saintstr1 Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 For Gods sake why cant we just all enjoy supporting our football club, A year ago pre Markus & Cortese we would have done a deal with the devil just to keep SFC afloat. We got lucky,very lucky when Markus invested some of HIS cash in the club and provided us fans with the best season of supporting Saints in many a long year. Whatever Markus & Cortese decide to do with the club in the future is entirely up to them, but one thing is for sure it cannot be any worse than where we were in May/June 2009. To many "We are doomed merchants" calling themselves Saints Supporters these days.
Gorgiesaint Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 I can't be bothered to read through everyone else's responses so I may (or may not) be repeating what has already been said. I expect the club to be run at a profit, given the stated goals when the duo came in (my minimum expectation is break-even). If ML decides he wants some of the profit to repay his capital, then I have no issue with that as long as I feel there is sufficient retention of profit to sustain a decent standard of football. What would concern me is if the club started taking on debts to repay ML or allow him to leverege money out of the club. That for me would be a huge no-no and the point that I would have to start protesting. The trouble is, it will be difficult for us as fans to get the confirmation of growing debts occuring, and would probably only get it from the accounts some months after the event. This club should not go into debt again - even if we decided to build a new stadium (again) or expand St marys. That has to be done through orgainc growth or donation by ML - if it can't be done by those two methods then it shouldn't happen.
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 We had realistic pricing in the Premiership last time and we came close to winning major domestic cups and on a few occasions, qualified for Europe through our league position. I just have no interest in paying stupid money to watch a game of football. Ticket office revenue is minimal compared to transfer revenue ( if buying well ) and Sky money.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 There are attrocities happening all over the World to thousands of people. People are starving as we debate this. And you want to hypothesise over whether the owner of the football club MIGHT not have the best intentions?!?!? I work with facts and data - not idle speculation - and all I see is a club in ascendency getting leaner, fitter, healthier in so many ways. I do not care one iota whether NC wants to be my friend - he is doing a good job revitalising the club and that is born out by tanglible improvements. Sorry, but this type of thread really gets me angry when there are so many more important things in life and death to concern ourselves with. In summary, this coming season I am looking forward to us getting promotion for the first time for decades. Do I need negative man to ruin that pleasure? NO. Get back negative man, get back. I'm not sure why atrocities mean we can't have some sort of discussion and debate around this topic. OK things may turn out brilliantly, but it's always wise to at least consider the possibility of a worst case scenario in case it occurs. If this thread achieves that and people are on their guard just a little bit more in case something like I have described occurs and if they are not supportive on the scenario, then I think that's pretty useful. If you have no interest in this and just want to follow the team then that's a fair view to hold and good luck to you.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 For Gods sake why cant we just all enjoy supporting our football club, We can. No one is denying that right. I don't think you would begrudge people discussing this hypothesis as a possibility would you? After all how much do we actually know about Cortese or even Markus? Mostly we know what they tell us and therefore what they want us to know. We have to trust them and take them on their word. A year ago pre Markus & Cortese we would have done a deal with the devil just to keep SFC afloat. Not everyone. Look at the skates! We got lucky,very lucky when Markus invested some of HIS cash in the club and provided us fans with the best season of supporting Saints in many a long year. Whatever Markus & Cortese decide to do with the club in the future is entirely up to them, but one thing is for sure it cannot be any worse than where we were in May/June 2009. I have no idea what the future may hold, I just started this thread so that people might consider the mindset of Cortese and Markus. I think many people believe he is in effect a sugar daddy who can do no wrong in the eyes of the fans, when there is always the possibility that he is something very different. This may not bother you in the slightest and that's fair enough, I was just interested in the views of others on the issue. To many "We are doomed merchants" calling themselves Saints Supporters these days. No need for that last comment and that's not what I said at all. Please try to lay off the insults and just debate the issue.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 If we get to the CCC next year then expect the price hike as it will happen. Cortese will set pricing at the upper end of where the competiton do in the CCC because he will do the research and act accordingly. His view will be that we have a product that is on demand and will price it as such. He will not need to give the tickets away to sell them or retain L1 pricing. Yes I agree. What are your views on this? If for instance the same thing happened in the Prem, would you be happy because we are competitive or sad because you would no longer be able to afford to watch the team? Or maybe you can?
