Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mack

A-League & 2nd Tier Expansion Thread V2

Recommended Posts

Approving a bid for a team that says they will play out of 3 different stadiums would be peak A-league / Gallop / Lowy.

Good luck getting over 5-7k at each of those venues.

A bid doomed to fail even with the financial backing. 

All 3 regions are soooooooooooo different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Join WestSydneyFootball.Com and participate by registering an account.

27 minutes ago, matty said:

Absolutely. They'll be the Heart of Sydney

Plus split the smurfs attendance making the business case for rebuilding Sydney Football Stadium irrelevant, as if it was wasn’t already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, luisenrique said:

Oh look, the FFA are delaying a decision again.

https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/ffa-delay-a-league-expansion-shortlist

 

Normally Deloitte would be to blame for this because they should either know that bids might require additional information and have factored this into their timing, or if it is just a "first cut" so bids can decide if they spend even more money on applying then there should be super strict regulations about getting all the required information together on time.  But this also has the smell of the FFA realising that their preferred bid didn't supply enough information.  I mean, if Canberra bid and they didn't supply enough info, you know the FFA would happily rule them out.

But how can you not have released the criteria, or even the cost of the licence? How can teams work out financials if they don't know the basic cost to buy a licence in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a farce. Football people have been saying for months that the FFA needed to provide bids with much more information so they know what they're bidding for! 

Fusking amateurs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, btron3000 said:

Normally Deloitte would be to blame for this because they should either know that bids might require additional information and have factored this into their timing, or if it is just a "first cut" so bids can decide if they spend even more money on applying then there should be super strict regulations about getting all the required information together on time.  But this also has the smell of the FFA realising that their preferred bid didn't supply enough information.  I mean, if Canberra bid and they didn't supply enough info, you know the FFA would happily rule them out.

But how can you not have released the criteria, or even the cost of the licence? How can teams work out financials if they don't know the basic cost to buy a licence in the first place?

It doesn’t look good normally in these processes you allow time in the plan for this, set aside a couple of weeks for additional questions and clarifications, so all bidders have same timeline and requirements.

This would get slammed if it was for example a government tender 

This has the optics of the bid we want didn’t give us what we want so we will go and ask for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×