|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
I like it the crest looks like it may have been designed by the same minimalist mob that brutalized Juventus... Would look great on the white away kit, sort of like a retro Hellas logo minus the soccer ball and stars :) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thekingmb
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Satisfied with the name and kit - simple but professional.
|
|
|
|
|
alvn1
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
Still intend to use "black nights" as a nickname. Thought they would try to distance themselves as far as possible from "knights" lol
|
|
|
|
|
Veritas
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 229,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
Club name is Auckland FC
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs. When the FFA and now the APL OWN the clubs IP, their name, their website, their actuall identity that is EXACTLY what they are a franchise of business run by a corporation.... and they have paid a lfranchsee license fee for the honour of doing so. Perth Glory (so sad that they had to sell their IP to get into the Aleague) is not different than Michelle's Patisserie... If head office say "sell this", then they "sell that". Understand, but what you call something and what it actually is are two different things. I have a background in advertising... Perception isn't everything. For example, could FFA have mandated each entity established clubrooms with bars as a condition of entry? I guess they could have if Lowy wasn't just interested in the corporate facilities so that his investors could make their ROI instead of giving a shit about club culture and the pleb fans. Doesnt matter what you or I call them, fact is they are run as satellite branches of "head office" and cant deviate outside of their franchise agreement even if that means running them into the ground. It is making the MLS owners a bucketload of monmey and FFA and now APl see this as the purpose of football in this country .... making them money... Apparently the new "commish" thinks the Aleague should be a development league now, so the clubs can make money from transfer fees... how revolutionary :P Clive was a fruitloop but he at least had a point about franchising... he would have tried every gimmick under the sun to make his club strong but wasnt allowed to because of the franchise license... Just like the guy with the "Jims Mowing" trailer not being allowed to paint his trailer neon pink... or the McDonald's franchisee being able to buy lettuce and potatoes from the farmer around the block from him to save costs... its all dictated to them..... "football but not as you know it" indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
Coverdale
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. Most sensible statement in ages
|
|
|
|
|
Midfielder
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. Yep and I personally never, ever buy from fast food franchises. Blanket rule. I love a sunburnt country A land set in the Southern Seas A vast enormous quarry To serve the pleasure of the Chinese We are vastly independent and it fills our hearts with pride To guzzle Coke a Cola and eat Kentucky Fried
|
|
|
|
|
bohemia
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. They brought in a 15 million fee. Can you remember where this figure came from ? Various numbers get thrown around. Saw 15 million but can't remember exactly where. This article puts it at 18 million but lumps Canberra into that, so maybe an average of the two? Who knows https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/a-league-expansion-talks-cools-as-interest-in-16-team-competition-wanes/KWOT2SPMSFF6XMXMPCZR2HRMWY/ It was $25 million from memory. This was Danny and Garcia's pipe dream. All reports since akl were confirmed have consistently said they didn't get the asking price.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs. When the FFA and now the APL OWN the clubs IP, their name, their website, their actuall identity that is EXACTLY what they are a franchise of business run by a corporation.... and they have paid a lfranchsee license fee for the honour of doing so. Perth Glory (so sad that they had to sell their IP to get into the Aleague) is not different than Michelle's Patisserie... If head office say "sell this", then they "sell that". Understand, but what you call something and what it actually is are two different things. I have a background in advertising... Perception isn't everything. For example, could FFA have mandated each entity established clubrooms with bars as a condition of entry? Fuck SwiftKey... Perception IS everything
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs. When the FFA and now the APL OWN the clubs IP, their name, their website, their actuall identity that is EXACTLY what they are a franchise of business run by a corporation.... and they have paid a lfranchsee license fee for the honour of doing so. Perth Glory (so sad that they had to sell their IP to get into the Aleague) is not different than Michelle's Patisserie... If head office say "sell this", then they "sell that". Understand, but what you call something and what it actually is are two different things. I have a background in advertising... Perception isn't everything. For example, could FFA have mandated each entity established clubrooms with bars as a condition of entry?
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs. When the FFA and now the APL OWN the clubs IP, their name, their website, their actuall identity that is EXACTLY what they are a franchise of business run by a corporation.... and they have paid a lfranchsee license fee for the honour of doing so. Perth Glory (so sad that they had to sell their IP to get into the Aleague) is not different than Michelle's Patisserie... If head office say "sell this", then they "sell that". The weird thing is that all of the A-League clubs and league trademarks are still listed as being owned by Football Australia. About 7 years ago, the company I work at purchased another company. I remember one of the key things that happened was going through the process of assigning a new owner to a couple of trademarks the other company had (absolute pain in the arse from memory). The only trademarks owned by APL are related to themselves, keepup and the 'A' logo which isn't actually registered as being the A-League logo but rather just an 'A' logo. Seems very odd to me that it hasn't happened with the AL clubs and league. Maybe there is just some licensing agreement with Football Australia and the clubs/APL.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs. When the FFA and now the APL OWN the clubs IP, their name, their website, their actuall identity that is EXACTLY what they are a franchise of business run by a corporation.... and they have paid a lfranchsee license fee for the honour of doing so. Perth Glory (so sad that they had to sell their IP to get into the Aleague) is not different than Michelle's Patisserie... If head office say "sell this", then they "sell that".
