Melbourne City Fan Representative Group

[jw1739]

The CFG group have a history in buying companies that are generally in bad shape and then turning them into multi million dollar brands... Mark my words Melbourne City FC will be the flag ship club for the CFG in Asia ... I also believe they have a 10yr license from FFA... and Etihad airways signed on for 5yrs...

I don't think they are looking at moving on anytime soon !!

The current licences have been extended to 20 years for all the licensees - until 2034.

[drewmelbcity]

 

 

Plus, they will have the best chance of securing young talent and they would only need to find one superstar that they can sell to get their initial investment back. Tell a young kid, come play for city, you will have the best coaches, training facilities and the opportunity that Manchester city can only deliver, pretty hard to resist.

 

Finding talent is way down the order of why they bought Melbourne Heart.  It's all about the shirt sales.

 

 

Yeah, that's it.....

 

So what's the best way to sell shirts? I know, bring in some great players so supporters want to buy their shirts...

....and what does bringing great players in do?  Makes it a better team (hopefully).

....and what does a better team do?  Makes existing supporters happier. Brings in new supporters and makes the club a more desirable option for new players to want to come to.

....and what does that do? Makes the club a powerhouse and makes more people want to buy their shirts... and the cycle goes on...

 

So for me, in the end - who gives a f**k what their intentions are if their involvement improves on every aspect of my experience as member of this club - especially watching them play better football.

 

 

I like your attitude son

[rass]

 

 

 

Plus, they will have the best chance of securing young talent and they would only need to find one superstar that they can sell to get their initial investment back. Tell a young kid, come play for city, you will have the best coaches, training facilities and the opportunity that Manchester city can only deliver, pretty hard to resist.

 

Finding talent is way down the order of why they bought Melbourne Heart.  It's all about the shirt sales.

 

 

Yeah, that's it.....

 

So what's the best way to sell shirts? I know, bring in some great players so supporters want to buy their shirts...

....and what does bringing great players in do?  Makes it a better team (hopefully).

....and what does a better team do?  Makes existing supporters happier. Brings in new supporters and makes the club a more desirable option for new players to want to come to.

....and what does that do? Makes the club a powerhouse and makes more people want to buy their shirts... and the cycle goes on...

 

So for me, in the end - who gives a f**k what their intentions are if their involvement improves on every aspect of my experience as member of this club - especially watching them play better football.

 

 

I like your attitude son

 

cheers pop - it's all pretty simple really... to me anyway!

[drewmelbcity]

 

 

 

 

Plus, they will have the best chance of securing young talent and they would only need to find one superstar that they can sell to get their initial investment back. Tell a young kid, come play for city, you will have the best coaches, training facilities and the opportunity that Manchester city can only deliver, pretty hard to resist.

 

Finding talent is way down the order of why they bought Melbourne Heart.  It's all about the shirt sales.

 

 

Yeah, that's it.....

 

So what's the best way to sell shirts? I know, bring in some great players so supporters want to buy their shirts...

....and what does bringing great players in do?  Makes it a better team (hopefully).

....and what does a better team do?  Makes existing supporters happier. Brings in new supporters and makes the club a more desirable option for new players to want to come to.

....and what does that do? Makes the club a powerhouse and makes more people want to buy their shirts... and the cycle goes on...

 

So for me, in the end - who gives a f**k what their intentions are if their involvement improves on every aspect of my experience as member of this club - especially watching them play better football.

 

 

I like your attitude son

 

cheers pop - it's all pretty simple really... to me anyway!

 

 

To me there is a little too much over analyzing. Bottom line is City Group is investing in infrastructure and players for our club so whether or not they sell in future is irrelevant because they are setting the proper foundations.

[jw1739]

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

 

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

[hedaik]

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

 

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

 

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises. 

 

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason. 

Edited October 10, 2014 by hedaik

[Tesla]

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

 

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

 

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises. 

 

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason.

They could just continue charging the new owners to use the City branding, if the club was sold.

[hedaik]

 

 

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

 

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

 

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises. 

 

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason.

 

They could just continue charging the new owners to use the City branding, if the club was sold.

 

 

Lots of things could happen, I just find it hard to get all CiTy 4 Lyf n shit with the current arrangement....unlike the AFL (or most other sports) where you know your club aint going nowhere. 

[Pete Heartspur]

 

 

 

 

 

 

All good points brought up. Will be interesting to see if the change of navy blue stripe to red will eventuate. I am unsure whether commercial jet liners are allowed to fly so close to the city. I particularly like the signed huge club jersey being hung for every home game gives us something unique that no other club has.

