The paper ban

[Jonnyboy]

Most of these papers never write about us let alone print a picture, it was only the JPT final and Pompey game that got press coverage last year. Ones like The Guardian barely mention League 1 at all!

[Norm]

This is not about simply charging for photos and I think most people here would agree that they don't particularly care for the Sun either. It may be 'business at the end of the day' but this particular piece of business is unlikley to make us much money, as few people will actually pay us for photos, and the loss of goodwill could well lead to a further loss of money in other forms in the future.

 

 

 

 

Sums this silly situation up in a nutshell, for me.

[dune]

I'm only on page 2 but you win the prize.*

 

 

* The most stupid post of the day (so far)

 

Possibly a PR plant?

[NickG]

didn't think NC cared about PR?

[Gigersaint]

I'm not quite sure what to make of all this.

 

From SFC's point of view I can understand why they would want to use match day images as an avenue for an additional income stream, which at this time is probably best tested now at the current level we remain before any such time we are promoted when the storm could be that much bigger.

There were several links to fans forums on here throughout last season where opposition fans were not even aware that we had been brought, still believing we were skint and in admin, I don't recall seeing many, if any, full page articles covering our new owner such was the coverage in the press, though sure plenty if not most opposition fans now know about the external photography ban due to how quickly this has story has spread.

However, despite all this for the press side of it, I always read anything in any paper I can find relating to stories on SFC no matter which Newspapers the match reports or club news appears in, if I can find anything on us at all these days, (Excluding Sun JPT Final edition ) and not that there was much when we were a Premier League team either. However, in that respect it now means I miss out reading balanced overall opinion on us too from the nationals.

 

So, is the press kicking up despite the fact they give us very little in coverage now that we may some day get back to the top flight where they'll have more to lose if this external photographer ban continues? Is it down to not how it affects them now, but how it may or may not affect them in the future?

[Give it to Ron]

Possibly a PR plant?

 

You really are a blind fool aren't you!!!

Norm has been posting on this and the old site since you were just a twinkle in your dad's eye!

[S-Clarke]

Sorry but what is wrong with the club wanting to use their own photographer and selling the image rights. The Premier League Does it. Also if you get a wedding photographer they will charge you more for the copy right of them all. FFS why are so many of you trying to bash the club? Especially two people who basically saved the club from going out of business a year ago. So what if they add the £3 booking fee so what if they charge a bit more for the ticket on the day, So what if there was no payment plan because a load of people decided to default on the payments and stuffed it for the rest of us.

 

They have invested heavily in the club and are running this as a business. So to bring more money into the club they are looking at ways to ensure they can maximise revenue. And secondly with regards to the payment option being removed then who cares we have (Apparently (TBC)) more season tickets sold than in the last 3 years. And it saves me a tone of money in the long term.

 

Personally this is a fair policy from the club to ensure they know who is coming to the club in the form of the press and also a fair and probably to be copied policy on photographers. Even the BBC charge for photo's they have taken.

 

So stop this club bashing and just get behind the team and don't boo them just because you have had 1 to many shandy's. We are called Supporters for a reason you know.

 

 

GRRRRRR Rant over. I think.

 

No one is wanting to bash the club mate, this is nothing to do with how much they've invested or how they're pushing the club forward. They are doing correct things in some areas and i think i speak for all fans when i say we appreciate them coming in when they did, but it doesn't mean that they're totally beyond criticism and can never be questioned.

 

Surely you can see what a completely horrendous bit of PR this is? I don't think it'll be the last with Cortese at the helm either.

[Norm]

You really are a blind fool aren't you!!!

Norm has been posting on this and the old site since you were just a twinkle in your dad's eye!

 

To be fair to dune, I think he meant moon monkey. Hope so, but heck, I've been called worse.

 

 

GITR, thanks for the shout!

[dune]

You really are a blind fool aren't you!!!

Norm has been posting on this and the old site since you were just a twinkle in your dad's eye!

 

lol, i was talking about the poster he was commenting on and it was tongue in cheek. I'll add a winky next time so as not to confuse you.

[saintfully]

ffs.

