Who’ll save the Newcastle Jets?

which formed 4 years before the world's first alpine ski club in 1861, which was in Kiandra, Australia. An irrelevant yet interesting fact.

Agree. 10,000 members with a big community awareness (good OR bad) is definitely enough for a club to exist. I know plenty of people who attend every Jets game, win or lose. I doubt Newcastle will push for the title again though. Now that the league is becoming established, the best players are opting for the bigger cities, with the kudos and bigger reputations (in spite of the salary cap and the new media deal).

Apparently Michael Bridges has resigned as Youth coach too.

Darren B - this is a rugby league town? 10 000 fotball fan membership for a team that is near the bottom still not bad at all, if the governace of the club is sorted out it can only be onwards and up wards for the club but I also agree they need as clean out for sure. They need to get away form that rugby league colour I reckon as well, football needs to be the leader here, the jets need to have their own identfying colour something that represents their roots for the fans to love and it looks as if they deserve this. The club also needs to have regular meetings with representaives of the fans for their in put so they feel engaged with the club. Also last thing change the colour of the seats or something in the stands it needs brightened up and looks drab, the other day when Ausy played the Emerates it was filled with colour and it looked wonderfull! NZer

Good post

Sheffield FC founded 1857 and still going. They were no more professional than Melbourne were at the time. Sheffield Rules published 1858. At any rate, this is the football tab. Fair to say that any reference to football means association rather than Australian rules.

Problem lies with the investment scenario the FFA have created, an article on SBS is very interesting where Tinkler raises his gripes over having to pay $5 million while others paid $500k They aren't buying clubs, they are purchasing a license to operate a team in a given area by the FFA, the entities have no assets etc, and there are severe operating restrictions, eg on sponsors and also websites which is a big deal in the internet age Biggest kick in the teeth is that they were/are expected to keep covering the losses most clubs made. Less of a problem with the new TV deal but the FFA have been rather disingenuous in keeping much of the revenue to fill their own coffers, binding the hands of investors, limiting their capacity to control their product and expecting them to silently bear millions in losses each year. No wonder they have agitated for more control of the league over the years Hardly surprising that even WS despite its potential struggled to find anyone to back it. Ironically this made the FFA pull its finger out and engage the community, and - shock horror - build that team up more in line with how clubs started up in the first place, and an even bigger shock was that as a result it became much more powerful and marketable, eg Wanderland branding and all the rest, A-League still not a good investment though, hence only $10 and Primo owner

FFA won't take over, they'll extend the deadline This issue has been really awkward when the Socceroos are playing at Newcastle Stadium in a Semi and beating the UAE to make the Asian Cup Final All feelgood stuff etc and the 31st is around the Final, they won't do anything until mid February so we can all hopefully bask in the warm glow of Asian Cup success Not a bad thing, kicking the can down the road on the one hand but importantly denying naysayers any ammunition to try and undermine what hopefully will be success by the Socceroos, at the very least Brisbane pitches aside we have been very successful

Melbourne Football Club (founded May 1859) is the oldest professional football club in the world. Even older than Stoke City (1864) or Notts County (1863). The document listing the rules of the club is in the Museum of Australian Sport.

Agree. FFA will have to come in to stabilise the Jets and bring in football people to run the club. They did this with WSW and Adelaide as you say. I'm pretty sure that the FFA would not want to spend money this way but that's just bad luck and more to the point, the problem with accepting license fee money from the likes of Tinkler and Palmer.

Glad to see Ben,somebody offering an example of what can work to turnaround dysfunctional clubs in smaller markets, plus of course picking a particular path football wise. Very clever IMO. Each market in Australia is different you've got to adjust accordingly.

great post BOPP and I suspect you are right in your assessment of what might work here in Newcastle.

This comment is simply proof that the football people don't talk to the league people. This is the main reason that the next Newcastle football club should ditch the red and blue for gold or the green and brown.

10,000 without making the finals in forever as well. Aside from that, membership/interest is not the issue right now.

I thought Balgownie Rangers on the south coast was the oldest football club in Australia.... http://www.balgownierangers.com.au/?page_id=2

Tinkler will lose the license. There is no other way forward. The FFA needs to do due diligence on the next ownership structure. I believe that the only one that will work is finding an owner who will allow the fans to be minority shareholders, and who allow the fans to inject capital in stages. The fans have to be real owners in shares that hold value and are tradeable, not members with voting rights who just pour money down a drain. You need a single owner or consortium to make the tough decisions but you need fans who are owners to boost capitalisation and to ensure proper governance from the major shareholders. Community ownership in Newcastle will always be undercapitalised and unprofessional while single owners seem to go on power trips and lose their heads, install yes-men as CEOs and impotent "Chairman" of non-existent boards. I ask the FFA to find an innovative model. If the owner of Dundee United is willing to allow community ownership in tradeable, profit sharing shares, then I will be 100% behind it. The FFA has a chance right here, right now to do something ground breaking. And the Hunter, which is full of a passionate and committed football community, is just the place to try it.

Given the strength of the Newcastle membership base and the links to the community, the approach adopted by Adelaide United may suit. There was simply no-one in Adelaide with both interest in football and deep enough pockets to make the club work. There were, however, several with sufficient funds and interest to form a consortium. Then the club embarked on a drive to break even with a business plan which focused on the core business and reduced a hell of a lot of the trimmings. This resulted in quite some grumbling from a section of the fans about being a "budget club" and when Adelaide picked up a young Spanish coach and some players scratching an earning in the Spanish 2nd division there certainly were some doubters. The grumblings do appear rather muted of late. I believe Adelaide retains one of the lowest, if not the lowest, operating budgets in the league. In short, it can be done. The issue is one of governance, not finance.

I say 10,000 members is more than enough support to sustain the club long term. If the club was run properly, by people that actually have a love for the game it would flourish. I live in Newcastle as well and it is comments like this and people like yourself that make Knights supporters look silly.