alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 If these supermen had not changed our foirtunes they still wouldnt have gone to games .High wages dont make guarenteed success. Rubbish. When we were nudging the top three back in 2006, in a game against Derby, the attendance rocketed (forget Burley delivered a totally dire performance for now) This season when Wotte won three-in-a-row, attendances started increasing. That rennaisance was brought about by Saga's return. The facts do not support your bland generalisation. Results would have brought the fans back, and better players would ahve brought the results. Saga, Rasiak and Stern peed all over Euell and McG from a great height.
saint1977 Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Breaking news!!! BBC1 in the next few minutes.. Michael Martin is resigning then I take it?
up and away Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Originally Posted by Dibden Purlieu Saint Chairman, board and fans, as well as managers and players, but as I don't have access to the 4 of them, some of the fans should know that part of this is THEIR responsibility. Complete and utter tosh. This is a business in the entertainment industry. If the customers refuse to buy into the product because they perceive it not to be good value for their expenditure, then it is the fault of the management. A customer is never at fault for the collapse of a business and has no responsibility for keeping it afloat. I know that some do not like this customer analogy, preferring to think of themselves as uber fans, but that is a hardcore which in itself is not large enough to keep us viable. That's fair enough, but I don't want to keep hearing from these same bleating thwats about where Woolworths have gone to and how could they have let this happen. Any fan knows in their own small way what they have done to support Saints. Others took a different road because of politics and bile. Well that bile gets to eating away on an empty stomach because it is never their fault, always someone else's.
Wes Tender Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Pretty much sums up my position. You only have to look at ST sales at Norwich to appreciate the meaning of fan loyalty vs team performance. As you are so keen to cite Norwich as the shining example of what decent fan support comprises, I suggest that it might be instructive for you to have a glimpse of what they expect their fans to pay for their STs. http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/SeasonTickets/ Pay particular attention please, to the prices for the youngsters under 21, the under 12s and those over 60 and 75 and speculate how many of their fans in that total are comprised of people in those groups. Then contrast that with our prices, which have not really been reduced since we were in the Premiership, even though last season they wanted that money for watching the youth team for much of the season.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Spot on. Pat we're all entitled to our views but why does the poor fare vs season ticket sales not necessarily correlate at clubs like Norwich who have sold more tickets fro L1 than I suspect we have sold certainly in the past two seasons and probably since relegation. Refering to people as ar5eholes is all well and good but you lose the argument when you and others can't argue why posters like myself and Dibden are wrong in our views? Did you have a go at Lawrie for his inferences about fans not interested in supporting a charity game? Is it any different?
Big Poppa Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Michael Martin is resigning then I take it? LOL It's about the bid, looks likely there will be no bid
Master Bates Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Breaking news!!! BBC1 in the next few minutes.. Nothing
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Ahhhh, diddums. Starts pointing fingers then cannot hack it when others fight back... What ARE you going to do with your Saturday afternoons from now on ? You're not fighting back, you're not even coming up with any arguments. You're just coming up with really poor insults and witticisms. At least UP actually researches and argues succinctly. Christ, even Sundance argued his points.
Wes Tender Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Hopes that 19 Canteen will now have done his check on why Norwich have such a high take up on STs because their pricing policy is correct. But I won't hold my breath that the penny will drop that our management ought to be blamed for getting it wrong...
kpturner Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 call me an old pessimist, but this really doesn't sound good at all! You are an old pessimist.OK, maybe you aren't after all.
Master Bates Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 It's on! and it's finished already. Nothing new to report.
Nineteen Canteen Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 As you are so keen to cite Norwich as the shining example of what decent fan support comprises, I suggest that it might be instructive for you to have a glimpse of what they expect their fans to pay for their STs. http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/SeasonTickets/ Pay particular attention please, to the prices for the youngsters under 21, the under 12s and those over 60 and 75 and speculate how many of their fans in that total are comprised of people in those groups. Then contrast that with our prices, which have not really been reduced since we were in the Premiership, even though last season they wanted that money for watching the youth team for much of the season. Compares quite favourably to the £495 I paid for an adult and junior ticket this season in the CCC not to mention the amount it would cost me to travel to Norwich. Wes I was expecting some startling revelation all this does is paint some of our fans in a worse light and at least we had a ST pricing policy that you could understand without the need to write a macro.
