fleckneymike Posted 17 August 2012 Posted 17 August 2012 You asked for a list, you got a fvcking list. Ok, thank you for the list of 3 football league clubs who are either part owned or completely owned by a supporters trust. Again at the risk of sounding antagonistic could you explain to me how this disproves the assertion that professional football has always been sustained by wealthy benefactors? I am more than willing to alter my belief that football clubs have been subsidised by wealthy benefactors if there is evidence which proves this. To avoid confusion I have used the plural to indicate the majority (like 70/30) in case we get to the stage where we find one club that bucks the trend.
TrentFox Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 Just picked this thread up and it's possibly the first time I've backtracked through many previous pages and read each and every post in order to catch up on all the points made ... most enjoyable. However, I do feel that if one of you could have found a way to insult one of the contributors in some deeply personal way, it would have added considerably to my enjoyment of an interesting and intelligent debate. This is FT, after all !!
fleckneymike Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 Just picked this thread up and it's possibly the first time I've backtracked through many previous pages and read each and every post in order to catch up on all the points made ... most enjoyable. However, I do feel that if one of you could have found a way to insult one of the contributors in some deeply personal way, it would have added considerably to my enjoyment of an interesting and intelligent debate. This is FT, after all !! Apologies. I tend to opt for passive aggression and a patronising tone. I don't suppose you know any British community run clubs who have existed and prospered throughout the history of the professional game do you?
Daggers Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 Right Mr. Mike from Fleckney, as much as you endeavoured to alter the point you wished to be argumentative over - let's remind ourselves of your initial point I responded to: The professional game has always been subsidised by benefactors... There is no mention of "thriving", "excelling", "Football League" or "England". Trusts: Ownership: 26 clubs are in ownership or control by supporters trusts. Partnership: Over 100 supporters’ trusts now have shareholdings in their clubs. Boardroom: Over 65 supporters’ trusts have directors at their clubs. Non-Trust: Over 40 football clubs currently have supporter representation within the boards of their football clubs Whether professional or not, as you progress down through the pyramid you encounter the breeding grounds for football, the structures for youth players which the top clubs rely on and poach from...the structures entirely reliant on volunteers and goodwill. If you adopt a narrow mindset and think only about top clubs in this country then you encounter clubs being run illegally as businesses, as losses, where inept owners simply do what they can in order to add perceived value so that they can sell on at a profit. Third and fourth division clubs rely hugely on the input of volunteers, and those clubs with an eye for survival all operate on a zero-profit basis, with anything over that being a bonus. Professional clubs in the GM would not exist without their teams of volunteers from the community. But seeing as we didn't define our terms of reference as purely the English league structure, let's peek at those clubs you elected to ignore - Barca and Real Madrid. Both fan owned, both have been slightly successful in their home countries league system and in European tournaments. In Latin America it is unusual to find clubs which aren't fan-owned. Germany? Again fan-ownership dominates and pricing is kept aggressively low. The handful of clubs you are thinking of are in a minority in the world of professional football. The professional game has not always been subsidised by benefactors, is not - and will continue to be not. Look at how the PL operates - WBA have been a club which has been the very model of best practice. Limited outgoings, banking the benefits of promotion. Villa - exceptionally tight control of the profit/loss account. In fact, aside from the billionaires funding a spend fest - tell me about a current chairman who bails out his club year on year? The professional game is subsidised by supporters, volunteers and communities. It is subsidised by goodwill and hard graft the length and breadth of the country/world. Every club should be fan owned - every decision ratified by a fan's representative.
TrentFox Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 Apologies. I tend to opt for passive aggression and a patronising tone. I don't suppose you know any British community run clubs who have existed and prospered throughout the history of the professional game do you? That's fine detail Mike !! I don't do that ! 'Blue skies' stuff I'm good at .... technical detail, numbers, figures .... I'm pants, to be honest !
