10/1/14 - Derby game is a PLATINUM FIXTURE

[Merging Cultures]

But I thought our owners were great?

 

Unacceptable.

 

While the owners are involved in board meetings and board committee meetings they have hired Susan Whelan to do the day to day running of the club.

 

Susan will also have a team who decide on the ticket prices.

 

Now, when the board meetings happen and they look at attendances and revenue I hope the board will ask about gate revenues and why they were low for this match/December. The CEO and her team will offer the cold weather, Sky, people have spent their money over Christmas etc as reasons why attendance was low but likely will suggest that because it was a platinum fixture the revenue was maximised given the other variables.

 

However, the board may recommend to Susan Whelan to review the ticket pricing policy, which the board will then amend as necessary and approve.

 

Could the owners just tell the LCFC company to do whatever they want? Yes. Is that correct business practice and why you hire professionals to run the company? No.

 

I am not bumming the owners, just stating they do not run the company day to day.

[Kitchandro]

While the owners are involved in board meetings and board committee meetings they have hired Susan Whelan to do the day to day running of the club.

 

Susan will also have a team who decide on the ticket prices.

 

Now, when the board meetings happen and they look at attendances and revenue I hope the board will ask about gate revenues and why they were low for this match/December. The CEO and her team will offer the cold weather, Sky, people have spent their money over Christmas etc as reasons why attendance was low but likely will suggest that because it was a platinum fixture the revenue was maximised given the other variables.

 

However, the board may recommend to Susan Whelan to review the ticket pricing policy, which the board will then amend as necessary and approve.

 

Could the owners just tell the LCFC company to do whatever they want? Yes. Is that correct business practice and why you hire professionals to run the company? No.

 

I am not bumming the owners, just stating they do not run the company day to day.

 

Hang on a minute, this isn't the first ever platinum fixture, we have them every season.

 

If they were going to correct this platinum fixture farce, don't you think they would have done it by now?

 

Or do you think actually they're not bothered about our crowds and the fans, only their own profits?

[Merging Cultures]

Hang on a minute, this isn't the first ever platinum fixture, we have them every season.

 

If they were going to correct this platinum fixture farce, don't you think they would have done it by now?

 

Or do you think actually they're not bothered about our crowds and the fans, only their own profits?

 

Yes, they are interested only in profits. It's a company. 

 

It will be the boards policy to review quarterly revenues from gate receipts etc. If they do not think the platinum fixture maximised profits (given all the variables) then they will adjust the policy.

 

However, the CEO and her team will argue that revenues were maximised given the variables.

[Kitchandro]

Yes, they are interested only in profits. It's a company. 

 

It will be the boards policy to review quarterly revenues from gate receipts etc. If they do not think the platinum fixture maximised profits (given all the variables) then they will adjust the policy.

 

However, the CEO and her team will argue that revenues were maximised given the variables.

 

Ok, so we're agreed then.

[MattGamble92]

When they add up the tv money for this game with the crowd of around 22,000 paying £32 they'll probably have made more than a 26,000 crowd paying £20 or £25.
 

Just a reminder of actually how much these owners do actually care

[Merging Cultures]

Ok, so we're agreed then.

 

Doesn't mean they are not great. Maximising profits is healthy for any company and will ensure the long life of the club.

 

What it doesn't mean is that they will continually price fans out of the game, or they lose revenue. They have a team that is responsible for maximising revenues. It is a balancing act. If the board thinks that revenues are not maximised they will amend the policy and/or fire the team making the decisions.

[cityfanlee23]

Love how our club are still desperately trying to play on that false derby "Massive rivalry"

[lavrentis]

Love how our club are still desperately trying to play on that false derby "Massive rivalry"

 

At least Coventry were up for a rivalry, Forest and Derby just don't care

[Kitchandro]

Doesn't mean they are not great. Maximising profits is healthy for any company and will ensure the long life of the club.

 

What it doesn't mean is that they will continually price fans out of the game, or they lose revenue. They have a team that is responsible for maximising revenues. It is a balancing act. If the board thinks that revenues are not maximised they will amend the policy and/or fire the team making the decisions.

 

Of course it does. If you don't care about the fans, from the fans point of view that makes them poor owners. That is exactly the issue I have with them. They will happily price us out, see our crowds dwindle, see our atmosphere die, without a second thought. That is poor ownership in my view, since these are things that are important to me, a supporter of the club.