Wes Tender Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Compares quite favourably to the £495 I paid for an adult and junior ticket this season in the CCC not to mention the amount it would cost me to travel to Norwich. Wes I was expecting some startling revelation all this does is paint some of our fans in a worse light and at least we had a ST pricing policy that you could understand without the need to write a macro. Well, as you cannot show figures to demonstrate the proportions of fans that fit into each of these categories, then it rather renders any comparison between our take-up and theirs, doesn't it? Therefore, until such times as you furnish a detailed split, most on here will be able to take it that a large proportion of their sales are inevitably to those either under 21, or over 60, attracted by the sort of price deals that we have failed to offer.
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Compares quite favourably to the £495 I paid for an adult and junior ticket this season in the CCC not to mention the amount it would cost me to travel to Norwich. Wes I was expecting some startling revelation all this does is paint some of our fans in a worse light and at least we had a ST pricing policy that you could understand without the need to write a macro. Average wage for Norwich is also £365.40 per week, compared to that of Southampton which is £487 per week, around 25% lower.
slickmick Posted 18 May, 2009 Author Posted 18 May, 2009 They have both put written bids on the table. The problem arises when hard cash has to be placed upon the table. You can get 10 people together who will promise £1M each for an equal share of the club. But before that money has to move from the hand to the table, those people will be wanting to know how much control they get for that equal share. Impossible to satisy all, you end up with just a fraction remaining. With one or possibly two you stand a chance. Even when you get one major backer with several smaller it always leaves the smaller open to being squeezed out once the money is in place. Everyone has clearly witnessed uberfan Crouch and his demands for his money. When push comes to shove you will not be getting a lot of takers in that environment. People who have made this sort of money have one common denomination, a heavy liking for power and control. It's a circle that's impossible to square because of the very nature of the beast. Crouch would gladly give aways his shares for the benefit of Saints, but what he failed to add was the proviso's. - not that thwat, or the one in the dicky bow and the one with the limp looks iffy, irrespective of what is best for Saints. Tony Lynam said there were just two of them in a very shaky emotional voice.
Cabrone Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 After 124 years is this finally it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AaElp-mimg
Pat from Poole Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Pat we're all entitled to our views but why does the poor fare vs season ticket sales not necessarily correlate at clubs like Norwich who have sold more tickets fro L1 than I suspect we have sold certainly in the past two seasons and probably since relegation. Refering to people as ar5eholes is all well and good but you lose the argument when you and others can't argue why posters like myself and Dibden are wrong in our views? Did you have a go at Lawrie for his inferences about fans not interested in supporting a charity game? Is it any different? Norwich's ST base was not that high in the 90's or the early part of this decade. I'd suggest that they have actively targeted their local fanbase and encouraged them to come to games, as opposed to the attitude of Lowe in his sneering comments about fans and shutting parts of the ground.
Wes Tender Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Average wage for Norwich is also £365.40 per week, compared to that of Southampton which is £487 per week, around 25% lower. The Southampton figures were distorted by Lowe's wage, whilst Norwich's was reduced by Delia's.
Crab Lungs Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 After 124 years is this finally it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AaElp-mimg I was thinking more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZkllM8znx4
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 The Southampton figures were distorted by Lowe's wage, whilst Norwich's was reduced by Delia's. Haha, very probably
70's Mike Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Norwich's ST base was not that high in the 90's or the early part of this decade. I'd suggest that they have actively targeted their local fanbase and encouraged them to come to games, as opposed to the attitude of Lowe in his sneering comments about fans and shutting parts of the ground. In the past when you went to Norwich or Ipswich there were as many coaches bringing in home fans as there were away fans, even in the days we took loads of fans to Ipswich. I believe that still to be the case, not sure if the clubs paid part of the cost or not but i am sure they organised it. Whereas we had free bus travel but only withing the city limits
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 The Southampton figures were distorted by Lowe's wage, whilst Norwich's was reduced by Delia's. Does that imply that the return of Lowe tipped us into administrtion?
