***Help Keep the Red & White***

[Sash]

Not happy with this decision, Do not want City walking away from us and us turning back into the basket case that we were

If City walk away, which they won't, but even if they did, we'd be administered by the FFA until suitable new owners came on board. Like WSW have been. And how successful was that?

[Alexxandro]

Yeah Heart were not a basket case despite the owners best efforts. Just needed some people with football brains to take over. Didn't need to be City. 

[Tesla]

I want to believe this is good news, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

I'm surprised that City didn't have sorted this out with the FFA before buying the club, since they would have had to negotiate with the FFA as well when buying the club.

FFA will probably cave if City threaten to walk away.

Let them walk though, end this whole saga already.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Tesla

[Deeming]

If there can be no color change, Heart would decrease or be non existant when it comes to attract sponsordeals  This will not only damage the city brand but it will damage Heart greatly because the resources will be low. But if you are happy with that then ok..   Just imagine any brand in the world who aspire to global domination, how they would react if the colour of the brand can be used on all place accept Australia   I would never invest in a market where my brand has been comprimised,  its like coca cola cant be red.

You honesty think a big corporation cares one iota what colour their branding is on. I can't see anyone going well we will sponsor Man City and NYCFC but we aren't going to sponsor Melbourne because their uniforms don't match?

[GreenSeater]

@zeven Heart already has a major sponsor in Westpac and the backing of a family worth over a trillion dollars. Sponsorhip money isn't really an issue at this point.

[FB.]

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

 

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

 

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

 

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

 

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

Edited May 29, 2014 by FB.

[Heart_fan]

Sash, with the potential for the Newcastle Jets becoming the FFA's issue again, don't be so sure they will be in a position to do that.

This may be a game to assert control by both parties, but don't underestimate the ease in which CFG would just write off the money they invested and move on.

Why would someone go spend $20 million on a training complex when they are blocked from making key decisions?

To think this is great move is only looking at half of the picture.

[M13]

Hmm... Aljazira FC new kit

[zeven]

I am rapt that we'll get to keep our colours (for now...) but this article has infuriated me a little.

 

From what's been written it seems that City are pushing relentlessly for this, and with all their crap (even in the quote Murphy has posted) about respecting us and our passion for the colours I feel like we're being treated like mugs here.

 

They don't respect us or the colours and are seemingly intent on continuing to push the envelope until they get their way. I don't see why they can't give us a sky blue away kit and use that in all their 'City Family' marketing crap.

 

I too

staring to wish City had never bought us..

you think you would care in 20 years?  pretty much the entire club is at stake only because of colours that in 20 years you would have grown to like so much the red and white would be a distant memory like ALL other clubs that have changed colours  clubs with 100 + years of history 

 

CFG as a global brand would lose shot load if theres one continent where the brand cant be unified.   it basic business. a sponsor would probably dont care about australia if the brand are different to the other clubs..  

[Deviant]

But if the results come, the sponsors will too.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Deviant

[Nate]

I'd be really surprised if the City Group decided to pull out now as a result of all of this as it would depict them in a very, very poor light. 

Even if it's a "just for now" thing, it buys us fans even more time to show these guys what the red and white means to us, so I can only hope that the terrace is fuller and more colourful than ever this season.

[Deeming]

"On the matter of colours, as we have said previously, any decisions made in relation to the club's identity will be guided by the traditions of our existing fan base, including their passion for red and white"

Guided = Ignore? Reject?

[Jestr]

Now we will see how hard will cfg fight in court to push to get their colours.

Pretty ironic if they just expected us to give them up without a fight while they will spend fortune not to give theirs up

Show us now without any ambiguity .......are you here to create successful ,winning football team regardless of colour, or you only here to spread and grow your brand and it's only purely business.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Jestr

[GreenSeater]

@zeven I can 100% guarantee to you right now that not in 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years or even a million years will I ever, under any circumstances "love" or even like seeing Melbourne Heart FC, my club, play in sky blue. We could win every A League title and every Asian Champions League from here on in and I would still hate sky blue and see Melbourne as red and white and only red and white. It's not your club, so you are not entitled to an opinion. End of story.

[Embee]

 

I am rapt that we'll get to keep our colours (for now...) but this article has infuriated me a little.

