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

[Kippax75-MCFC]

Melbourne Heart may not just play in a similar uniform as Manchester City next season, but could be wearing a near exact replica playing strip.

The application to change the club's identity will include a uniform involving the same kit manufacturer and front-of-shirt sponsor as the English Premier League giants. 

The identity change is yet to be approved by the Football Federation of Australia but Fairfax Media understands that should the governing body accept the proposals, the club will wear a sky blue Nike jersey with Etihad Airlines as sponsor, just like its parent club. 

 

Under the proposed application, Melbourne Heart will be renamed Melbourne City, its logo will be changed and its home uniform be white socks, white shorts and a sky blue jersey. 

FFA chief executive David Gallop confirmed negotiations with Melbourne Heart and its owners regarding a change of the club's identity, but said there has not been a decision made as to whether Melbourne City will take form under the proposed terms.

 

"We have received an application from Melbourne Heart/Melbourne City and are still working through our process regarding the request for a change," Gallop said. 

The proposed re-branding of the A-League club sparked tensions with Sydney FC over the clash of identity with a sporting brand known as "The Sky Blues" as well as earning the ire of some of the more hardened fans of Melbourne Heart.

 

Heart's supporter group unveiled banners proclaiming "Keep Melbourne Red & White" at its final home game of the season against Western Sydney Wanderers last weekend, though a proposed name-change to Melbourne City hasn't been met with as much widespread discontent.

Melbourne Heart registered the lowest single crowd attendance of the season and has traditionally struggled with average attendances. City's takeover is regarded by some involved in the process as a much-needed facelift for a club that has been dwarfed by the success of Melbourne Victory. 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/melbourne-heart-in-bid-for-new-look-20140418-zqwfs.html#ixzz2zDvQyaPV

[Murfy1]

Just read that article. 

 

Oh god Man City are really pandering to all of the Euro-snobs in Melbourne 

 

And perhaps just as worse the FFA seem to be the only thing between stopping the  complete re-branding of Heart and the creation of a mini-Man City. And the FFA have a bad record when it comes to looking after the interests and integrity of clubs, and especially the interests of supporters, when they come up against the interests and whims of club owners.

 

 

A tragic and depressing situation.

[Kippax75-MCFC]

Just read that article. 

 

Oh god Man City are really pandering to all of the Euro-snobs in Melbourne 

 

And perhaps just as worse the FFA seem to be the only thing between stopping the  complete re-branding of Heart and the creation of a mini-Man City. And the FFA have a bad record when it comes to looking after the interests and integrity of clubs, and especially the interests of supporters, when they come up against the interests and whims of club owners.

 

 

A tragic and depressing situation.

 

 

You could always have your current colours as your away kit, they could at least give you that, would that still not be acceptable?  

[Dylan]

Well for me thats all I need to hear. Melbourne is sky blue. The biggest tragedy is that it will be another season without a collar on the shirt.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Dylan

[jw1739]

I note the gratuitous throwaway line of the lowest attendance of the season.

[Murfy1]

 

Just read that article. 

 

Oh god Man City are really pandering to all of the Euro-snobs in Melbourne 

 

And perhaps just as worse the FFA seem to be the only thing between stopping the  complete re-branding of Heart and the creation of a mini-Man City. And the FFA have a bad record when it comes to looking after the interests and integrity of clubs, and especially the interests of supporters, when they come up against the interests and whims of club owners.

 

 

A tragic and depressing situation.

 

 

You could always have your current colours as your away kit, they could at least give you that, would that still not be acceptable?  

 

 

 

It's far from sure that Man City will even give us Red and White away colours.

 

 

And no that's not a respectable outcome. Man City are throwing out the name and the logo, and for so many reasons (that I've discussed at length) this club deserves to have its colours continue. If Heart's away jersey is made red and white it'll be a very token and contemptuous gesture towards Heart supporters, to try and co-op them and hijack the emotions of Heart supporters, and transplant the remarkably loyal support they've shown for a very under-performing club and put them on a clone club of Manchester City.

 

In Australia the away colours are rarely seen, because the distances in Australia make away matches very difficult to travel to.

 

And as far as I can see, if Man City make Red and White the away colours, it will be in a vain attempt to downplay the protests and displeasure of many supporters like myself, who will wear Red and White every time we attend home matches (if we attend matches).