emerson massey Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Complete and utter tosh. This is a business in the entertainment industry. If the customers refuse to buy into the product because they perceive it not to be good value for their expenditure, then it is the fault of the management. A customer is never at fault for the collapse of a business and has no responsibility for keeping it afloat. I know that some do not like this customer analogy, preferring to think of themselves as uber fans, but that is a hardcore which in itself is not large enough to keep us viable. Pretty much sums up my thoughts also I have not been as often over the last season or 2 because i find it hard to spend well over £150 for each home game to leave dissapointed andfeeling like i wasted money that i work damn hard for. If i lived closer, i would probably go more as the cost would be less or if the football was better. But i dont live closer, the football has been **** for ages, and i just cannot afford to follow as much as i used to Of course, i accept that this means it is my fault that we had to enter administration, along with all the other 'stay aways'.... FFS, some people need to get a grip - i accept passions are high and everyone has their own (well informed opinion) but some of the sweeping generalisations (sp) on here are crazy. IMHO, the board and their continuous mistakes have bought this once great club to its knees, if a board cannot supply the customers with what they require, the customers will walk - its the same in all business all around the world I dont post much and when i do i try and keep neutral, but hey, i feel pretty strongly about this (prepares tin hat)
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 The Southampton figures were distorted by Lowe's wage, whilst Norwich's was reduced by Delia's. Haha, very probably
Fan The Flames Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Jesus Christ, knock it off. Yes Jesus pack it in.
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Pretty much sums up my thoughts also I have not been as often over the last season or 2 because i find it hard to spend well over £150 for each home game to leave dissapointed andfeeling like i wasted money that i work damn hard for. If i lived closer, i would probably go more as the cost would be less or if the football was better. But i dont live closer, the football has been **** for ages, and i just cannot afford to follow as much as i used to Of course, i accept that this means it is my fault that we had to enter administration, along with all the other 'stay aways'.... FFS, some people need to get a grip - i accept passions are high and everyone has their own (well informed opinion) but some of the sweeping generalisations (sp) on here are crazy. IMHO, the board and their continuous mistakes have bought this once great club to its knees, if a board cannot supply the customers with what they require, the customers will walk - its the same in all business all around the world I dont post much and when i do i try and keep neutral, but hey, i feel pretty strongly about this (prepares tin hat) Well written. I think the issue I have is those that live close, but chose not to turn up and support their football club not for financial and geogaphical reasons, but for political reasons. It seems to me that these people could have gone, and joined in with the protests like the rest of us, but decided to cut off their nose to spite their face.
slickmick Posted 18 May, 2009 Author Posted 18 May, 2009 No posts from F/Fella or Weston Saint, seems odd.:confused:
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Pretty much sums up my thoughts also I have not been as often over the last season or 2 because i find it hard to spend well over £150 for each home game to leave dissapointed andfeeling like i wasted money that i work damn hard for. If i lived closer, i would probably go more as the cost would be less or if the football was better. But i dont live closer, the football has been **** for ages, and i just cannot afford to follow as much as i used to Of course, i accept that this means it is my fault that we had to enter administration, along with all the other 'stay aways'.... FFS, some people need to get a grip - i accept passions are high and everyone has their own (well informed opinion) but some of the sweeping generalisations (sp) on here are crazy. IMHO, the board and their continuous mistakes have bought this once great club to its knees, if a board cannot supply the customers with what they require, the customers will walk - its the same in all business all around the world I dont post much and when i do i try and keep neutral, but hey, i feel pretty strongly about this (prepares tin hat) Thnks for the contribution. You are right of course, and some of us have been saying it for ages, but its always good to hear the same comments being made from someone not regarded as one of the residential seasoned gob-shiiites, like we are.
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Well written. I think the issue I have is those that live close, but chose not to turn up and support their football club not for financial and geogaphical reasons, but for political reasons. It seems to me that these people could have gone, and joined in with the protests like the rest of us, but decided to cut off their nose to spite their face. Ah, well, that excludes me as a target for your oppobrium then...
bungle Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I am glad alpine is still delighted we are in administration, and isn't even that bothered we may not exist. He has been wrong on EVERY issue to do with SFC over recent years, and this thread just goes to prove he has lost what little of the plot he might have had.