 

Its like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Give it to Ron]

lol, i was talking about the poster he was commenting on and it was tongue in cheek. I'll add a winky next time so as not to confuse you.

 

Apologies...the quoting fooled this old fool.

[StUrrock]

Cortese is an idiot. Embarrassed to support s'ampton at the moment.

[beatlesaint]

No one is wanting to bash the club mate, this is nothing to do with how much they've invested or how they're pushing the club forward. They are doing correct things in some areas and i think i speak for all fans when i say we appreciate them coming in when they did, but it doesn't mean that they're totally beyond criticism and can never be questioned.

 

Surely you can see what a completely horrendous bit of PR this is? I don't think it'll be the last with Cortese at the helm either.

 

PR is not his strong point, a career in banking would mean he never had to worry about PR.

This is a different ball game and goodwill and a good name goes a long way.

Its our 125th year Mr Cortese, just have a read and see what people have said about Southampton FC for most of that time.

[sadoldgit]

Apologies if this has been posted already, but driving home tonight there was a bit on Talksport about us. They said a cartoonist had drawn a picture of the Plymouth goal as the photographers were not allowed in.

 

(Sorry, just caught the other thread and seen the pictures)

Edited 9 August, 2010 by sadoldgit
updated

[Faz]

Cortese is an idiot. Embarrassed to support s'ampton at the moment.

 

Really? Really??

 

Because why?

[CityRanger]

Apologies if this link has already been posted. Opinion and a little history from former newspaper editor Roy Greenslade:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/aug/09/southampton-fc-press-freedom

[saint_bert]

All seems abit silly to me.

[up and away]

Picture this(no pun).

You're the sports ed of the Sun.

From a personal point of view: Many of your oldest and best friends are photographers. This applies to many of the journos working under you.

You prob started on a "provincial" paper, again as did many of your colleagues and therefore sympathise with them when they are supposedly "bullied".

From a professional point of view: When you're getting the pullout ready on Sunday morn for Mondays pullout you want a wide selection of pics to choose from, from both a financial and artistic point of view.

 

Taking just these factors into account you can see how Mr Sports ed is gonna make sure he nips this in the bud. I really wonder if Mr Cortese can pull this off.

 

Here's another picture closer to home. Papers / freelance make money from these pictures with the image rights. Don't get confused with freedom of the press, when Murdoch will drag your sorry arse into court if you try taking liberties with any image rights he holds, with not even a muttering of "freedom of the press". It's all about money, nothing else.

[dubai_phil]

Just back from a day out (and a very HOT round of golf) to find a 5 page thread.

 

No idea if anyone else has taken this line as it's late and I ain't reading all 5 pages

 

OK I have a lot of time for NC for how he brought ML to SMS, but on this one he really really really has made an utter plank of himself.

 

No it's not the decision to ban photographers per se, it's the way he has managed to do it that is wrong.

 

He COULD have done exactly the same thing, banned the press, got them to buy from his phot library AND been a hero of the Nation and made front page news for all the RIGHT reasons....

 

He SHOULD have simply said

 

"Southampton FC are investingating every way possible for the club to become more Eco-Friendly. We have teams investgiating every aspect of our business, and our first act is to reduce the number of un-necessary journeys made to our stadium. Our first act is to save all the National Media the cost and Carbon Emissions of their staff having to travel to SMS to take photos by using our own in-house team and will be distributing those pictures at less than the cost of the car-parking fee.

 

Simples, he's saving the planet and has used Marketing Bullsh1t to get a case across that nobody will be able to take issue with.

 

But then he just ain't that media and marketing savvy is he? So we're at war instead of being heroes.

 

Well done

[sadoldgit]

Just back from a day out (and a very HOT round of golf) to find a 5 page thread.

 

No idea if anyone else has taken this line as it's late and I ain't reading all 5 pages

 

OK I have a lot of time for NC for how he brought ML to SMS, but on this one he really really really has made an utter plank of himself.

 

No it's not the decision to ban photographers per se, it's the way he has managed to do it that is wrong.

 

He COULD have done exactly the same thing, banned the press, got them to buy from his phot library AND been a hero of the Nation and made front page news for all the RIGHT reasons....

