Wellington support alone won't save the Nix because FFA want more out of 4.2 million peeps. So, Auckland, stand the fudge up.
Phoenix Ownership - Rob says FTFFA
Wellington support alone won't save the Nix because FFA want more out of 4.2 million peeps. So, Auckland, stand the fudge up.
You say this as though it's just a simple matter of 'a population' standing up. What you mean is 'why isn't any one person prepared to risk $2-3 mill for the cause?'
Because of the risk, that's why.
Scale innit?
NZ's got 5 Super Rugby sides that get, maximum, 20k into a ground in the regular season. The averages are way down on that too, so you're looking at 10 - 13k for the 8 games of the season with sub-10k as standard. The days of 30k watching regular season games are pretty much done now, people just turn up for finals.
Rugby's meant to be THE sport in NZ, but it's not pulling the crouds that the FFA want from the Nix.
Understand your thinking - just think the manifestation and impact of that would be quite different to what you/the FFA are hoping. The stark reality is that just like Australia, NZ is relatively regionally tribal in the sense that we support our "own" teams and identify with them. The regional roadshow is the complete antithesis to this. Sure, it would open the exposure up to the 4.5M audience but who would actually identify with the club and feel vested therein? Don't get me wrong - I'd support (although much less actively) a NZ team from ANY region over an Aussie team but would I feel passionate about it and think they were "my" team? No.
As others have said, which other Australian clubs have been told they need to take their team on the road to drum up support from further afield? CCM? Newy? Roar? Oh wait, none of them...
Wellington support alone won't save the Nix because FFA want more out of 4.2 million peeps. So, Auckland, stand the fudge up.
You say this as though it's just a simple matter of 'a population' standing up. What you mean is 'why isn't any one person prepared to risk $2-3 mill for the cause?'
Because of the risk, that's why.
I totally get that but I'm telling you if football in Auk cant find an "ownership consortium" its curtains for everyone. Think of the children. Seriously, NZF needs to play a long game with FFA and say our future is tied to your stinking ship, whether we like it or not.
Plus, Auk is the capital of corporate NZ Inc.
Wellington support alone won't save the Nix because FFA want more out of 4.2 million peeps. So, Auckland, stand the fudge up.
You say this as though it's just a simple matter of 'a population' standing up. What you mean is 'why isn't any one person prepared to risk $2-3 mill for the cause?'
Because of the risk, that's why.
I totally get that but I'm telling you if football in Auk cant find an "ownership consortium" its curtains for everyone. Think of the children. Seriously, NZF needs to play a long game with FFA and say our future is tied to your stinking ship, whether we like it or not.
Plus, Auk is the capital of corporate NZ Inc.
There's the problem. NZF has made enough shark decisions recently, do you reckon they'd be willing to throw in with the obvious gangsters of the FFA knowing that as soon as another option comes in it doesn't matter how much they've put in, they'll be dumped at the side of the road without a kiss goodbye. Back to square one, because the FFA say so.
Scale innit?
NZ's got 5 Super Rugby sides that get, maximum, 20k into a ground in the regular season. The averages are way down on that too, so you're looking at 10 - 13k for the 8 games of the season with sub-10k as standard. The days of 30k watching regular season games are pretty much done now, people just turn up for finals.
Rugby's meant to be THE sport in NZ, but it's not pulling the crouds that the FFA want from the Nix.
It's about much more than croud numbers Balbi. FFA want money from New Zealand. This is the single thing that should focus stakeholders' minds. FFA don't give a shark how it happens, but also have no idea how to make it happen.
Can't seeing a fudgeland team happening anytime soon.
Wellington support alone won't save the Nix because FFA want more out of 4.2 million peeps. So, Auckland, stand the fudge up.
You say this as though it's just a simple matter of 'a population' standing up. What you mean is 'why isn't any one person prepared to risk $2-3 mill for the cause?'
Because of the risk, that's why.
I totally get that but I'm telling you if football in Auk cant find an "ownership consortium" its curtains for everyone. Think of the children. Seriously, NZF needs to play a long game with FFA and say our future is tied to your stinking ship, whether we like it or not.
Plus, Auk is the capital of corporate NZ Inc.
