Melbourne Heart FC buy out - Man City, Melbourne City FC, etc.

[Heart_fan]

^^ I think you will find the survey and any focus groups they may be conducting may be all the consultation they will do. Consultation is a funny thing really, as people never feel that enough is done, especially if their viewpoint is not the accepted outcome.

 

I tthink they will focus on the rest of the population that don't attend games to work out their drivers, as they are trying to unlock the market potential.

 

Lets me honest, we currently get 5-8k at best for most matches, which is a decent core, but will that be enough to stop them changing their decision if 60% say they will still support the club anyway? If the rest of their research says that they will geberate substantially increased fan bases in coming years with their changes, they will chase the best potential return.

[belaguttman]

Surely the point of difference new members would be the ones who currently refuse to attend because the team plays in red and white but would be there in a flash if they played in light blue. I'd be surprised if there were many of those. All the rest will be attracted irrespective of whether the team plays in red and white or light blue

[jw1739]

Bela, the reason only 5,000-8,000 people attend Heart matches in a city of nearly 4 million is nothing whatsoever to do with our name or our home colours, and it's nothing to do with who owns the franchise. It's because for four seasons we have played crappy football with crappy results and have finished in the lower half of the table every season. Spectators have not been given what they were promised - and that's not just under JA either - and reserved seat adult memberships are very expensive in comparison with other A-League clubs. In short, Heart has offered poor entertainment value and as stated on this forum so many times we have been the epitome of mediocrity, both on and off the field.

[belaguttman]

jw, you and I agree on this, and likely so do the non-attending 25,000 potential attendees.Heart's Friday night games on SBS have been more effective than mozzie repellant, we've played spectacularly poorly in all of them. If our  'quality' of play during those games emerged us they hardly did anything to attract interested casual viewers. Colours are irrelevant to this.

[Rellum]

Bela, the reason only 5,000-8,000 people attend Heart matches in a city of nearly 4 million is nothing whatsoever to do with our name or our home colours, and it's nothing to do with who owns the franchise. It's because for four seasons we have played crappy football with crappy results and have finished in the lower half of the table every season. Spectators have not been given what they were promised - and that's not just under JA either - and reserved seat adult memberships are very expensive in comparison with other A-League clubs. In short, Heart has offered poor entertainment value and as stated on this forum so many times we have been the epitome of mediocrity, both on and off the field.

How does all that contradict what Bela is saying?

[Semper Cor]

If the colours do change, for who’s benefit do they change, Melbourne or Manchester?

 

IMO this is the reason why the issue of potential colour change so contentious, because the motivation for doing so is very questionable.

 

In my mind the benefit will be for Manchester.  Meaning this decision will signify to the rest of the world that Melbourne Heart or City (should the name change go ahead) will only serve as a Manchester City outpost, a proxy if you will, existing only to further their brand awareness and market penetrability through sky blue at the expense of Melbourne football and its’ independence.  A clear representation of everything that is wrong with modern football.

 

We should be known in Australia, Asia and beyond as THE club from Melbourne, not that club Man. City own in Melbourne which we are in danger of becoming if we go sky blue.  Any decisions regarding Melbourne Heart (City) needs to be done in the best interests of Melbourne Heart (City) not Manchester City, if not Melbourne will truly have a hollow identity.

 

For me it comes down to what Manchester City value and respect.  If they value and respect football for what it means and stands, like Heart fans and most football fans globally, then there will be NO change in colours.  It will be through value and respect that will bind the clubs of Manchester, New York and Melbourne, not the colour of sky blue.

 

However if they do change, it will purely be in the interests of Manchester City business at the expense of one of the few escapisms in life that has any real passion and substance.  And football without passion is like a broken pencil – pointless.

 

The truth is with the backing of Manchester City, I believe Melbourne Heart (City) does have the potential to become one of the more successful sporting organisations not only in the A-League but in Australian sport and also the wider Asia-Pacific region.  But its’ roots need to be planted in Melbourne, not Manchester, and they need to be Red & White.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Semper Cor

[HEARTinator]

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

[Torn Asunder]

#keepTheRedAndWhite

Good blog and twitter campaign on Red White Unite

http://www.redwhiteunite.com/keep-the-red-and-white/

[Torn Asunder]

Stay positive (for now anyway) people. Still no official word from the club so things are only hypothetical.

