|
Footballer
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+xyeah, nothing to see here - if there's anyone you can trust to "put football first", its an American sports marketing firm... Exactly this is a disaster waiting to happen.
Selling control to an American marketing firm??? I thought this was the opposite of what everyone has been driving for over the past 10 years ?!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs? Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The deal with the clubs is a little different as the clubs would be paying a fee back to the FFA every year. In the long run, that could be far more lucrative for the FFA than a once off sale.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay.
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. True, but they are not free to take their IP with them.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. True, but they are not free to take their IP with them. They are. The sticking point would be the participation agreements
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
If the owners continue to oppose global investment, when the foreign investors are lined up, just sign up contracts with them ffa.
Then when the owners theaten to leave, the US entities can come Straight in and buy the clubs outright.
Stuff independence, ffa bring in investment to save the aleague!
Some owners are now the New Lowy/Gallop.
The aleague needs global investment asap or it will stay small fry, No second division along with No eventual pro/rel either, it won't suit their Self Interest!
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs? Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). That’s actually a really good point, AL is a FFA asset at present and giving it away for free would not only be foolish but probably expose directors to negligence. I wonder if this is also one of the sticking points, how much owners have to pay FFA to buy out the AL?
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. Actually, FFA has to sanction the comp otherwise it won’t be recognised by FIFA or AFC.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. Actually, FFA has to sanction the comp otherwise it won’t be recognised by FIFA or AFC. Of course it does but they can’t block clubs without good reason, and there’s very few good reasons to block clubs forming their own competition.
So the FFA can’t block clubs from forming their own competition just because they like running the AL, Otherwise the FFA won’t be recognised by FIFA.
This all played out when the EPL was formed. The English FA and Football League thought they could dictate to the clubs, FIFA reminded them they can’t.
FIFA is very clear - football is organised for the players and their clubs; not for the benefit of Administrators.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. Actually, FFA has to sanction the comp otherwise it won’t be recognised by FIFA or AFC. Of course it does but they can’t block clubs without good reason, and there’s very few good reasons to block clubs forming their own competition.
So the FFA can’t block clubs from forming their own competition just because they like running the AL, Otherwise the FFA won’t be recognised by FIFA.
This all played out when the EPL was formed. The English FA and Football League thought they could dictate to the clubs, FIFA reminded them they can’t.
FIFA is very clear - football is organised for the players and their clubs; not for the benefit of Administrators.
Oh the irony of that last paragraph.
|
|
|
|
|
Footballer
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. Actually, FFA has to sanction the comp otherwise it won’t be recognised by FIFA or AFC. Of course it does but they can’t block clubs without good reason, and there’s very few good reasons to block clubs forming their own competition.
So the FFA can’t block clubs from forming their own competition just because they like running the AL, Otherwise the FFA won’t be recognised by FIFA.
This all played out when the EPL was formed. The English FA and Football League thought they could dictate to the clubs, FIFA reminded them they can’t.
FIFA is very clear - football is organised for the players and their clubs; not for the benefit of Administrators.
Oh the irony of that last paragraph. haha :D
|
|
|
|
|
Feed_The_Brox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
I'm OK with selling a percentage of the AL if it brings in more revenue, and a marketing firm should bring in better marketing ideas... but we need to be worried about the intentions of the potential buyers. Do they have the best interests of Football at heart? You'd think profit or capital growth would be the priority. You would hope that if some of it was sold, it would be a minority stake.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+x+xFurther confirmation that the FFA still own the A League and think they can sell it off There are so many talking points in this article, that's just one of them. For example, if the FFA is trying to sell a half share, presumably for tens of millions of dollars, prior to handing it over to the clubs, does that mean the FFA expects a similar payment from the clubs to take it over? I mean, if the league is worth $100 million, and the FFA is currently able to sell half of it, why on Earth would they hand it over for nothing to the clubs?Doesn't actually make any sense, clearly, you are not going to hand it over for nothing, that would be foolish (from the FFA's perspective). The value is determined by the 11 clubs that make up the competition. They are free to leave and set up their own competition, as English clubs did in forming the EPL, so the FFA don’t have to hand it over, but equally the clubs don’t have to stay. Actually, FFA has to sanction the comp otherwise it won’t be recognised by FIFA or AFC. Of course it does but they can’t block clubs without good reason, and there’s very few good reasons to block clubs forming their own competition.
So the FFA can’t block clubs from forming their own competition just because they like running the AL, Otherwise the FFA won’t be recognised by FIFA.
This all played out when the EPL was formed. The English FA and Football League thought they could dictate to the clubs, FIFA reminded them they can’t.
FIFA is very clear - football is organised for the players and their clubs; not for the benefit of Administrators.
so the old NSL clubs could create their own national comp and FFA cant stop them? dont think so
|
|
|
|