No one will drink Roar light beer or Roar soy-latte coffee or eat there Roar Vegan burgers! Or is that Melb Victory?

It’s not about Roar, it’s about what the clubs can now do.

This is a licence to print money for clubs like Victory with large support bases. 

But if Roar don’t open up a Leagues club with Pokies in Logan after this they’ll be mad 

even clubs with small support bases can now make money. 

Lol. Nothing happens, slap in the face. Something happens, slap in the face. 

Please get over it. Being a Lowy bitter can’t be good for your health.

Welcome to the bitters pauly, most on here knew it was only a matter of time

Reap in what you sow.

Your premise makes absolutely no sense....on the one hand you say the FFA will not be around to bail out a struggling club.....however where do you think the FFA got their funds from to bail out those clubs in the past  ?
They got them from all the money they got from the A-League clubs .
Now those clubs themselves will now be getting that money instead of the FFA.
The FFA probably also used Foxtel money .
I can only assume this will be ongoing in the short term .
So the FFA  did not use money it generated to help anyone ...they simply gave back money the A-League had generated and they kept.

I would also contend that now that clubs can control their own intellectual property they will be more inclined to invest money to keep their clubs going and also be more able to entice extra investors if needed.
I see this whole thing making investment in this league far more attractive .
It is common sense ...it is the same as in the normal business world .....already rich people do not invest in someone else's franchise ...they are used to running things themselves and keeping their profits (and/or losses) . 

Interestingly, this now makes the big name marquees more viable as anything with their name/face on it will be going direct to clubs.

Hooray...finally we are starting to move in the right direction towards having a proper football league. Once the second division is up and running...the goal should be to instill pro/rel by the third season.

Putting it off any longer than that in order for HAL clubs to protect their place in the top tier would be counter-productive and the A league might well be a corpse by then.

Let’s hope the A league clubs realise that they will have nothing to protect if the League no longer has a pulse.

Agree. ADP was perfect for marketing but SFC couldn’t commercialise it because FFA owned the SFC brand - imagine if SFC had been able to sell 10,000 special shirts at $50 profit on each, and scarves, and calendars, and mugs, T-Shirts, key rings etc etc 

Exactly, explains why the marketing for Honda on MVFCs part was a bit dour last season. Why would they bother when they earn about 9% of the revenue? 

Um yeah, erm, about that...

A-League owners are expected to pour in $10 million a year to promote the league and sign marquee players and could sell a chunk of the league to outside investors after clinching a deal with Football Federation Australia to privatise the competition.

The deal will result in a much diminished FFA and is set to cause exits of executives such as chief executive David Gallop, who may leave the governing body before his contract ends in November next year.

A-League owners will establish a new body to run prof­essional soccer in Australia under new management while FFA will look after the national teams and development pathways, though it will maintain a 20 per cent share of the A-League and receive annual payments of at least $4.5m from the independent league.


But those payments will not kick in until 2023, under recommendations of an in-principle agreement between the clubs and FFA released yesterday, which also includes the W-League and the youth Y-League.

The deal means the 12 clubs, including expansion teams Wes­tern United FC and Macarthur FC, gain majority control of an asset valued at $80-100m for no upfront payment. But club owners, who have accumulated losses of $350m since the A-League was formed in 2005, say they will deliver strategic plans for the three leagues that will ensure more investment in an effort to arrest sliding attendances and broadcast viewership numbers.

“These recommendations are the foundations for a critically needed evolution and vitalisation,” the billionaire chairman of the Western Sydney Wanderers and the clubs’ association Paul Lederer said.

“Once executed they will create the environment for investment and associated opport­unities that we all want to see.”

In a statement, FFA said “the recommendations will precipitate the injection by the clubs of significant capital in the leagues to enhance the on-field product and bolster their commercial and marketing appeal”.

FFA will emerge after a transition period as a smaller organisation with annual revenue of about $50m, according to sources, compared to $130m last year.

Agreements still have to be struck as to how the league and FFA will split the proceeds of the existing six-year $346m broadcast deal it has with Fox Sports and A-League major sponsor Hyundai, with figures between 82-90 per cent of all commercial deals understood to be demanded by clubs.

The Hyundai deal expires at the end of the upcoming season and FFA is likely to have already commenced negotiations with the car manufacturer on a new deal, as it is with other sponsors.

Otherwise, FFA will receive the annual $4.5m payment from 2023 onwards, plus 10 per cent of the sale of any new club licences or the net profit of the sale of existing clubs.

FFA will also receive 10 per cent of transfer fees any clubs receive from selling players abroad, as part of an assurance from the clubs it will not be worse off from the reorganisation.

It will also maintain a 20 per cent non-diluting but non-voting shareholding in the new league and receive 20 per cent of any funds received should the owners sell some of the league to outside investors to bring in much-need money to invest in marketing, new players and other initiatives.