Let's bring the colour to our last game of the season and show the passion for the red and white

[moops]

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

There could be a number of reasons.

Australia's strong economy, cultural similarities, youth development being expanded into another country (offering another pool of players), a similar club (play style and philosophy) to loan players too or from , brand exposure and enhanced reputation, a smallish league with great potential, with the FFA putting a lot into the NC it offers another network of ideas into youth development.

Just to mention a few.

[HEARTinator]

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

There could be a number of reasons.

Australia's strong economy, cultural similarities, youth development being expanded into another country (offering another pool of players), a similar club (play style and philosophy) to loan players too or from , brand exposure and enhanced reputation, a smallish league with great potential, with the FFA putting a lot into the NC it offers another network of ideas into youth development.

Just to mention a few. If they accept that the investment is a money losing venture, at least in the short to med term, but that in the longer term some of the benefits you mention may materialise then I can go along with that. They must have made the call that the investment they make here is of such a minor amount compared to their yearly budget that even if things don't go according to plan it hasn't set them back. If things work out then great.

[silva10]

 

 

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

There could be a number of reasons.

Australia's strong economy, cultural similarities, youth development being expanded into another country (offering another pool of players), a similar club (play style and philosophy) to loan players too or from , brand exposure and enhanced reputation, a smallish league with great potential, with the FFA putting a lot into the NC it offers another network of ideas into youth development.

Just to mention a few. If they accept that the investment is a money losing venture, at least in the short to med term, but that in the longer term some of the benefits you mention may materialise then I can go along with that. They must have made the call that the investment they make here is of such a minor amount compared to their yearly budget that even if things don't go according to plan it hasn't set them back. If things work out then great.

 

 

Just would like to say that the owners don't do short term. Of course money will probably be lost int he short term just like at City. However, they will ensure the investment in Hearts will be successful long term.

 

I sincerely hope that all you Heart fans will be still here when that success arrives.

[moops]

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

There could be a number of reasons.

Australia's strong economy, cultural similarities, youth development being expanded into another country (offering another pool of players), a similar club (play style and philosophy) to loan players too or from , brand exposure and enhanced reputation, a smallish league with great potential, with the FFA putting a lot into the NC it offers another network of ideas into youth development.

Just to mention a few.If they accept that the investment is a money losing venture, at least in the short to med term, but that in the longer term some of the benefits you mention may materialise then I can go along with that. They must have made the call that the investment they make here is of such a minor amount compared to their yearly budget that even if things don't go according to plan it hasn't set them back. If things work out then great.

Just would like to say that the owners don't do short term. Of course money will probably be lost int he short term just like at City. However, they will ensure the investment in Hearts will be successful long term.

I sincerely hope that all you Heart fans will be still here when that success arrives.

So do I, or something terribly interesting has happened

But thanks for the well wishes.

[jw1739]

 

Apart from the commentary concerning colours and name, I don't get why MCFC are investing in the HAL. In New York and the US I can see big upside based on population size, latino, Asian and Euro influences, and a growing interest in MLS. But in Oz with 23M people, where is the business sense in the HeartFC investment? Doesn't make sense unless Lowy conned them into it so as to put a stop to the SMFC destabilisation of our club. Long shot and off the mark I know but the investment doesn't make sense IMO.

There could be a number of reasons.

Australia's strong economy, cultural similarities, youth development being expanded into another country (offering another pool of players), a similar club (play style and philosophy) to loan players too or from , brand exposure and enhanced reputation, a smallish league with great potential, with the FFA putting a lot into the NC it offers another network of ideas into youth development.

Just to mention a few.

 

It's about building a global network of football interests with the ultimate intent of benefit to all the constituent parts. We are the East Asia part, or at least the first step into that Confederation. I would expect in time to see the network expanded to include South America, Africa and West Asia (although the last named might not be considered necessary as that is where all the cash comes from anyway). It's about player and coach pathways, scouting young players and their development, managing the mental and physical aspects of being a footballer etc. etc.