 

He SHOULD have simply said

 

"Southampton FC are investingating every way possible for the club to become more Eco-Friendly. We have teams investgiating every aspect of our business, and our first act is to reduce the number of un-necessary journeys made to our stadium. Our first act is to save all the National Media the cost and Carbon Emissions of their staff having to travel to SMS to take photos by using our own in-house team and will be distributing those pictures at less than the cost of the car-parking fee.

 

Simples, he's saving the planet and has used Marketing Bullsh1t to get a case across that nobody will be able to take issue with.

 

But then he just ain't that media and marketing savvy is he? So we're at war instead of being heroes.

 

Well done

 

Spot on.

[La BoIS Saint]

Just back from a day out (and a very HOT round of golf) to find a 5 page thread.

 

No idea if anyone else has taken this line as it's late and I ain't reading all 5 pages

 

OK I have a lot of time for NC for how he brought ML to SMS, but on this one he really really really has made an utter plank of himself.

 

No it's not the decision to ban photographers per se, it's the way he has managed to do it that is wrong.

 

He COULD have done exactly the same thing, banned the press, got them to buy from his phot library AND been a hero of the Nation and made front page news for all the RIGHT reasons....

 

He SHOULD have simply said

 

"Southampton FC are investingating every way possible for the club to become more Eco-Friendly. We have teams investgiating every aspect of our business, and our first act is to reduce the number of un-necessary journeys made to our stadium. Our first act is to save all the National Media the cost and Carbon Emissions of their staff having to travel to SMS to take photos by using our own in-house team and will be distributing those pictures at less than the cost of the car-parking fee.

 

Simples, he's saving the planet and has used Marketing Bullsh1t to get a case across that nobody will be able to take issue with.

 

But then he just ain't that media and marketing savvy is he? So we're at war instead of being heroes.

 

Well done

 

That would be the most ludicrously transparent bull**** and no one would fall for it. He's going to ban a photographer who might be able to walk to the ground on the basis of saving carbon emissions? Lol.

 

How about this? Why not save about 2/3 of the crowd going by banning any fans outside walking distance and instead their season ticket gets them a live stream. Banning any Saints fans from travelling away?

 

Despite being harsh on Cortese I am beginning to warm to him. Really can't wait to see what he will do next to make himself look an even biggeer chump.

[dune]

Expect a statement saying "we won't be pushed around by a bunch of Fleet Street Yobbos".

[Dig Dig]

Apologies if this link has already been posted. Opinion and a little history from former newspaper editor Roy Greenslade:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/aug/09/southampton-fc-press-freedom

 

So now the guardian think that southampton fc are news worthy? I like the guardian but they dont even write up league 1 match reports (online anyway).

[Faz]

So now the guardian think that southampton fc are news worthy? I like the guardian but they dont even write up league 1 match reports (online anyway).

 

The "Freedom of the Press" arguement is bullsh1t. They are free to report on games, they just need to use images (if the actually want to use them) from the official source. The club are within their rights to protect their image rights. Others will follow.

 

If we unearth the next Rooney they'll be tripping over their principles to get the story before anyone else, and buying pictures from us if it sells papers. Shysters, the lot of them.

[CB Fry]

Here's another picture closer to home. Papers / freelance make money from these pictures with the image rights. Don't get confused with freedom of the press, when Murdoch will drag your sorry arse into court if you try taking liberties with any image rights he holds, with not even a muttering of "freedom of the press". It's all about money, nothing else.

 

How much money is being made on photos from League one matches exactly? Do you really think this is some kind of goldmine the national press have been depriving poor liddle Cortese of?

 

Whatever this is about it isn't about money. If we were that desperate for money we'd have a bloody shirt sponsor, we wouldn't be on the selling-photos-of-Dan-Harding-taking-a-throw-in gravy train .

[sadoldgit]

So now the guardian think that southampton fc are news worthy? I like the guardian but they dont even write up league 1 match reports (online anyway).

 

To be fair it is not a question of SFC being newsworthy (or not), it is about the story.

[mack rill]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-10914863

 

All thats missing is a Walt Disney signature Lol Truly are a Micky Mouse Club!