 

From what's been written it seems that City are pushing relentlessly for this, and with all their crap (even in the quote Murphy has posted) about respecting us and our passion for the colours I feel like we're being treated like mugs here.

 

They don't respect us or the colours and are seemingly intent on continuing to push the envelope until they get their way. I don't see why they can't give us a sky blue away kit and use that in all their 'City Family' marketing crap.

 

I too

staring to wish City had never bought us..

you think you would care in 20 years?  pretty much the entire club is at stake only because of colours that in 20 years you would have grown to like so much the red and white would be a distant memory like ALL other clubs that have changed colours  clubs with 100 + years of history 

 

CFG as a global brand would lose shot load if theres one continent where the brand cant be unified.   it basic business. a sponsor would probably dont care about australia if the brand are different to the other clubs..  

 

 

Yes, I would care.

 

This topic has been discussed a thousand times in this forum but here we go; yes, clubs change their colours at times but they are often changed internally (by boards/management teams that have been in place for a while) in consultation with their fans and not normally at the whim of a new owner, when they are changed at the whim of a new owner it normally doesn't sit well at all. MY club is red and white and that's the way I want it to stay. I don't want my club to have their kit changed simply so they fit into this nice, pretty brand that another football club has purchased us to join.

 

CFG will lose nothing. How does the colour of a kit/badge change sponsors attitudes to latching onto a team? If City invest in this club as they plan to do then we could likely be the most successful in the country and also have a direct link to one of the (currently) largest clubs in world football. What sponsor is going to turn their nose up at that because we're red?

[zeven]

the difference in sponsorship deals to CFG (you reach out on all continents in all iconic cities)  compared to today where its one team one city one league.

 

do i need to futher explain why this is a good thing compared to the rest of the world football.. But if the CFG brand are not unified it will damage the brand. and everyone will lose out.  

 

this is why i believe this is so important for CFG   

[Begbie]

Although the Sky blue was only a brief part of our short history, it was still a hugely important phase that we should not just roll over and let go. #bringbacktheskyblue

[GreenSeater]

To be honest I don't think anyone on here gives a fuck about what's good for CFG

[zeven]

I want to point out that i only try to see this from CFG point of view.  because seeing it from supporters is not very hard.. 

 

i dot not advocate a color change here..  

[M13]

That´s not really true Zeven... Many companies keep their brands very different, just look at breweries, Heineken and Amstel don´t have a colour in common but both are Heineken brands

[malloy]

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

If going to the supreme court is what is required to get us playing in sky blue then that is what will happen. FFA have played a strong hand, which may come back to bite them as they need city to pump cash in the league to get it to grow. City can still "walk away" by running the club on a shoe string budget like it previously was run and then just focus on NYCFC.

If you think any negative media will tarnish their brand then you are wrong as money and results ( for city not us) are ultimately what people focus on not a small team in a shitty league in a country full of people that don't even like the game.

[JoyfulPenguin]

the difference in sponsorship deals to CFG (you reach out on all continents in all iconic cities) compared to today where its one team one city one league.

do i need to futher explain why this is a good thing compared to the rest of the world football.. But if the CFG brand are not unified it will damage the brand. and everyone will lose out.

this is why i believe this is so important for CFG

I hardly believe that the colours Surrounding not apart of the actual sponsor's part of the jumper would matter compared to exposure in a marketplace the colour of the jumper doesn't affect the colour of the sponsor's emblem. The CFG brand would be unified through the use of the "City" name and away jumper. Signifying the club's home in Melbourne and overlords away. Edited May 29, 2014 by JoyfulPenguin

[Deeming]

What really sucks about this is it took bloody Sydney to save us

[Heart_fan]

Who knows what will happen, but the fight that CFG are undertaking shows just how important it is to them.

To them this is "philanthropy", or a gift to our game in this country.

Why they didn't get permission for this during the sale process is the strangest thing though. For an organisation that is meant to be experienced, which we are relying on to gain some success, this is a huge oversight.

[zeven]

That´s not really true Zeven... Many companies keep their brands very different, just look at breweries, Heineken and Amstel don´t have a colour in common but both are Heineken brands

true but brands like these mentioned, dont attract sponsorships.  CFG need to build a platform where its sponsors can reach out to most ppl as possible and this is easier if the brand itself is the same on all continents. 