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 What an odd way of looking at it. But is it odd though? For some, the main reason for watching saints is a social one. Meeting up with your mates and feeling a sense of belonging and shared identity with the supporters around you. If we were competing with the big 4 and our prices reflected this, then many supporters would be priced out of going which would mean they lost their main reason to love saints. For many it is purely about the result but for others it is something very different.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 +1, if money was their only motivation, there are far easier ways to make it. And how much more could Markus realistically use anyway? My personal opinion is that they are either genuinely interested in owning/running a successful football club, or that Markus and Nicola are in fact hostile aliens from another galaxy bent on world domination using SMS as a springboard. Take your pick Maybe not pure money, but money and status perhaps? Not much that can raise your profile more than running a football club. If looked at from this angle, why would Cortese care what fans think? If fans turn up if saints are successful regardless of what is charged and regardless of anything else then Cortese can really charge what he likes and act exactly how he wants. I guess we shall see in the coming years exactly what sort of strategy will be employed at saints. I would like to think that the fans will be listened to at least a little bit and attempts are made to rectify the more serious concerns.
aintforever Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 It's pointless worrying about what might happen because we cannot effect it, it is right to ask questions and people shouldn't get all defensive when people do. We all like to think of pompey's owners as evil and our rich owner as some sort of fairy god father but fact is we could very easily end up in a similar situation to portsmouth (saddled with massive debt), it is nieve to think otherwise.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 We've got to accept any price rises and take them on the chin. We can't take the p1ss out of Pompey for their unsustainable wage structure and then expect to pay stupidly low prices on tickets. If we want to have success then we've got to pay for it or we'll end up just like Pompey... Fair comment, I suppose that means many will be priced out of watching saints though. The price of success I guess though that is sad. I wouldn't say it is all about ticket price though. I would hope that the administration realises the importance of keeping fans onside but then, is that really that important if people will go whatever happens if saints are winning? Do posters take the view that it doesn't matter if some fans are ****ed off by the club (or in my scenario above threatened with legal action) as long as saints do well on the pitch? Genuine question.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 It's pointless worrying about what might happen because we cannot effect it, it is right to ask questions and people shouldn't get all defensive when people do. We all like to think of pompey's owners as evil and our rich owner as some sort of fairy god father but fact is we could very easily end up in a similar situation to portsmouth (saddled with massive debt), it is nieve to think otherwise. That's sort of where I am coming from so thanks for that. Not just the massive debt bit though. I could see a scenario where saints are successful and debt free yet many have become hugely disenchanted with the club. IMO that would be equally sad. I do think it is important to ask these questions so that those in charge are not given a totally free ride. OK so we can't stop any decisions being taken but as the Pardew decision showed, we can certainly influence them.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 Sure, it's a business opportunity for them. They were able to buy high value assets at a knock-down price. The business plan is get us back to the Premiership, with associated revenues, within 5 years. Then the value of the Club, with its assets and revenue stream, will be significant. At that point, I would expect them to consider their options, and they may chose to sell to another investor. And fair enough, they will have taken us back to the Promised Land, and if the costs of investment over the 5 years plus the initial capital outlay (in year 0) is less than the resale value, meaning they have made a profit, good luck to them - they will have deserved it. What impresses me, and makes me believe they are in it for the long-term, is the redevelopment of Staplewood and the proposed infrastructure improvements at St Mary's. If they were mercenary, they would minimise expenditure and maximise revenues, and - instalment plan issue aside - they haven't given any indication they will hike season ticket prices to the max. Yes, Leibherr is largely anonymous, and Cortese is very driven and a bit abrasive, but I'd rather have this setup than that at - say, Liverpool, ManYoo, West Ham etc. I honestly believe we're in safe hands. How is that going?
once_bitterne Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 I would have no problem with that at all. If they are only concerned with maximising profit then the club will have to be doing well to acheve this. You won't make much money on L1 revenues. All I want from my club is to do well on the pitch. Have no interest at all about whether a chairman gives a sh it about the fans or whether he allows meaningful dialogue and goods communication with the fans/fans groups. Our fans seemed to carry far too much stall in worrying about what the Chairman's opinions are of them. One of the reasons Lowe was so hated was that he made it obvious how much contempt he had for the fans, but in reality I would imagine that Glazer, Levy, Abramovich and the rest (inc Cortese) all think that a large majority of their club's fanbase are utter morons. I think if I owned a football club I would feel the same.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 So the general consensus is nothing matters except results? I must be in the minority then!