Oh hope you are paying the tax on these Image rites,

[Dig Dig]

The "Freedom of the Press" arguement is bullsh1t. They are free to report on games, they just need to use images (if the actually want to use them) from the official source. The club are within their rights to protect their image rights. Others will follow.

 

If we unearth the next Rooney they'll be tripping over their principles to get the story before anyone else, and buying pictures from us if it sells papers. Shysters, the lot of them.

 

exactly, even when we do make an appearance in the nationals our one or two paragraphs worth doesn't even merit a picture! They are just worried that this will set a precedence in sports journalism (I know others have tried and failed) but ultimately this could well be normal practise in a few years time, others just need to follow suit

[docker-p]

exactly, even when we do make an appearance in the nationals our one or two paragraphs worth doesn't even merit a picture! They are just worried that this will set a precedence in sports journalism (I know others have tried and failed) but ultimately this could well be normal practise in a few years time, others just need to follow suit

But others won't follow suit, as the bottom line is no national newspaper needs photos from SMS to sell papers. Have a think and ask yourself why Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea etc etc don't do this, and NC thinks a League 1 club is going to make Fleet street sit up and take notice????

What is worrying is a blind man with Mongolia could see this policy would back-fire. What else is NC going to screw up?

[Dig Dig]

But others won't follow suit, as the bottom line is no national newspaper needs photos from SMS to sell papers. Have a think and ask yourself why Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea etc etc don't do this, and NC thinks a League 1 club is going to make Fleet street sit up and take notice????

What is worrying is a blind man with Mongolia could see this policy would back-fire. What else is NC going to screw up?

 

Tbf it has been attempted by other clubs, although with little success but only because of the backlash from the media. I just can't stand the likes of the sun trying to take some kind of "free press" morale high ground when 1) 99% of the time they couldn't give a monkeys about saints and 2) they are a bunch of slimely, hypocritical scumbags

[SW11_Saint]

It'd certainly make me look at the Daily Echo site regularly if they did comic strip pictures for all Saints games as it's highly amusing and a brilliant way to laugh at Cortese. I will be writing to the editor of the Echo urging him to do the same.

Funny how they are going to use cartoons for all Plymouth games from now on. This could catch on...

[shurlock]

Tbf it has been attempted by other clubs, although with little success but only because of the backlash from the media. I just can't stand the likes of the sun trying to take some kind of "free press" morale high ground when 1) 99% of the time they couldn't give a monkeys about saints and 2) they are a bunch of slimely, hypocritical scumbags

 

Agree totally - idiots on this board think the papers give two monkeys about us; we are just a plaything, some tokenistic ammunition for a self-important media that loves to give it but can't take it. Glad we've ruffled a few feathers. F**k 'em.

Edited 9 August, 2010 by shurlock

[CB Fry]

Agree totally - idiots on this board think the papers give two monkeys about us; we are just a plaything, some tokenistic ammunition for a self-important media that loves to give it but can't take it. Glad we've ruffled a few feathers. F**k 'em.

 

I think the only person using this football club as a "plaything" is Cortese, with his pursuit of something so petulent and pointless. Using "Tokenistic ammunition" and being "self important" and someone who can "give it but can't take it" sums up Nicola pretty bloody well, actually.

 

I don't think there are any "idiots on this board" who "think the papers give two monkeys about us" either.

[Weston Super Saint]

I

I don't think there are any "idiots on this board"

 

Are you sure

[JackanorySFC]

Jesus, people on here are so stupidly blind in their hatred of anything critical of SFC it's emarrassing, reminds me of a scumbag Mum that swears blind their delinquant kid "ain't done nothing wrong" when deep inside, even their thick brain knows full well they have.

 

The Sun is read by over 2.5m ABC1's every day (more than any other newspaper) - so put that "The Sun is read by thickos" propoaganda to bed. It has by a huge distance the most read pull out sports section (Goals) of any newspaper in the World. It has always had a "soft spot" for us (there are still Saints fans on the Sports desk due to Southampton workers breaking the picket lines in the early 80's) hence the 240k copies they ran in SO post codes after the Cup final at NO commercial gain (the print, paper, ink and fuel costs outweighed a late notice commercial oppertunity - it was seen as good pr to a working class part of the country that buys The Sun regulary).

