Phoenix Ownership - Rob says FTFFA

I know Gallop has been the one fronting to the media (sort of) about all this, but how much of it would be his decisions and how much would be the board's? I thought that the board were more the ones who dealt with this sort of thing, although obviously with input from the CEO. As I understand it the old board is still there but the new one starts next month - even though it's a continuation of the same types of people (including Lowy 2.0) could they possibly be a bit more sympathetic towards us or have a different take on the role of the Nix in the A League's future?

When a super rich 85 year old passes his position down to his son you know it's rotten.

According to Lia Welnix are talking to stake holders to try and generate more revenue outside of Fox.

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2015/10/29/...

It was stated that this was the final decision of the outgoing board.

I know flights are out but I wonder if an overnight bus could be an option. Just searching for the date of the next game out of interest, Mana Bus have a 9.45pm bus from Wellington to Auckland (arriving 8.25am) for $25 and they leave from in front of the train station. 7pm kickoff would finish around 9pm so you could easily make it. Think they have a bus this sort of time most days. I've done it during the day (well Hamilton to Wellington so not quite the full way) and it's comfortable enough but don't know what it would be like overnight or trying to sleep. Could something like this be an option without having to stay the night in Wellington?

Edit: Oops I realise the next game is 7.30pm so that probably wouldn't quite work unless you left a few minutes before full time but for 19th December they also have one the same time and it's only $10 at the moment.

Some part of me feels that if we can manage to somehow lessen the financial burden the Nix are on the FFA then we have a chance of staying in the competition. Metrics = $$. If we find a long-term solution to increase that, then I can see the FFA at least acquiesce to having us in the league. 

Are the talks with the South Sydney consortium real? Probably. We have no idea how far those talks have been going. The Lowys know business - they have always wanted more money out of the 'Nix and they have finally made their threat. Of course, that threat isn't totally credible without a visible replacement for the 'Nix in the league. Leaking the talks with the Southern Sydney side really puts the ball in the Phoenix's court and lets them know that their next best alternative to a negotiated agreement is another team in Sydney next year. The Phoenix's next best alternative is to fold. It's clear to see who has the stronger position. 

t’s only been five years since Patrick Barnes fully threw his lot in with the Phoenix but the senior member of Phoenix’s supporter group, Yellow Fever, has taken Monday’s news hard

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/oct/30/...

Who is this Barnsey person?

#transparency

An awful lot of things I've read over the last few days cast a fair bit of doubt on just how much of a financial burden we actually are to the FFA.

There are some different issues here.

First - croud capture rates by population size is a completely valid 'metric' used in sports and arts audience management all the time. It shows the Wellington population are materially more supportive of their club through their attendance numbers than are the catchment populations for most other A-league clubs. This is also achieved without the benefits of derbies or significant visiting fan numbers. It it not irrelevant when croud numbers are continually cited as a significant problem and most people seem to believe Wellington doesn't support football. We are performing at several times the rate at which Melbourne and Sydney crouds are performing. It is significant or a number of reasons - it shows there is good support for football here (in relative terms); it shows there is probably good opportunity for expansion; it shows sponsors that there is a good presence in Wellington, it shows that we are doing something right - others should be looking at us. We're also exceeding rugby here - in New Zealand. Gross attendance numbers in this context are simply misleading - assuming a smart business sense is being applied.

Second - of course that is not to say we can't do better, and Welnix are proving that it can be done it steadily improving team performance, feeder development, club memberships and croud attendance. Obviously we are being held to a higher level of performance that everyone else, and in that respect its harder to show improvement since we're already doing better. Don't tell me we're not supporting football relatively well just because we haven't got a croud average of 10,000+. As I've said elsewhere, Sydney and Melbourne crouds would need to be over 100,000 to meet the support levels generated in Wellington. Come back and try that argument when their numbers are at that level. 

But again - that isn't to say it can't be improved here - nothing I would like more. I applaud any call to get more people there. But lets not buy into the negative propaganda and ignorance being used to undermine the Nix's and Welnix's position - lets start getting some of these 'facts' or 'metrics' out there to counter that and change the conversation to a more truthful basis - then we're getting somewhere. One 'fact' or 'metric' won't do it on  its own, but a portfolio of evidence disseminated smartly can start to influence the landscape - we should have been doing it for years already but better late than never. We're getting a lot of negative press and comment for plainly false reasons. Gallop is saying we're squatters on a licence - basically the old 'Kiwi bludger' argument being recycled and lapped up. We need to counter that as part of our wider approach. We need it to be an honest discussion about what really needs to be done to stop the axe ASAP, then we can move on to wider improvement initiatives. 