[Sash]

 

 

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

If going to the supreme court is what is required to get us playing in sky blue then that is what will happen. FFA have played a strong hand, which may come back to bite them as they need city to pump cash in the league to get it to grow. City can still "walk away" by running the club on a shoe string budget like it previously was run and then just focus on NYCFC.

If you think any negative media will tarnish their brand then you are wrong as money and results ( for city not us) are ultimately what people focus on not a small team in a shitty league in a country full of people that don't even like the game.

 

I know City will probably keep pushing and may eventually get their way, but I don't see on what basis the Supreme Court would overturn a ruling of the competition's governing body. Unless there's a contract or agreement that hasn't been honoured. But otherwise, I think courts are reluctant to get involved in the decision making processes of sporting bodies.

[Kiro Kompiro]

Kingofhearts, we only made money though running as a cut price operation and selling players, which had people crying out for better things on a constant basis.

For so long all we kept hearing was rumours that the owners were looking to walk away, sell the club and other constant negativity.

So yes, we made money but at what cost?

 

I understand your concerns, but...

 

If Citeh pack up their bat and ball, the FFA will take it over, at worst.  And look how that went for WSW.

 

Its a salary capped league, with the right people in charge, anyone can be champions.  With or without Citeh.  Look at the Mariners.

[FB.]

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

If going to the supreme court is what is required to get us playing in sky blue then that is what will happen. FFA have played a strong hand, which may come back to bite them as they need city to pump cash in the league to get it to grow. City can still "walk away" by running the club on a shoe string budget like it previously was run and then just focus on NYCFC.

If you think any negative media will tarnish their brand then you are wrong as money and results ( for city not us) are ultimately what people focus on not a small team in a shitty league in a country full of people that don't even like the game.

Like I said, they have little ground to challenge the FFA on. The FFA controls nearly all aspects of the A-League, they knew this before buying into it.

 

The league has experienced significant growth over the past three seasons and is in arguably the strongest shape it's ever been in. The FFA don't need City to grow the league like you say, to grow Heart yes, but not the league and not if the investments come at the expense of the integrity of the league as a whole. FFA has shown many times before it is prepared to cast off owners no matter how many billions they own, if they threatened the integrity of the league as a whole.

And if they put Heart on a drip feed and try to kill the club (like you say) then I can't see how that wouldn't damage their rep. Not sure how anyone could allow them to invest in other clubs in the future, knowing they might do that to their club tbh. But each to their own.

Edited May 29, 2014 by FB.

[Kiro Kompiro]

 

 

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

If going to the supreme court is what is required to get us playing in sky blue then that is what will happen. FFA have played a strong hand, which may come back to bite them as they need city to pump cash in the league to get it to grow. City can still "walk away" by running the club on a shoe string budget like it previously was run and then just focus on NYCFC.

If you think any negative media will tarnish their brand then you are wrong as money and results ( for city not us) are ultimately what people focus on not a small team in a shitty league in a country full of people that don't even like the game.

 

 

I'll say this about franchise agreements: they are very strongly worded in favour of the franchisor, and cover pretty much any eventuality.  Frank Lowy didn't become a billionaire by hiring shit lawyers.  So if Citeh are stupid to go to the Supreme Court, they will find that this isn't the Gulf where the Shiekh owns the Courts.

 

And as far as City's success goes, with Financial fair play they won't be able to lose 100 mill pounds per trophy for ever.

[M13]

But Zeven.. CFG don´t need sponsors, they sell opportunities to sponsor their teams yes but having de facto several teams, all with different names and perhaps some odd colours doesn´t change anything really.
I might argue that McDonalds or Hilton Hotels that are all the same don´t streamline everything to attract sponsors

[M13]

Kiro.. You have never really understood the difference between CFG and MCFC I take it?

[Murfy1]

Why would someone go spend $20 million on a training complex when they are blocked from making key decisions?

To think this is great move is only looking at half of the picture.