There's the problem. NZF has made enough shark decisions recently, do you reckon they'd be willing to throw in with the obvious gangsters of the FFA knowing that as soon as another option comes in it doesn't matter how much they've put in, they'll be dumped at the side of the road without a kiss goodbye. Back to square one, because the FFA say so.
Long game. 20 years licences for 2 x NZ franchises.
[/quote]
Long game. 20 years licences for 2 x NZ franchises.
Haha. Tell that to the sucker willing to put up his $couplamill. As if!.
Assuming, of course, they don't revoke the licenses at any point they want to - which they totally can for any license holder. Would you trust Gallop, Lowy and Baby Lowy?
... shark, what if NZF/FFA thought a great idea would be promotion/relegation: i.e. the Nix have to play off home-and-away with the ASBPrem winner for an A-League slot? That would get some kind of local derby happening.
... shark, what if NZF/FFA thought a great idea would be promotion/relegation: i.e. the Nix have to play off home-and-away with the ASBPrem winner for an A-League slot? That would get some kind of local derby happening.
God help us then if Waitakery won the ASB!
... shark, what if NZF/FFA thought a great idea would be promotion/relegation: i.e. the Nix have to play off home-and-away with the ASBPrem winner for an A-League slot? That would get some kind of local derby happening.
God help us then if Waitakery won the ASB!
Well, obviously, there'd have to be conditions like "NZ's A-League team must have an actual stadium, not an empty paddock in the back of beyond."
Apologise if I am not on top of all the comings and goings…
Is this the brief summary,
Nix’s wanted a 10 year extension,
FFA offered 4 years with caveats / qualification’s, centred around key KPI indexes need to be met by the end of the 4 years otherwise and the next extension will not be granted.
The key KPI’s are ratings, crouds, memberships, a new media deal and NZF getting more involved… and unspoken is much more media.
Then in the background as Simon Hill says there is the AFC
Muddying the waters are the “exemption” clauses needed from the NZFA, Oceania, AFC, and ultimately FIFA, for a non-AFC club to continue playing outside its own confederation.
The reason? AFC could soon face problems of its own, over a mooted ASEAN Super League. The countries involved - Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia - contain some clubs that are hugely in favour, but others aren’t so keen. AFC, keen to avoid conflict, may not want to set a precedent by offering a club an “opt-out” from its own domestic competition, as is currently the case with Wellington.
Just to remind you, Midfielder: your gate attendances aren't any better than ours, so if they can do this to us, next thing you know the CCM licence will be pulled in favour of the North Sydney Metrics.
Apologise if I am not on top of all the comings and goings…
Is this the brief summary,
Nix’s wanted a 10 year extension,
FFA offered 4 years with caveats / qualification’s, centred around key KPI indexes need to be met by the end of the 4 years otherwise and the next extension will not be granted.
The key KPI’s are ratings, crouds, memberships, a new media deal and NZF getting more involved… and unspoken is much more media.
Then in the background as Simon Hill says there is the AFC
Muddying the waters are the “exemption” clauses needed from the NZFA, Oceania, AFC, and ultimately FIFA, for a non-AFC club to continue playing outside its own confederation.
The reason? AFC could soon face problems of its own, over a mooted ASEAN Super League. The countries involved - Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia - contain some clubs that are hugely in favour, but others aren’t so keen. AFC, keen to avoid conflict, may not want to set a precedent by offering a club an “opt-out” from its own domestic competition, as is currently the case with Wellington.
Nah FIFA said that if the A League is happy and we are happy then the confederations wont touch our involvement in the league.
Its just another little scapegoat thrown out to muddy the simple fact that its a strayan league, and while the stakeholders may want us in the league, the bosses dont.
The thing about this expanding the brand business is that WelNix want the Phoenix for Wellington, even in Rob's press release about the english language school he said that they want to stop things being so Auckland Centric. So the goal of WelNix is to keep assets like the Phoenix in Wellington which seems at odds with what the FFA want.
They could call themselves the NZ Phoenix and still play all their games in Wellington like the NZ Warriors don't play any games outside of Auckland. But they would not be able to play in Yellow and Black.