Considering MCFC completely ignored the #KeepMelbourneRedAndWhite Campaign and in doing so were rewarded by receiving not only a boost to Membership Figures but also no real significant fallout from the campaigners themselves...

 

I highly doubt they will start listen to "Colour Suggestions" fan the fans now.

Haha. That was my first thought. Pretty cheeky to say they will start asking fans what colors they want to use now

 

I wouldn't think of it as CFG taking suggestions from supporters, instead as a way they could sneak more sky blue onto the kit. Appease the fans by replacing the navy with red, but bring more sky blue in through the back door. They'll be so happy with the red being introduced, they won't give a shit.

 

They only significant home kit colour changes that we will ever see from here on would be:

 

1. More Sky Blue

2. More Sky Blue

3. And maybe some more Sky Blue. 

 

I'm well aware of this.

 

But please don't shatter my unrealistic dream of there ever being a slither of red on our home kit.

 

 

1. Denial and Isolation

2. Anger

3. Bargaining

4. Depression

5. Acceptance

 

I think I've regressed.

[drewmelbcity]

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises.

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason.

They could just continue charging the new owners to use the City branding, if the club was sold.

Lots of things could happen, I just find it hard to get all CiTy 4 Lyf n shit with the current arrangement....unlike the AFL (or most other sports) where you know your club aint going nowhere.

Ask Fitzroy fans that.

[cadete]

 

 

 

 

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises.

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason. They could just continue charging the new owners to use the City branding, if the club was sold.

Lots of things could happen, I just find it hard to get all CiTy 4 Lyf n shit with the current arrangement....unlike the AFL (or most other sports) where you know your club aint going nowhere.

Ask Fitzroy fans that.

 

If you compare the last thirty years of National Domestic Soccer with the the history of the AFL he has a point... Fitzroy are an isolated example.

Edited October 10, 2014 by cadete

[KSK_47]

 

 

 

 

 

Why would they sell? Suppose someone offered $20m or $30m for the licence - why would CFG bother to sell because to them $10m-$20m profit is peanuts in their overall scheme of things. And who's going to offer more than that?

No, CFG are in this for the long haul.

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises.

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason. They could just continue charging the new owners to use the City branding, if the club was sold.

Lots of things could happen, I just find it hard to get all CiTy 4 Lyf n shit with the current arrangement....unlike the AFL (or most other sports) where you know your club aint going nowhere.

Ask Fitzroy fans that.

 

If you compare the last thirty years of National Domestic Soccer with the the history of the AFL he has a point... Fitzroy are an isolated example.

 

 

I was going to bring up this exact point before. But I figure people have heard more than enough of my rants about instability being a major contributing factor to Soccer's limited appeal

[NewConvert]

When did South Melbourne become Sydney? From recollection it was in the 80s. And of course there is the rebranding of Footscray and North Melbourne. Also the rise and demise of the the Bears.

[El Cunado]

When did South Melbourne become Sydney? From recollection it was in the 80s. And of course there is the rebranding of Footscray and North Melbourne. Also the rise and demise of the the Bears.

Not to mention all those University fans still reeling from the pre-WW1 days.

Edited October 11, 2014 by El Cunado

[Shahanga]

 

When did South Melbourne become Sydney? From recollection it was in the 80s. And of course there is the rebranding of Footscray and North Melbourne. Also the rise and demise of the the Bears.

Not to mention all those University fans still really from the pre-WW1 days.

 

Not all of us on here are 15.  

 

Still bump into disgruntled South Melbourne people from time to time.  When Wimbledon tried this ("relocating" a club, renaming it and saying it now had no history)  in the UK supporters of all clubs got behind the Wimbledon supporters, but here in Oz we are just too laid back.  IMO Brisbane at least made an effort to acknowledge the Fitzroy past, where as Sydney under Edelsten actively tried to disassociate from it.

[jw1739]

 

 

When did South Melbourne become Sydney? From recollection it was in the 80s. And of course there is the rebranding of Footscray and North Melbourne. Also the rise and demise of the the Bears.

Not to mention all those University fans still really from the pre-WW1 days.

 

Not all of us on here are 15.  

 

Still bump into disgruntled South Melbourne people from time to time.  When Wimbledon tried this ("relocating" a club, renaming it and saying it now had no history)  in the UK supporters of all clubs got behind the Wimbledon supporters, but here in Oz we are just too laid back.  IMO Brisbane at least made an effort to acknowledge the Fitzroy past, where as Sydney under Edelsten actively tried to disassociate from it.

