FC Edmonton - 2022 Season Thread

[Ansem]

12 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

First, all teams going into the league were vetted and they had to make a multi-year committment. So this is a league problem as well. 

This is probably a case where the league chose to "grant" someone's request to leave at their discretion even if they didn't have too. What more value could the Faths bring by staying on? If anything, the league staff looked more competent at running the club (I know perception might not be reality)

 

16 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Second, there is an injection of money from Mediapro and clearly we don't know where it's going. You'd think that kind of investment would also work to help bolster clubs and provide a hedge against losses. Especially in the development period we are still in. Didn't happen.

It's the same as SUM for MLS. Despite the cheques, doesn't stop clubs like CF Montreal to bleeding money. The difference is that CPL tries to spend more closely to their revenues unlike MLS.

*Losses of ~$10M before the pandemic and $20M during... Says it's not sustainable. No kidding... Oh and that's SUM cheques included

I think the Fath just wanted out, period as they were dead set on spending the bare minimum anyways. I think the city denying the Clarke Stadium upgrades killed whatever passion was left. You can't make money in a stadium deal like that... impossible.

 

22 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Three: Canadian Soccer Business has a failure on its hands if this comes to pass. So that is a failure that we have to attribute to the previous management, not the new boss. Oh, forgot, they had no one running the thing for more than half a year. That was a good way to ensure one of your eight teams was being properly supported by the league.

I think they learned from it. Under the new management, I'm not convince they would have let the Fath come in even if they were on board. CPL knew that Clarke Stadium didn't meet CPL requirements and let them in anyways hoping they'd get what they wanted from the city of Edmonton.

Now, it seems that anything short than a soccer stadium and solid business plan won't get you an expansion. The main issue with Quebec City is the stadium and despite how bad the league wants in that province, they won't budge on the minimum required to be accepted... as they should.

 

32 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Finally, the rumoured entry fees for new clubs. If you want to call them the equivalent of buying a franchise, or something else, does not matter: the argumentation I disagree with but that many have bought here as well, is that since the league is increasing in value, anyone wanting in has to pay more. The deeper we get in, the more new teams have to pay. Which denies the basic principle that the league's value is still unstable. Yes, I am arguing entry fees to the league, what anyone pays into CSB to be a member club, have to be kept low. At least until we get to 10-12 teams, to the optimal level. 

It helps weed out those they shouldn't be doing business with. Also, CSB "IS" valuable to the point that everyone wants to blow up their deal with the CSA now that they are profiting from "competently" managing those properties that the CSA never could or cared too.

 

35 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Does the CPL really think it makes sense to argue for a new club to pay in millions when 1/8 of the league is failing? Any new addition adds more value by its mere presence (including stadium, fans, merchandising, growing the CPL market nationally, helping justifying tv contracts, making it more enticing for sponsors). FCE proves you should be facilitating new clubs and not taking this greedy attitude of "we were here first", which is a misplaced imitation of MLS.

But it didn't stop MLS becoming what it is - why should CPL/CSB doubt they could do any less?

[Ansem]

31 minutes ago, narduch said:

My own theory is that CSB isn`t owned evenly by the 8 clubs. In fact possibly Edmonton owned 0% of it.

Good point - Maybe someone can remind me of the issue with broadcasting/equipment they wanted to do on their own (I might completely be wrong) - doesn't sound like they were 100% all in like the other clubs seems to be. I think the league dodged a huge bullet by not having OSEG with them as I'm convinced they'd be constantly trying to go against the flow.

For a league to succeed, you need all parties to be all in as much as possible in this era. MLS might have been onto something with the "Single-Entity" structure.

[MtlMario]

Anybody else remember when the Fath's gave up the team the league said there were many interested new owners and there would be news soon? Wonder what happened?