The thing about this expanding the brand business is that WelNix want the Phoenix for Wellington, even in Rob's press release about the english language school he said that they want to stop things being so Auckland Centric. So the goal of WelNix is to keep assets like the Phoenix in Wellington which seems at odds with what the FFA want.
They could call themselves the NZ Phoenix and still play all their games in Wellington like the NZ Warriors don't play any games outside of Auckland. But they would not be able to play in Yellow and Black.
Unless they went Black white and yellow.
The thing about this expanding the brand business is that WelNix want the Phoenix for Wellington, even in Rob's press release about the english language school he said that they want to stop things being so Auckland Centric. So the goal of WelNix is to keep assets like the Phoenix in Wellington which seems at odds with what the FFA want.
They could call themselves the NZ Phoenix and still play all their games in Wellington like the NZ Warriors don't play any games outside of Auckland. But they would not be able to play in Yellow and Black.
Unless they went Black white and yellow.
Next season's kit sorted....
No-one is going to invest short term when there is no short term payback. Long game is the only game. If we want to play in Australia's sandpit we need to move the conversation on to that platform. Two franchises.
NZ Penguins.
Would we get a better mascot than Nixie the chicken?
What has convinced people that making this a travelling circus is the answer. I think the losses in terms of support and the extras done by fans in making this a circus would be more than what some people are claiming.I have spoken to a few people and probably 80% of them reckon their commitment wouldnt be as great as what it is know. Yes they would still attend games in Wellington but would be less inclined to do the little extra things that many down here do to promote the team.
No-one is going to invest short term when there is no short term payback. Long game is the only game. If we want to play in Australia's sandpit we need to move the conversation on to that platform.
No-one is going to invest short term when there is no short term payback. Long game is the only game. If we want to play in Australia's sandpit we need to move the conversation on to that platform.
To long game or no game. That is the question. But we now know that Wellington long game is not enough. We need a New Zealand long game; hence my call for ACFC + investors to step up to the plate and be part of the long game discussion.
What has convinced people that making this a travelling circus is the answer.
Yes, it's flawed.
Yes, it's wrong.
Yes, it's the FFA.
What has convinced people that making this a travelling circus is the answer.
Yes, it's flawed.
Yes, it's wrong.
Yes, it's the FFA.
I think people on here recognise that having an NZ Nix is better than no Nix at all.
Sure, we'd love the status quo but clearly something has to change or we'll have nothing.
Just on "metrics". Linguistically it really means quantitative measurements - things you can count. What's been missing from this whole discussion is a qualitative approach; things like "how do you feel about it", "what are people's attitudes towards it", "emotionally how do you respond", which provide insights and a real strategy to build a sport/business etc. You need both of course.
FFA really do not understand how to build a sport (long history of it when you look at treatment of "old soccer") and they keep showing they have no grasp of qualitative insight into football as a sport. Shirley Bright's blog gives many other recent examples. We, as Nix supporters and people involved in football in NZ see it when they suggest Wellington Phoenix become NZ Nix or that geographically separate entities and communities like Wollongong and St George/Sutherland merge to form one club. A superficial view of the metrics might say so but from a qualitative standpoint they've completely missed it. And continue to.
What is still pissing me off about the whole thing is that as a club we are not in the financial crap of at least two Australians clubs yet Lowry & Gallop are making a big song and dance about us having to give more dosh. Sure things could be better, I acknowledge that but really, they need to sort out their own teams financial woes before worrying about us. Just give us the ten year licence to show we can do something long term...and get another Auckland side up and running, make it quite interesting and it gives Australian players another door in which to try and make a name for themselves. Thus having two opportunites instead of one such as South Sydney for example.
Just on "metrics". Linguistically it really means quantitative measurements - things you can count. What's been missing from this whole discussion is a qualitative approach; things like "how do you feel about it", "what are people's attitudes towards it", "emotionally how do you respond", which provide insights and a real strategy to build a sport/business etc. You need both of course.
