CSL Side London City Soccer Club SOLD to Hamilton-based owner

[Redcoatsforever]

http://londoncity.ca/

London City Soccer Club, a fixture in professional soccer in the Canadian Soccer League since 1973 and the longest uninterrupted professional soccer club in North America, has been sold to out-of-town interests.

Ryan Gauss, the club’s CEO and General Manager, has announced the takeover by a group headed by Hamilton entrepreneur Andrew Crowe, successful in the environmental recycling business. The team will remain in London.

Hopefully this is actually good for the club, and a more professional atmosphere will emerge. Maybe they'll even move to TD Waterhouse instead of playing at a freaking swamp?

Also, at the end of the article:

London City is one of nine equity owners of the CSL, which in 2010 had 17 clubs in membership fielding 24 teams in two divisions. The Canadian Soccer League, with offices at Mississauga, Ontario, is now in direct membership with the national governing soccer body CSA and aims to be a level two professional soccer league playing on a regional basis across Canada.

So the CSL are still talking about nationwide expansion. Not bad.

[DigzTFC]

Any idea what became of the equity strategy to encourage expansion?

http://22066.vws.magma.ca/reports11/11csl010.htm

Deep down, the league wants to erase as quickly as possible any perception of a difference between its members that consists on one hand of league owners - member teams which collectively have invested millions of dollars since the 70s to establish the CSL as Canada’s only professional league - and recent teams in membership as playing members without equity ownership.

The league is introducing a change in its structure to achieve an environment which brings the business side of the CSL more in line with the game – the competition, where all teams are the same, all on a level playing field. The formation of an incorporated body, CSL Association Inc. developed during 2010, is complete now so that expressions such as ‘equity owners’, ‘non-equity owners’ or ‘playing members’ will soon be terminology from the past..

CSL League Administrator Pino Jazbec, a proponent of a change that brings equalization to the status of teams, sees the new company as a step in the right direction. “It’s a very painless way over a long period of time to compensate those clubs who poured money into the CSL over the years and who presently own the league. In time, it will be everyone’s league” he said, referring to the question of league ownership.

[Redcoatsforever]

Any idea what became of the equity strategy to encourage expansion?

http://22066.vws.magma.ca/reports11/11csl010.htm

Deep down, the league wants to erase as quickly as possible any perception of a difference between its members that consists on one hand of league owners - member teams which collectively have invested millions of dollars since the 70s to establish the CSL as Canada’s only professional league - and recent teams in membership as playing members without equity ownership.

The league is introducing a change in its structure to achieve an environment which brings the business side of the CSL more in line with the game – the competition, where all teams are the same, all on a level playing field. The formation of an incorporated body, CSL Association Inc. developed during 2010, is complete now so that expressions such as ‘equity owners’, ‘non-equity owners’ or ‘playing members’ will soon be terminology from the past..

CSL League Administrator Pino Jazbec, a proponent of a change that brings equalization to the status of teams, sees the new company as a step in the right direction. “It’s a very painless way over a long period of time to compensate those clubs who poured money into the CSL over the years and who presently own the league. In time, it will be everyone’s league” he said, referring to the question of league ownership.

I think the answer lies in that last bit of quoting from Pino Jazbec, in which he states that the equalization process is a lengthy one. My guess would be that this is to appease the equity owners/original CSL investors who took on larger risk and larger investment, while still eliminating a system that creates two classes of ownership.

[Juby]

I think the answer lies in that last bit of quoting from Pino Jazbec, in which he states that the equalization process is a lengthy one. My guess would be that this is to appease the equity owners/original CSL investors who took on larger risk and larger investment, while still eliminating a system that creates two classes of ownership.

I remember there was a big CSL franchise fee debate a while ago and how a lot of people thought it was over priced (at a guessed $150 000? IIRC), this might be a factor in that price. I don't really want to get into the whole arguement again because were not talking on pitch value here but if you can bypass their grievances of millions of dollars with 150 000 - 200 000$ it doesnt seem too terrible or anything.

And their letting the little guy compete, their just not handing league ownership over for the ?25 000? non equity fee so I kinda think they might be getting close to a good sustainable model, maybe they should introduce a reward system (5, 8 or 10 years of successful operation could result in being granted an equity member?).

tbh, I think their doing us all a bit of a favour by letting people compete at that level before they have a lot of safety cash and I think its completely understandable that their not rushing to give away their interests for $20 000. Wouldn't it be rather silly if a group decently backed, stable teams were suddenly a minority power in their own league to a bunch of new teams (some possibly green) who couldn't afford the franchise fee? Would it really be wise of them to hand over the reigns of their league to new teams that can pony up $20 000? I don't doubt some are already qualified, and most will eventually be experienced owners and quality league members but I think it should be a slow process, being too generous (ie giving away ownership to more teams than equity owners at once) could literally be like a complete change in ownership so I think they should just slowly reward qualified members so you can get peoples feet wet without too much tumult.


edit: sorry, on topic, from the little info we have it does look like a fairly stable change, London City might actually be in need of a bit of a shakeup (although you had a good run at the end of last year)

[coppercanuck]

http://www.londoncommunitynews.com/2...tay-in-london/
http://www.lfpress.com/sports/soccer.../19073751.html
http://www.metronews.ca/london/local...ccer-club-sold

Some local news coverage

Always good to support local news who support local football.

[dmont]

.

This is good for London City. I don't know much about the London soccer scene, but I met Ryan Gauss a few times while he was going to school at Western. What a tool.

[Redcoatsforever]

.

This is good for London City. I don't know much about the London soccer scene, but I met Ryan Gauss a few times while he was going to school at Western. What a tool.

I don't think he did the best job managing the club, but I don't really see any reason to go with the personal attacks. Hopefully, this improves the club and we get a semi-pro team that actually attracts the top players in the area out of it. Currently most of them are with AEK and Middlesex...

[dobar dan]

maybe not so good for the Hamilton guy that just purchased the London

http://www.canadiansoccernews.com/co...tandards-Audit

[ted]

As negative as I often sound about the CSL I don't see this as a big deal. Either they will meet the criteria or they will be designated a D4 league. I am not sure that there is enough difference between the two to make a noticeable difference to the on-field product.

[dobar dan]

The big negative is that the CSA will not sanction a D4 league, therefore they will not be a sanctioned organization or they go back to the OSA for sanctioning which I doubt will happen as there is a new group looking for D3 sanctioning and that application has been approved, (correct me if I'm wrong on that point of approval as I'm not 100% sure)
Losing CSA sanctioning also removes the CSL opportunity to go National and take the league across Canada and most likely have implications with QUE. based teams, so it could be a big deal.