[jonovision]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

*Losses of ~$10M before the pandemic and $20M during... Says it's not sustainable. No kidding... Oh and that's SUM cheques included

I'm always suspicious when business owners claim to be losing money, especially sports franchises. Frankly I have a hard time believing CF Montreal even spends $20m in a year, unless a huge chunk of that is amortized real estate costs that go towards building equity.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

5 hours ago, narduch said:

My own theory is that CSB isn`t owned evenly by the 8 clubs. In fact possibly Edmonton owned 0% of it. Really if CSB is such a money maker that critics of the CSA are claiming, Edmonton could be surviving on that money alone...

Or maybe CSB isn't such a money maker and Mediapro's "investment" revolves mainly around Onesoccer's operational costs? I doubt they'll announce anything negative about FCE until playoffs are out of the way. What would be interesting to find out was why there was so much optimism about new owners a couple of months back and why nothing progressed further on that.

[Unnamed Trialist]

13 hours ago, Ansem said:

This is probably a case where the league chose to "grant" someone's request to leave at their discretion even if they didn't have too. What more value could the Faths bring by staying on? If anything, the league staff looked more competent at running the club (I know perception might not be reality)

 

It's the same as SUM for MLS. Despite the cheques, doesn't stop clubs like CF Montreal to bleeding money. The difference is that CPL tries to spend more closely to their revenues unlike MLS.

*Losses of ~$10M before the pandemic and $20M during... Says it's not sustainable. No kidding... Oh and that's SUM cheques included

I think the Fath just wanted out, period as they were dead set on spending the bare minimum anyways. I think the city denying the Clarke Stadium upgrades killed whatever passion was left. You can't make money in a stadium deal like that... impossible.

 

I think they learned from it. Under the new management, I'm not convince they would have let the Fath come in even if they were on board. CPL knew that Clarke Stadium didn't meet CPL requirements and let them in anyways hoping they'd get what they wanted from the city of Edmonton.

Now, it seems that anything short than a soccer stadium and solid business plan won't get you an expansion. The main issue with Quebec City is the stadium and despite how bad the league wants in that province, they won't budge on the minimum required to be accepted... as they should.

 

It helps weed out those they shouldn't be doing business with. Also, CSB "IS" valuable to the point that everyone wants to blow up their deal with the CSA now that they are profiting from "competently" managing those properties that the CSA never could or cared too.

 

But it didn't stop MLS becoming what it is - why should CPL/CSB doubt they could do any less?

Comparing and justifying on the basis of the MLS--I'm convinced if we go that way, the league will fail. It's a different model, but the owners are not clear enough about that. And some fans.

For example: if you think demanding a high standard for a specific stadium is not a cost outlay, so that you press there, on top of requiring a high entrance fee, we are not going to get any more new teams. It is too prohibitive. Especially if new potential owners look at the CPL and see it can't even keep what it has.

And if we do that, we'll just watch the league shrink. Every team leaving puts the league at risk overall. Do we have owners acting like a bunch of drunks on a party boat, someone falls overboard and they think, "hey, more booze for us"?

Edited October 14, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[narduch]

Heads up

 

[Ansem]

Wow! FC Edmonton still carrying debt from "Pre-CanPL" - no wonder they are hard to sell.

As I said before - the league dodged a bullet by not having OSEG based on that. Unless a new owner is willing to pay the debt or the league does, makes more sense for an investor to start fresh somewhere else unless it's a rich local who really really want a club in his city/

Even then, I'd fold the club and restart from scratch if I was a rich local investor

Edited October 14, 2022 by Ansem

[SpursFlu]

Probably going to kill it and then just start a new team fresh completely out from under all the baggage of FC Edmonton 

For all the old timers around here.. wasn't that the reason for the 86ers instead of Whitecaps? Whitecaps had carried a bunch of debt and other baggage they needed to separate from. Truthfully FC Edmonton "brand" likely doesn't carry much equity with the market anyways 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Steven Sandor:

• Faths still own FCE, league only administer, many don't realize this.
• Situation of other owners paying bills not sustainable even with low player budget thanks to loan deals, exhorbitant travel costs in Canada, no travel deals including from Westjet.
• Liabilities go back 11 years and said to be infinitely more than an expansion franchise fee.
• Not easy to just fold the team and restart because of lease agreements and rights of first refusal.
• City of Edmonton and Alberta as a province not happy with soccer right now, took a long time for the CSA to pay bill for using Commonwealth & FIFA went with two host cities having promised three.
• New stadium a non-starter any time soon as $300 million related to hosting from Feds & Alberta won't be spent in Edmonton now.

