world once the A League exposes itself as a money-grabbing anti-football establishment."
"Why should English fans, confronted with an orgy of international football from the bright lights of La Liga to the intriguing emergence of the MLS, pay any attention to a league that can wipe out a stable, well-liked club with barely a hint of thought for the ruins it leaves behind?"
The trouble is he starts with "English clubs fold all the time". Bollox. What was the last professional English team to go under? Not in my living memory, which is quite long. The rest of what he said was OK though.
Middlesbrough 1986.
MSV Duisburg got relegated from the 2. Bundesliga to the 3rd in 2013 because of management shambles.
This is a complete non-issue. The FFA have a clause in the current Phoenix license that states that all future negotiations must be undertaken in "good faith", which means that the Nix can't just come out and slag off the FFA in the media.
Plus, Rob doesn't just speak for himself, he speaks on behalf of the entire ownership group, and as they are all successful businessmen it takes time to get them all together. As I understand, they had a Skype meeting late last week.
Add in the fact that the FFA gave exactly two hours notice of the decision to the Phoenix, and then didn't even release all of the facts behind the decision and you can hardly blame Rob for not wanting to step out into the limelight and potentially say something. Frank Lowy didn't exactly paint himself in glory when he did that.
Rob will come out at some point this week, mark my words.
I know what you are saying but the perception if you only read the paper is that the Phoenix are being kicked out of the A-League/the Phoenix are folding (I've had this said to me on numerous occasions). Don't want to leave it too long! And it would be great if initiatives like the give a little campaign and the need for people to buy memberships got a bit more traction publically
Normo's coming home
I know what you are saying but the perception if you only read the paper is that the Phoenix are being kicked out of the A-League/the Phoenix are folding (I've had this said to me on numerous occasions). Don't want to leave it too long! And it would be great if initiatives like the give a little campaign and the need for people to buy memberships got a bit more traction publically
I like that Yellow Fever is doing this with minimal owner interaction, I personally think if the owners were begging and pleading for memberships it would send the wrong idea.
By the fan base doing it, it shows the love for the team over here, which looks good to everybody except the FFA and the FFA cronies at Fox Sports.
I personally think if the owners were begging and pleading for memberships it would send the wrong idea.
Having said that, if the owners do want the Nix to survive then they (as well as all of us) have to get off their arses and make it happen. And yes, I know it's happening behind closed doors but it is my hope (and expectation) that they are keeping their powder dry whilst the country is going ga-ga over Bill before unleashing the hounds of hell (well, the marketing, membership, attendance, equivalent).
It's all about the metrics: eyeballs and arses.
I personally think if the owners were begging and pleading for memberships it would send the wrong idea.
Having said that, if the owners do want the Nix to survive then they (as well as all of us) have to get off their arses and make it happen. And yes, I know it's happening behind closed doors but it is my hope (and expectation) that they are keeping their powder dry whilst the country is going ga-ga over Bill before unleashing the hounds of hell (well, the marketing, membership, attendance, equivalent).
It's all about the metrics: eyeballs and arses.
Sorry I may have misinterpreted what he said. I thought he was suggesting the owners come out and publicize requests for more people to buy memberships and to get behind the give a little fund.
In terms of metrics, I'm not sure what kind of reach the forums have but the NZF database will be much bigger. Welnix needs NZF to use it. But to date it hasn't been activated. Such a no brainer really.
Kotahitanga. We are one.
In my honest opinion iIt does go back to the relatively poor job the club is doing so far on having a mainstream media presence, from the disinterested Radio National (which nevertheless reports on all things EPL) to the TV3 / TVNZ giving more coverage to American Football on their sports bulletins than The Nix. Newspapers are probably still those with most Nix coverage, unless someone has a proof to the contrary.
I am not blaming the club for lack of coverage, but perhaps a dedicated part-time media staffer could do wonders for the club, from engaging with the mainstream media to being savvy with use of modern social media.