 

I don't know how accurate this is, but there's a chronology of what happened here: http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/07/06/the-south-to-sydney-saga/

 

I don't quite get the point that's being made with these references to AFL clubs. The point that I want to make with respect to references to "Melbourne City" when the team/club/franchise involved at the time was Melbourne Heart is that IMO these are a pathetic effort to re-write history. I can't believe that anyone would go to the trouble to airbrush out a Heart logo on a cap or refer to the first derby as "Melbourne City vs. Melbourne Victory." It's the sort of thing I might have expected in North Korea, but not here. I have zero respect for whoever thinks they are achieving something by doing it.

[Attack11]

I loved the support and the atmosphere created by our active supporter members behind the goal but please don't chant or sing songs about Muscute .... It makes us look amateurish and small.

[melbournelad55]

good effort by all involved today, looked great and were loud.. Keep it up!!

[HeartFrom2009]

I agree their intention is for the long term, but financial situations change pretty quickly, especially with owners of sporting franchises.

Whether its 5 or 50 years, I can't help but feel that the whole sky blue and City branding is only around for as long as CFG are, and our next owners will be free to do (or forced to) move away from the City branding and place their own imprint on the club. Im finding it pretty hard to attach myself to Melb City for this reason.

Lots of things could happen, I just find it hard to get all CiTy 4 Lyf n shit with the current arrangement....unlike the AFL (or most other sports) where you know your club aint going nowhere.

Agreed. I continue to support the club, but I really hope CFG sell pretty soon. I want our colours, our name, our kit, out logo, our club back.

I'd rather be Melbourne Heart like we were every other season than be Melbourne City will heaps of money. We obviously didn't have the resources of a Melbourne Victory or Sydney FC but we could have kept growing.

Edited October 21, 2014 by HeartFrom2009

[Heart_fan]

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

[Heart_fan]

EDIT: Double post.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Heart_fan

[belaguttman]

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

I agree, but you don't have to rebrand to change perception, you need to change the team performance to change perception.

[NewConvert]

 

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

I agree, but you don't have to rebrand to change perception, you need to change the team performance to change perception.

 

 

Out of curiosity, do you have any examples of clubs that have changed from failure to success? The only one I can think of was Hawthorn here in Melbourne, Sydney are a transplanted South Melbourne that have only succeeded by substantial amounts of money from the AFL. Fitzroy technically merged with Brisbane Bears but really not many remember Fitzroy. Outside of Oz I have no idea (actually outside of AFL).

[KSK_47]

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

I agree, but you don't have to rebrand to change perception, you need to change the team performance to change perception.

 

Out of curiosity, do you have any examples of clubs that have changed from failure to success? The only one I can think of was Hawthorn here in Melbourne, Sydney are a transplanted South Melbourne that have only succeeded by substantial amounts of money from the AFL. Fitzroy technically merged with Brisbane Bears but really not many remember Fitzroy. Outside of Oz I have no idea (actually outside of AFL).

Manchester City is a good example

[M13]

The same Manchester City that was one of the best clubs in the country when I was a teen...

[KSK_47]

The same Manchester City that was one of the best clubs in the country when I was a teen...

Well believe it or not there was a time when city were terrible and Leeds were good.

[M13]

That´s recent.. I was talking about the 70´s

[KSK_47]

That´s recent.. I was talking about the 70´s

 

Oh! Haha. Well that was before my time.

[HeartFrom2009]

The Premier League doesn't have a salary cap. CFG owning us won't mean we can just buy the leagues best players, like it does with Man City. They only thing they can buy us that will be far superior to everyone else is facilities.

 

We just needed to build, in leagues with salary caps, it gives smaller teams hope and a real chance of success.

[KSK_47]

The Premier League doesn't have a salary cap. CFG owning us won't mean we can just buy the leagues best players, like it does with Man City. They only thing they can buy us that will be far superior to everyone else is facilities.

 

We just needed to build, in leagues with salary caps, it gives smaller teams hope and a real chance of success.

 

As well as marquee players and coaching staff.

 

Anyway. This is all very off topic for this thread

[cadete]

When did South Melbourne become Sydney? From recollection it was in the 80s. And of course there is the rebranding of Footscray and North Melbourne. Also the rise and demise of the the Bears.

If we are going count rebranding the above changes look like typos when compared to the amount of colour/name/location changes that have occurred in Australian Domestic Soccer.

 

In fact some individual teams would almost have the whole AFL covered... my own old NSL team has changed its name, merged/unmerged and moved grounds about seven or eight times since I was a kid.