 

The Sun, however, is the least of our worries. Obviously there are loonies that put their head in the sand shout "Murdoch kills babies" and deny The Sun with it's 8m (3m more than it's nearest rival - The Mail) daily readers has any commercial impact on potential sponsors (Jesus, that's before you involve News Corps stake in Sky which will be a serious problem soon) ALL other nationals will jopin in on this and generally make us a laughing stock.

 

Keep up with the stupid "yeah, annoy everyone saints I don't care as long as we win" attitude, personally always thought we had more class than that!

[Micky]

He COULD have done exactly the same thing, banned the press, got them to buy from his phot library AND been a hero of the Nation and made front page news for all the RIGHT reasons....

 

He SHOULD have simply said

 

"Southampton FC are investingating every way possible for the club to become more Eco-Friendly. We have teams investgiating every aspect of our business, and our first act is to reduce the number of un-necessary journeys made to our stadium. Our first act is to save all the National Media the cost and Carbon Emissions of their staff having to travel to SMS to take photos by using our own in-house team and will be distributing those pictures at less than the cost of the car-parking fee.

 

Simples, he's saving the planet and has used Marketing Bullsh1t to get a case across that nobody will be able to take issue with.

 

 

You honestly believe that anybody would have believed that total bollux...? Really...? I don't particularly agree with what he has done, but if you honestly think that anybody would be taken in by the bag of bollux that you have just come up with - then I want you as my boss.

[shurlock]

I think the only person using this football club as a "plaything" is Cortese, with his pursuit of something so petulent and pointless. Using "Tokenistic ammunition" and being "self important" and someone who can "give it but can't take it" sums up Nicola pretty bloody well, actually.

 

I don't think there are any "idiots on this board" who "think the papers give two monkeys about us" either.

 

The last thing Cortese sees us as is a plaything - people may disagree about the means but Cortese is serious about making us successful, at least defined in terms of winning things.

 

There is a distinction between controversial actions/decisions that affect fans and ones that affect the media: by and large, I need much greater convincing/justification when it comes to the former. After all fans interests are naturally aligned with those of club and they show the kind of loyalty and commitment that gives rise to the expectation that the club will sometimes put the bottom line to one side.

 

The media is a totally different beast- nobody says it should show slavish deference to football clubs -so what goes around will often come around- but neither does it show much interest in speaking truth to power, except when it serves a commercial imperative and that usually entails sensationalising/sexing up the facts.

 

In other words there is world of difference between the rights and wrongs of scrapping installment plans (which affects fans) and getting the media to cough up for match images or stonewalling the Echo (which affects the media); however for some there is no difference which suggests nothing more than a warped anti-Cortese fixation.

Edited 9 August, 2010 by shurlock

[Saint George]

I'm in two, well 3 minds over all this....On one hand i really hate the ever increasing controls and commercialization of Image rights and over the top copyright enforcement (removal of poor quantity 2 min you tube clips etc) But having said that, as a Saints fan since 72 i can honestly say we owe the press/media **** all. So.....screw em!

Also this looks like a sign of things to come and that Cortese is not going to leave a stone unturned when it comes to the success of Southampton FC......He's only taking maximum advantage of the law/rules as they stand.....If peeps don't like it, get the law/rules changed.

 

The big boys better make some room at the top table, because Cortese is going to be setting a place there for the Saints, whether they like it or not!

[oldskoolsi]

Can't see it posted anywhere so far but story is now on Yahoo sports site.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/article/21664/

[oldskoolsi]

Also on BBC website but only on local news.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-10914863

 

I think this is as big as the story is going to get now.

[MAY-Z]

Also on BBC website but only on local news.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-10914863

 

I think this is as big as the story is going to get now.