fleckneymike Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 Right Mr. Mike from Fleckney, as much as you endeavoured to alter the point you wished to be argumentative over - let's remind ourselves of your initial point I responded to: There is no mention of "thriving", "excelling", "Football League" or "England". Trusts: Ownership: 26 clubs are in ownership or control by supporters trusts. Partnership: Over 100 supporters’ trusts now have shareholdings in their clubs. Boardroom: Over 65 supporters’ trusts have directors at their clubs. Non-Trust: Over 40 football clubs currently have supporter representation within the boards of their football clubs Whether professional or not, as you progress down through the pyramid you encounter the breeding grounds for football, the structures for youth players which the top clubs rely on and poach from...the structures entirely reliant on volunteers and goodwill. If you adopt a narrow mindset and think only about top clubs in this country then you encounter clubs being run illegally as businesses, as losses, where inept owners simply do what they can in order to add perceived value so that they can sell on at a profit. Third and fourth division clubs rely hugely on the input of volunteers, and those clubs with an eye for survival all operate on a zero-profit basis, with anything over that being a bonus. Professional clubs in the GM would not exist without their teams of volunteers from the community. But seeing as we didn't define our terms of reference as purely the English league structure, let's peek at those clubs you elected to ignore - Barca and Real Madrid. Both fan owned, both have been slightly successful in their home countries league system and in European tournaments. In Latin America it is unusual to find clubs which aren't fan-owned. Germany? Again fan-ownership dominates and pricing is kept aggressively low. The handful of clubs you are thinking of are in a minority in the world of professional football. The professional game has not always been subsidised by benefactors, is not - and will continue to be not. Look at how the PL operates - WBA have been a club which has been the very model of best practice. Limited outgoings, banking the benefits of promotion. Villa - exceptionally tight control of the profit/loss account. In fact, aside from the billionaires funding a spend fest - tell me about a current chairman who bails out his club year on year? The professional game is subsidised by supporters, volunteers and communities. It is subsidised by goodwill and hard graft the length and breadth of the country/world. Every club should be fan owned - every decision ratified by a fan's representative. So we've moved on from wikipedia to abstraction. I'll gladly move the boundaries to the whole wide world. I think including every single layer of the footballing pyramid is slightly desperate but that's your prerogative. I really wish you didn't invoke Barca and Real as examples of supporter 'owned' clubs. Neither club is the best example of fiscal responsibility, Barca's debt is currently in excess of €500m and Real's was cleared thanks to some very interesting property deals a few years ago. Their impact of the Spanish league is proving a fairly major problem since the abolition of collective bargaining which has seen TV rights sold individually with the big 2 recieve in excess of £80m more than the third highest paid club (Valencia I think). Germany is often touted as the model thanks to its 51/49 ownership structure. This in itself has not led to balance sheets being improved. Dortmund and Schalke came close to bankruptcy. It has undoubtedly created a more competitive league in terms of domestic results but had an adverse impact of their success in European competition where they haven't won the Champions league in over a decade. At the risk of sounding like a broken record I am not a cheerleader for big corporations or fiscal irresponsibility but I do believe that when we discuss returning football to the people (that was the post to which I originally responded and which caused you to interject in a slightly smug manner) that we should not romanticise the past and be aware that football (at a level most reasonable people would consider professional) has been subsidised by the wealthy. Villa's debt currently stands at £114m (their wages account for something like 90% of turnover). WBA a very modest £2m. The only two clubs to report no debt in their accounts were Stoke and Wolves.
Daggers Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 So we've moved on from wikipedia to abstraction... </interest> I'm only going to end up calling a spade a spade at this rate, so thank you very much for an incredibly stimulating discussion and the deeply interesting points you raised. Have a nice weekend.
fleckneymike Posted 18 August 2012 Posted 18 August 2012 </interest> I'm only going to end up calling a spade a spade at this rate, so thank you very much for an incredibly stimulating discussion and the deeply interesting points you raised. Have a nice weekend. Feel free to support your point with some more evidence, though I would appreciate it if you could avoid calling a spade a spade (I interpreted that as some for of veiled threat that you'd resort to personal insults if you were to continue). That's fine detail Mike !! I don't do that ! 'Blue skies' stuff I'm good at .... technical detail, numbers, figures .... I'm pants, to be honest ! As you like numbers, figures etc have you applied for all the Man City data
Brown Fox Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Just randomly messing about on the internet and came across Derby's ticketing method. They use the demand pricing, so prices go up the higher the demand for the game. That means at the moment, for example, you can get adult tickets to games such as Barnsley between £11-24. For Seniors and U18 tickets you can buy them now for about £13 per game on average. Think it's actually a really clever idea.
5waller5 Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Have you never heard of price elasticity of demand? http://en.wikipedia....icity_of_demand It is possible for demand to be inelastic and show only a very small response to price changes. Woah this is getting a little heavy for my numbed senses at this time on a Friday night. Yes I have .... and the football is only inelastic to a very small number of supporters ..... most would stop going if it meant they had to make too many sacrifices to go .... I'd agree there's a certain amount of non-elasticity but it's mild.
5waller5 Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Just randomly messing about on the internet and came across Derby's ticketing method. They use the demand pricing, so prices go up the higher the demand for the game. That means at the moment, for example, you can get adult tickets to games such as Barnsley between £11-24. For Seniors and U18 tickets you can buy them now for about £13 per game on average. Think it's actually a really clever idea. I do too .... the people who leave things to the last minute (me included) know they run the risk of paying more .... the organised people that think ahead and buy well in advance tend to be those more careful with money, possibly because they have less to dispose of get a better deal and reward for thinking ahead. Works well for me.