 

I have seen zero actual evidence that Man City have any respect whatsoever for Melbourne Heart FC and its supporters. The colours were the final stand, and the final opportunity for Man City to show that they respect this club and its supporters, and that they were actually sincere when they said they want each club (whether in Manchester or New York City or Melbourne) to represent its home city (with the colours Red and White being linked to Melbourne as far back as the 19th century through the city of Melbourne flag). It is now clear that global brand branding and promotion of Man City FC is their only concern.

 

 

The funny thing is that it's almost certainly in Man City's own selfish interest to keep the club Red and White, as it distinguishes the club in the A-League and the Melbourne and Australian sports markets in general. And a vain attempt to appeal to supporters of European football clubs will fall flat, especially if Man City's Melbourne club overly mimicks Manchester City, as it will repel Melburnians who support European clubs other than Man City, and there are very very very few Man City supporters in Melbourne (and why would they even care about supporting this pale comparison of Man City FC in Melbourne). It's a loss-loss idea switching to sky blue, and it's a tragic outcome that sounds like it may well happen.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Murfy1

[Embee]

Don't know how reliable that article is (is the smh normally quite good?) but if it indeed is reliable then I think that the main reason of purchase of our club is definitely to help Man City circumnavigate FFP.

 

If we are to play in a near identical playing kit (and potentially a similar badge/one they pay to have designed) then they will likely charge Melbourne Heart/City large sums in regards to 'image rights' whilst writing off the spendings they make towards our academy (as far as I'm aware youth infrastructure spending is exempt from FFP).

 

Giving us basically the same kit as City puts another spin on this personally for me as well, I was starting to think that although I'd be enraged with a colour change I would continue to attend our games and support the club, if we're made to play in a kit identical to that of Man City I don't know if I'll still feel that way. That would truly make us a 'mini-me' in their image and give the 'Heart is Dead' argument considerably more weight.

Edited April 18, 2014 by King Malta

[Shahanga]

That article didn't really add to anything we didn't already know.

 

What we don't know is do clubs have to apply each year to change their away jerseys?  Well i guess, as the FFA don't want colour clashes and "inappropriate" displays.  Manchester City (Australian Franchise) could be applying over the away jersey, but seeing as Victory pretty much have that colour this year, without fuss from Sydney, that would seem unlikely. 

[M13]

That CFG would use Nike or Adidas was a given from the start, and as for sponsors they are negotiated centrally with CFM meaning that the same sponsor might very well be displayed on all clubs under the CFG umbrella.
So yet again we arrive at the homeshirt colours as the only matter of interest in the article but no confirmation from either FFA or Heart about what the changes actually would mean which is leaving us assuming that the media outlets are correct, even as in the article above they can´t confirm anything "but understands that"

[Scarletfields_3]

If etihad do become our shirt sponsor I hope it doesn't mean we will be playing at Etihad Stadium.

[Dylan]

If etihad do become our shirt sponsor I hope it doesn't mean we will be playing at Etihad Stadium.

Nah the new owners have numerous times said they loved aami park and that it was a great stadium

[Rellum]

That article didn't really add to anything we didn't already know.

 

What we don't know is do clubs have to apply each year to change their away jerseys?  Well i guess, as the FFA don't want colour clashes and "inappropriate" displays.  Manchester City (Australian Franchise) could be applying over the away jersey, but seeing as Victory pretty much have that colour this year, without fuss from Sydney, that would seem unlikely. 

The FFA can't get simple colour clashes right now. FIFA has a rule that shirts, shorts and socks should not clash and yet tonight we have Sydney and the Victory playing in the same coloured shorts. Personally I hink clashing colours are so far off their radar they would never consider it.

[M13]

You might find yourself playing in Etihad Park eventually.. Given that the Etihad President/CEO is a Melbourne lad

 

How long is the AAMI sponsorship deal?

Edited April 18, 2014 by M13

[malloy]

You might find yourself playing in Etihad Park eventually.. Given that the Etihad President/CEO is a Melbourne lad

 

 

I find this much more likely than the team moving to Docklands (Etihad) stadium 

[Dylan]

You might find yourself playing in Etihad Park eventually.. Given that the Etihad President/CEO is a Melbourne lad

 

How long is the AAMI sponsorship deal?

50 years

[M13]

AAMI deals ends 2018 apparently, thank you google..