While some A-League owners, such as Melbourne City’s Abu Dhabi and Chinese-owned parent body City Football Group have considerable funds, others may not have the capacity to inject new funds into the league. That could see owners explore selling some of the league to private equity or a global sports management firm, a strategy believed to have been considered by the owners and FFA.

The in-principle agreement will be finalised by August 1 ahead of a transition period before and potentially during the season, which begins in October.

This is interesting - is this just having clubs have more owners? Like, rather than a single individual owning a club, more consortium's becoming involved? What else could possibly be sold?

Sad sad paulc. It's a shame you're still stuck in the Lowy era. The rest of us see positive and exciting times ahead.

Yup. Nix owners want to sell 40% for example to spread the risk.

The Nix owners don't want to sell 40%, previously they wanted to sell 40% but they don't anymore.

Yes they wanted to sell  the 40% the FFA would not let us use.  Now the Nix can run a Y-league and W-League team hope fully.

Ok. We can still use it as an example though. Divestment isn’t a bad thing. More people in the game.

It's probably the strongest aspect of our code - multiple hands providing cash is better than one. Look at how big and wealthy the Victory is because of it.

By Vince Rugari

July 1, 2019 — 6.33pm
The A-League, W-League and national youth league will be run by an entirely new body. Each of the 12 clubs will have a seat on the new board, along with two FFA representatives and an independent chair. They will call the shots.

It really doesn't matter where the money came from. The fact was that FFA was willing and able to subsidise multiple struggling teams that would have folded without assistance. I doubt the club owners by themselves will show such willingness to keep bailing out CCM or BR. This is the danger of unfettered capitalism. There has to be a central welfare system or safety net to help the less fortunate in times of need.  I just don't see one here, which could be dangerous if this sudden influx of investment you guys are anticipating doesn't eventuate. 

The league will not be attractive to investors unless it shows that it can be profitable. No one will want to buy in with such horrendously low viewing figures and declining attendances. Clubs won't be able to count on the TV money for much longer either, so I just don't where all this cash will come from. You seem to believe that it was the evil FFA keeping money out of football and that now they're gone we'll magically be awash with funds, but that just sounds silly to me. 

Its just gonna be a learning curve for the new commission if a club goes belly up. That's why we need to avoid the Canberra's and Wollongong's. 

Yeah, I disagree completely. If Wollongong were brought in, I might actually start watching it. I completely lost interest once the initial novelty of the league wore off years ago. Now I need a local team to get behind. 

Canberra is the capital city and a very large town which should be able to support a pro football team. There's something irrevocably broken in our sporting culture when cities of 300-500,000 people are considered too small to host a football team. 

This is one of the reasons that pro/rel is needed. If a club is playing above its level, with pro/rel it can fall back to a lower level with lower costs and try to grow from there instead of needing assistance to be propped up, taking on debt, in a level that is beyond their means at that time.

You seem to think that investors will only come for a take of current TV revenue and it is that dependence on TV revenue that holds the league back. Investors will come for player development, partnerships, building brands gaining new markets etc and further down the track to be part of a quality football league with strong TV revenue.

Wellington has about 450,000 people.

Canberra have big money backers behind them. they will be fine. Wollongong don't. They will be a basketcase (like CCM) if they were admitted now. They will need to prove themselves via the second division  

With 8 of the ten existing teams consistently losing money and many failed iterations of clubs behind us, I suggest we are going to find out quite quickly.  In one way it makes sense to have a central sinking fund to manage the health and stability of clubs because under the broadcast agreement teams have to be in certain locations or no $$$.  However, the alternate view is, if I have the financial discipline and business acumen to run a sustainable operation, why should I get less dollars each year to support other teams that don't.  That "tension" will be interesting to watch play out.  Personally, I would strap in because we are in for a bumpy ride.  Given the number of new bids each time there is a licence to give out I think there will be no central fund and it will be Darwin in action.  

Yeah, so does Newcastle with Central Coast even smaller, but in general, the powers that be are extremely hesitant to expand to any region with less than a million people. The FFA even plainly stated it at one point. I suppose they were stung by the Gold Coast and Townsville debacles. 

All the football codes in Australia are very metropolis-centric. Very little room for even relatively large 'regional' cities like Wollongong in modern pro sports. The metrics don't stack up, though I don't understand why. Surely any population centre of over 300,000 is more than large enough to have its own professional team in any sport. I mean, Wollongong is larger than Stoke and Bournemouth combined! Why is the system so broken that such big areas are ignored by pro sports in this country? It frustrates me. 

Wollongong has a nice stadium but no one wants to invest, then you have Tassie that has no stadium and people want to invest. Where do you take your chances? You would go with the money.