 

Don't you think that those things indicate that the club isn't moving forward? Surely you think a healthy club would have improving crowds an atmosphere's when the team is getting better? The club isn't just finances. Good owners would consider these things to be significant as well.

 

If they were so worried about the long life of the club they shouldn't have pissed away so much money on shite players and managers. What you're saying is it's ok for the fans to pay for their failures.

 

Whether they are good businessmen is not the argument. I am saying they are not great owners for our football club.

At least Coventry were up for a rivalry, Forest and Derby just don't care

 

Who cares what the fvck Coventry fans think?

 

Did they ever fill our away end? So much for being up for it. I believe we had a full house against Forest the other month. Never seen that against Cov.

[Manwell Pablo]

It's their club isn't it?

 

If they don't think it's their business to oversee that part of the club then they bloody should do.

 

why should they, do you think Richard Broadbent decideds what prices Tesco sell their milk at? Do you want Vichai down the club show individually pricing each item as well . You're demonstrating a serious lack of knowledge of big business. They will have someone, possibly even a whole department consisting of a team of people, doing this for them along with all the pre match marketing etc, even if they are involved in deciding how much each category of game costs absolutely zero chance they'll be deciding what each game is graded at on a game to game basis . It might be important to you Kitch but to them it's just another part of a massive operation, and that's not mentioning the fact that they run more than one massive operation. What a lame excuse to try and belittle paying our debts off they'll have absolutely nothing to do with this and neither should they. 

[Manwell Pablo]

Of course it does. If you don't care about the fans, from the fans point of view that makes them poor owners. That is exactly the issue I have with them. They will happily price us out, see our crowds dwindle, see our atmosphere die, without a second thought. That is poor ownership in my view, since these are things that are important to me, a supporter of the club.

 

Don't you think that those things indicate that the club isn't moving forward? Surely you think a healthy club would have improving crowds an atmosphere's when the team is getting better? The club isn't just finances. Good owners would consider these things to be significant as well.

 

If they were so worried about the long life of the club they shouldn't have pissed away so much money on shite players and managers. What you're saying is it's ok for the fans to pay for their failures.

 

Whether they are good businessmen is not the argument. I am saying they are not great owners for our football club.

 

Who cares what the fvck Coventry fans think?

 

Did they ever fill our away end? So much for being up for it. I believe we had a full house against Forest the other month. Never seen that against Cov.

 

F8ck me sideways you've got a short memory if you've managed to forget some of the cretins who have been in charge of this football club in the last 30 years, not to mention some of the clowns at other clubs at the minute. Relatively speaking their F8cking Angelic 

[leeleic]

If this Mahrez deal goes through and they look to unveil him Friday night, I'd have thought that'd put a few more bums on seats.

[ealingfox]

On the other hand, Burnley was a fixture of similar pedigree, and tickets were cheap. Did that make people show up in their droves? Did it fvck. 23k.

[Merging Cultures]

Of course it does. If you don't care about the fans, from the fans point of view that makes them poor owners. That is exactly the issue I have with them. They will happily price us out, see our crowds dwindle, see our atmosphere die, without a second thought. That is poor ownership in my view, since these are things that are important to me, a supporter of the club.

 

Don't you think that those things indicate that the club isn't moving forward? Surely you think a healthy club would have improving crowds an atmosphere's when the team is getting better? The club isn't just finances. Good owners would consider these things to be significant as well.

 

If they were so worried about the long life of the club they shouldn't have pissed away so much money on shite players and managers. What you're saying is it's ok for the fans to pay for their failures.

 

Whether they are good businessmen is not the argument. I am saying they are not great owners for our football club.

 

Clearly only reading what you want to read.

 

To be good owners they have to maximise revenue, which is a balancing act, they recognise they have to have fans in the ground to get gate revenues. Too high prices = no fans. No fans = no gate revenue. No revenue = no club. Low prices also means limited revenue, which also does not help the club. We wouldn't be able to compete for players and invest in the infrastructure of the club. So, they balance price v attendance to maximise revenue and ensure the long life of the club.

