It seems that running an A-League club is beyond many of those currently entrusted to do so.  Yet many of these same people have or are running multi-million dollar companies.  So why is the A-League business so different?

In the dark old days of semi-professional football in Australia most of the clubs were ran by chook raffles and trivia nights held at the teams affiliated club or pub.  These clubs were always on the brink of folding and often did so, this was not good for the game or the players we were trying to raise in the game.

There were a few clubs that were ran exceptionally well that made real money and managed to build small empires, however many of these were based on a cultural background or ethnically common group.  In short most of the successful clubs were successful due to strong support from a common group of people with a bond beyond the sport.

So the A-League launched and the cultural base of support was to be eroded and bring all football loving people with a geographic commonality together.  Thus meaning that the clubs would have a larger supporter base to draw on and a higher income. This would help the new clubs with the much higher overheads and cost of running in the professional era.  How well are the clubs coping in this new era?

The majority of the A-League clubs, if not all, have had economic issues and as we are all well aware the worst fears became a reality with North Queensland Fury.  Added to the economic pressure, there has been a number of actions and decisions made by clubs that could be at best classed as unprofessional.  So given that many of the clubs have been owned and operated by people that have amassed fortunes and run seemingly very successful businesses.  Why is this happening?

So first off I think we should look at the oily rag or as I like to call it the ‘Chook Raffle’ system.  The Central Coast Mariners club looked for some time to have a strong financial grounding with links to the Blades family of clubs and the development of a large complex that would supply a number of alternate income streams.  However as with many organisations around the world during the Global Financial Crisis, these plans seem to have been eroded and the club is now teetering on the brink of insolvency.  Well that seems to be the view of the press and players who think that the way out of the current situation is the club adopting the 'Tinkler' model.  This model consists of finding a rich sugar daddy that can ride into town on the white charger and sweep all the worries away with a huge fat cheque book.  The Mariners players seem to believe that this sugar daddy might be the self-proclaimed League nut John Singleton.  Personally I am not so sure the Tinkler solution is the best way, or that the main man behind the Central Coast Bears push to re-join the NRL is the right white knight.

So to look at the other extreme in operation I think we should look at the man/club the model was named after.  The Jets have now had two sugar daddies: the first a self-absorbed ego maniac who was more interested in the glory for himself than the club or the fans.  This of course was not successful for a number of well publicised reasons and thankfully Mr Tinkler was ready to take over.  Nathan Tinkler on the surface portrays a man who enjoys his sport (primarily League and the Nags, but also Football and Basketball) and loves his home region.  Nathan recently sold his vision of love for the Hunter and sport to the members of the other professional team in Newcastle who voted to hand over the keys to the kingdom.  So was this just a sales pitch?  Is Mr Tinkler the selfless community guy that he is portrayed as?  Only time will tell but I hope for the Jets and football's sake he is.

Whether Tinkler is this selfless community man or not there are still issues facing the Jets outside of the economic pressure.  The problem with single ownership model is the same issues that the Jets have already faced once before.  Not for one second would I say that Tinkler has done half of the things that Con did or did not do but the Culina affair that has played out this week shows the dangers of having a single owner with very deep pockets.  As much as the Community Advisory Board or whatever title they may wish to put over the handpicked group Nathan assigned to make player selections and club direction decisions may say it was their choices it was Mr Tinkler who met and fired Branko.

I cannot see how the Jets will ever function as a company or effective organisation in their current structure.  They have a CEO who has no experience at management other than running the operations side of a club that ran on the smell of an oily rag with no oil and folded less than twelve months after he took over.  The 'CEO' has a manager above him who is tasked with running both the Football and League clubs now but could have a basketball team added to his commitments very soon.  However he then reports to a single man that pays all the bills and has shown in his racing interests that he can change his mind on a whim and get involved when he shouldn't.  Don't get me wrong I think Tinkler is great for Newcastle as long as he is what he says.  So is this really a good way to run a club?

So we have a chook raffle model(community / shareholder model)  that is always running low on funds and in danger of becoming insolvent or we have the sugar daddy club (single benefactor model) where the clubs are at the mercy of men who are used to getting whatever they want.  Likewise the way the clubs were run in the old days where you had to belong to the correct cultural group to be allowed as a supporter is also not the answer.  So what is the answer?

Looking at other sports around Australia and overseas I don't know that there is a perfect answer.  However a mix of the Mariners and the Jets would be utopia.  How about a club that is owned or funded by a number of mega rich men but run by a community voted board.  This board is elected on a regular basis by the club membership.  At the same time to ensure that the club is not solely at the mercy of the rich owners the club should have investments and income streams outside of their owners such as hotels, licensed clubs and community based businesses.  This means in the event that the owners wish to walk away from the club or there is a collapse of the owners wealth the club could support itself completely or partially.  The final part of this would be that the head of the board or at least the clubs key executives (CEO, Chairman and CFO) should be paid in line with executives in the private sector of similar sized organisations.  This ensures that the people who are appointed to these positions would be appropriate professionals that are remunerated and required to act in a professional manner.

If only such a club existed in Australian football, they could sell the blueprints to the rest of the clubs and create yet another income stream.  

To be honest as a Mariners Supporter I think the Jets are closer to this than we are but after this week I don't think I would trade in the current 'Chook Raffle' we are running for Tinkler.

Now all we need is three or four billionaires who are willing to hand over control of their investments to someone else for free?  A supporter can dream, can’t they?