Whats a billion when you've got 10.  ;)

The link below is to a pdf entitled "Structural Overview of German Professional Football".  A large part of the presentation deals with club licensing but the first few pages give details of the relationship and roles of the DFB, League Association and the League operator.  It also details the calculation of the fees the League and clubs pay the DFB and the state associations the clubs operate in.  There are many other documents around that give information on how football works in Germany but this is a good, easy to follow summary.  Its worth noting that the Treaty between the DFB and the League Association mentioned in one of the charts was recently renegotiated and extended for 7 years.

I like the German model as I believe it ties in extremely well with the FIFA Standard Statutes whereas the EPL model doesn't.

http://www.sportbusinesscentre.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/ChristianMueller.pdf

yep

http://footballtoday.news/features/fact-check-sponsor-exodus

I certainly hope we don't adopt  an EPL style setup. It simply isn't sustainable in Australia. 

The DFB model allows for rapid growth if their success is a useful metric.

All-in-all, the final resolution that came out of the CRWG was quite sound.  It calms down the expectations of the radicals and doesn't frighten the conservatives.
The one thing it doesn't do as I far as I can judge is guarantee anybody anything.  In fact, it's arguable that without good-faith negotiation nobody will get anywhere.

We won't know til next year how things are going because there will be a lot of quiet back room lobbying taking place.  Living in interesting times.

That Football Administration is more interesting than the main League tells a story

You possibly haven't realised yet that your interest in the Administration side of things isn't broadly mirrored in the wider community - even in the football community.

However I want to make a point: My enthusiasm for the DFB model hangs on a couple of simple and basic concepts.

Their 50+1 rule requires that the licences are held by real clubs.  I don't know how the DFB define what a real club is but that is a foundation stone of their League.
It means that big pocket investors can't just roll in and start up with a sponsor's name and get a licence.
I genuinely believe it is in the best interest of the A League Clubs to become real clubs.  Some are nearly there anyway.  It could probably be sold to them as some sort of loyalty bonus concept.  Who knows what appeals to them?  It needs to happen formally and irreversibly.

Because sugar-daddys can't just float in, they are able to keep a tight reign on expenditure vs earnings.  This works well as an incentive for individual Clubs to market their product, keeps them solvent and apparently brings the advantages of a salary cap without the fine grained silliness and endless variations that undermine it.

The League is required to play in modern safe stadiums with good facilities.  Talk of moving to suburban shit-holes to save money should die right there.  (As popular as that is with the rabble at the moment).

Not a whole lot of change need in outlook or setup, but it would change the fundamentals of football in this country forever.

Just watching Bathurst coverage and thinking how the split to an independent board (Away from CAMS) has built V8super cars into a thriving International spectator sport, with a dedicated 2nd tier.

Is this model possible to adapt to football

No because football will be fully electric and self playing within 10 years.

Time will tell I guess, however we have no guarantees on either expansion nor P & R.

My hope as always is for a 16 team competition with a second division and in time P & R in time.

We have something like 15 [I think] expressions of interest to join.

I have no idea if the new board can mandate as part of the licence agreement FFA will give an independent A-League that both expansion of the A-League and P & R need to take place.

To date the A-League clubs have refused requests from the media to offer their intentions on the matter.

IMO the big test of the new board will in the key requirements by FFA for an independently run A-League.

I think it's in the interest of both the state feds and the PFA to have more professional clubs. Whereas it seems a number of A-League clubs want to recover their investment, I just can't see the Nix wanting P & R as once regulated its difficult to see them making a come back and the current rugby loving owners do want their investment back.

Interesting and hopefully fruitful times ahead. 

Lets all hope for the best possible outcome.

Nix's owners where on sports radio NZ and stated that new licences for all clubs were to be written up when it becomes independent, Nix will be given a 20 year deal just like every other Aussie club including ACL qualifying. 

@ nomates

They can’t know any of that.

First, the working group has to decide the model.

Secondly, the new Congress has to vote it through. .

 that's not the issue the issue is we have just gone through two to three years of civil war that was for more than for the control of A-League revenue it was for a new teams and P N R .

Yeah there was no talk of new teams or P/R just on our future going forward "IF" A-League becomes independent.

ACL qualifying is up to the AFC, not the FFA, regardless of who is in charge of the latter. 

Entry Manual for AFC Club Competitions 2017-2020, Section 3, Clause 5:

http://www.the-afc.com/afc/documents/PdfFiles/entry-manual-afc-club-competitions-2017-2020-33728

There'll be no change in Phoenix's eligibility, and indeed if we go to 12 teams they'll be the reason we don't get four slots, which is what we should already have going off our ranking.

Is the deal of handing over $3m a year to a bunch of Kiwis in a windy oval with two blokes and a sheep watching worth giving up an ACL spot for Australian teams?

They don't even know who will be on the FFA board. Nice try though.

But they will have a good idea of how an independent A-League will be structured!

The clubs no doubt know how they want it to be structured but they certainly don't know whether they can convince the rest of the people on the NLWG to agree to that.  Remember also that the restructure will require a change to the constitution and that means a 75% vote of the members eligible to vote on the resolution and with the clubs and PFA agreeing not to be involved in the vote its almost certain that the clubs will have to accept a compromise.

I reckon any comprises will be relating to the fees paid back to the FFA. I don't think there will be many compromises on the actual structure. I reckon much of the bulk of the the details would already be agreed upon in principle, hence why the vote was unanimous. I reckon this change will happen relatively promptly with very little in the way of push back from anyone. 

There is nothing in the NLWG resolution that gives any indication that a structure has been agreed in principle, however, there are many issues raised in it that need to be resolved in order to determine a suitable governance structure, to detail the relationship to the FFA and to sort out what contribution the Professional Leagues should make to the wider operation of football.  About half of the people on the NLWG have not previously been involved in the negotiations on the CRWG so how the NLWG determinations finally come out is anyone's guess at this stage.

Obviously I'm just making assumptions here, however with talk of the independence being finalised in March 2019, a lot of core issues would have definitely been discussed and negotiated already (behind closed doors of course). Not a lot of time between now and March, especially seeing as the new board won't be in place until next month. If that March target is to be met, a lot of people would already be on the same page.

APFCA - The future as we see it

After reading that, the FFA are a massive failure.

Any new rumours over there?

11 days til deadline day. 

there's no reason why this couldnt happen.  optus starts to look good with that on top of their current roster.

it could be so budget as well -  single camera and a couple commentators to start if off. 

Can Optus produce the content? (i.e. have the cameras etc)

will the new board give us a shorter a off season? 

@ MelbCityGuy

The new board are proposing a 16 team/30 round competition with international breaks so in theory it will be a month longer.

The inhibitor of course is fox who want a shorter season, not longer.