 

 

"Key decisions" (plural)? What other decisions haven't City got their way on? As far as I can see, they've been able to do as they please in Australia. Compared with the USA, where their plans to build a whole stadium have gone awry, I'd say that they are much more getting their way here then they are in the United States (and they are continuing to do business there, of course).

 

And I'd even question whether this is a "key" decision. It's not an insignificant decision for them, I agree, and their initial preference was evidently to change the home jersey to sky blue. But what evidence is there that it's a key/main decision for them, and not simply one small/not-very-important issue for them?

 

 

I'm weary of sounding optimistic, but I think this is an excellent outcome. The club remains red and white (with the home jersey) as the supporters want), although the name might change to Melbourne City and the crest/badge might change to reflect the name change (which is all annoying, but I can live with it).

All the words in the statement Man City released reflects that they intend to keep running the club, and there's even a small chance that they might shift gears and sincerely wish to have "any decisions made in relation to the club's identity will be guided by the traditions of our existing fan base, including their passion for red and white". Maybe now, a bit late, but better late then never, they do sincerely want to keep that one iota of the club's identity (and affirm the club's city and distinctiveness), even if they want to change everything else? They needn't of said those very specific words, so it's very interesting that they did.

 

 

So as far as I can see, anyone who thinks this will be a very big issue for Manchester City are seriously ignorant with regards to this global multibillion dollar organisation, and think they will overly concern themselves with details, when they are much more focused on bigger and more substantive issues.

[zeven]

 

 

 

This is not over. The risk is that City will walk away if FFA makes things too hard. Or restrict their support of Heart in terms of marquees, facilities, coaching, etc. There are plenty of opportunities around the world, as their purchase of a stake in Yokohama shows. City does not benefit from Heart as much as we benefit from them.

There is not a chance City will walk away from Heart over this.

They signed a contract for a 20 year licence for the club, they knew FFA would have final say over such matters, and any return of the Heart licence would result in likely legal proceedings from the FFA.

The negative publicity from walking away alone would be devastating to their reputation, and would make many federations weary from allowing them to further invest in other leagues across the world. Can't see it happening, and can't see them taking this to the Supreme Court without further putting the FFA, football public and media offside.

FFA won't budge on the issue, cause if they do they will undermine the entire league and open every HAL club up to offers and complete rebrands from foreign football clubs in the future. It is the right decision from them for the integrity of the league.

 

If going to the supreme court is what is required to get us playing in sky blue then that is what will happen. FFA have played a strong hand, which may come back to bite them as they need city to pump cash in the league to get it to grow. City can still "walk away" by running the club on a shoe string budget like it previously was run and then just focus on NYCFC.

If you think any negative media will tarnish their brand then you are wrong as money and results ( for city not us) are ultimately what people focus on not a small team in a shitty league in a country full of people that don't even like the game.

 

Like I said, they have little ground to challenge the FFA on. The FFA controls nearly all aspects of the A-League, they knew this before buying into it.

 

The league has experienced significant growth over the past three seasons and is in arguably the strongest shape it's ever been in. The FFA don't need City to grow the league like you say, to grow Heart yes, but not the league and not if the investments come at the expense of the integrity of the league as a whole. FFA has shown many times before it is prepared to cast off owners no matter how many billions they own, if they threatened the integrity of the league as a whole.

And if they put Heart on a drip feed and try to kill the club (like you say) then I can't see how that wouldn't damage their rep. How could anyone allow them to invest in other clubs in the future, knowing they might do that to their club. So yeah nah, I reckon you're wrong about that.

 

A-leauge may grow, but its sill a nothing leauge compared everything els. Citys revenue are what? 10 times that of the entire A-league. city revenue is larger than any sporting league in the country.  we are talking about one single club here larger than entire leagues.  so FFA could need some help from city to grow.

[AyeCee]

Hate to be the one to say it, but I'm rather sure no one in the world would give a shit if City did the wrong thing by us. They already have by trying to change the colours, which has even gained support by existing city fans. They dump us, and the world will just forget about us completely.

And I'm sure they wouldn't give a shit about any legal action taken against them, considering the cost of our entire club was similar to the price of an average Man City player. They won't be hit hard by any court decisions made here if they were to up and leave.

Am amazed they didn't look into this before purchasing the club. I'm hopeful for our club to now remain, however I'm worried as to what we're about to be potentially dragged through.