Harry Faz Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 The way i see it almost all football clubs are in a crap position - the mad economics of modern football as a' business' dictate this. It seems you have a choice between 1) massive debt - such as pompey,palace, liverpool etc - with the risk that you lose success on the pitch - you lose your club! 2) living hand by mouth- as saints did under the old regime - and again if something goes wrong ( ie relegation) - the odds are again against you or 3) have a wealthy owner - with the risk that you are tied to their whims. We are in situation 3 , which is better than 1 or 2 - but does mean we are reliant on ML's continued support. So i think we are in a relatively envious position - but am not unaware that are fortunes are tied to the motivations of our new owners- but cant see any better alternative at this time.
Saint Fan CaM Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 I'm not sure why atrocities mean we can't have some sort of discussion and debate around this topic. OK things may turn out brilliantly, but it's always wise to at least consider the possibility of a worst case scenario in case it occurs. If this thread achieves that and people are on their guard just a little bit more in case something like I have described occurs and if they are not supportive on the scenario, then I think that's pretty useful. If you have no interest in this and just want to follow the team then that's a fair view to hold and good luck to you. The whole basis on which you set out your arguement is (IMO) as useful as a chocolate teapot! What is the point of concerning yourself with something that has not happened or indeed is unlikely to happen? And yes, there are far greater things of importance in life to worry about TBF. Football is supposedly a pleasure whether through direct involvement or through spectating, why anyone wishes to place anymore importance on it is beyond me (I actually think you've got no real beef, but you're getting a bit bored ). But hey, you got your debate, so well done.
saintstr1 Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 No need for that last comment and that's not what I said at all. Please try to lay off the insults and just debate the issue. As far as I can see there is no issue to debate, Just you starting a hypothetical thread on a doomsday scenario that will in all probability never happen. Thats not being insulting, Thats my view on what I consider to be a pointless and scaremongering thread started by yourself. Sorry if my opinion dont agree with your thoughts on what I consider to be a totally unneeded thread, All IMO of course
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 The whole basis on which you set out your arguement is (IMO) as useful as a chocolate teapot! What is the point of concerning yourself with something that has not happened or indeed is unlikely to happen? And yes, there are far greater things of importance in life to worry about TBF. Football is supposedly a pleasure whether through direct involvement or through spectating, why anyone wishes to place anymore importance on it is beyond me (I actually think you've got no real beef, but you're getting a bit bored ). But hey, you got your debate, so well done. Why is it unlikely? I don't think it's unlikely really. You are right though, I am slightly bored.
Saint Fan CaM Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Why is it unlikely? I don't think it's unlikely really. You are right though, I am slightly bored. lol - I think there should be a special symbol or something to indicate whether a thread is genuine or a closed season and bored thread. Got to say, the world cup is by no means making up for the drip feed of Saints news or decent rumours. Roll on August.
Colinjb Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Why is it unlikely? I don't think it's unlikely really. You are right though, I am slightly bored. Bored and living up to your forum username quite nicely! Looking for something wrong when really, there isn't at all. Nothing wrong with playing Devil's advocate mind!
capitalsaint Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 As far as I can see there is no issue to debate, Just you starting a hypothetical thread on a doomsday scenario that will in all probability never happen. Thats not being insulting, Thats my view on what I consider to be a pointless and scaremongering thread started by yourself. Sorry if my opinion dont agree with your thoughts on what I consider to be a totally unneeded thread, All IMO of course +9999999 the 'hypothetical' situation is loaded, ie. it is more conceivable to him that this will happen rather than not. The OP already has an opinion about our regime, starting a hypothetical debate does not detract from that. I could hypothetically ask how we would all feel about our owners putting the club up for sale, thus forcing the sale of Lambert et al and the resignation of Pardew as he doesn't want to work with limited funds in League 1. But remember guys, don't start getting into arguments (or, put another way, debating my MOTIVATION for creating such a situation.)