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. I think that using the term franchise was a huge mistake. There must have been a way FAA could have situated them as clubs.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space. Yep and I personally never, ever buy from fast food franchises. Blanket rule.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American. I wonder why new dawners get so aggravated over the term though.... If the actual owners see it as buying into a franchise why are the customer insulted... People visit Mcdonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut all the time. They know there is much healthier, tastier, better food options elsewhere but they like the quick, one size fits all convenience of the franchise... Sure its not for everyone but plenty are content to live in this space.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise"..... Yeah, I detest the word too. The original ugly American.
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. You don't know that and that's not the point. Licenses shouldn't go to who has the most money otherwise give one to Bali or Singapore. Also its likely Canberra will be next cab off the rank. I live in the Gold Coast region. Decent population, decent stadium. To say I am was disappointed that Gold Coast wasn't in the discussion is a huge understatement. Like you, I would much prefer an Australian option, but there was never any suggestion that the money was there for an Australian option. Really, Canberra and the Gold Coast are all that's left here. Anyone who suggests Tasmania, a place I know very, very well, really does not understand them context down there. The economy is a shambles and they are are losing people to the mainland - and there will be no government support. That's the trouble, Muz. We have a small population and with Canberra in, the only vacancy isn't Gold Coast. There is no realistic capacity for second teams in Perth, Brisbane, or Adelaide. We need more teams, and if New Zealand is the only option, sobeit. *the only vacancy is Gold Coast
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. You don't know that and that's not the point. Licenses shouldn't go to who has the most money otherwise give one to Bali or Singapore. Also its likely Canberra will be next cab off the rank. I live in the Gold Coast region. Decent population, decent stadium. To say I am was disappointed that Gold Coast wasn't in the discussion is a huge understatement. Like you, I would much prefer an Australian option, but there was never any suggestion that the money was there for an Australian option. Really, Canberra and the Gold Coast are all that's left here. Anyone who suggests Tasmania, a place I know very, very well, really does not understand them context down there. The economy is a shambles and they are are losing people to the mainland - and there will be no government support. That's the trouble, Muz. We have a small population and with Canberra in, the only vacancy isn't Gold Coast. There is no realistic capacity for second teams in Perth, Brisbane, or Adelaide. We need more teams, and if New Zealand is the only option, sobeit.
|
|
|
|
|
robbos
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. Exactly we are trying to grow the league & as we see with Canberra & Newcastle, we are limited in Australia. Apart from the 900 clubs that are already here With $25 million?
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. i don't think this is true - have wellington brought scale? nobody cares less about them, this year they are only getting half decent crowds. TV figures are not good either I'm with muz, they actually are a drag on our professional football set up If we have a Full Pyramid that splits in to regions lower down I have no problems with New Zealand being one of them
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. Exactly we are trying to grow the league & as we see with Canberra & Newcastle, we are limited in Australia. Apart from the 900 clubs that are already here
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. i don't think this is true - have wellington brought scale? nobody cares less about them, this year they are only getting half decent crowds. TV figures are not good either I'm with muz, they actually are a drag on our professional football set up
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. They brought in a 15 million fee. Can you remember where this figure came from ? Various numbers get thrown around. Saw 15 million but can't remember exactly where. This article puts it at 18 million but lumps Canberra into that, so maybe an average of the two? Who knows https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/a-league-expansion-talks-cools-as-interest-in-16-team-competition-wanes/KWOT2SPMSFF6XMXMPCZR2HRMWY/ It was $25 million from memory.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. You don't know that and that's not the point. Licenses shouldn't go to who has the most money otherwise give one to Bali or Singapore. Also its likely Canberra will be next cab off the rank.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
robbos
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option. Exactly we are trying to grow the league & as we see with Canberra & Newcastle, we are limited in Australia.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xGoooooo Auckland Franchise.... yay No competing tradition as in Aus, mono. You can suspend hostilities. No hostilities Charlied, sorry if it came across that way.. Just pointing out they are happy to call themselves a "franchise".....
|
|
|
|
|
Booney
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 674,
Visits: 0
|
After all it is the world game .
|
|
|
|
|
charlied
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI love how we have to be a crutch for NZ football...do not know what they bring to us (and don't say the peanuts for the NZ tv deal) Couldn't agree more. Boot them both out. Muz, I usually agree with you but not on this. I lived in and near Auckland for 10 years and I recall the excitement when the Knights were launched. Attendances were decent too until the team morphed into the worst pro side I've ever seen. There's a commercially decent size football public in Auckland and reckon this new club will bring a lot of positives to the A League. We need scale, and Auckland delivers a city of 2 million people. Mate good for you and good for New Zealand. I'm glad you're excited but I'm coming at it from the angle of they bring nothing to Australian football and shouldn't be in our comp. They're taking up professional spots that should be going to Australian footballers. Additionally they bring nothing in the way of revenue and they're a drain on Australian teams. Like I said good for you but if it were up to me I'd bring 3 Australian sides in tomorrow that met the criteria. What they deliver is scale... A bigger competition. That money is was not available for an Australian option.
|
|
|
|