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
In my honest opinion iIt does go back to the relatively poor job the club is doing so far on having a mainstream media presence, from the disinterested Radio National (which nevertheless reports on all things EPL) to the TV3 / TVNZ giving more coverage to American Football on their sports bulletins than The Nix. Newspapers are probably still those with most Nix coverage, unless someone has a proof to the contrary.
I am not blaming the club for lack of coverage, but perhaps a dedicated part-time media staffer could do wonders for the club, from engaging with the mainstream media to being savvy with use of modern social media.
I feel like a handful of fans social media presence probably does more than mainstream media for the Nix. Bit sad really. I haven't even seen an article about the give-a-little drive?
a.haak
And when they do bother to report on it, they slant it negatively, e.g. the loss to Victory on TV One and CGW only showing the 3 Tards' goals, not Siggy's great header & the last ditch tackles that denied us. I think Radio Sport and TV One are in league with the FFA at times.
Oi Oi Edgecumbe... lets have a clean sheet
To be fair TV3 isn't bad. That's probably due to the presence of Andrew Gourdie and Simon Hampton than anything that Welnix do.
Let's be honest. TVNZ are sharkbags for coverage of Nix/A-League.
TV3 much better including the 2 idiots video on the website (why 4-4-2? Why not 4-2-3-1 or 0-0-10?)
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
And when they do bother to report on it, they slant it negatively, e.g. the loss to Victory on TV One and CGW only showing the 3 Tards' goals, not Siggy's great header & the last ditch tackles that denied us. I think Radio Sport and TV One are in league with the FFA at times.
Hell yes, they shouldnt show the goals, only the near misses - by both sides, would still have been more coverage of Tards than us
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
Oz media commentator tries reductive "new player in the market automatically increases value of A-League rights" argument: Optus deal could provide A-league windfall
Not sure if that's just wishful thinking, there's certainly other variables to consider like, umm, ratings. It might be true that there are a lot more Pay TV and internet options this time round that collectively increase the possible reach and value of the rights though. I'd love to think that's the case.
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11539876
"In most cases over the last six months, blaming New Zealand Football would be about par for the course. Their amateur administration shattered Olympic dreams. They wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees, went to war with OFC and lost, and even got suckered out of a few easy dollars from Fifa.
But they are not to blame here.
Sources say NZF has already invested $1 million into the Phoenix over the last several years, as well as incorporating their reserve team into the ASB Premiership and youth team into the National Youth League."
And goes on to address other points Tim Brown made.
Oz media commentator tries reductive "new player in the market automatically increases value of A-League rights" argument: Optus deal could provide A-league windfall
Not sure if that's just wishful thinking, there's certainly other variables to consider like, umm, ratings. It might be true that there are a lot more Pay TV and internet options this time round that collectively increase the possible reach and value of the rights though. I'd love to think that's the case.
Following on from that line of thinking what if this was a way in which NZ could offer real commercial value to the A-League - as a kind of research laboratory for innovative new broadcast/mobile/internet products? At its simplest what if the FFA specifically used NZ to trial an A-League internet streaming product similar to PL Pass?
Basically, I don't buy the "new player in the market increases the value of the rights" argument but I do think that there's now potential for new and innovative products and packages across broadcast/mobile/internet to offset some of the ratings decline or maybe even increase ratings.
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
Let's think about this from Fox's perspective.
They pay 40m for a 10 team league. Their goal is to increase subscribers. If you assume that the FFA can replace the Phoenix with another Australian team what is more likely for them to increase subscribers and therefore be willing to pay more for the rights - a NZ team or another Australian team? The idea that the Phoenix are one of 10 teams therefore they bring in 1/10th of the revenue doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
That's Fox's perspective.
If you're the FFA, what you want is overall increased revenue generated by overall interest in the league. Part of that is NZ TV deal (fairly small change, apparently less than $1mn per season including value ascribed to production). Other is overall league sponsorship and attention, NZ can be a positive story in that (an additional 4.5mn eyeballs) but that only means something if the NZ club actually has people watching and attending.