John Smith Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 IF, and this is a big hypothetical IF, there were, as you put it - "an opportunity to make serious cash" - why oh why oh why, was there only 2 potential suitors for us, and given that one of those were bogus, why was this so? IF there is so much serious money to be made out of football clubs, why wasn;t poopey sold more easily, surely a Prem club or CCC club is more profitable than ours OR at least as profitable. What about Crystal Palace, what about Bournemouth, and what about all the others? Serious cash? Are you being serious? So, in answer to your hypothetical question, I would have to ask the question that has yet to be asked - How much money do you think ML and NC will make Net profit from this venture after 5 years? And In making this Net profit, how much 'investment' do you think it will take to achieve this, ie how much cash on the hip will ANY investor require in order to achieve these substantial rewards that you so loosely talk of? And if it were so obviously easy to achieve, by screwing all these fans, why didn;t a common poopey supporter do it, or an avid Saints fan? Why did Wilde and Crouch fail? Couldn;t have been the investment, as you seem to think in this hypothetical situation that millions of pounds investment is par of the course OR is irrelevant. And lastly, in this hypothetical scenario, why oh why oh why, did Rupert Lowe 'allow' this club to go into debt when all he had to do was introduce a £3 charge on purchases. I bet he's turning in his chair!
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 I think that Liebherr ( it's Liebherr, not Cortese that owns Saints ) is running at close to a profit right now. The only difference between L1 and Championship revenues is TV money. Which is £1.6m more than in L1. However our average gates would place us about 7th in the Championship table, and in terms of turnover, we are well inside the top half of the Championship. I don't understand why people discuss League 1 revenue, when it's all a bit hypothetical because we don't have a stereotypical League 1 revenue, we have a top half Championship revenue.
yorkiesaint Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 hypo, I will give you my take on this. Yes, I believe that Cortese and Leibherr are in it for the profit, after all the club is a business. The brief for Pardew this season was to make the playoffs, but not to get promotion. Why? This is to make sure the interest of fans is maintained to the end, putting paying bums on seats, convincing them the dream was alive. Promotion itself was actually unimportant. We have to be realistic and realise that whenever Cortese, Pardew and the players speak to the media it is all carefully choreographed to be positive and to keep fans coming. This is why managers are often so bullish after poor games (remember Burley?). This is why Pardew was up there towards the end of the season sayign we still have a chance, when the reality was that it needed a miracle. Leibherr is an investor, and is waiting for his return, and I'm sure wouldn't have parted with any cash unless Cortese had a clear business plan which stated how much he would get back and in what time frame. Does any of this matter? I don't know, and I guess pompey and leicester fans would take different views right now. the bottom line is that we love football and we'll keep on paying, even if there is a £3 booking fee! Every club is run this way, so I don't see why it should suddenly be an issue now.
channonball Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Why would they say no to cash for shirt sponsorship if it was purely for profit?
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Why would they say no to cash for shirt sponsorship if it was purely for profit? I would have thought that they would be in a stronger position for negotiating a new deal if we were in the Championship, where the exposure is considerably more, so it almost benefits the club to have no sponsor this season and go back to the table next season. And also as the kit is a '1 year special' , most of the costs would be met by the extra revenue this would create. I understand football kits cost less than £10 a shirt to the club, so there is £30 markup. So if we sold 8,000 shirts in the next year ( I hear we have sold 1,000 already ) then another 8,000 next year, that alone will cover the no sponsorship. By increasing other revenue streams, such as the booking fee etc, they still maintain their bottom line, so infact the club does not lose any money.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Why would they say no to cash for shirt sponsorship if it was purely for profit? Excellent point and well done for posting it, this surely shows what the owners are doing for the club. Sponsorship pays a large amount of expected debt before known figures, they have actually turned down money to let the fans rejoice a special moment in our history. Yes they are businessmen but they are actually fan based rather than profit based imo.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 I would have thought that they would be in a stronger position for negotiating a new deal if we were in the Championship, where the exposure is considerably more, so it almost benefits the club to have no sponsor this season and go back to the table next season. And also as the kit is a '1 year special' , most of the costs would be met by the extra revenue this would create. I understand football kits cost less than £10 a shirt to the club, so there is £30 markup. So if we sold 8,000 shirts in the next year ( I hear we have sold 1,000 already ) then another 8,000 next year, that alone will cover the no sponsorship. By increasing other revenue streams, such as the booking fee etc, they still maintain their bottom line, so infact the club does not lose any money. Whilst I have no facts about shirt sales I don't think we will sell too many more than we would normally sell, people are creatures of habit and most will buy because they do, a bit like me Btw we have had one year shirt sales fairly recently and that didn't do us any good then.