[Kiro Kompiro]

Kiro.. You have never really understood the difference between CFG and MCFC I take it?

 

What is their to understand.?

 

CFG owns MCFC, CFG wants to re-brand all their clubs as if they're Mini Man City, CFG wants all the clubs it owns to wear the same sky blue as MCFC..For our purposes, they're one and the same.

[Torn Asunder]

Other than this current statement,

"The club remains in constructive discussions with the FFA on a range of matters relating to its future plans including its playing strips. On the matter of colours, as we have said previously, any decisions made in relation to the club's identity will be guided by the traditions of our existing fan base, including their passion for red and white, and the opportunities provided by our new ownership."

I can't recall any other single statement from the club that was definitive on the colour issue.

I will hold my opinion until such time.

I am all for keeping the red and white, 100%, but the arrogance of Sydney to argue that Sky Blue can only belong to them, and then the contradictory argument by FFA, when there are so many teams with Red, especially with WSWFFA being allowed red and white(away) after this colour combo was adopted by Heart, is galling, and fully lends itself to the view that the FFA are massively Sydney centric and biased.

Makes me want some sky blue somewhere in our kit just to stick it up em

[zeven]

I can see city leave.  you cant just take invenstment and dont expect giving anything back. (CFG sole reason was to expand their brand) and the club and the league is worth as much as bench player for city.  

Im pretty sure city will not care as much about heart now when they cant even get their brand 100 per cent out there.  I bet there will be no big signings either. 

From a business perspektive its just not worth it, CFG have teams in shanghai, japan, soon India and Sout Africa where money will be better spent. 

best for both parties, Heart supporters got what they wanted.  

 

Now let us see NYCFC flourish 

[Nate]

I can see city leave.  you cant just take invenstment and dont expect giving anything back. (CFG sole reason was to expand their brand) and the club and the league is worth as much as bench player for city.  

Im pretty sure city will not care as much about heart now when they cant even get their brand 100 per cent out there.  I bet there will be no big signings either. 

From a business perspektive its just not worth it, CFG have teams in shanghai, japan, soon India and Sout Africa where money will be better spent. 

best for both parties, Heart supporters got what they wanted.  

 

Now let us see NYCFC flourish 

You seem to know a hell of a lot about CFG for someone not in CFG.

[BlueWolf]

Hate to be the one to say it, but I'm rather sure no one in the world would give a shit if City did the wrong thing by us. They already have by trying to change the colours, which has even gained support by existing city fans. They dump us, and the world will just forget about us completely.

And I'm sure they wouldn't give a shit about any legal action taken against them, considering the cost of our entire club was similar to the price of an average Man City player. They won't be hit hard by any court decisions made here if they were to up and leave.

Am amazed they didn't look into this before purchasing the club. I'm hopeful for our club to now remain, however I'm worried as to what we're about to be potentially dragged through.

 

Indeed. If Melbourne were going to play in blue, and the badge was blue, it would look great (to City) lined up alongside their own badge and the blue one of NYCFC in promotional material. But it isn't. It's red and white, and as such would stick out like a sore thumb. And as soon as you start talking about red and Manchester (as many will) people instantly think United, and City will not want that, ever. That is basically the short and tall of it.

 

This could get unbelievably messy, not just for the club, but the league itself.

[Sash]

I am all for keeping the red and white, 100%, but the arrogance of Sydney to argue that Sky Blue can only belong to them, and then the contradictory argument by FFA, when there are so many teams with Red, especially with WSWFFA being allowed red and white(away) after this colour combo was adopted by Heart, is galling, and fully lends itself to the view that the FFA are massively Sydney centric and biased.

Makes me want some sky blue somewhere in our kit just to stick it up em

I don't see any conradiction at all.

 

Adelaide is red. (Maybe some additional yellow and blue as they're the SA state colours.) We're red & white. And WSW are red & black. Each club is unique with their own colour combination.

 

Sydney are sky blue, and if we became sky blue, there would be two sky blue teams. Which would be stupid and unneccesary.

 

I'd say if City proposed a compromise which combined their sky blue with our red and white, they would be able to get it through the FFA and probably most of our fans. But they haven't even been prepared to compromise.