Duane Rollins

• Nef's story not being shot down when Rollins speaks to people off the record, which is not a good sign.
• Has heard of audiences under 100 on Onesoccer

Edited October 14, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

14 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

Probably going to kill it and then just start a new team fresh completely out from under all the baggage of FC Edmonton 

For all the old timers around here.. wasn't that the reason for the 86ers instead of Whitecaps? Whitecaps had carried a bunch of debt and other baggage they needed to separate from. Truthfully FC Edmonton "brand" likely doesn't carry much equity with the market anyways 

Go Brickmen!

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

23 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

...For all the old timers around here.. wasn't that the reason for the 86ers instead of Whitecaps? Whitecaps had carried a bunch of debt and other baggage they needed to separate from...

Been a while but think the 86ers were basically a fan owned project initially. Although crowds were good in CSL terms they couldn't balance the books and quickly needed private ownership (Milan Ilich?) to step in. Later after the CSL era David Braley of CFL fame stepped in for a bit to keep them going. Steve Sandor talked about maybe a team could be started out in the burbs. The league seems to have set a high bar on what's an acceptable stadium so not sure how easy that would be.

[Stoppage Time]

39 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

The league seems to have set a high bar on what's an acceptable stadium so not sure how easy that would be.

I have asked this once before, but would it be practical or sensible to upgrade Clarke Stadium in Edmonton to make the stadium more modern and aesthetically pleasing? That would, I imagine, be a lot less expensive for a new ownership group. Cheers!

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Think that was very much on the cards if Edmonton had been a host city for 2026 because training facilities would have been needed. Sandor seemed pessimistic about the prospects of that happening now.

The Eskimos/Elks and CJFL teams have always made it awkward for the Faths to make the changes they wanted because it's not a soccer specific venue.

There was talk years back of the City of Edmonton building a soccer stadium if FCE consistently sold out Clarke stadium but that never happened obviously.

[shermanator]

33 minutes ago, Stoppage Time said:

I have asked this once before, but would it be practical or sensible to upgrade Clarke Stadium in Edmonton to make the stadium more modern and aesthetically pleasing? That would, I imagine, be a lot less expensive for a new ownership group. Cheers!

Yes, but in reality that isn't going to happen. The stadium is owned by the city of Edmonton and it has to cater to multiple sports.

What people may not realize is that back in 2014 the city and FC Edmonton had an agreement to upgrade Clarke Stadium to a 5000-10000 seat stadium suitable for multiple sports, concerts, etc. Phase 1 of the plan was the upgrade of the turf. This was done, and now the turf is now horribly outdated and we are back to needing new turf.

Phase 2 was to see the stadium expanded to 10000 seats with new dressing rooms, washrooms, storage etc. In order to commit funding to phase 2 the city of Edmonton wanted to see a certain attendance target hit by FC Edmonton. To paraphrase, if there was enough demand to upgrade Clarke Stadium, they'd do it.

Not a single FC Edmonton game played since has hit that attendance target of 4500. Take that information in for a minute...

Quote

The trigger for Phase II development includes achieving an average attendance of 4,500 for professional and/or amateur sport organizations who use Clarke as their home field on an annual basis for three years.

Source: https://www.edmonton.ca/public-files/assets/document?path=PDF/MediumSizeStadiumStrategy.pdf

Edited October 14, 2022 by shermanator

[CDNFootballer]

5 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

Probably going to kill it and then just start a new team fresh completely out from under all the baggage of FC Edmonton 

For all the old timers around here.. wasn't that the reason for the 86ers instead of Whitecaps? Whitecaps had carried a bunch of debt and other baggage they needed to separate from. Truthfully FC Edmonton "brand" likely doesn't carry much equity with the market anyways 

The original Whitecaps folded after the NASL also folded, 86ers group had tried to purchase the "Whitecaps" name but weren't able to come to an agreement with the holder at that time.