 

We were a sitting duck for a change in ownership. The franchise system makes ownership change very easy, because the "shares" are so tightly held - sometimes by a single person - in our case by a group of six or so. And we were an under-performing organization in what is a huge potential market, and an organization that already had the desired basics in place. Without harping on the issues that are causing so much angst I am looking at what will happen in the next few seasons as a metamorphosis rather than the end of something and the start of something else. Personally I find that helpful.

[MHFCRC]

Red and white is necessary. Initial excitement at the purchase has boiled down to concern and worry that this isn't going to be the same club I've fallen in love with.

Spent about half an hour talking with mates about the last 4 years, and whilst I haven't experienced as much as the Y-Side core there's still plenty of stories. From my first game being the Wellington 2-1 win at home to the first derby the following week to miserable days with 2,000 others watching us get done by 10 man Newcastle to standing in the pouring rain after a 2 hour train trip for a 9.30 start against Central Coast.. right through to a 4-0 derby win this year.

Pretty solid memories for a team who's on field success has been at the bare minimum.

I'm just not sure things would be the same at all, and I know the passion of many others, including myself would be dwindled.

[Rellum]

Here is an article from Lynch that explains perfectly where the colour change stories are coming from.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/no-bigname-influx-from-city-planned-as-heart-looks-to-rebuild-20140404-zqqf9.html

 

While most in Australia assume it is inevitable that the club will call itself Melbourne City and change its strip to sky blue, in line with City's and its soon-to-be-established MLS team New York City, Marwood merely says that no final decisions have been made.

 

 

[HEARTinator]

Here is an article from Lynch that explains perfectly where the colour change stories are coming from.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/no-bigname-influx-from-city-planned-as-heart-looks-to-rebuild-20140404-zqqf9.html

 

While most in Australia assume it is inevitable that the club will call itself Melbourne City and change its strip to sky blue, in line with City's and its soon-to-be-established MLS team New York City, Marwood merely says that no final decisions have been made.

Interesting that Lynch was over in the UK as a guest of MCFC. Looks like they're buttering up our local journos with some tidbits of information ahead of the end of HAL9 and the re-launch of HeartFC under the MCFC. Happy that MCFC may come next year rather than a half baked team this year with players missing because of the WC. Also it gives us a year to get our act together.

[M13]

There´s usually a board meeting before the end of the season to rubberstamp the goals for the coming season.. or to change the course like when Mancini got the sack in favour of Pellegrini.
There´s also a little after season top brass meetup in Abu Dhabi hosted by Sheikh Mansour and the UAE sponsors.

 

But what everyone is waiting for is the annual TV-interview with Khaldoon (CFG Chairman) with the Q&A

All of this usually is in May..

[Heart_fan]

If the club can find a compromise to keep the red and white, it would be a great thing to do.

 

Keeping the existing fans on side would at least let the club build on a base, but at the end of the day, they have the research, are crunching the numbers and ultimately paid $11.25m as a consotium to buy the club.It is their money at play, so I am sure they are trying to ascertain what moves it can make to make this club successful.

[Shahanga]

Leaving aside the emotion for a sec, all the practical reasons point to retaining red and white, as there is really no sensible business reason to change the colours.  The problem is, in my working life, i am sorry to say i have seen so many bad decisions made on nebulous pretexts like "brand" and "feel", that I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen here as well. 

 

The business landscape:

• Heart currently has about 7000 members and a further satellite group of fans (don't know how many- maybe the same amount).
• Melbourne has about 4M people and has a very pro sport culture
• There are probably 100K football fans in Melbourne who don't closely follow either A League Club.

 

Man City want to attract that 100K (or however many it is).  The problem is I know a number who would fit into that category.  Some are very anti- A league simply because the standard isn't as good as "insert top flight European league here".  They will be tough nuts to crack.  Crowd, fan and membership growth will need to be incremental, underpinned by strong on field performances and back up by good community work.  To do this you will need a good solid membership base (which we currently have).