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I am glad alpine is still delighted we are in administration, and isn't even that bothered we may not exist. He has been wrong on EVERY issue to do with SFC over recent years, and this thread just goes to prove he has lost what little of the plot he might have had. Any your alternative was......what ? Do remind me. You might think me wrong, but at least I give my opinion, not just come on here to slag others off for giving theirs, like you do. Therefore, it is impossible to even determine what you might have been wrong about...
happiness stan Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I only dip in to this forum every now and then, but I have never really understood the flak that Alpine gets. If we are still in existence next season and that board of jokers have all gone, then I'd take the hit of ten points and the drop down to league one, gladly.
bungle Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Any your alternative was......what ? Do remind me. You might think me wrong, but at least I give my opinion, not just come on here to slag others off for giving theirs, like you do. Therefore, it is impossible to even determine what you might have been wrong about... I am pleased to learn you are rubbing your hands with glee at our sorry situation. You clearly are not a saints supporter.
Gemmel Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I am glad alpine is still delighted we are in administration, and isn't even that bothered we may not exist. He has been wrong on EVERY issue to do with SFC over recent years, and this thread just goes to prove he has lost what little of the plot he might have had. Actually whilst i was very much against Administration, you could argue that Alpine was completely right. If as wilde is telling us that admin was inevitable then ha we done it sooner, we woudl have taken the points hit this year, have more time to have found a buyer and been more attractive without the minus 10 next season
OldNick Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I only dip in to this forum every now and then, but I have never really understood the flak that Alpine gets. If we are still in existence next season and that board of jokers have all gone, then I'd take the hit of ten points and the drop down to league one, gladly. well if you dont find people wallowing with delight that the club may be fiinished then I question your mindset. It at present looks as though the -10 could be -25 or even worse no club.Fans who wouildnt turn up due to bad performances have seen nothing yet and they sure wont return as they cant stomach the bad days and only want the up side. I myself will pay for 2 s/ts whatever league we are in, and if I have to pay CCC prices to help reserrect our club by doing so be it.SFC has given me some terrible days and some unbelievable highs but I want something left for my grandchildren.Hence why Im so defensive when I read some of the negative posters oh here who would rather see the club fail than have to pay or make an effort I
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Ah, well, that excludes me as a target for your oppobrium then... I never actually included you Alpine except for in the most flippant if remarks, it was more a dig at the locals who refused to go.
OldNick Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Actually whilst i was very much against Administration, you could argue that Alpine was completely right. If as wilde is telling us that admin was inevitable then ha we done it sooner, we woudl have taken the points hit this year, have more time to have found a buyer and been more attractive without the minus 10 next seasonNonsense, avoiding administration could have been achieved if the whole of the fanbase could have forgotten their predudice and attended. That would have meant accepting poor football and perhaps bad results, it would also have meant the galling dssight of Lowe but in time the gate receipts would have helped build us .This is not a defrence of |Lowe or attack on fans.It is a statement as i see it. The product is not an excuse of not turning up IMO
slickmick Posted 18 May, 2009 Author Posted 18 May, 2009 Nonsense, avoiding administration could have been achieved if the whole of the fanbase could have forgotten their predudice and attended. That would have meant accepting poor football and perhaps bad results, it would also have meant the galling dssight of Lowe but in time the gate receipts would have helped build us .This is not a defrence of |Lowe or attack on fans.It is a statement as i see it. The product is not an excuse of not turning up IMO This is a chicken and egg situation. We could go on and on, who and why, but its in the past now. Question is how many fans will we get next year and what league will we be in ?
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 I only dip in to this forum every now and then, but I have never really understood the flak that Alpine gets. If we are still in existence next season and that board of jokers have all gone, then I'd take the hit of ten points and the drop down to league one, gladly. We all would, you're missing the point. If we fail to exist, would you still have taken admin?
happiness stan Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 well if you dont find people wallowing with delight that the club may be fiinished then I question your mindset. I didn't get that he was wallowing with delight, to be honest that sounds a little hysterical. My mindset is reasonably good, considering. The one thing that does upset me, are the supposed leaks and people making stuff up. Pointing no fingers, just wish this was over the same as everyone. Saints will always be my only team, not possible to change. I've been going to a few St. Pats games since I've been living in Dublin (they do sing 'Oh When The Saints....' which is nice) but they could never be a replacement.
kpturner Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 See what you have started Slick? Anyway, the 15:00 news bulletin on Solent makes no mention of Saints at all. We are no longer news worthy.