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Excellent point and well done for posting it, this surely shows what the owners are doing for the club. Sponsorship pays a large amount of expected debt before known figures, they have actually turned down money to let the fans rejoice a special moment in our history. Yes they are businessmen but they are actually fan based rather than profit based imo. Having worked in Corporate Sponsorship before, as I stated above, it would be my belief that the decision to withdraw a sponsor would have been a commercial one as opposed to a fan one. SFC will be in a much stronger negotiating position as a Championship team, where they will attract around double the sponsorship revenue ( more than covering the loss this season ) , and as I said, by increasing revenue streams in other areas, they maintain their bottom line. That said, it's a nice gesture on the face of it, and some innovative marketing by the club, as it has obviously captured the imagination of some of our supporters whilst still coming across as a freebie to the consumer, as they say, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Fair comment, I suppose that means many will be priced out of watching saints though. The price of success I guess though that is sad. I wouldn't say it is all about ticket price though. I would hope that the administration realises the importance of keeping fans onside but then, is that really that important if people will go whatever happens if saints are winning? Do posters take the view that it doesn't matter if some fans are ****ed off by the club (or in my scenario above threatened with legal action) as long as saints do well on the pitch? Genuine question. It didn't affect us last time in the premiership, we got more support as the seasons moved on so pricing wasn't an obstacle, people will always find a way to follow their club. Yes it will be more costly to support your team in the higher leagues but that is the price of success, like it or not prices will be higher. Just look at the top 4 in the premiership, not cheap by all means but they have the support.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Having worked in Corporate Sponsorship before, as I stated above, it would be my belief that the decision to withdraw a sponsor would have been a commercial one as opposed to a fan one. SFC will be in a much stronger negotiating position as a Championship team, where they will attract around double the sponsorship revenue ( more than covering the loss this season ) , and as I said, by increasing revenue streams in other areas, they maintain their bottom line. That said, it's a nice gesture on the face of it, and some innovative marketing by the club, as it has obviously captured the imagination of some of our supporters whilst still coming across as a freebie to the consumer, as they say, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Well that is in your personal opinion and because you work in sponsorship doesn't mean you know the minds of ML or NC, they have turned down mega bucks imo to speak to the fans, There is no way they can make up in the shortfall just by getting us promoted to the championship as this cannot be guaranteed, we have to get there next season by winning, we are not invited. By the way how do we make up the extra revenue streams in other areas, I am at a loss to see what more they can do as opposed to last season.
RedAndWhite91 Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Having worked in Corporate Sponsorship before Was that before or after Get Your Own Back?
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Well that is in your personal opinion and because you work in sponsorship doesn't mean you know the minds of ML or NC, they have turned down mega bucks imo to speak to the fans, There is no way they can make up in the shortfall just by getting us promoted to the championship as this cannot be guaranteed, we have to get there next season by winning, we are not invited. By the way how do we make up the extra revenue streams in other areas, I am at a loss to see what more they can do as opposed to last season. Our sponsorship agreement last time was worth £400,000 per annum and was negotiated when we were a play-off challenging Championship team. It's fair to say we would command less than half of that as a league 1 team. Take Huddersfield Town for example, a club with a significantly smaller revenue to us, they donated their shirt sponsorship last season to Yorkshire Air Ambulance. Shirt sponsorship is not as lucrative as you might think and can easily be recovered in other ways. For example, if 2,500 tickets are sold with a booking fee for each home game and 500 transactions for each away game, this will equate to £207,000 - which should cover any sponsorship revenue income. As I said, all you have to do is mess around with the revenue streams and as long as you get the same bottom line, you can do without a shirt sponsor.