 

The other thread shows that between about 40-50% of current members will sever all ties with the club if they adopt sky blue.  I find it hard to believe that these 3000 or so members will be instantly replaced by Australian Man City supporters.  Why? well:

• Man City doesn't have that many supporters in Melbourne.  In terms of numbers down under, they simply aren't a big club.  That's not being negative, just stating the facts.  The clubs with the large followings are Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal.  
• if existing Melbourne based Man City fans were keen on the A League, they'd already have a club.  Might be us, might be the tards.  If it's the tards can't see them changing and for those that might, there would surely be 5 Man Utd fans who went the other way, so we would be net losers.

So a jersey colour change could set crowd and fan numbers back so far it would take several years to recover.  I can't see it giving any business benefit at all, apart from allowing someone to talk ad nauseum about a "consistent marketing strategy" or other clap trap that would fail the first logic test put on it. 

 

Let's hope Man City management is staffed by practical football business people, not marketing bull artists.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Shahanga

[Tommykins]

Leaving aside the emotion for a sec, all the practical reasons point to retaining red and white, as there is really no sensible business reason to change the colours.  The problem is, in my working life, i am sorry to save i have seen so many bad decisions made on nebulous pretexts like "brand" and "feel", that I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen here as well. 

 

The business landscape:

Heart currently has about 7000 members and a further satellite group of fans (don't know how many- maybe the same amount).

Melbourne has about 4M people and has a very pro sport culture

There are probably 100K football fans in Melbourne who don't closely follow either A League Club.

 

Man City want to attract that 100K (or however many it is).  The problem is I know a number who would fit into that category.  Some are very anti- A league simply because the standard isn't as good as "insert top flight European league here".  They will be tough nuts to crack.  Crowd, fan and membership growth will need to be incremental, underpinned by strong on field performances and back up by good community work.  To do this you will need a good solid membership base (which we currently have).

 

The other thread shows that between about 40-50% of current members will sever all ties with the club if they adopt sky blue.  I find it hard to believe that these 3000 or so members will be instantly replaced by Australian Man City supporters.  Why? well:

• Man City doesn't have that many supporters in Melbourne.  In terms of numbers down under, they simply aren't a big club.  That's not being negative, just stating the facts.  The clubs with the large followings are Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal.  
• if existing Melbourne based Man City fans were keen on the A League, they'd already have a club.  Might be us, might be the tards.  If it's the tards can't see them changing and for those that might, there would surely be 5 Man Utd fans who went the other way, so we would be net losers.

So a jersey colour change could set crowd and fan numbers back so far it would take several years to recover.  I can't see it giving any business benefit at all, apart from allowing someone to talk ad nauseum about a "consistent marketing strategy" or other clap trap that would fail the first logic test put on it. 

 

Let's hope Man City management is staffed by practical football business people, not marketing bull artists.

 

This is based on people who inhabit this forum, which is unlikely to be a true cross section of the community, but it's a well made point.

 

I'll play devils advocate for a second, because the following point was made to me by a friend who occasionally comes to Heart games, but doesn't find himself entrenched in this as most of us. He postulated out that even if we lost say, 2 to 3 thousand supporters as a result of a name/colour change that if we had a successful season (his parameters for this were top two or three finish), that you'd make these supporter numbers back in the blink of an eye, especially if the success was built upon football which was easy on the eyes, coupled with a few marquee players. He included himself in this group.

 

Most (?) interestingly, he's a die-hard Liverpool supporter and happily included himself in the group of people which would jump of board. Now while its easy to say that any supporter which will only come if we're winning or playing a certain way is fair-weather, but it's really not the case, you need to draw these people in first, we've already got a very transient membership base and bringing success would seem to be the best way (especially from a business point of view) to turn these people into rusted on supporters.

 

As a result, if you weighed everything up, its likely that Manchester City feel like they'd be alienating a few, to gain many, in terms of overall support.

[Begbie]

 

Leaving aside the emotion for a sec, all the practical reasons point to retaining red and white, as there is really no sensible business reason to change the colours.  The problem is, in my working life, i am sorry to save i have seen so many bad decisions made on nebulous pretexts like "brand" and "feel", that I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen here as well. 

 

The business landscape:

Heart currently has about 7000 members and a further satellite group of fans (don't know how many- maybe the same amount).