[Dylan]

haha damn google

[Shahanga]

You do know etihad is a oval shaped? Terrible football venue

 

(Sorry just figured out what you guys were getting at! )  yeah, there would be a fair chance that Etihad could replace AAMI.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Shahanga

[Alexxandro]

 but seeing as Victory pretty much have that colour this year, without fuss from Sydney,

I was just thinking who were the iditos that thought having  Sydney sky blue for Victory's away jersey was a good idea. How did that meeting go?

 

"Hey guys last season we had that hideous council worker fluoro yellow. how about this year we adopt the colours of our most hated rival?"

 

Just seems so stupid. 

 

As stupid as making Heart a mini man city. 

[Alexxandro]

Did anyone watching the final catch that FFA wanted to have microphones on the refs but it was stopped by FIFA. I hate the FFA sometimes. They would turn the A-League into such a plastic freak show if they could. 

Edited April 18, 2014 by Alexxandro

[Alexxandro]

Okay I'm feeing a bit grumpy. Time to step away tom the keyboard. 

[Dylan]

Yeah well you did confuse FFA with FIFA....

[Rellum]

I would love to know how well the Victory away shirts have sold this year.

[HeartMillsy29]

This exact replica thing if it happens is a step too far for me and I think I might be done if it eventuates. As sad as it is to get attached to a sponsor, Westpac have been with us since the start and if they went as well as the shirt colours and the name then it is definitely not the same club as I chose to support back in 2010.

 

I really don't want to believe this because they have said they don't want to turn us into a mini Man City, but what else can I believe right now? This whole colours dilemma is actually stressing me out. First thing in the morning I hop on here and see if there has been any new articles.

 

I think I've been fairly lenient. I would be satisfied with a sky blue home shirt with a red trim and the traditional kit as the away kit, and I also have no problem with the name change. Sacrificing these things so we can go back to what Heart originally set out to do, like develop tomorrow's Socceroos, I thought was a fair trade for the investment.

 

But there does come a line. Westpac recently signed a new 3 year extension to be our sponsor, but I'm sure CFG could work their way out of it somehow. The bottom line is; an exact replica of the City kit will see a LOT of people jump off.

 

We are not a mini Man City. We are Melbourne Heart and you can fuck off if you think you're turning us into the former.

[Shahanga]

Well I hear you bro, but I went back and had yet antoher read of what Torn Asunder wrote about the fans rep meeting.

 

The meeting was attended by a very influential City person.  They were adamant they would be respectful to our club's history, "wouldn't do a Cardiff", understood that the fans were committed to red & white, would reach a solution that was acceptable to most fans and wouldn't make us a "mini-Man City".

 

So assuming they aren't complete bull artists, I think there is still plenty of hope that we will play in our colours at home and all this fuss from Sydney is just about away kits (Sydney might see a much greater threat from a Man City owned club using NSW colours than from the ephemeral use by another club?). 

 

Anyway having said that I have my own alternative plans if the worst happens and I'd recommend everyone gives thought to what action they might take should certain things happen (not trying to influence others- just suggest you should be mentally prepared).

 

I just can't see how Man City can make the claims TA reported and hand us a city replica kit for home games; no way "most fans" will consider that acceptable (at best some will consider it "tolerable" which is a big difference) and it will probably lead to Cardiff style campaign(s) next year, in complete contradiction to what Man City have said they want to achieve.  if they believe different they really need to get out more.

 

(This post probably makes me sound bipolar given other posts i have made!  Truth is I oscillate from hope to despair regularly on this issue.)

[Rellum]

I personally know how many changes I am prepared to put up with and I have had that idea since the are you in or out thread started up. I have a small grey area but it seems that may not come into play.

[jw1739]

 

Well I hear you bro, but I went back and had yet antoher read of what Torn Asunder wrote about the fans rep meeting.

 

The meeting was attended by a very influential City person.  They were adamant they would be respectful to our club's history, "wouldn't do a Cardiff", understood that the fans were committed to red & white, would reach a solution that was acceptable to most fans and wouldn't make us a "mini-Man City".

 

So assuming they aren't complete bull artists, I think there is still plenty of hope that we will play in our colours at home and all this fuss from Sydney is just about away kits (Sydney might see a much greater threat from a Man City owned club using NSW colours than from the ephemeral use by another club?). 

