Huzie Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 Xavi was linked with NYC and was "100% done" until he came out and said he's not talked with anyone and will finish his career at Barca. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartFc Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 That article is horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboozeadams Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 wojciech szczesny shouldn't have been sent off and you are all wankers 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falastur Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 Xavi was linked with NYC and was "100% done" until he came out and said he's not talked with anyone and will finish his career at Barca. Got to agree, unfortunately. Almost certainly just a rehash of the NYCFC story. http://www.caughtoffside.com/2014/01/28/barcelona-star-xavi-snubs-chance-to-move-to-mls-expansion-side-new-york-city-fc/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murfy1 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Melbourne suburban club defies UK juggernaut on name February 24, 2014 Alana Schetzer A suburban soccer club is preparing a David and Goliath-style battle against global superpower, Manchester City, over the right to keep its name. South Kingsville's Melbourne City Football Club has taken steps to protect its name against the new owners of A-League club Melbourne Heart, who have mooted changing the club's name to Melbourne City Football Club. Heart was recently acquired for $12 million by Manchester City, which is owned by Abu Dhabi royal and billionaire Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan. A consortium led by New Zealand entrepreneur and Melbourne Storm owner Bart Campbell was also part of the deal. The new owners have broached changing the team's name, colours and logo but have not officially released any details. Following the takeover announcement, Football Federation Australia said it was prepared to discuss the idea of rebranding the club. Those plans are now under way, with a company associated with Heart and its new owners recently applying to register a trademark for ''Melbourne City Football Club''. Another related company controls the domain name, MelbourneCityFC.com.au. But the tiny suburban soccer team - which plays in the Football Federation of Victoria's State League fourth division - is now gearing up to contest the claim. Melbourne City Football Club was registered as an incorporated association in Victoria in 2005 but claims to have been established in 1991. It fields teams in seniors, reserves and juniors. In a bid to protect its brand, the local club has also made applications to trademark its name with the Australian government's intellectual property agency. Melbourne City FC has also engaged trademark experts Cooper Mills Lawyers. Club spokesman Claudio Paz said the committee had begun talks with Manchester City's management about the naming conflict. He declined to confirm or deny the prospect of legal action being launched, however sources told Fairfax Media that a legal battle was being considered. ''At this point, it's too early to tell what could happen,'' Mr Paz said. ''I don't think Manchester will do anything without any consensus from us. It's a matter of waiting.'' Melbourne Heart did not respond to a request for comment. The club has suffered its worst season since it entered the A-League in 2009. It failed to win any games in the first 14 rounds, which led to the departure of coach John Aloisi in December. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-suburban-club-defies-uk-juggernaut-on-name-20140223-33amc.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 So there´s two entities applying for a not registered trademark... Odd really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofhearts Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 I think I speak for most people by saying lets go Melbourne city! Force us to keep the heart! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Don´t get to optimistic about this, the current Melbourne City might well consider selling their "brand" or whatever we call it.. It´s not like they are minted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 I would suggest that a small donation to Melbourne City's funds will relieve their pain. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viva el City Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 It's entirely possible they could become a part of the family... it wouldn't surprise me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heart_fan Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 I can see this being a nice money earner for the small club. They say they are in negotiations with MH about the name, which seems to suggest they are well aware that this is a good position for them to be in. I don't blame them for standing up for their name. Strange though that it wasn't already registered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardRed Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 That small club ( no pun intended city fans ) Should stand there ground Melbourne City Football Club is there's and hopefully there's to stay. Keep The Heart - Keep The Colours - Keep The Fans 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falastur Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 (edited) It's entirely possible they could become a part of the family... it wouldn't surprise me. Would they want