Melbourne has about 4M people and has a very pro sport culture

There are probably 100K football fans in Melbourne who don't closely follow either A League Club.

 

Man City want to attract that 100K (or however many it is).  The problem is I know a number who would fit into that category.  Some are very anti- A league simply because the standard isn't as good as "insert top flight European league here".  They will be tough nuts to crack.  Crowd, fan and membership growth will need to be incremental, underpinned by strong on field performances and back up by good community work.  To do this you will need a good solid membership base (which we currently have).

 

The other thread shows that between about 40-50% of current members will sever all ties with the club if they adopt sky blue.  I find it hard to believe that these 3000 or so members will be instantly replaced by Australian Man City supporters.  Why? well:

• Man City doesn't have that many supporters in Melbourne.  In terms of numbers down under, they simply aren't a big club.  That's not being negative, just stating the facts.  The clubs with the large followings are Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal.  
• if existing Melbourne based Man City fans were keen on the A League, they'd already have a club.  Might be us, might be the tards.  If it's the tards can't see them changing and for those that might, there would surely be 5 Man Utd fans who went the other way, so we would be net losers.

So a jersey colour change could set crowd and fan numbers back so far it would take several years to recover.  I can't see it giving any business benefit at all, apart from allowing someone to talk ad nauseum about a "consistent marketing strategy" or other clap trap that would fail the first logic test put on it. 

 

Let's hope Man City management is staffed by practical football business people, not marketing bull artists.

 

This is based on people who inhabit this forum, which is unlikely to be a true cross section of the community, but it's a well made point.

 

I'll play devils advocate for a second, because the following point was made to me by a friend who occasionally comes to Heart games, but doesn't find himself entrenched in this as most of us. He postulated out that even if we lost say, 2 to 3 thousand supporters as a result of a name/colour change that if we had a successful season (his parameters for this were top two or three finish), that you'd make these supporter numbers back in the blink of an eye, especially if the success was built upon football which was easy on the eyes, coupled with a few marquee players. He included himself in this group.

 

Most (?) interestingly, he's a die-hard Liverpool supporter and happily included himself in the group of people which would jump of board. Now while its easy to say that any supporter which will only come if we're winning or playing a certain way is fair-weather, but it's really not the case, you need to draw these people in first, we've already got a very transient membership base and bringing success would seem to be the best way (especially from a business point of view) to turn these people into rusted on supporters.

 

As a result, if you weighed everything up, its likely that Manchester City feel like they'd be alienating a few, to gain many, in terms of overall support.

 

Not to mention the worldwide support and publicity we'd gain from Manchester and New York alone as a result of being a part of the 'City blue' brand.

 

There are also many fans of the 'EPL' who don't support one particular team and would no doubt love to sign up with a club with such affiliations to the prem.

 

A loss of 3500 paying members would equate roughly to losses of $1m-$1.5m per season, which would barely register on City's bank statements.

 

I'd argue that it would be poor business judgement not to change the colours. (not saying I necessarily want this to happen) 

[Shahanga]

 

Leaving aside the emotion for a sec, all the practical reasons point to retaining red and white, as there is really no sensible business reason to change the colours.  The problem is, in my working life, i am sorry to save i have seen so many bad decisions made on nebulous pretexts like "brand" and "feel", that I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen here as well. 

 

The business landscape:

Heart currently has about 7000 members and a further satellite group of fans (don't know how many- maybe the same amount).

Melbourne has about 4M people and has a very pro sport culture

There are probably 100K football fans in Melbourne who don't closely follow either A League Club.

 

Man City want to attract that 100K (or however many it is).  The problem is I know a number who would fit into that category.  Some are very anti- A league simply because the standard isn't as good as "insert top flight European league here".  They will be tough nuts to crack.  Crowd, fan and membership growth will need to be incremental, underpinned by strong on field performances and back up by good community work.  To do this you will need a good solid membership base (which we currently have).