Gemmel Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Nonsense, avoiding administration could have been achieved if the whole of the fanbase could have forgotten their predudice and attended. That would have meant accepting poor football and perhaps bad results, it would also have meant the galling dssight of Lowe but in time the gate receipts would have helped build us .This is not a defrence of |Lowe or attack on fans.It is a statement as i see it. The product is not an excuse of not turning up IMO I couldn't disagree more. I have had a season ticket for over 30 years (with the exception of 1 year) and although i renewed the kids, i couldn't bring myself to sign up again this season. Almost every decision was a disaster waiting to happen and ...... it did.
saintjay77 Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Nonsense, avoiding administration could have been achieved if the whole of the fanbase could have forgotten their predudice and attended. That would have meant accepting poor football and perhaps bad results, it would also have meant the galling dssight of Lowe but in time the gate receipts would have helped build us .This is not a defrence of |Lowe or attack on fans.It is a statement as i see it. The product is not an excuse of not turning up IMO thing is there is no way of saying that without it sounding like blaming the fans. It doesnt matter who is in the hotseat, they all need the fans support to try and make there plan work. Wilde n Co budgeted to get us promoted and while the stadium was nearly full we could afford to sustain it. When we failed the gates dropped and we were running at a loss. Same goes for this past season, we are not happy that the experience didnt get a look in and blamed it on Lowe being a di ck when its possible that the income couldnt sustain to keep them in the team. I know for many to accept that would mean that many would have to accept Lowe was doing something right so it will never happen. I have no idea if that was the case but I can accept it was possible
happiness stan Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 We all would, you're missing the point. If we fail to exist, would you still have taken admin? Is that a silly question? Read this again: If we are still in existence next season and that board of jokers have all gone, then I'd take the hit of ten points and the drop down to league one, gladly. See what I'm saying? Now, what is your point?
slickmick Posted 18 May, 2009 Author Posted 18 May, 2009 Almost a direct contradiction of your first post!! I appreciate getting the heads up of some possible developments but you could have been a little less alarmist at the start could you not? It is not a race to see who can post "the" news first is it? See what you have started Slick? Anyway, the 15:00 news bulletin on Solent makes no mention of Saints at all. We are no longer news worthy. And I still haven't had an apology.
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 well if you dont find people wallowing with delight that the club may be fiinished then I question your mindset. It at present looks as though the -10 could be -25 or even worse no club.Fans who wouildnt turn up due to bad performances have seen nothing yet and they sure wont return as they cant stomach the bad days and only want the up side. I myself will pay for 2 s/ts whatever league we are in, and if I have to pay CCC prices to help reserrect our club by doing so be it.SFC has given me some terrible days and some unbelievable highs but I want something left for my grandchildren.Hence why Im so defensive when I read some of the negative posters oh here who would rather see the club fail than have to pay or make an effortI What a pathetic exercise in self-congratulation and c*ck-swinging. There is not a single person on here...NO-ONE...that is getting a kick out of or wallowing in delight at todays news. Just because you dont understand their perspective gives you no right to make such childish accusations.
Flyer Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 We all would, you're missing the point. If we fail to exist, would you still have taken admin? Admin makes the club more attractive to buyers. If Saints werent in admin, they would have zero chance of a buyer. In fact, they went into admin too late. If it happened a month earlier, it would have meant a month longer to find a buyer and starting next season on 0 points instead of -10.
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 We all would, you're missing the point. If we fail to exist, would you still have taken admin? I STILL dont think it will come to that.
alpine_saint Posted 18 May, 2009 Posted 18 May, 2009 Admin makes the club more attractive to buyers. If Saints werent in admin, they would have zero chance of a buyer. In fact, they went into admin too late. If it happened a month earlier, it would have meant a month longer to find a buyer and starting next season on 0 points instead of -10. Yeah, but the way some on here fail to see that, you'd think it was Quantum Mechanics, let alone Rocket Science...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now