 

Anyway having said that I have my own alternative plans if the worst happens and I'd recommend everyone gives thought to what action they might take should certain things happen (not trying to influence others- just suggest you should be mentally prepared).

 

I just can't see how Man City can make the claims TA reported and hand us a city replica kit for home games; no way "most fans" will consider that acceptable (at best some will consider it "tolerable" which is a big difference) and it will probably lead to Cardiff style campaign(s) next year, in complete contradiction to what Man City have said they want to achieve.  if they believe different they really need to get out more.

 

(This post probably makes me sound bipolar given other posts i have made!  Truth is I oscillate from hope to despair regularly on this issue.)

 

Hey, Shahanga, we better stop agreeing with each other! Like you I just cannot see how Simon Pearce, named as one of the 50 most influential Brits in the UAE, could make those statements at the FRG meeting and then we end up as a mini-Man-City.

 

I also think it would be rather unlikely that Westpac would step away from a 3-year agreement with the club to be its front-of-shirt sponsor (and their commitment with the club to the grass roots aspect of the sponsorship) one year into that agreement.

 

As I understand it all kits have to be approved by FFA, even minor changes. And I thought also that they had to remain basically the same for at least 2 years before a change can be made? I've got no doubt City want to and intend to introduce sky blue into our playing colours, and indeed they have said that straight out. But to throw out the red-and-white wholesale would mean that their representatives have told lies, and I'm finding that hard to believe.  Possibly the lies would have a greater negative impact than the actual introduction of sky blue.

 

 

44 Simon Pearce

As director of strategic communications and executive director at the Executive Affairs Authority Simon Pearce is entrusted with building and protecting Abu Dhabi’s reputation. Pearce has a big budget and an even bigger remit. He is considered one of the UAE’s most influential officials, particularly close to Khaldoon Al Mubarak, the CEO of Mubadala, for whom he helped “smooth the communication of the Manchester City Football Club takeover” according to the Wall Street Journal. Since taking on the position in 2006, Pearce has overseen a significant revamp of Abu Dhabi’s communications offering, and also plays an important role in key assets such as the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix and media initiative twofour54. Pearce came to the Middle East role after a varied life in the agency world, including a lengthy stint at Burson-Marsteller, encompassing positions on four continents and — in his last job at the firm — CEO of Australia.

[Jovan]

Agree with you Shahanga. After reading from Torn Asunder I felt finally sanity would prevail. Now all these reports from what appears to be credible sources contradict it all. Not bipolar but definitely confused .

[Haydos]

 

Well I hear you bro, but I went back and had yet antoher read of what Torn Asunder wrote about the fans rep meeting.

 

The meeting was attended by a very influential City person.  They were adamant they would be respectful to our club's history, "wouldn't do a Cardiff", understood that the fans were committed to red & white, would reach a solution that was acceptable to most fans and wouldn't make us a "mini-Man City".

 

So assuming they aren't complete bull artists, I think there is still plenty of hope that we will play in our colours at home and all this fuss from Sydney is just about away kits (Sydney might see a much greater threat from a Man City owned club using NSW colours than from the ephemeral use by another club?). 

 

Anyway having said that I have my own alternative plans if the worst happens and I'd recommend everyone gives thought to what action they might take should certain things happen (not trying to influence others- just suggest you should be mentally prepared).

 

I just can't see how Man City can make the claims TA reported and hand us a city replica kit for home games; no way "most fans" will consider that acceptable (at best some will consider it "tolerable" which is a big difference) and it will probably lead to Cardiff style campaign(s) next year, in complete contradiction to what Man City have said they want to achieve.  if they believe different they really need to get out more.

 

(This post probably makes me sound bipolar given other posts i have made!  Truth is I oscillate from hope to despair regularly on this issue.)

 

Agreed, Im holding onto TA's comments and the fact they have continuously stated they will respect our colours. 

 

The City Group has attempted to rub the supporters up the right way by resigning JVS, DW, Hoffman etc, trying to make good first impressions. Their next move is massive. It will divide supporters.

 

If FFA does approve this Replica Kit, it will clearly be to appeal to the Euro-Snobs.

 

How about the FFA supports US, the supporters who have supported THEM and THEIR league with our hard earned money, through the thick and thin.

 

 

[Alexxandro]

I would love to know how well the Victory away shirts have sold this year.