that, though? It sounds like when they first heard the news, they were furious. That kind of reaction doesn't always tend to be conducive to wanting to agree terms to join those who angered you, even if it means that you technically get to keep the name, and get a lot more resources besides. Not to mention, if Australian lower-league fans are like English non-league fans, they may actually not even want a path to the big-time. I have to say, I don't exactly feel comfortable with trying to strong-arm, pay or even talk another club into changing its identity just so that a little rebranding can happen. If it has to be done by stepping over another club, I'd rather that the Heart stayed the Heart. Just my opinion of course. Edited February 24, 2014 by Falastur 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 Melbourne Heart of the City FC ... Nice tie in with the "Heart of the City" slogan already used by MCFC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falastur Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 Melbourne Heart of the City FC ... Nice tie in with the "Heart of the City" slogan already used by MCFC Go MHOTCFC! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 MHOTCFC..Hmm, "Melbourne, HOT CITY" to the tune of "Detroit, rock city" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blosstradamus Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 The Melbourne City guys shouldn't kid themselves about keeping the name - as soon as Manchester City's lawyers come knocking on the door with a bucketload of cash they'll jump on it quicker than a seagull on a hot chip 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 For a layman it's all very murky. Melbourne City Football Club Inc. is registered in Victoria as an incorporated not-for-profit organisation. Whether that precludes another entity using that name I'm not sure. Trademarks are registered for the purposes of protecting the "labels" attached to goods and services. IIRC there were objections from various medical groups when the name "Melbourne Heart" was chosen. Let the lawyers sort it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Manchester City FC will offer Melbourne City FC $100,000 to change their name to Old Melbourne City FC (or whatever). Melbourne City FC will ask for $500,000, but they'll eventually settle for $350k and Sheikh Bob's your uncle! Manchester City FC will report that Old Melbourne City FC has paid them $10m for 'branding rights' i.e. keeping Melbourne City FC in their name and playing in sky blue (which they already do anyway) to show UEFA that they have another $10m revenue to spend on players in England 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InMyHeart Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Change the name to "Melbourne City FC" but not "Melbourne City Heart FC" in essence dont mix heart with city in the name... With this in mind definitely have our nickname and still can be referred to as "the heart" "heart" "hearts" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FB. Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Melbourne Heart of the City FC ... Nice tie in with the "Heart of the City" slogan already used by MCFC 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulhollanddrive Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Sounds like they're after money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 If not Melbourne City FC or Heart of Melbourne City FC, how about just City of Melbourne FC? Mind you, I'm sure the AFL will have a problem with having "Melbourne FC" without a moniker in between the two words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fentonthescreamingcactus Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 I don't see the need of our name being city of, or heart of or ect ect, it should either stay as it is or be changed to Melbourne city and then our nick name can just be the heart 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnno cpfc Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 I really don't mind what the name is but please please leave the colours alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falastur Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) I just thought I'd mention here (because I've only just remembered it), this kind of situation came up here in the UK a couple of seasons ago when Spurs were talking about moving to the Olympic Stadium. Some guy or other made a name for himself by saying that if Spurs left the Borough of Tottenham - the area of London that they, of course, claim to represent - that he would view it as an abandonment of the natives of Tottenham and would go to the High Court to argue that Spurs had voided the right to use the name Tottenham - he was then going to trademark it himself to stop them from ever using it again. No-one seriously believed that the guy could win the case, but it gave the press a few pauses for thought, and it publicised the actual nature of trademarks in football. In essence, what was found is that there's nothing to stop a football team from using pretty much whatever name they so choose - so long as the governing body accepts it - but what can be trademarked is the use of that name for anything constituting marketing. In other words, if that guy had succeeded in trademarking "Tottenham Hotspur F.C." then Spurs would not have been able to sell anything which featured their name, so that goes all the way from Spurs alarm clocks and calendars up to and including selling