Edited October 14, 2022 by CDNFootballer

[SpursFlu]

1 hour ago, CDNFootballer said:

The original Whitecaps folded after the NASL also folded, 86ers group had tried to purchase the "Whitecaps" name but weren't able to come to an agreement with the holder at that time.

Yah but I had heard that along with that there was a debt associated with the Whitecaps. Maybe that was part of why there couldn't be an agreement. I remember Bobaduzzi saying that in an interview somewhere. The name 86 along with the year was also in reference to 86 investors or something like that

Edited October 15, 2022 by SpursFlu

[Aird25]

Aren’t Sandor and Rollins two of the biggest CPL detractors out there? I used to read both their work but I had to stop long ago due to the negativity 

[SpursFlu]

54 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

Aren’t Sandor and Rollins two of the biggest CPL detractors out there? I used to read both their work but I had to stop long ago due to the negativity 

They're definitely a couple Grade A haters. Only happy to be unhappy 

Edited October 15, 2022 by SpursFlu

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, Aird25 said:

Aren’t Sandor and Rollins two of the biggest CPL detractors out there? I used to read both their work but I had to stop long ago due to the negativity 

I've found at times that both have reported on things that people didn't want to hear, and that lead to them being tagged as "detractors".  And I say that as someone who doesn't like Rollins.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

5 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

...The name 86 along with the year was also in reference to 86 investors or something like that

1986 as the year they were founded and the year of the Expo was what was usually mentioned. 

https://www.nwpb.org/2021/07/15/vancouver-expo-86-remembering-cascadias-last-great-worlds-fair-35-years-later/

Edited October 15, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

21 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

I've found at times that both have reported on things that people didn't want to hear, and that lead to them being tagged as "detractors".  And I say that as someone who doesn't like Rollins.

Both Rollins and Sandor didn't get the jobs they clearly coveted so stopped toeing the corporate line.

Have to say a lot of what Steven Sandor said later in this interview about gatekeeping fangroup types, soccer guilt tripping fans into buying tickets unlike other minor league sports operations in Edmonton, the league office rescheduling games at short notice for Onesoccer, and the need for one price general admission, is the sort of stuff Mark Noonan should be listening to and responding to right now.

It's also the sort of stuff that would have been better pushed before the league launched when they were both still about as objective about the league and its immediate prospects as Radio Tirana was where Enver Hoxha was concerned back in the day.

Edited October 15, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[yothat2]

5 hours ago, Aird25 said:

Aren’t Sandor and Rollins two of the biggest CPL detractors out there? I used to read both their work but I had to stop long ago due to the negativity 

he' so annoying and overly dramatic.  say your an futbol fan ..  but spends all your time hating on the team because you don't have the same access with the league. 

[Treppy2]

12 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Both Rollins and Sandor didn't get the jobs they clearly coveted so stopped toeing the corporate line.

Have to say a lot of what Steven Sandor said later in this interview about gatekeeping fangroup types, soccer guilt tripping fans into buying tickets unlike other minor league sports operations in Edmonton, the league office rescheduling games at short notice for Onesoccer, and the need for one price general admission, is the sort of stuff Mark Noonan should be listening to and responding to right now.

It's also the sort of stuff that would have been better pushed before the league launched when they were both still about as objective about the league and its immediate prospects as Radio Tirana was where Enver Hoxha was concerned back in the day.

Never thought I would read the name Enver Hoxha on a Canadian football forum!

ETA: Especially on this thread!

Edited October 15, 2022 by Treppy2

[SthMelbRed]

11 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

1986 as the year they were founded and the year of the Expo was what was usually mentioned. 

https://www.nwpb.org/2021/07/15/vancouver-expo-86-remembering-cascadias-last-great-worlds-fair-35-years-later/

1986 was the centenary of the founding of the city of Vancouver. Hosting Expo '86 was the centrepiece of the centennial celebrations. The 86ers name was a nod to the city's founding year, with the added significance of the club being formed in the centennial year. Having 86 original investors was just a gimmick to play on the name.