Crispypie Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Selling better players than we are buying Relegation battles instead of promotion battles. If prices go up more than I think is right, I stop buying.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Our sponsorship agreement last time was worth £400,000 per annum and was negotiated when we were a play-off challenging Championship team. It's fair to say we would command less than half of that as a league 1 team. Take Huddersfield Town for example, a club with a significantly smaller revenue to us, they donated their shirt sponsorship last season to Yorkshire Air Ambulance. Shirt sponsorship is not as lucrative as you might think and can easily be recovered in other ways. For example, if 2,500 tickets are sold with a booking fee for each home game and 500 transactions for each away game, this will equate to £207,000 - which should cover any sponsorship revenue income. As I said, all you have to do is mess around with the revenue streams and as long as you get the same bottom line, you can do without a shirt sponsor. But you cannot guarantee these figures so its only a personal opinion on your part. Remember people used to pay by credit arrangements over the last several years, how many of them won't be renewing this season because they now cannot afford it? We don't know what the season ticket sales are so we might even be running at less than last season. Also last season there was a booking fee if done over the phone so the only difference is those booking online who will now pay a fee. I have mentioned before that I quite often bring a few 'other' supporters down for footie but a lot of these won't be coming because of this new booking fee. Money lost by the club not just through ticket sales but through merchandising as well. As you said you can mess around with with revenue streams but you can also come out as a loss.
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 But you cannot guarantee these figures so its only a personal opinion on your part. Remember people used to pay by credit arrangements over the last several years, how many of them won't be renewing this season because they now cannot afford it? We don't know what the season ticket sales are so we might even be running at less than last season. Also last season there was a booking fee if done over the phone so the only difference is those booking online who will now pay a fee. I have mentioned before that I quite often bring a few 'other' supporters down for footie but a lot of these won't be coming because of this new booking fee. Money lost by the club not just through ticket sales but through merchandising as well. As you said you can mess around with with revenue streams but you can also come out as a loss. It was my understanding that there was a Credit Card booking fee last year, now there is a generic fee for bookings. I think that 2,500 booking fees per home game and 500 ( 1 booking fee for every 3 tickets purchased ) is if anything quite a conservative estimate. We had 8,000 non STH customers per game last season. Not to mention the 2,000 a game on average who 'walk-up' to the game and will be paying an extra £2 per game, which doesn't sound alot but is worth an extra £100,000 to the club a season. Then you have the extra revenue from having a 1 year shirt, as the design is completely different to the standard kit, so when the 2012/2013 season kit is released, most people will buy again. For the sake of this debate, I won't even use the increase in the casual crowd and walk-ups, which can be worth millions to the club, nor will I speculate about the increase in costs around the concourses, which I have no doubt will happen. SFC is most definately being run as a business, which of course is a good thing, but the lack of sponsorship is more than made up in price increases in other departments, so let's not be naive to think it is a gift from the chairman, when clearly it is not.
miserableoldgit Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Sadly, the days of the benevolent benefactors have long gone when it comes to football club ownership. Most owners are in it for kudos and profit, although not necessarily in that order.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 +9999999 the 'hypothetical' situation is loaded, ie. it is more conceivable to him that this will happen rather than not. The OP already has an opinion about our regime, starting a hypothetical debate does not detract from that. I could hypothetically ask how we would all feel about our owners putting the club up for sale, thus forcing the sale of Lambert et al and the resignation of Pardew as he doesn't want to work with limited funds in League 1. But remember guys, don't start getting into arguments (or, put another way, debating my MOTIVATION for creating such a situation.) That wasn't my motivation for starting this thread at all. It's actually going pretty well because people with opposing opinion are airing them without getting personal. I urge you to join in!