 

 

or not - i cant remember the last time that anything to do with southampton made the papers over here

 

this story also ran in the newspapers daily email news

 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/soccer/cartoon-capers-as-club-bans-pictures/story-e6frfg8x-1225903319332?referrer=email&source=HS_email_nl&emcmp=HS&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member

[saint_mears]

Not a bad article

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/aug/09/southampton-fc-press-freedom

[John Smith]

Let's get this right shall we. Saints players are contracted to Southampton FC. Some of them do advertising, some of them have certain image rights (maybe not at this level, but it is possible), but mostly, these players are Southampton FC. In years gone by, clubs have allowed photographers into the ground to take pictures that supplement the reporters write up. However, these phtographs are sold, ie, there is a profit behind it. A reporter is giving an opinion and it is that opinion which is being sold, ie the way they tell it and this is totally legit and should give a less biased view of the game. However, for papers to believe they own the imagary of football is absolute nonsense. They don't! Giving it the freedom of the press rubbish is just them clining onto tradition, a tradition they started and they continue. The photographs taken at a game do not belong to the free press, they either belong to everyone and should not be sold at all and no profit gained, or, they belong to the club, the free press DO NOT own the rights to print photo's of any football player, playing for their team, anywhere.

 

What we have here is someone trying to buck the trend, he obviously has had enough with the wrethced press in general, and who could blame him, the Echo, the bench mark for putrid local reporting, the daily mail of local rags if you like. Then, you have the likes of the Daily Mail, always happy to print anything contreversial just to sell papers, nevermind the truth, if someone reports it, that's enough to be printed. So, how do you fight back, you take away the rights they don't have, the 'goodwill' if you like. And that's exactly what's happened. The press have NO RIGHT to take photo's to sell papers or profit from individual sales of a business, they need permission, without that permission, they don;t have the right. And so, what do they do? The likes of the Mail and the Sun get together and Saints get the most coverage since we won the FA Cup in 1976! I don;t even remember the last time Saints had an average league 1 game photo printed in the paper?

 

The Mail have whipped up the press into a frenzy and labelled it as a removal of freedom, of their god given right to take photo's of anything they so please. And why? Because the echo and the mail have taken the p*ss for so long, the club has reacted and it has reacted in a totally legal fashion. The mail has got it's buddies to jump on this strike against freedom and labelled NC all sorts of names. I mean, I almost accept the name calling on here, but the press have stepped over that mark. Some have mentioned a possible smear campaign against NC due to this. Hang on, for what? Doing something clubs should've done years ago! The press have only got themselves to blame and I support NC in this decision. The echo does not run or own this club, the mail does not run or own this club, the national press do not own this club!

 

I say boycott the Sun and the Mail, I certainly don;t buy the Mail, but the sun occasionally on a Monday, but not anymore. I hate bully boys, I hate the Mail and the sun, this country could do without these gutter press advocates, don;t buy them, they haven't got any pictures anymore anyway!

[CB Saint]

So what now...

 

NC has got this wrong IMO. Selling image rights for photos is not something that I object to - fair playto any club trying to maximise revenue (Oh and you can bet the the newspapers syndicate their photos to other organisations - try going to the echo for a free reprint).

 

What NC got wrong was going this alone - this should have been done as part of a league wide action. TV has to pay, why shouldn't the press.

[Gingeletiss]

Not a bad article

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/aug/09/southampton-fc-press-freedom

 

Not a bad article, if they had bothered to get their facts right. Remind me again, who is our owner?

note what the club's owner, Nicola Cortese, said a couple of months ago:

[SaintRichmond]

Cortese is a liability and an embarrassment. I hope Mr Liebherr realises this.

 

I expect so, and Leibherr sell up and they will both leave

[Cheesegrater999]

This story is currently fourth on the BBC's most read news page!

[bowers-sfc]

http://northstandchat.com/showthread.php?t=180706

 

this made me lol

[dubai_phil]

You honestly believe that anybody would have believed that total bollux...? Really...? I don't particularly agree with what he has done, but if you honestly think that anybody would be taken in by the bag of bollux that you have just come up with - then I want you as my boss.

 

Of course they wouldn't be taken in. The irony flag was flying high. Any organisation back there can get away with all sorts of cr@p as long as it is Green. Green taxes - yep give it to me Brownie I want more. I deliberately used the term Marketing Bullsh1t.