If we knew we could probably use it as further evidence of how disliked Sky Blue is in Melbourne. I can't imagine it was much. 

[Rellum]

 

I would love to know how well the Victory away shirts have sold this year.

If we knew we could probably use it as further evidence of how disliked Sky Blue is in Melbourne. I can't imagine it was much. 

 

That is why I asked the question.

[Pete Heartspur]

 

Well I hear you bro, but I went back and had yet antoher read of what Torn Asunder wrote about the fans rep meeting.

 

The meeting was attended by a very influential City person.  They were adamant they would be respectful to our club's history, "wouldn't do a Cardiff", understood that the fans were committed to red & white, would reach a solution that was acceptable to most fans and wouldn't make us a "mini-Man City".

 

So assuming they aren't complete bull artists, I think there is still plenty of hope that we will play in our colours at home and all this fuss from Sydney is just about away kits (Sydney might see a much greater threat from a Man City owned club using NSW colours than from the ephemeral use by another club?). 

 

Anyway having said that I have my own alternative plans if the worst happens and I'd recommend everyone gives thought to what action they might take should certain things happen (not trying to influence others- just suggest you should be mentally prepared).

 

I just can't see how Man City can make the claims TA reported and hand us a city replica kit for home games; no way "most fans" will consider that acceptable (at best some will consider it "tolerable" which is a big difference) and it will probably lead to Cardiff style campaign(s) next year, in complete contradiction to what Man City have said they want to achieve.  if they believe different they really need to get out more.

 

(This post probably makes me sound bipolar given other posts i have made!  Truth is I oscillate from hope to despair regularly on this issue.)

 

Depends on what they are using as evidence as to what "most fans" means. If they're going by that ambiguous members survey then they may have the numbers to back it up.

 

On the subject of alternative arrangements, I have the problem of being 1 of 3 friends (who attend nearly all/if not all matches) who is unsure as to what I will do. I am responsible for the other 2 being Heart supporters. They are happy to keep going regardless, even though they would rather keep our red and white. I might be simplifying it a bit but they see Heart games as a way of us getting together, having beers, and watching football. I feel that way too, but my attachment to the club is a lot stronger. I was at the very first game against the Mariners, I still have the fading ticket, and I bought my Heart scarf for 10 or 15 dollars. The only reason I wasn't a member in the first season was because I still worked in hospitality and couldn't get to many games. I've been a member (season ticket holder) the last 3 seasons and had every intention of being one for eternity, eventually turning it into a weekly family event when kids came along. Now I'm in limbo. I want to keep going to watch football, with my friends and family, but despise everything about what these rumours seem to be alluding to. I don't dislike Man City. I dislike being lied to, I dislike selling out my beliefs, I dislike hypocrisy, and I dislike the victory. IF I go it will be in my red and white stripes, but at this stage I certainly can't commit to another season ticket.

[belaguttman]

Pearce came to the Middle East role after a varied life in the agency world, including a lengthy stint at Burson-Marsteller, encompassing positions on four continents and — in his last job at the firm — CEO of Australia.

 

CEO of Australia no less, I thought that was Rupert Murdoch's role.

[jw1739]

While we're naturally very focussed on one particular aspect of the takeover, I think there are many other things that CFG need to focus on before the "club" will grow. I can't help but contrast last night's match where the Visitards scored in injury time to progress in the finals series and send their fans home happy, whereas just a week earlier (yes, it's been only a week) we contrived to throw away a result that would have seen us finish 8th and done a little bit to give us hope for next season through the next six months. We simply do not provide enough "entertainment" to entice the fans in the first place and then keep them coming. It's more than good football and results, good players and good coaches - there needs to be more of the "wow" factor.

 

If we had come away from more matches feeling more exhilarated we would not be so despondent right now.

Edited April 19, 2014 by jw1739

[Alexxandro]

The start and end to every season we've had has been dire. I think that says a lot about the weakness of the team's psychology. 

[Nate]

 

Melbourne Heart may not just play in a similar uniform as Manchester City next season, but could be wearing a near exact replica playing strip.

The application to change the club's identity will include a uniform involving the same kit manufacturer and front-of-shirt sponsor as the English Premier League giants. 