[SF33]

 

 

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

I agree, but you don't have to rebrand to change perception, you need to change the team performance to change perception.

 

 

Out of curiosity, do you have any examples of clubs that have changed from failure to success? The only one I can think of was Hawthorn here in Melbourne, Sydney are a transplanted South Melbourne that have only succeeded by substantial amounts of money from the AFL. Fitzroy technically merged with Brisbane Bears but really not many remember Fitzroy. Outside of Oz I have no idea (actually outside of AFL).

 

 

Well, I guess it depends on your definition of failure. I'd suggest Geelong is a reasonable example: an absolute basket case on and off the field in the late 90s-early 00s. Two years ago, I reckon Port Adelaide would have just about been considered the club in the worst position in the AFL, as debts and losses piled up and they had to cover empty bays at AAMI Stadium with tarps to try to draw attention away from the meagre attendances. And, after several years in the doldrums, Brisbane looks to be well on the way to building towards another era of success. In fact, nearly every Victorian and some interstate clubs have been under serious pressure to continue as going concerns at some point or another in the past 30 years.

 

In the NRL, South Sydney (despite being historically the most successful club) is the obvious example. The Rabbitohs ceased to be an NRL club for a couple of seasons.

 

I think Melburnians have a pretty long history of jumping on any professional club that's a winner (AFL club memberships pretty clearly reflect this). I'm quite confident that Heart would have ended up being a moderately successful business, if it had managed to continually compete for top four/top six spots in the league and was roughly as successful (or more successful) as Victory. Potential supporters stayed away because the team was garbage and the rival that it was hoping to take some supporters away from was better than it was year after year.

Edited October 21, 2014 by SF33

[hedaik]

 

 

 

In fact some individual teams would almost have the whole AFL covered... my own old NSL team has changed its name, merged/unmerged and moved grounds about seven or eight times since I was a kid.

 

 

The funny thing about all of this is that soccer fans are probably the worst when it comes to calling other teams/fans 'plastic' or with no history/tradition, when NSL/ALeague is probably 1000 x worse than the NBA or NFL with teams relocating and changing names. 

[mulhollanddrive]

If our owners were serious about the club, they could have made Villa a permanent marquee.  NYCFC could have landed 3 others no problem.   Not only that now they're pulling strings at our expense with Villa and not spending their cash with Koren and no Australian marquee. 

 

And they've kept the same mediocre management that are making the same mistakes. 

[schrecky]

If our owners were serious about the club, they could have made Villa a permanent marquee.  NYCFC could have landed 3 others no problem.   Not only that now they're pulling strings at our expense with Villa and not spending their cash with Koren and no Australian marquee. 

 

And they've kept the same mediocre management that are making the same mistakes. 

A bit harsh i think.  The club is in the best position its ever been in. Our lineup is pretty good. 

Villa Chose to go to NYCFC, we just asked if we could borrow him, we had zero chance of making him marquee. he was a bonus that could not have happened without the new owners.

 

The club still is being operated sensibly as there is no benefit o running at a loss for too long. 

Just like koren, villa could have got injured as well, This is part of the game and hopefully the rest of the team has enough quality to make up for it. 

 

That first half in Sydney without Koren, Williams or Villa was the best i've seen the team play (in 5 years)  

I Cant see to many mistakes being made so far.  Its just going to get better.

[Shahanga]

 

^^ Doubt it.

The club brand was damaged very deeply , and as friends of mine had said, the name became synonymous with failure.

Without investment and confidence, we were going backwards fast. Changing that perception was going to take a lot to get us back on track in the eyes of the general public.

I agree, but you don't have to rebrand to change perception, you need to change the team performance to change perception.

 

Yes!  Look no further than Brisbane Roar.

 

Pre-Ange, textbook Brisbane was to play well, dominate the game, not score and either lose or draw (sound familiar?).

 

Now, 3 title later, they are the team to beat.

[Tesla]

The Premier League doesn't have a salary cap.

If you want to get technical, it actually sort of does.

[Braveheart]

The real question is: When will Hackett be made part of this group? 

[raw10]

I am not sure whether this is the right topic to post in but can someone from the FRG feedback to the club about the way they handle the kits? In particular the Away ones? we are already in the 3rd round and they have yet to offer the Away kit to the public.. that is piss poor.. Merch online is s***house .. And now I heard the home kit has sold out? WTF??? 

[melbournelad55]

Considering this is fan related... Can anyone tell me if rebel sport or another store besides the merchandise stand at Aami or the online shop, is selling the new scarves?