It's not that difficult and nor is it that ridiculous to look at this from the FFA's bottom line and say an Australian club may have the potential for overall more income than a NZ one (given that it's been 10 years and the A-League hasn't really taken off in NZ).
There are lots of other arguments why we should stay in the league but if it comes down to dollars and cents only (and that is an important caveat), and a new Australian team can be set up to replace us, it's not that difficult to understand what is being proposed here and why for the FFA, the "metrics" are important.
You could equally say it's short sighted to replace a club and cut off the potential 4.5mn A-League fans but if they don't think they are getting much out of NZ this is why they are willing to make that decision.
Normo's coming home
My issue with that is the A-League is already available to all of Sydney. I'm not sure they can justify a claim that another club in the Sydney market would bring additional viewers or subscribers.
Sydney FC say they have got significant support in the region they are talking about so you would think they have all the A-League viewers they are going to get there unless there is an overall growth in A-League viewership across the whole Australian market and so far this season the the market and viewership is suffering a massive retraction.
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
Let's think about this from Fox's perspective.
They pay 40m for a 10 team league. Their goal is to increase subscribers. If you assume that the FFA can replace the Phoenix with another Australian team what is more likely for them to increase subscribers and therefore be willing to pay more for the rights - a NZ team or another Australian team? The idea that the Phoenix are one of 10 teams therefore they bring in 1/10th of the revenue doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
That's Fox's perspective.
If you're the FFA, what you want is overall increased revenue generated by overall interest in the league. Part of that is NZ TV deal (fairly small change, apparently less than $1mn per season including value ascribed to production). Other is overall league sponsorship and attention, NZ can be a positive story in that (an additional 4.5mn eyeballs) but that only means something if the NZ club actually has people watching and attending.
It's not that difficult and nor is it that ridiculous to look at this from the FFA's bottom line and say an Australian club may have the potential for overall more income than a NZ one (given that it's been 10 years and the A-League hasn't really taken off in NZ).
There are lots of other arguments why we should stay in the league but if it comes down to dollars and cents only (and that is an important caveat), and a new Australian team can be set up to replace us, it's not that difficult to understand what is being proposed here and why for the FFA, the "metrics" are important.
You could equally say it's short sighted to replace a club and cut off the potential 4.5mn A-League fans but if they don't think they are getting much out of NZ this is why they are willing to make that decision.
All true, but there's also a risk factor to consider. The Phoenix may not be headline "metrics" but they are a relatively low risk proposition for the FFA. They deliver their 10% of the content without too much fuss.
If the FFA replace the Nix the new team has to rate higher and/or bring other commercial value, otherwise there's no point, especially considering the risk involved. Also, if you put the new team in the Sydney or Melbourne market hoping to create more derbies (which at the moment rate higher than average) then you risk actually diluting the value of a derby (both Sydney or Melbourne would go from 3 to 9 derbies a season, or 1 every 3 weeks).
Or you can have a bob each way, keep one of your more stable teams and look to expand the league as soon the opportunity arises.
What's Tim Brown doing criticising our crouds anyway. As said above they aren't the smallest in the league, but reguardless of that they are good for a city our size. If Crouds were waht you wanted then you shouldn't have started a team in Wellington, or Gosford in the first place. There is also no guaranty that a third sydney team will have any better crouds than us, just look at Melbourne City - what did they have 7k for their last game?
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
Let's think about this from Fox's perspective.
They pay 40m for a 10 team league. Their goal is to increase subscribers. If you assume that the FFA can replace the Phoenix with another Australian team what is more likely for them to increase subscribers and therefore be willing to pay more for the rights - a NZ team or another Australian team? The idea that the Phoenix are one of 10 teams therefore they bring in 1/10th of the revenue doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
That's Fox's perspective.