FFA really do not understand how to build a sport (long history of it when you look at treatment of "old soccer") and they keep showing they have no grasp of qualitative insight into football as a sport. Shirley Bright's blog gives many other recent examples. We, as Nix supporters and people involved in football in NZ see it when they suggest Wellington Phoenix become NZ Nix or that geographically separate entities and communities like Wollongong and St George/Sutherland merge to form one club. A superficial view of the metrics might say so but from a qualitative standpoint they've completely missed it. And continue to.
to be honest, I love the nix because I love going. If the team played here less, I would need to reevaluate the season membership. I simply don't watch any non nix a league games, perhaps outside the final.
Never underestimate the power of Mabo and the Constitution.
to be honest, I love the nix because I love going. If the team played here less, I would need to reevaluate the season membership. I simply don't watch any non nix a league games, perhaps outside the final.
Interestingly over the years I've been watching more and more A-league games. This season I'd watched all of them up to the FFA announcement. Haven't watch any since then apart from the Nix.
FFA Wankers
Just on "metrics". Linguistically it really means quantitative measurements - things you can count. What's been missing from this whole discussion is a qualitative approach; things like "how do you feel about it", "what are people's attitudes towards it", "emotionally how do you respond", which provide insights and a real strategy to build a sport/business etc. You need both of course.
FFA really do not understand how to build a sport (long history of it when you look at treatment of "old soccer") and they keep showing they have no grasp of qualitative insight into football as a sport. Shirley Bright's blog gives many other recent examples. We, as Nix supporters and people involved in football in NZ see it when they suggest Wellington Phoenix become NZ Nix or that geographically separate entities and communities like Wollongong and St George/Sutherland merge to form one club. A superficial view of the metrics might say so but from a qualitative standpoint they've completely missed it. And continue to.
LOL!!!
"The vibe of the thing" doesn't count in law, but it certainly does count in consumer behaviour, something that brainwashed MBA drones who get parachuted into CEO roles often don't understand.
In all seriousness, my issue with the metrics thing is that it hasn't been clearly explained publicly what exactly they are measuring, how they are measuring it, or why they are measuring it. I suspect that the #metrics have been either arbitrarily selected, or deliberately selected as a post hoc justification for why they want to kick us out. Either way, they don't seem to provide a full picture of our contribution to the league. One massively key metric that hasn't been mentioned is the amount of money WelNix have spent and are willing to spend on the club. That is what makes us sustainable, and that is our contribution to the growth and development of the league: a stable, functioning club in a small market. We are proof that it can be done. Also, here's another metric: .1.5 million. That's the estimated cost of the FFA running the Jets for a season. Or this metric: 3 . That's the number of clubs that have folded in 11 years of the A League.Or this one: 0. That's the number of willing buyers the FFA has been able to find for the Jets. Or this one: 50. That's the number of dollars CCM tried to charge their players to attend their own awards night, such was the state of the clubs finances. Or 3 again - the number of clubs which didn't operate at a loss last year. But you know the number of members the Phoenix have is the sort of metric they claim they make decisions on.
What is still pissing me off about the whole thing is that as a club we are not in the financial crap of at least two Australians clubs yet Lowry & Gallop are making a big song and dance about us having to give more dosh. Sure things could be better, I acknowledge that but really, they need to sort out their own teams financial woes before worrying about us. Just give us the ten year licence to show we can do something long term...and get another Auckland side up and running, make it quite interesting and it gives Australian players another door in which to try and make a name for themselves. Thus having two opportunites instead of one such as South Sydney for example.
Well apparently its socceroos money that is paying for the A-League cap, i.e. out of the 40 million broadcast deal most of that is for the Socceroos while a smaller amount is for the A-League. So if that's the case then you can see why the FFA think that they are subsidising NZ football and want some contribution from the NZ stakeholders. That was mentioned by Ryans Rovers on twitter and as we all know here he's not prone to posting shark for no reason.
In all seriousness, my issue with the metrics thing is that it hasn't been clearly explained publicly what exactly they are measuring, how they are measuring it, or why they are measuring it. I suspect that the #metrics have been either arbitrarily selected, or deliberately selected as a post hoc justification for why they want to kick us out.
Stop channelling the spirit of Midfielder CT.
In other words FFA made it up.
Here's the Australian definition (and by it's Australian-ness is quite simple and direct...
METRICS = $$$$$$$$
There are no other metrics that will motivate the FFA. That's it. They want (lots) more money.