Yeah we know it. But the FFA see an opportunity to get a team for cheap if we get less of our share of the Fox revenue.

Lets hope all of this translates to memberships/better croud for our next home game..

But they've made it clear that they're having a party when Phoenix dies, because then the broad masses will all start supporting the ASBP and coal-face grass-roots corruptly-relying-on-pokies-money football in a tin shed in Sandringham.

I was thinking the next game would be an absolute fudging cracker of a croud.

But its really annoying its 2 weeks out, I will be surprised if in 2 weeks the media gives a flying fudge anymore, and it may not impress the way we would expect.

i.e. if the next home game was tonight a 12-15k croud wouldn't surprise me, but in 2 weeks, who knows, maybe 10?

A sell out would make me so damn happy.

Just more excuses though, aint it? If people really want to save this club, they'll turn up in 2 weeks. If they don't start, we will be gone. Pretty simple, I'd say.

I began a response to something but ended up ranting about how crap the FFA is and how far away from their own vision they're going... so without inflicting my misinformed opinions on everyone - here it is.

As has been said our crouds are not bad, our stadium is just too big.

Teams in top leagues in Europe including the Eredivisie get similar crouds to us. It's unreasonable to expect Wellington to consistantly support more than 10k. It just isn't going to happen. So we need to improve other metrics such as the TV ratings throughout the country.

I was listening to talk back the other day and lots of people ring up saying things like why not call them the NZ Phoenix like the Warriors and Breakers, I'd support them then. 

The thing that cracks me up is how often do the "New Zealand" Breakers or Warriors tour outside of Auckland. The Phoenix are on the road much more than those teams. How many people supported the "New Zealand" knights.

Having an Auckland team be called New Zealand is just a typical Auckland attitude. I would prefer them to be called the Auckland Warriors, I'd probably support them more if that was the case.

Oh totally agree.

I'm not referring to a sustainability standpoint, IMHO I think we are fudgeed no matter what now.  But I would like to see us get some record crouds so when we look back on our final season we can remember some cracking events, and maybe some kids that go to an almost sell out croud decides that this sport is awesome, changes their rugby boots for football boots (really easy as I think they are the same boot) and then when we are all a little older, and a little less wise, one of those kids could be tearing it up in All White on the international stage.

This doesn't make sense for so many reasons, not least that as you have said Melbourne needs to average 100k which is literally impossible Ruud.  I've also seen figures done that have to count the same people in multiple catchments areas (for example if you use 4.8m for Sydney FC and for WSW plus whatever you use for CCM that's expecting the same people potentially to attend 3 different clubs).  You're also talking about a far larger area with far more difficulties to travel.  Try getting from Sydney's North Shore out to Paramatta on a Saturday...

Let's get real here, I think we have seen recently that the club is well liked but not necessarily well supported.  That does need to change.  The club have acknowledged it.

There is arguments both ways.  The Warriors re-branded themselves at the right time, to really start the push for a wider NZ fan base.  I was obsessed with them right before the re-brand change so it didn't affect me but I think it got more people behind as there is that whole stupid "anti-auckland and australia" mentality.  And up there they probably have a bit of a anti-everywhere that's not auckland mentality.  So a NZ rebrand could help, but not exclusively fix the issues.

They need a perfect storm of things to change.

A stadium to make more people want to go, that amkes the games look better on TV so more people watch, a nation wide advertising campaign to sell club memberships and merch, NZF to pull their foot out of their asses and help advertising to make the psort itself more popular.

What don't get is the FFA moaning about sky,yet I hand seen any media take them to task over it. As far as I'm aware it's the FFAs job to negotiate these deals,so why do they keep getting away not being asked why they signed off on this. It's not the Welnix guys job to get a better  broadcasting deal.  Also really think we are pushing it thinking we can get 10000 on a consistent basis. Yes  occasionaly but think we are kidding ourselves if we think it's going to be a regular accurance.

I know I've beaten this argument over the head, but honestly a 10,000+ regular croud I reckon would be feasible in a smaller stadium.  In a 12-14k stadium that scarcity and not knowing there will be tickets available I reckon would regularly drive sales.  And the atmosphere would keep those people coming back far more regularly.