shirts, which are surely the biggest form of merchandising revenue for most clubs. I know this will make little difference to proceedings - it's unlikely that MHFC would want to use the City name if they couldn't merchandise it - but I just thought I'd mention that in case it was interesting/insightful to anyone. Edited February 25, 2014 by Falastur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontra.11 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 That small club ( no pun intended city fans ) Should stand there ground Melbourne City Football Club is there's and hopefully there's to stay. Keep The Heart - Keep The Colours - Keep The Fans Thankfully someone!! As for Melbourne City, there is a long tradition in Victorian football with that name. I hope the actual Melbourne City stay strong and fight for their club.. It's already much more than most on this forum are doing for theirs.. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNNaVo93 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Keep The Heart - Keep The Colours - Keep The Fans I can see that as a banner. Keep the (Heart monogram shield) Keep the (Red white stripes) Keep the (Fan holding up scarf) I'll make a mockup tonight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 I just thought I'd mention here (because I've only just remembered it), this kind of situation came up here in the UK a couple of seasons ago when Spurs were talking about moving to the Olympic Stadium. Some guy or other made a name for himself by saying that if Spurs left the Borough of Tottenham - the area of London that they, of course, claim to represent - that he would view it as an abandonment of the natives of Tottenham and would go to the High Court to argue that Spurs had voided the right to use the name Tottenham - he was then going to trademark it himself to stop them from ever using it again. No-one seriously believed that the guy could win the case, but it gave the press a few pauses for thought, and it publicised the actual nature of trademarks in football. In essence, what was found is that there's nothing to stop a football team from using pretty much whatever name they so choose - so long as the governing body accepts it - but what can be trademarked is the use of that name for anything constituting marketing. In other words, if that guy had succeeded in trademarking "Tottenham Hotspur F.C." then Spurs would not have been able to sell anything which featured their name, so that goes all the way from Spurs alarm clocks and calendars up to and including selling shirts, which are surely the biggest form of merchandising revenue for most clubs. I know this will make little difference to proceedings - it's unlikely that MHFC would want to use the City name if they couldn't merchandise it - but I just thought I'd mention that in case it was interesting/insightful to anyone. That's pretty much what I suspect is the case here too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stone Island Manc Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Why didn't they just start there own franchise club AKA ''Melbourne City FC'' in the first place and leave us alone. Its getting annoying now. It reminds me of when the Glazers took over Man Utd in 2005, the fans did everything the could to stop it...But as others mentioned before me...Money is everything and fans cant do NOTHING. LOVE HEARTS HATE SHEIKH MANSOUR MHTID Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontra.11 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Fans CAN do something, but the reality is that most of our fan base is willing to sell its soul for results.. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morphine Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Fans CAN do something, but the reality is that most of our fan base is willing to sell its soul for results.. This is, and should be, the mantra for anyone who wants to be successful. 'Whatever it takes' (no reference intended). Our name isn't our soul - to me. It's so subjective though. It's all just about where each individual draws the line. Nothing illegal - no worries in my book. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sash Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Just found this opinion piece on the FFA website. Gives a bit of insight into Sheikh Mansour's way of operating his UAE club. Hearts should be beating with new owner John Duerden For most fans, the news that your team has been bought by someone or something else is an unusual feeling. The head is full of warnings, while the heart is already checking the contract status of some big name players from around the world. I can only wonder what Melbourne Heart supporters are going through right now. When my club, Blackburn Rovers, were bought by Indian firm Venky’s in 2010, there was a little trepidation, but the promise of funds, fun, and fantastic football found a receptive audience - for a short-time at least. Asian owners haven’t had the best of presses in the international media. Venky’s have become a byword of incompetence as Rovers dropped from mid-table Premier League stability to a club flirting with relegation to the third tier. More recently, Vincent Tan angered Cardiff City fans by changing the Bluebirds’ colours to red to appeal more to eastern audiences. Manchester City supporters have had few such concerns since being taken over by Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who has poured untold fortunes into turning the club into English champions