 

Club not moving forward? Have you heard, we do not have much debt, may have made a profit, and we are top of the league?! Definitely sounds like we are moving backwards to me!! smh

 

I dont think the fans are paying for their failures. If that was the case then they could have kept the debt on the books and been assured of receiving that money back. Also, are the tickets that much higher than they have been in previous seasons? If not, how are fans paying them back?

 

We need good business people running and owning the club. Any owner at this level considers a football club a business investment, unless they are mega billionaires and can waste hundreds of millions. Which if they were, let's face it, they'd buy a premier league team. Owning a football club is not a philanthropic venture to make the people of Leicester feel good about themselves.

 

But as previously stated, it is not the owners making the pricing decisions but if the revenue is lower than expected then the board will review the pricing policy and/or fire the team making the decisions if they are not able to provide strong reasons for the lower than expected revenue.

[Dan]

Yes, they are interested only in profits. It's a company. 

 

It will be the boards policy to review quarterly revenues from gate receipts etc. If they do not think the platinum fixture maximised profits (given all the variables) then they will adjust the policy.

 

However, the CEO and her team will argue that revenues were maximised given the variables.

 

And that line ladies and gentlemen is why me, and many others were sceptical of the 12th minute clapping idea.

[Merging Cultures]

And that line ladies and gentlemen is why me, and many others were sceptical of the 12th minute clapping idea.

 

That's fine. Personally, I think it is great that the club is no longer on the hook to repay all that debt. Definitely secures the long term future of the club. Also, they didnt have to do it and now their finances are less secure because of it. Debt is a much more secure investment than equity.

[Manwell Pablo]

Whilst they might not be directly in charge of it, it's not exactly out of their control.

 

In theory you're correct but in practice they wouldn't get involved, nor would any owner, ever, for one it would totally undermine the person they bought in to do it, so that a complete mute point.  

[Dan]

That's fine. Personally, I think it is great that the club is no longer on the hook to repay all that debt. Definitely secures the long term future of the club. Also, they didnt have to do it and now their finances are less secure because of it. Debt is a much more secure investment than equity.

 

No doubting what they did around Christmas was a very positive move, but I still think the almost celebration it got to be an indication of what a state the modern game is, so credit to them for defying that trend.

 

But if it's all business motives, then why should fans applaud that? I don't go to football to see a successful business (and I think you could argue if it's been successful as one yet either)

In theory you're correct but in practice they wouldn't get involved, nor would any owner, ever, for one it would totally undermine the person they bought in to do it, so that a complete mute point.  

 

Correct, but it's their person.

[Manwell Pablo]

No doubting what they did around Christmas was a very positive move, but I still think the almost celebration it got to be an indication of what a state the modern game is, so credit to them for defying that trend.

 

But if it's all business motives, then why should fans applaud that? I don't go to football to see a successful business (and I think you could argue if it's been successful as one yet either)

 

Correct, but it's their person.

 

 

So I am sure they're performance is being monitored and if they don't perform, they will be replaced, so it is impossible to lay the blame directly at the top. Unless you want an on the spot sacking for making one categorizing error, and let's be fair who knows it might not even be one yet.

 

Or perhaps you feel the owners should be impervious to mistakes and should employ the perfect candidate in every area of the club so we never have any problems?

 

Dream world. 

 

As I say this is a lame, pathetic attempt, to discredit the paying off of our debts when in reality they've had nothing to do with this. Sad really. 

[Dan]

So I am sure they're performance is being monitored and if they don't perform, they will be replaced, so it is impossible to lay the blame directly at the top. Unless you want an on the spot sacking for making one categorizing error, and let's be fair who knows it might not even be one yet.

 

Or perhaps you feel the owners should be impervious to mistakes and should employ the perfect candidate in every area of the club so we never have any problems?

 

Dream world. 

 

As I say this is a lame, pathetic attempt, to discredit the paying off of our debts when in reality they've had nothing to do with this. Sad really. 

 

It's already an error in the way that it's far too much for a Friday night game and the attendance will prove that. This has been going on for years as well - what happened in this fixture last year? A 5:20 in December, attendance was under 21,000 for a game against one of our rivals with us in good form, with Derby taking a very poor number that was about half of their away average that season despite it being their second closest game. Why was the attendance shit?

 

The same reason it'll be shit again on Friday. Abysmal pricing.