 

The gist of the dig however is that these things CAN be packaged with the right BS and people then find it very much harder to form a coherent "anti" argument.

 

Perhaps BS was the wrong word, maybe Spin would have been better, after all, the UK fell for about 5 years of Spin from the ex Government and look where that got the country.

 

 

John Smith's post is actually quite eloquent on the subject. In reality it has feck all impact on the National Press as they print VERY few pictures of us during a season, but it does impact the local media.

 

The main reason the nationals are up in arms is that they fear OTHER clubs & sports doing this.

 

Oh, and by the way, the media buy photos in other sports. Reuters, AP, Agence France and Getty Images all make their money from this. I can assure you that the Mail, Telegraph et al do not have photographers at (for example) major Golf Events. Reporters - yes sometimes, but they buy their images from Getty.

 

 

Think this again - players don't want to pay tax so they invented Image Rights. Clubs have to show Commercial Income (& the value of image rights) is in line with the amount paid to players (see HMRC V Skates thread). The press are in a twist because NC was the first to try this on and a bunch of old timer hacks and flashers are worried they'll lose their freebie seats at Old Trafford Wembley etc when the others jump on the bandwagon.

 

The Press NEED football. Football & Scandals SELL papers - look at how many pages are devoted to it this week with the PL kick off. It is FREE to the press and they make money from it in many ways - sales, advertising, Fantasy Leagues etc.

 

Conceptually this was always going to happen in football.

 

From an implementation perspective, it SHOULD have been marketed (ie handled & communicated) far far better.

 

The press are up in arms but I bet a lot of Club Chairmen are sitting back and watching and hoping

[Weston Super Saint]

Of course they wouldn't be taken in. The irony flag was flying high. Any organisation back there can get away with all sorts of cr@p as long as it is Green. Green taxes - yep give it to me Brownie I want more. I deliberately used the term Marketing Bullsh1t.

 

The gist of the dig however is that these things CAN be packaged with the right BS and people then find it very much harder to form a coherent "anti" argument.

 

Perhaps BS was the wrong word, maybe Spin would have been better, after all, the UK fell for about 5 years of Spin from the ex Government and look where that got the country.

 

 

John Smith's post is actually quite eloquent on the subject. In reality it has feck all impact on the National Press as they print VERY few pictures of us during a season, but it does impact the local media.

 

The main reason the nationals are up in arms is that they fear OTHER clubs & sports doing this.

 

Oh, and by the way, the media buy photos in other sports. Reuters, AP, Agence France and Getty Images all make their money from this. I can assure you that the Mail, Telegraph et al do not have photographers at (for example) major Golf Events. Reporters - yes sometimes, but they buy their images from Getty.

 

 

Think this again - players don't want to pay tax so they invented Image Rights. Clubs have to show Commercial Income (& the value of image rights) is in line with the amount paid to players (see HMRC V Skates thread). The press are in a twist because NC was the first to try this on and a bunch of old timer hacks and flashers are worried they'll lose their freebie seats at Old Trafford Wembley etc when the others jump on the bandwagon.

 

The Press NEED football. Football & Scandals SELL papers - look at how many pages are devoted to it this week with the PL kick off. It is FREE to the press and they make money from it in many ways - sales, advertising, Fantasy Leagues etc.

 

Conceptually this was always going to happen in football.

 

From an implementation perspective, it SHOULD have been marketed (ie handled & communicated) far far better.

 

The press are up in arms but I bet a lot of Club Chairmen are sitting back and watching and hoping

 

Phil.

 

You seem to be suggesting that our Chairman should tell a lie to cover up the reason why he has taken his decision.

 

I suspect that once people - and the press in particular - saw through that hopelessly thin lie, all sorts of sh1t would hit the fan.

 

As it is, we have a statement from the club saying in plain old English, not trying to dress it up or hide the fact at all, that this decision was taken solely and simply to make more money for SFC.

 

And yet, look at all the grief this and other threads have generated on the topic, where the club have come out and openly stated the reason behind the decision! The whole South Coast would have gone into meltdown if the club / Cortese had been found out to be lying!!