I think yes, the were like brokers only. In spite of the fact that Phoenician alphabet was very old (13-14BC) it was adopted too from other alfabet.
The Bronze age excavations in Ugarit (Ras Shamra) showed that two branches of culture existed in proto-Phoenicia; and two alphabets were too. The first, which was adapted to the Ugaric language, used 30 signs. Its "nails", which are cuneiforms signs, point from left to right. The second system requires only 22 signs; they point left. The cuneiform signs were replaced by more linear signs, and they in turn are the basic types of the Greek alphabet.
In addition to using the two new system that were developed in 13-14 BC, the main benefit of which was to facilitate the recording of economic data, the scribes did occasionaly prefer to use Egyptian hieroglyphs for the records of local members dynasty. In this they were following the example of the scribes of Byblos, who were the actually developing their own system of "pseudohieroglyphs".
I think the Phoenician alphabet is reductive Egyptian only. But Phoenicians extended own alphabet on the most part of Mediterranean area.
Runes... I suggest the Runes and the Phoenician (and other last) alphabet are the two absolutely different ways of writing development. They existed nearly at the same time but have different locations and roots. But Runes became transformed under the Phoenician's influence later.