 

The fact the owners would see it as a success if revenues were maximised rather than the ground being full is the root of my cynicism. I'm not saying they're bad at what they do, but it's what they aim for in games like this that doesn't sit right with me as a fan. I don't go to football to see better balance sheets and nor should any fan.

 

I'd be prepared to take every word of this back and more if I saw evidence that proper efforts were being made to get our ground more full, but only time will tell.

[Grewks]

When they add up the tv money for this game with the crowd of around 22,000 paying £32 they'll probably have made more than a 26,000 crowd paying £20 or £25.

 

Just a reminder of actually how much these owners do actually care

 

 

 

 

Ungrateful.

 

 

They've just wiped all of our debts, and you criticize them for charging prices which they believe is in the best interest of the club....which is after all a business.

[Manwell Pablo]

It's already an error in the way that it's far too much for a Friday night game and the attendance will prove that. This has been going on for years as well - what happened in this fixture last year? A 5:20 in December, attendance was under 21,000 for a game against one of our rivals with us in good form, with Derby taking a very poor number that was about half of their away average that season despite it being their second closest game. Why was the attendance shit?

 

The same reason it'll be shit again on Friday. Abysmal pricing.

 

The fact the owners would see it as a success if revenues were maximised rather than the ground being full is the root of my cynicism. I'm not saying they're bad at what they do, but it's what they aim for in games like this that doesn't sit right with me as a fan. I don't go to football to see better balance sheets and nor should any fan.

 

I'd be prepared to take every word of this back and more if I saw evidence that proper efforts were being made to get our ground more full, but only time will tell.

 

I should imagine you're right however this is an assumption it is yet to happen. But again this is by the by you've picked up on a totally irrelevant point in my post that merely points out that you've not seen the attendance yet and pointlessly spent half your post wittering about it. Your still attacking the owners for this despite the fact it's been pointed out numerous times they have nothing to do with it what part of that is difficult? I doubt the owners care about the relatively small increase in revenue from this this is a ticket/marketing/sales manager taking a risk probably trying to increase revenue on last years home game against Derby to make themselves look good, the owners want promotion to the Premier League and £60,000,000 that come with it. Increase/decrease of match day revenue by a few thousand each season is actually small fry.

 

The lack of understanding of business in this thread is incredible. 

[Dan]

I should imagine you're right however this is an assumption it is yet to happen. But again this is by the by you've picked up on a totally irrelevant point in my post that merely points out that you've not seen the attendance yet and pointlessly spent half your post wittering about it. Your still attacking the owners for this despite the fact it's been pointed out numerous times they have nothing to do with it what part of that is difficult? I doubt the owners care about the relatively small increase in revenue from this this is a ticket/marketing/sales manager taking a risk probably trying to increase revenue on last years home game against Derby to make themselves look good, the owners want promotion to the Premier League and £60,000,000 that come with it. Increase/decrease of match day revenue by a few thousand each season is actually small fry.

 

The lack of understanding of business in this thread is incredible. 

 

My point is even if the attendance is crap (and I'm 99% sure it will be considering we're top, and at home to a rival in 4th place) will they be bothered? Everything you said to me made sense, no doubt about it, but it's what they'll be judging this game's 'success' on that irks me, rather than if that 'success' is achieved.

 

Your point towards the end signals to me that surely we should do whatever to actually fill the ground? If it's such an irrelevant figure then why not make it cheap to get in? That's of course assuming we get up.

 

Ealingfox made a fair point about the crap attendance v Burnley. I agree it was very disappointing, but I really ain't convinced that occasional cheaper ticket games are going to reverse a non-matchgoing culture which has been bred through greed from clubs.

 

The owners have a lot going for them but their motives still don't sit completely right with me. You say it's not them making the decisions but they've been here three and a half years now and the crowds remain lower than what they could be despite an improving team. We're finally getting there on the pitch, but off it, we're going nowhere.

[Manwell Pablo]

Ah I just deleted my post.

 

 

In short your assuming their motives and promotion is the only thing that'll fill the KP

[Dan]

Ah I just deleted my post.

 

 

In short your assuming their motives and promotion is the only thing that'll fill the KP

 

Or consistently improved pricing. If we go up we'd average at least 28k next year in my opinion (provided they didn't go totally overboard). In a few years I don't think £40 for Norwich at home is going to sell very well.