 

The other thread shows that between about 40-50% of current members will sever all ties with the club if they adopt sky blue.  I find it hard to believe that these 3000 or so members will be instantly replaced by Australian Man City supporters.  Why? well:

• Man City doesn't have that many supporters in Melbourne.  In terms of numbers down under, they simply aren't a big club.  That's not being negative, just stating the facts.  The clubs with the large followings are Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal.  
• if existing Melbourne based Man City fans were keen on the A League, they'd already have a club.  Might be us, might be the tards.  If it's the tards can't see them changing and for those that might, there would surely be 5 Man Utd fans who went the other way, so we would be net losers.

So a jersey colour change could set crowd and fan numbers back so far it would take several years to recover.  I can't see it giving any business benefit at all, apart from allowing someone to talk ad nauseum about a "consistent marketing strategy" or other clap trap that would fail the first logic test put on it. 

 

Let's hope Man City management is staffed by practical football business people, not marketing bull artists.

 

This is based on people who inhabit this forum, which is unlikely to be a true cross section of the community, but it's a well made point.

 

I'll play devils advocate for a second, because the following point was made to me by a friend who occasionally comes to Heart games, but doesn't find himself entrenched in this as most of us. He postulated out that even if we lost say, 2 to 3 thousand supporters as a result of a name/colour change that if we had a successful season (his parameters for this were top two or three finish), that you'd make these supporter numbers back in the blink of an eye, especially if the success was built upon football which was easy on the eyes, coupled with a few marquee players. He included himself in this group.

 

Most (?) interestingly, he's a die-hard Liverpool supporter and happily included himself in the group of people which would jump of board. Now while its easy to say that any supporter which will only come if we're winning or playing a certain way is fair-weather, but it's really not the case, you need to draw these people in first, we've already got a very transient membership base and bringing success would seem to be the best way (especially from a business point of view) to turn these people into rusted on supporters.

 

As a result, if you weighed everything up, its likely that Manchester City feel like they'd be alienating a few, to gain many, in terms of overall support.

 

But those new people would still come if you played in red and white (following your argument) , so you'd just be knocking 3k (plus those you lose in the outer fan group) off your starting point.  Why would you do that?

[Tommykins]

Because ultimately, 3k lower starting point, versus an entirely visible, united brand is probably a worthy trade, I imagine.

[cadete]

I doubt the New Club would lose over 3k of current Heart fans...

As Tesla pointed out its not like anybody involved in the Offical Red and White Campaign has signed anything permanent like a Stat Dec or even a Petition commiting to never ever supporting the "Sky Blue of Melbourne City".

In fact judging by the way our crowd attendances react to performances.

A New Club could also actually gain 3k fans straight off by just starting a Season well with a strong opening month of results...

Something Heart has always failed to do.

Winning games of Football could change a lot of People's minds... as could the prospect of no football and not enjoying game day with their mates anymore.

Edited April 7, 2014 by cadete

[NewConvert]

What I don't get is why people who support an English club would dump Heart if they switched over to a shade of blue. Perhaps because I have no tie to the UK or European continent. As an Essendon supporter I actually drink at a pub that is owned by the Carlton football club. So whats the problem???

[Tbitm]

Because ultimately, 3k lower starting point, versus an entirely visible, united brand is probably a worthy trade, I imagine.

that's fine, however they can't say that they are a "team for Melbourne" or a teams that "listens to its fans", something they have claimed they aim to achieve with this club.

[KSK_47]

Because ultimately, 3k lower starting point, versus an entirely visible, united brand is probably a worthy trade, I imagine.

that's fine, however they can't say that they are a "team for Melbourne" or a teams that "listens to its fans", something they have claimed they aim to achieve with this club.

I think if enough people kicked up a big enough shit about it they would listen. But what some people have to realize is that just because you want something, it doesn't mean everyone does.

As much as I want the colors to stay red and white (and yes I will be wearing my ys scarf to show my support this weekend), I think most people would prefer to just see a strong second club in Melbourne that will help grow the sport and strength the community. If the new owners think that a re brand will better achieve this then I trust they know their stuff and will get behind it. May take a little while to get used to it but I am sure they have a much better understanding of what will and won't work than anyone we have dealt with previously.