and a contender for the UEFA Champions League. And now Melbourne Heart has been drawn into this increasingly global football family. Yet while the Eastlands outfit may be Mansour’s best-known football acquisition, it was not his first. The original love of the Sheikh’s life was, and remains, Al Jazira - the club based in his hometown of in Abu Dhabi. For Melbourne Heart fans looking to get an idea of what the future may bring, the Middle East provides more answers than Manchester. It is here where the Sheikh can often be found watching his boys play in the UAE Pro League. And it is here where his influence is biggest -,perhaps not in monetary terms, but in affection and influence. He rarely makes a match in Manchester, but he rarely misses one at the Mohammed Bin Zayen Stadium in the west of the city. Al Jazira has been one of the better teams in an improving UAE league over the last few years, and currently sits just four points off the lead, behind Dubai rivals Al Ahli. A repeat of the 2011 title success is not out of the question. That achievement wasn’t quite as dramatic as Manchester City’s championship win the following year - a 12-point margin meant that the race was all over well before the curtain came down. Other UAE clubs had big names like Fabio Cannavaro and Diego Maradona involved, but Al Jazira went about their business professionally, on and off the pitch. This was a new kind of team in the region. Mansour hired Phil Anderton, a highly regarded sports administrator who had worked with Edinburgh club Hearts and the Scottish Rugby Union, because he wanted to reach out to the large but transient expat community - something that had never really happened before. Attendances in the league had been, and still are, relatively poor. Given the wealthy owners of so many clubs, trying to become self-sufficient through sponsorship and good old-fashioned ticket sales was not seen as a priority. Sometimes tickets are not sold at all, and it has been known for clubs to actually pay fans to attend. “We’ve tried to professionalize the marketing of the club, treating the fans as priority,” Anderton told me soon after the 2011 title win. “We’ve looked after the players better...and just looked to take everything to the next level." It worked, although giving away the occasional Ferrari at half-time helps. In 2011, Al Jazira averaged over 15,000 fans, three times more than any rival. The UAE league does not publish attendance figures, but Al Jazira are still topping the crowd chart. It’s not just marketing where Al Jazira leads, or perhaps led, the way. In terms of keeping faith with head coaches, this western outpost of Abu Dhabi was an island of serene sanity in a sea of sackings. In the first three professional seasons of the 12-team league, there were 40 coaching changes. Yet during that time, the team stayed with Abel Braga and were rewarded with the title. It hasn’t been quite the same since the Brazilian stepped down in 2011. Since then, the club has resorted to regional type, and Walter Zenga, former Italian goalkeeper, is the sixth coach to try and repeat Braga’s success. Privately, officials at the club admit that they lost their way and the departure of Anderton also left a big hole to fill. But the philosophy of trying to build for the long-term is still there, and hopes are high that Zenga is the right man for the job. Al Jazira is very much a work in progress, but is a club that has only benefitted from its relationship with Sheikh Mansour. The majority, if not all, of Manchester City fans would say something similar. Now it’s the turn of Melbourne Heart/City to see how its Abu Dhabi connection works out. http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/duerden-opinion-display/Hearts-should-be-beating-with-new-owner/84396 Edited February 26, 2014 by Sash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heart4Life Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Fans CAN do something, but the reality is that most of our fan base is willing to sell its soul for results.. If the colours are changed to sky blue I don't think I'll be able to support the heart anymore. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sash Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) I don't know how much of a priority it is for the owners to have a global brand identified by sky blue. This may not be relevant, but just out of interest I checked Al Jazira's colours. Their home strip is white with red socks, and away is all red. We'll see how it goes, but so far at least, there's no precedent yet for these owners upsetting local supporters or interests. To the contrary, they generally seem to reach out to them. But it's good to be wary until we find out more. Edited February 26, 2014 by Sash 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 http://www.nycisblue.com/2014/02/summary-of-saturdays-meeting.html?m=1 Thought this would be of interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 I don't know how much of a priority it is for the owners to have a global brand identified by sky blue. This may not be relevant, but just out of interest I checked Al Jazira's colours. Their home strip is white with red socks, and away is all red. We'll see how it goes, but so far at least, there's no precedent yet for these owners upsetting local supporters or interests. To the contrary, they generally seem to reach out to them. But it's good to be wary until we find out more. I think one major thing is that if this decision to buy heart was a 'man city' decision or a 'Mansour' decision but as you said Sash our purchase is largely unprecedented Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theresonlyonebzamora Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 is there not already a thread for colour change discussions? IMO this should be more about everything but the colours/name argument... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 I just don't understand why some people are anticipating certain changes when there's no indication whatsoever that they will occur. I also don't understand the obsession of remaining just exactly the same as we were under the Sidwell syndicate ownership, when that group was the subject of so much abuse on here as having no knowledge of football, no interest in making the club successful, no interest in spending any money, and so on and so forth. Clubs are undergoing changes in ownership on a regular basis. There have been a number in the A-League. Clubs change their colours and their home grounds. Some go bankrupt and arise again; others go bankrupt only to disappear altogether or to be merged with another club. Our club has new owners, and one of the biggest EPL clubs has an 80% share. I can't think of a better outcome for us. Our new owners share the vision that our club has had from the start - good football, community engagement and development of players. The professionalism and pathways that the new owners offer are an amazing alternative to the mediocrity that we suffered before. It was inevitable that our club was going to be sold. It could have been to anyone at all, and just as likely to interests that had no knowledge of football and no empathy with football supporters. You're never going to please everyone all of the time, but from what we've heard Manchester City have done everything right for their own club so far, so why should it be any different for Melbourne Heart? I will vote to retain our colours if I get to vote on the issue. But I'm not going to concern myself with something that may never happen. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murfy1 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) There's a bit more evidence than "no indication whatsoever" that rebranding might occur. MHFC Holdings Pty Ltd did register the trademark for "Melbourne City Football Club" on January 16, and Melbourne Storm Holding Pty Ltd did register the business name "Melbourne City FC" with the ASIC and did buy the domain name MelbourneCityFC.com.au. So rebranding is conceivable. The question is, how likely is it? And honestly I don't know. I'd also distinguish between the people who run the club (the board, the CEO, the football director) and the club itself. The previous people who ran Melbourne Heart were fools, but Melbourne Heart as a club has always been very good: the ideals of the club (attacking/Dutch football, promotion of youth, community engagement) and the identity/appearance of the club (the kits, crest, name). You can have a very good club that's been run by jackasses, but that shouldn't tarnish the club itself. It should only tarnish the idiots who poorly ran the club. This can be said of Perth Glory, Melbourne Victory, Sydney FC, heck, pretty much every A-League club. These clubs as football clubs are fine, they have just been poorly run. As for the "obsession of remaining just exactly the same", the role of the supporters is to tell the owners of the club how important the identity (either the whole identity or parts of the identity) is. If the supporters don't stand up for these things, who will? Personally, I would be ok with some change to the image of the club, but I would loathe this club that I've supported since the beginning completely changing its identity (and especially if it became a mini-Man City). We're not an NSL club, or a 19th century English club, which changed their identities all the time. The identity and markers of the club should be built to last and they should be held on to. Man City said a lot of right things at the start, but so did Sidwell and co. (yes, I'm prepared to make that comparison). Actions are more important than words, and so far Man City haven't done anything (in a way it's understandable, given their pledge to start running the club at the end of the season, but still we can't give them any ticks of approval when they have done nothing). Also, since a day or two after the takeover the silence has been deafening. So ATM I believe cautious optimism is appropriate. I ultimately think that this club will still feel like the same A-League club I've supported since its beginning, but I don't think it's a given that Heart will avoid large-scale rebranding, and supporters are right to be weary of such possibilities. P.S. I should also say I think there is a vast amount of middle ground between what supporters want and what Man City want with regards to Melbourne Heart's identity. I don't think Man City want this club to mimic the Manchester club in every observable way, and likewise I think this club could still easily feel like the club I've supported since the 2010-11 season if it underwent some change. So overall I think the discussion about Heart's identity under Man City is far too either/or (will the club stay either completely the same OR will it completely change and mimic Man City), and in the end I think a perfect compromise will be reached that will please all (or most) parties. Edited February 26, 2014 by Murfy1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.