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 IF, and this is a big hypothetical IF, there were, as you put it - "an opportunity to make serious cash" - why oh why oh why, was there only 2 potential suitors for us, and given that one of those were bogus, why was this so? Do you not believe that Southampton was an utter bargain? Because I do. Look at what you got for the money then look at prices of other clubs. The only thing we didn't/don't have going for us is league position, something which can be easily sorted and is only a short term problem. Nevertheless, it's still a gamble of sorts, though if Markus sold tomorrow he would still make a profit IMO. Quite simply, in the current economic climate, not many people had 12 million or whatever it was to spunk on a football club. Perhaps quite simply not all billionaires were aware of the opportunity? Markus would not have been either had Cortese not said something. IF there is so much serious money to be made out of football clubs, why wasn;t poopey sold more easily, surely a Prem club or CCC club is more profitable than ours OR at least as profitable. Well you can read the pompey takeover thread for many many reasons why Portsmouth are much less attractive than us. over 100 million pound debt for starters, not owning their own ground or training facilities. Most CCC clubs are either in a lot of debt or don't own their own training facilities or ground etc. For 12 million you got a world class (according to UEFA) ground, top notch training facilities, whatever players were left (Kelvin and Lallana could have netted you about 3 million of that back if you were desperate FFS! Not to mention that really promising youngster Oxlade Chamberlin) and also the development land of Jacksons Farm, potentially worth quite a bit. League position is largely irrelevant (at least it is when referring to league one and CCC.) It can change in 1 season so it really wouldn't affect the price too much. Saints was an utter utter bargain, I challenge you to find a better deal with regards to football clubs. If they invest wisely (which they appear to be doing) and maximise the profit, getting us into the prem as quickly as possible, then they will make an absolutely huge profit. They will be able to sell us for about 200 million IMO (remembering how much you get from the prem for promotion) should they wish which is huge and if you think Markus isn't bothered about profit of that sort then you are just wrong. What about Crystal Palace, They have nowhere near the amount of assets that we do. Not even close. They didn't even own their own ground. what about Bournemouth, and what about all the others? Serious cash? Are you being serious? Are you seriously comparing our attractiveness to that of Bournemouth? Amongst other things there are only three sides to their ground? If you seriously think Markus would have bought us over Bournemouth with a view to making a bigger profit then you are barking. So, in answer to your hypothetical question, I would have to ask the question that has yet to be asked - How much money do you think ML and NC will make Net profit from this venture after 5 years? I've given you a figure should they get back to the prem with the ground, spruced up training facilities (should that even happen given recent events) and the players which will go with it. Besides, I doubt the plan is for five years but they would make a significant profit no doubt about it. And In making this Net profit, how much 'investment' do you think it will take to achieve this, ie how much cash on the hip will ANY investor require in order to achieve these substantial rewards that you so loosely talk of? Well so far its been the 12 million roughly for buying the club (though the assets are clearly worth far more) and whatever else has been used to fund player purchases and wages. There has been much speculation that due to much higher than expected crowds, the JPT final etc that we were probably close to breaking even this year if we didn't make a small profit. I expect some player purchases to be made from the pocket of Markus but IMO this will be repaid many times over should we reach the prem. And if it were so obviously easy to achieve, by screwing all these fans, why didn;t a common poopey supporter do it, or an avid Saints fan? Why did Wilde and Crouch fail? Couldn;t have been the investment, as you seem to think in this hypothetical situation that millions of pounds investment is par of the course OR is irrelevant. Because fairly obviously they don't have millions of pounds to gamble. As I said it is a gamble quite clearly but it has the potential to make them a mint. And lastly, in this hypothetical scenario, why oh why oh why, did Rupert Lowe 'allow' this club to go into debt when all he had to do was introduce a £3 charge on purchases. I bet he's turning in his chair! That is irrelevent and has nothing to do with the question I was asking.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 hypo, I will give you my take on this. Yes, I believe that Cortese and Leibherr are in it for the profit, after all the club is a business. The brief for Pardew this season was to make the playoffs, but not to get promotion. Why? This is to make sure the interest of fans is maintained to the end, putting paying bums on seats, convincing them the dream was alive. Promotion itself was actually unimportant. We have to be realistic and realise that whenever Cortese, Pardew and the players speak to the media it is all carefully choreographed to be positive and to keep fans coming. This is why managers are often so bullish after poor games (remember Burley?). This is why Pardew was up there towards the end of the season sayign we still have a chance, when the reality was that it needed a miracle. Leibherr is an investor, and is waiting for his return, and I'm sure wouldn't have parted with any cash unless Cortese had a clear business plan which stated how much he would get back and in what time frame. Does any of this matter? I don't know, and I guess pompey and leicester fans would take different views right now. the bottom line is that we love football and we'll keep on paying, even if there is a £3 booking fee! Every club is run this way, so I don't see why it should suddenly be an issue now. Thanks for that, that's the sort of eloquent opinion I was after! I know we'll keep paying but I was also wondering if there would be a situation where you would withdraw your support. I know that we are always exploited to an extent, but I imagine for Cortese it is a balance between doing as much as he can to squeeze every last drop of revenue from the support without going too far and turning them off. I do hope however that Cortese takes the time to listen to fans concerns if they are valid concerns.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 Excellent point and well done for posting it, this surely shows what the owners are doing for the club. Sponsorship pays a large amount of expected debt before known figures, they have actually turned down money to let the fans rejoice a special moment in our history. Yes they are businessmen but they are actually fan based rather than profit based imo. It will have been a pure business decision, as Dave Benson Phillips has pointed out. I imagine the increase in shirt sales as well as having the freedom to negotiate a more lucrative sponsor contract in the CCC next season will have played a huge part.