The identity change is yet to be approved by the Football Federation of Australia but Fairfax Media understands that should the governing body accept the proposals, the club will wear a sky blue Nike jersey with Etihad Airlines as sponsor, just like its parent club. 

 

Under the proposed application, Melbourne Heart will be renamed Melbourne City, its logo will be changed and its home uniform be white socks, white shorts and a sky blue jersey. 

FFA chief executive David Gallop confirmed negotiations with Melbourne Heart and its owners regarding a change of the club's identity, but said there has not been a decision made as to whether Melbourne City will take form under the proposed terms.

 

"We have received an application from Melbourne Heart/Melbourne City and are still working through our process regarding the request for a change," Gallop said. 

The proposed re-branding of the A-League club sparked tensions with Sydney FC over the clash of identity with a sporting brand known as "The Sky Blues" as well as earning the ire of some of the more hardened fans of Melbourne Heart.

 

Heart's supporter group unveiled banners proclaiming "Keep Melbourne Red & White" at its final home game of the season against Western Sydney Wanderers last weekend, though a proposed name-change to Melbourne City hasn't been met with as much widespread discontent.

Melbourne Heart registered the lowest single crowd attendance of the season and has traditionally struggled with average attendances. City's takeover is regarded by some involved in the process as a much-needed facelift for a club that has been dwarfed by the success of Melbourne Victory. 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/melbourne-heart-in-bid-for-new-look-20140418-zqwfs.html#ixzz2zDvQyaPV

 

Fuck this, fuck this so much.

 

Good results next season mean nothing to me because it'll be the successes of a brand new club that won't mean squat to me, cheers for taking my club Manchester City.

[KSK_47]

Melbourne Heart may not just play in a similar uniform as Manchester City next season, but could be wearing a near exact replica playing strip.

The application to change the club's identity will include a uniform involving the same kit manufacturer and front-of-shirt sponsor as the English Premier League giants. 

The identity change is yet to be approved by the Football Federation of Australia but Fairfax Media understands that should the governing body accept the proposals, the club will wear a sky blue Nike jersey with Etihad Airlines as sponsor, just like its parent club. 

 

Under the proposed application, Melbourne Heart will be renamed Melbourne City, its logo will be changed and its home uniform be white socks, white shorts and a sky blue jersey. 

FFA chief executive David Gallop confirmed negotiations with Melbourne Heart and its owners regarding a change of the club's identity, but said there has not been a decision made as to whether Melbourne City will take form under the proposed terms.

 

"We have received an application from Melbourne Heart/Melbourne City and are still working through our process regarding the request for a change," Gallop said. 

The proposed re-branding of the A-League club sparked tensions with Sydney FC over the clash of identity with a sporting brand known as "The Sky Blues" as well as earning the ire of some of the more hardened fans of Melbourne Heart.

 

Heart's supporter group unveiled banners proclaiming "Keep Melbourne Red & White" at its final home game of the season against Western Sydney Wanderers last weekend, though a proposed name-change to Melbourne City hasn't been met with as much widespread discontent.

Melbourne Heart registered the lowest single crowd attendance of the season and has traditionally struggled with average attendances. City's takeover is regarded by some involved in the process as a much-needed facelift for a club that has been dwarfed by the success of Melbourne Victory. 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/melbourne-heart-in-bid-for-new-look-20140418-zqwfs.html#ixzz2zDvQyaPV

Fuck this, fuck this so much.

 

Good results next season mean nothing to me because it'll be the successes of a brand new club that won't mean squat to me, cheers for taking my club Manchester City.

I think you mean cheers to Sidwell and co for not giving a shit about the club you guys created, and selling it to people who clearly had no intention of seeing your vision come to life.

[KSK_47]

And talking a lot of shit about having the supporters best interest in mind when you sold us out.

[Nate]

Both parties are at fault as neither party give the slightest of fucks about the actual people this decision affects - the loyal supporters.

[KSK_47]

Both parties are at fault as neither party give the slightest of fucks about the actual people this decision affects - the loyal supporters.

 

True. But if you are buying a business in a prime location that has been run into the ground by a group of people who were half arsed about everything they did, would you keep things as they are, just to keep a handful of people who have become emotionally attached to it happy? I wouldnt. I would re-brand and build a business that actually works. 

 

The fact is we were completely sold out by our previous admin. Regardless of any small gestures made by the city group, this club died when it was sold. Its a new club.