TrentFox Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Feel free to support your point with some more evidence, though I would appreciate it if you could avoid calling a spade a spade (I interpreted that as some for of veiled threat that you'd resort to personal insults if you were to continue). As you like numbers, figures etc have you applied for all the Man City data ????
fleckneymike Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 ???? They have made available all the data they have on every player in the Premier league. It's what they use to prepare for matches and opponents. Kompany uses it to lead meetings for the defence ahead of all games. They've made it available to see if other people can identify trends and areas of weakness etc. All inspired by sabremetrics.
5waller5 Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 They have made available all the data they have on every player in the Premier league. It's what they use to prepare for matches and opponents. Kompany uses it to lead meetings for the defence ahead of all games. They've made it available to see if other people can identify trends and areas of weakness etc. All inspired by sabremetrics. Really? Have they included their own players?
fleckneymike Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Really? Have they included their own players? Yep. You can get it all for free here http://www.mcfc.co.uk/Home/The%20Club/MCFC%20Analytics
5waller5 Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Yep. You can get it all for free here http://www.mcfc.co.u.../MCFC Analytics Amazing project ...... T&C No 4 is a bit of a sting though!!!
Salieri Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Just randomly messing about on the internet and came across Derby's ticketing method. 'Random messing about on the internet' leads to discovering about Derby's ticketing method? Disappointing.
Brown Fox Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 'Random messing about on the internet' leads to discovering about Derby's ticketing method? Disappointing. Yep thinking about it that's extremely poor by me. Might have to re-evaluate my priorities and what i do in my spare time!
Salieri Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 Yep thinking about it that's extremely poor by me. Might have to re-evaluate my priorities and what i do in my spare time! There's a whole world of filth and deprivation out there.
Babylon Posted 19 August 2012 Posted 19 August 2012 It's not £1.3m, it's all of those bottom 3 lines in the accounts .... £6m. You mean £5.3m? But it's not. Conference and Banqueting would not be altered by the number of people turning up on a match day as It's a non match day service. Executive suites would not be altered by charging less to the average Joe and getting more cheap seaters in on a match day. It's not clear whether the catering section covers match day food stalls, it could well be that those things are included in retail. Even then the food is subcontracted out and there are many portions of that cake that get taken away before city see the money. Having actually dealt with the club over advertising and sponsorship ( quite a few of the boards in the ground have been booked and done by me or the company I worked for), the benefit of higher attendances to them is worth very little when it comes to selling the sponsorship to most of our sponsors.They do it knowing it can be between 20 and 28 any given week already. Many of them just do it because they are city fans. What does matter is the league we are in and being on television. That is what the serious advertisers want, and that's when you can really ramp up your profits because it's big companies with serious advertising budgets.
Big Dave Posted 20 August 2012 Posted 20 August 2012 Very expensive in my opinion, now I'm no longer a student full Adult prices are crippling and I'm going to be limited to very few games. I've always though it would be better to reduce costs to get more people in but perhaps make the same amount? obviously then there is the sale of food on merchandise to make the extra. Football is meant to be a working class sport yet someone such as myself in a minimum wage job can't afford to go, gutted i cant afford to watch them but until i get a better job there's nothing i can do. I am not sure how the set-up works, but I don't think the club gets a cut of the refreshments takings. I believe that the food providors bid and pay an amount to be there for the season - i.e. they are renting the space. I think that they then keep all of the profits from refreshment sales, so no matter how many people buy food and drink, the club make no more money from it.
Babylon Posted 20 August 2012 Posted 20 August 2012 I am not sure how the set-up works, but I don't think the club gets a cut of the refreshments takings. I believe that the food providors bid and pay an amount to be there for the season - i.e. they are renting the space. I think that they then keep all of the profits from refreshment sales, so no matter how many people buy food and drink, the club make no more money from it. I think that's how it used to work, but that was a while back. Not sure if it's still the same.
Carter The Boss Posted 20 August 2012 Posted 20 August 2012 I think that's how it used to work, but that was a while back. Not sure if it's still the same. I think I've read it's Compass who do contract stuff like this. Big Dave is right, Compass will have tendered for the contract for a certain amount of time (e.g.2-3 years), and will keep all the money made from it. The club will get the tender monies but no matchday stuff
dynamark Posted 20 August 2012 Posted 20 August 2012 Its Compass they have been advertising for staff on Jobcentre website. Usually they like to try to get longer term deals and build in some price reviews and refurbishment of the units.
Grey Fox Posted 20 August 2012 Posted 20 August 2012 Yes I have .... and the football is only inelastic to a very small number of supporters ..... most would stop going if it meant they had to make too many sacrifices to go .... I'd agree there's a certain amount of non-elasticity but it's mild. Do you have any facts to back this up? Or is it just your opinion? We are talking about a difference of around £5 per game here. What evidence do you have to show how demand responds to a change of that size?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.