[Peter]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Peter

[Ando]

I don't understand the reluctance that some members are showing in regard to the Keep Melbourne Red and White campaign. You have nothing to lose by supporting it tbh. 

[KSK_47]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop.

[Koerner4]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop.

I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne.

[KSK_47]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop. I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne. That's fair enough. And there is little to no evidence suggesting that we will be anything like a mini man city. In fact looking at ny so far, I suspect we will be nothing like a mini man city. Edited April 7, 2014 by KSK_47

[Rellum]

 

 

 

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop. I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne. That's fair enough. And there is little to no evidence suggesting that we will be anything like a mini man city. In fact looking at ny so far, I suspect we will be nothing like a mini man city.

 

There is little evidence suggesting we won't be a mini Man City so all the resistance you see is people letting CFG that we don't want to be a mini Man City while all that is still in the air.

[Heart_fan]

 

 

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop.

I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne.

 

 

Theres a fine line really.

 

It needs to be a local brand that appeals to this market, but it also needs to promote the wider CFG branding and commercial interests. Just how it achieves this will be interesting to see.

[KSK_47]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop. I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne. That's fair enough. And there is little to no evidence suggesting that we will be anything like a mini man city. In fact looking at ny so far, I suspect we will be nothing like a mini man city.

There is little evidence suggesting we won't be a mini Man City so all the resistance you see is people letting CFG that we don't want to be a mini Man City while all that is still in the air.

We better protest a move to China because there is no evidence to suggest that won't be happening either.

Seriously though I just think people are getting way too fired up about about something that has only come about through media speculation.

As mentioned I am behind the campaign and will be wearing red and white. Just think the comments about burning memberships and never coming back are a little premature.

[Koerner4]

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop.I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne.That's fair enough. And there is little to no evidence suggesting that we will be anything like a mini man city. In fact looking at ny so far, I suspect we will be nothing like a mini man city.

There is little evidence suggesting we won't be a mini Man City so all the resistance you see is people letting CFG that we don't want to be a mini Man City while all that is still in the air. We better protest a move to China because there is no evidence to suggest that won't be happening either.

Seriously though I just think people are getting way too fired up about about something that has only come about through media speculation.

As mentioned I am behind the campaign and will be wearing red and white. Just think the comments about burning memberships and never coming back are a little premature.

Agreed but when it's something that people are so passionate about you can't really blame them for getting a bit carried away.

[KSK_47]

It just sort of come across as people getting ready for a fight nobody started is all. Probably not a great welcome. Almost could be taken as people saying they prefer the previous administration before the new guys have even sat down.

[KSK_47]

Anyway. We've been over this before so will drop it.

Just sayin is all.

[Shahanga]

 

 

 

 

 

I want to see us retain our own identity and be a success. No Mini-Man City thank you.

But what you need to realize is that we are a small part of the man city group regardless of the badge, name or colours. Our identity as it was, is gone. It left when sidwel and Co decided they couldn't deliver what they promised and sold the club before it was even given a chance to develop. I can accept being owned by the same people as man city and being part of their group but I can't handle us being a direct copy of Manchester City in Melbourne. That's fair enough. And there is little to no evidence suggesting that we will be anything like a mini man city. In fact looking at ny so far, I suspect we will be nothing like a mini man city. There is little evidence suggesting we won't be a mini Man City so all the resistance you see is people letting CFG that we don't want to be a mini Man City while all that is still in the air.

We better protest a move to China because there is no evidence to suggest that won't be happening either.

Seriously though I just think people are getting way too fired up about about something that has only come about through media speculation.

As mentioned I am behind the campaign and will be wearing red and white. Just think the comments about burning memberships and never coming back are a little premature.

 

To be fair it is nothing like that.

 

There has been constant speculation in the local media about both a name and colour change.  The club has done NOTHING to quell that speculation, despite ample opportunity to do so.  All they have said is "they haven't made their mind up yet".  Hardly reassuring.

 

There has been no speculation about moving to another city.

 

Your suggested approach of "wait and see" would remove any opportunity for those supporters who care about this to have any influence on the decision makers, as by the time you find out they will have made up their minds and won't be changing them at that point.  Our only hope of influencing this is to speak up NOW.