rumor: Athletica going under

When it comes to women (team) sports and sponsoring it all seems to follow the rule of "beggers can`t be choosers". One is bound to get some unpleasant results on behalf of this compromise. Dreadfull deja-vu included.

Thanx for the information. Let`s hope there is a way to turn this around.

 

Did anyone post a link to this: http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/05/22/ac-st-louis-update-52210/ ? It says the Vaid brothers have not put in money in a long time. It looks like a new investor will have to be found. Is there any chance of finding one who will keep the team in the same location, or is it time to look at the interested parties being mentioned on the expansion forum to relocate?

 

Did the WPS teams not have to have a bond also for each team, so that if these money issues came up, they could at least keep them going? it is so sad to think of all the girls on athletica not being able to keep playing. Who is running the WPS? seems like bad business practices to me...

 

http://rams.football-news-update.com/saving-soccer-in-st-louis-the-cash-of-khan/
Nothing too new, other than a hope than Khan will save the day, and that the Vaids were supposedly vetted by Cooper.

also: http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/soccer/post/_/id/587/wps-week-7-another-club-about-to-perish

Just points out that Athletica demise could mean WPS demise. something USSF would not be happy about insofar as it affects their quest for a world cup bid, as well as residency camp issues.

 

"Womens Professional Soccer teams do not have the same bonding process as Division-2 teams. The athletic club does not currently have resources to make the women’s teams next payroll commitment.'

http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.co...ll-cooper-no-longer-functioning-as-owner/9091

 

What caught my eye was the "at least one other team is experiencing severe financial problems" remark. My guess is the Pride or Sky Blue.

 

Ditto. I'd guess the Pride as well, with the "Marta Effect" about to send another team to the graveyard.

I cannot believe the WPS wouldn't require a bond before the season in case something like this would come up. Looks like the higher ups with the league failed "How To Run A Viable Sports League 101".

 

This sucks. It may be time for the team owners in the WPS to gather around a table, look each other in the eye and ask, OK who is committed to this league for the long run and who is not? Who's in and who's out? Let's find out now!!

This smells to me like a bunch of crap in St. Louis by ownership. Reading all these articles, it appears to me like Cooper is completely bailing or has bailed out.
Was the league aware and did they aprove the sale of Athletica to other owners?

I feel bad for my friends like, Cville KC, rokagrl13 and others who have given thier heart and soul in support of this team.

It would be a big shame if this team folds.

 

Just thinking about the worst-case scenario here. If St Louis and FCGP fold before next season, the question is: could WPS possibly be viable as a six-team (Boston, NJ, Philly, DC, Atlanta, Chicago) regional league? Travel costs would certainly be cut way down, but there would be nothing resembling a national footprint.

 

Time to consider reducing budgets by reducing the number of foreign players, especially if there are limited openings for U.S. players?

 

WPS could possible run Athletica depending on what happens elsewhere w/ Cooper/new investors/etc.

 

I wonder if the league takes over would they put more effort into selling tickets & grassroots marketing? Did the "Defend Your Turf" campaign ever reach STL?

 

In the Post-Dispatch article about all of this (the first one) there were quite a few comments on the article bringing up Athletica/AC's association with SLSG.

I'm not originally from St. Louis, nor do I have kids, and so I have ZERO knowledge of the politics of children's club soccer in this town. So, is this a legitimate concern? Is the association with SLSG limiting the number of youth teams Athletica can market to? Will parents really not take their kids to see national team players because their paycheck comes from (or came from) Cooper? Is there any solution to the situation? It all sounds pretty petty to me, but people with kids can get pretty nuts about them, it seems. I don't like the politics of Checketts, but I'll still attend the occasional Blues game.

I love St. Louis, but after living here for 7 years I'm not convinced its as much of a soccer town as people make it out to be. That said, I'd love to be proven wrong.

 

St. Louis is a very good soccer town, but it can't get behind the youth league feud, regionalism, and the attitude that if it isn't the best we don't want it (the EPL is the only real soccer Snobs).

I don't have any children, but from the people I have talked to, it would seem the youth league relationship ranges from resentment at best to out-and-out hatred at its worst. And it appears to me, that many of these parents would be willing to sacrifice whatever pro soccer this community might have to make a point.

The regionalism is awful, too. Basically, there are certain areas or regions in St. Louis that tend to look down their noses at everyone and everywhere else in the community. Supposedly, the move to Soccer Park last year was primarily for 3 reasons:

1) It's a better overall facility with office space, etc. (I won't argue that one, because I believe that's it's basically true).

2) Since Athletica will have their own facility, it will save the team a lot of money. (Maybe true, probably true, but apparently it didn't save them enough).

3) It would put the team in the center of population (translation...in the middle of the people with money), and therefore, the team will draw better. Well, where the hell are all those people, because I sure as hell haven't been seeing them at games. I'm not saying SIU-E would have been any better, because nobody knows for sure, but the people that whined about the team being in Illinois apparently are still not showing up.

If you asked me to rank the top reasons of why Athletica isn't drawing better, I would rank them like this.

1) Not enough spent on marketing, nor enough staff to properly market the team. As I've said before, I think the staff they do have works their butts off, but they need help.

2) The youth soccer club feud.

3) Let's face it, we're a chauvinistic society. If it ain't the national team where we can get all patriotic and wave our flags, then some people can't get excited about women's sports.

4) Crappy weather so far this year.

Add those four together and you're talking about a lot of people. Each reason is probably costing the team at least 200-400 people at the gates. Total that up, and you're talking over 1000 per game, probably a lot more.

 

Even if he isn't involved, I know from other organizational feud type things that the hatred/hurt feelings/perceptions/etc don't just evaporate once leadership changes (eg the person who was seen by one side to be the reason for the "hate"). It takes a very long time and lots of hard work to mend fences & sooth the waters.

If Cooper was seen as The Problem and for those w/ grudges Cooper = SLSG, SLSG will = Cooper for a while after he's no longer w/ SLSG.

 

Was the attendance that bad? And did they think they could open the doors and make money or was there an actual serious marketing effort (by that I mean laborious and hard-working and everyone in the community 24/7 and not blowing money on ads)?

 

Thanks for the info on the SLSG issue. As has been discussed, its obvious that marketing/sales support is a huge issue this year. But this whole SLSG thing was completely new to me until I read the comments in the Post-Dispatch article.

 

You have to be very visible in every club with women and girls within 50 miles. Clinics, practices, training days, players running training and talking. Non-stop. Like it or not - *everyone* is in marketing.

 

Yep. Totally agree. Every one associated w/ a WPS team should have "sell the team & sell tickets" as their first priority -- players, coaches, staff, ownership, fans. Everyone. Sure each has other, different job responsibilities but selling the team/league must be the first priority or they won't be able to do the other parts (ie play, coach, etc).

 

http://pitchinvasion.net/blog/2010/05/25/the-grand-failure-of-a-real-soccer-club-in-st-louis/ The irony of miscalculation.

 

So it boils down to the "fact" that costs of operating Soccer Park are too much for Cooper. That makes no sense if Cooper is truly worth over $200 million.

We all thought that owning the Soccer Park would greatly help the Athletica and help them generate a profit this year and I think Cooper said that himself.

Yet now it seems it costs too much just to OPERATE the park even if you own it!!??!??! That just doesn't seem right. Something is rotten in Denmark.