If we walk / fold then we simply confirm their argument and we'll be consigned to a history dustbin. I for one am not prepared to accept that is the case until the final whistle.  If possible  I would like to see the club, Welnix and YF to  have an open chat as to what our options could be.  Calling on FFA to make their argument about "off-field metrics" open to public scrutiny would be one way to clear the air. 

B: Who (pays)?

I've said it before, and Ryan said the same thing on the last page, but forget about all this per capita/catchment area stuff around our crouds- in absolute terms they're not even bad and they are trending upwards. CCM's crouds were way worse than ours last year. Croud numbers are a red herring in this debate, as are memberships (other than adding people to their mailing list, what difference does the membership figure make to the FFA independent of croud numbers?). The real metric issue if there is one is TV  deal revenue. If there is an issue with crouds its that the stadium is too big and the seats are too yellow and it looks bad on TV, which might slightly affect excitement and interest among the TV audience. We can't directly change the TV deal at this stage but if there is a notable bump in interest in the club on both sides of the Tasman between now and the next TV deal we might have a chance. Ironically all this talk of getting rid of us has given us a bump in the interest stakes, now we need to sustain it. But increased crouds in Wellington won't matter squat if TV ratings flat line, and if TV ratings leap without our crouds increasing there may be hope.

Before anyone says it, I know our ratings aren't actually that bad, but if The FFA think they can get better from a SS team then they might ditch us. Really it should be Newcastle going first but the fans of Newcastle are Australian and are in more of a position to pressure the FFA than us kiwis are.

The names are a joke, they don't tour NZ. In fact most of the Warriors games that Wellington has had have been Bulldogs home games and not Warriors home games.

The breakers have played, what? Two games outside of Auckland throughout their history? The Phoenix, despite their name, are much more of a NZ team than either of those two.

They are both Auckalnd teams, calling them NZ teams is just a cheap way to get people who are a little soft in the head to support them.

The FFA are there to develop AUSTRALIAN football, if there is ANY choice between dumping us or an Aussie team, we're gone.

It is no enough for us not to be the least shark - in any sense.

We have to be near or above average. And even then, we're simply not Australian.

The problem isn't really our Fox ratings, but our ratings in NZ are terrible. So you can kind of see the FFA's point, why pay for a NZ team when we get nothing from NZ - a Sydney team that does the same as us makes more sense. We need to be bringing the NZ market to the table and we just aren't.

I don't agree with this as there is no guaranty that a Sydney team is going to get the same ratings as us on Fox, and there is a pretty good chance of ownership issues and financial problems. I think if they drop the nix they will regret it, but on paper you can see the arguments from a purely business point of view.

There is a conflict of interest because Sky is one of the largest employers of media in NZ. No one wants to badmouth one of the only jobs in town.

If you build it, they will come.

Like I said, its a re-brand and nothing more.  Exactly like Telecom rebranding itself to spark and doing a little ad campaign, fundamentally they are the same crap company with crap service.  They are NZ teams because that gets more interest on TV and they are based in NZ, its as simple as that.

Like I said, doesn't affect me, but its a rebrand to generate interest and it worked for them.  So criticize them all you want but as far as I know it frikin worked for them.

I dont know if ti would work for the Nix or not though, if they did a fundamental colour change like the Warriors did then it could kill a little of its fan base here.  But if they somehow appealed to the wider country that could help, or might achieve nothing, fudge knows.

Which is a bit rich coming from the FFA who joined the AFC to develop their football, but they aren't even part of Asia.

Nobody really likes kilbirnie.  flatten it and build a stadium, that has shark tonnes of parking.

Owners, after they get their 10 year extension.  becomes insanely profitable, especially when other teams use it like the Lions.

If you call yourself NZ then go on tour to at least the big cities.

Those teams make no effort, as I said the only Warriors games I've been to in Wellington have been Bulldogs home games.

When? Where? Did they say "we get sh!t crouds"?

New Zealand Phoenix? Rebrand? LOL no fkn way. The first thing that should be done is gaining the four year extension.

Last 2 Warriors games I went to in Wellington were Warriors home games.

I have no issue with a team that only plays in NZ and is the only team in NZ being called the New Zealand *insert names here*.  Where is the Phoenixes tour of all of the major parts of Wellington?  

I just think personally that's a silly argument, that if a team has NZ in the name they must play in all of the major cities.  It would be good if they did, but I dont consider it a must.