Wes Tender Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 So the general consensus is nothing matters except results? I must be in the minority then! Why would that surprise you? I can't be bothered to read all through the posts, but will take your post as being evidence that most feel that they are happy with how things are and that they are enjoying supporting the club at the moment. If we succeed and then ML puts the club up for sale to make a tidy profit on his investment along the way, then good luck to him. We will be back in the Premiership as a result and will be a profitable going concern. If money has been spent on increasing the size of the stadium in the process and we are also playing in Europe, then so much the better. I'll make my judgement call on that situation if it comes to pass. In the meantime, I'm enjoying the ride, unless something comes up to spoil it. If that comes to pass, then the time for comment is then, not now.
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 (edited) It will have been a pure business decision, as Dave Benson Phillips has pointed out. I imagine the increase in shirt sales as well as having the freedom to negotiate a more lucrative sponsor contract in the CCC next season will have played a huge part. Correct, and I did also forget the extra revenue from season ticket sales and the 15% rise in cost, looking through the forum it seems people think sales will not be affected, if this is the case, taking the average ticket rise of £50, equates to £650,000 in extra revenue in the 2010/2011 season... around 3 times the amount of revenue as what a shirt sponsor will bring in. For people whom are happy to pay the extra money to earn the club more money, this is obviously good news, as it means the club will earn more in the next season than they did last, but is another example of how a shirt sponsor loss has been offset through other revenue streams. Our bottom line will look better next season for sure, but it will be at the expense of the supporters, make no bones about it. I guess it just depends whether or not people are happy with this, some people will be, some people won't. Edited 15 June, 2010 by Dave Benson Phillips
dune Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 DBP - are you from the Echo? btw I agree with everything you're saying.
capitalsaint Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 Thanks for that, that's the sort of eloquent opinion I was after! I know we'll keep paying but I was also wondering if there would be a situation where you would withdraw your support. I know that we are always exploited to an extent, but I imagine for Cortese it is a balance between doing as much as he can to squeeze every last drop of revenue from the support without going too far and turning them off. I do hope however that Cortese takes the time to listen to fans concerns if they are valid concerns. hypo, why would supporters who have had to suffer two relegations and the near-demise of their club EVER withdraw their support because the club are successful and so they have to pay a bit more? The nature of competitive sport is such that you try to win, all other factors are secondary to this. If somebody stops supporting Saints because they don't want to pay the price that comes with success (which, actually, would be not much more than mediocrity) then they are hypothetically deluded. We supported Saints when they were at their lowest ebb, I'm sure that even in a hypothetical world we'd support them when successful.
saintwarwick Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 It will have been a pure business decision, as Dave Benson Phillips has pointed out. I imagine the increase in shirt sales as well as having the freedom to negotiate a more lucrative sponsor contract in the CCC next season will have played a huge part. In what way? There is no proof yet that shirt sales will exceed other seasons and we are not guaranteed a place in the championship after this current next season so no way will we be able to negotiate a better deal? Everything is speculative, yes they will do things based on business but they have to hope that the business works in the first place. Us getting promoted will stand us in better stance but we have to get there first, if we don't succeed then we won't get what you are assuming we will get.
hypochondriac Posted 15 June, 2010 Author Posted 15 June, 2010 In what way? There is no proof yet that shirt sales will exceed other seasons and we are not guaranteed a place in the championship after this current next season so no way will we be able to negotiate a better deal? Everything is speculative, yes they will do things based on business but they have to hope that the business works in the first place. Us getting promoted will stand us in better stance but we have to get there first, if we don't succeed then we won't get what you are assuming we will get. Want to bet that shirt sales will not be quite a bit higher this year? Almost definitely IMO. Anyway it's irrelevent because it's clearly a calculated gamble. SOme would say a similar calculated gamble to the one that meant they bought the club in the first place.
Dave Benson Phillips Posted 15 June, 2010 Posted 15 June, 2010 DBP - are you from the Echo? btw I agree with everything you're saying. No, most definately not. I have no personal opinion on the situation, other than being interested how football clubs run at business level etc. I am just a bit of an anorak.
Recommended Posts