If you're the FFA, what you want is overall increased revenue generated by overall interest in the league. Part of that is NZ TV deal (fairly small change, apparently less than $1mn per season including value ascribed to production). Other is overall league sponsorship and attention, NZ can be a positive story in that (an additional 4.5mn eyeballs) but that only means something if the NZ club actually has people watching and attending.
It's not that difficult and nor is it that ridiculous to look at this from the FFA's bottom line and say an Australian club may have the potential for overall more income than a NZ one (given that it's been 10 years and the A-League hasn't really taken off in NZ).
There are lots of other arguments why we should stay in the league but if it comes down to dollars and cents only (and that is an important caveat), and a new Australian team can be set up to replace us, it's not that difficult to understand what is being proposed here and why for the FFA, the "metrics" are important.
You could equally say it's short sighted to replace a club and cut off the potential 4.5mn A-League fans but if they don't think they are getting much out of NZ this is why they are willing to make that decision.
650k NZers living in Australia, thats a potential subscriber base for Fox.
Tim Brown blames NZF, damn right
"If you're the FFA and you see this outlier club which plays in a different Confederation, with small crouds, which gives you bugger-all money for TV rights - and they're trying to grow the league the best way that they can....
whether it's a negotiation ploy or whether it's something they genuinely feel, objectively speaking, I don't think it's something we can criticise them over," Brown said.
Brown, who was one of the most likeable, intelligent All Whites of recent years and now lives in San Francisco where he is the founder of a footwear start-up company, then turned his attention to a familiar if slightly unexpected scapegoat.
"For me, there's only one bad guy in all this, and that's New Zealand Football."
Let's think about this from Fox's perspective.
They pay 40m for a 10 team league. Their goal is to increase subscribers. If you assume that the FFA can replace the Phoenix with another Australian team what is more likely for them to increase subscribers and therefore be willing to pay more for the rights - a NZ team or another Australian team? The idea that the Phoenix are one of 10 teams therefore they bring in 1/10th of the revenue doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
That's Fox's perspective.
If you're the FFA, what you want is overall increased revenue generated by overall interest in the league. Part of that is NZ TV deal (fairly small change, apparently less than $1mn per season including value ascribed to production). Other is overall league sponsorship and attention, NZ can be a positive story in that (an additional 4.5mn eyeballs) but that only means something if the NZ club actually has people watching and attending.
It's not that difficult and nor is it that ridiculous to look at this from the FFA's bottom line and say an Australian club may have the potential for overall more income than a NZ one (given that it's been 10 years and the A-League hasn't really taken off in NZ).
There are lots of other arguments why we should stay in the league but if it comes down to dollars and cents only (and that is an important caveat), and a new Australian team can be set up to replace us, it's not that difficult to understand what is being proposed here and why for the FFA, the "metrics" are important.
You could equally say it's short sighted to replace a club and cut off the potential 4.5mn A-League fans but if they don't think they are getting much out of NZ this is why they are willing to make that decision.
I get that an Aussie team may bring in more cash, but why are we being set up to compete with another team which doesn't exist yet? How does our existence preclude the existence of an 11th team in a couple of years? ? Would an 11 team league including the Nix create more commercial revenue than a 10 team league without the Nix?
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
I don't know the answer to that but it seems like a fair point to me.
On the other hand WSW were a shot in the arm for the league (at least initially).
I guess my point is we are being naïve in the extreme to keep arguing (as some people do) that we are 1/10 teams in the league and therefore we generate or are responsible for 1/10th of the revenue.
Normo's coming home
Agree expansion is an option for increasing the league income but there seems to be reluctance to committing to expansion which I don't fully understand. Maybe that would be too difficult to manage with the existing owners (given the FFA clearly don't want to expand outside the existing big cities).
Normo's coming home
I don't know the answer to that but it seems like a fair point to me.
On the other hand WSW were a shot in the arm for the league (at least initially).
I guess my point is we are being naïve in the extreme to keep arguing (as some people do) that we are 1/10 teams in the league and therefore we generate or are responsible for 1/10th of the revenue.
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
