Calming the waters

THE MAN IN CHARGE New Swindon Town chairman Jed McCrory   	                     		   Pictures: STUART HARRISON

THE MAN IN CHARGE New Swindon Town chairman Jed McCrory Pictures: STUART HARRISON Buy this photo

First published in Sport
Last updated
by

SWINDON Town’s new board will be backed by funds similar in size to those of their predecessors, Jed McCrory has revealed, but the Robins’ new chairman has stressed that financial prudence will be one of the principal traits of his reign.

McCrory’s Seebeck 87 Limited finally completed their takeover of the club on Thursday, buying up a 99 per cent stake in Town from former majority shareholder Andrew Black, and the new board was formally unveiled to the media at a press conference at the County Ground yesterday.

Though it was McCrory’s cash which acquired the club initially, he told the Advertiser that two private investors would help to bankroll the continued development of the Wiltshire outfit and that they have a financial clout roughly equating to the budget under Black.

Swindon’s estimated monthly wage bill during the last 12 months of the Betfair co-founder’s tenure was £250,000, while almost £500,000 was spent on agents’ fees in 2011/12. Paolo Di Canio was understood to have been handed a £4.5million warchest this season.

“It’s significant funds to put it politely,” he said before, when asked if the kitty was of a similar size to recent years, adding: “Yes to be fair, yes it is but not to be spent naively or through false promises and it’s about managing it and one’s expectations, calming down the big drive of this ‘we’re going to get a new stadium’.

“You’ve just got to be realistic. You’ve got to calm everybody down a little bit and say ‘hang on a minute, let’s go one thing at a time’.

“The first thing is settling down the team, getting that commitment from the lads to take the club forward which is what I believe we’ve got. It’s also about making the balance right so it’s sustainable going forward in winning and aiming towards promotion.”

McCrory would not disclose the identity of the investors but described them as “football fans”.

The man whose cash injection helped revitalise Banbury United over the summer stressed how delighted he was to get the deal over the line after a whirlwind process came to a head last week.

It took McCrory & Co around five weeks to complete what would normally require several months of negotiation and due diligence – a pace necessary in order for the club to avoid the very real threat of insolvency.

“Having seen Luton go through a similar situation before I thought, from a football fan’s eyes, if I could help a member of the football family I would.

“I agreed to purchase the club with my personal money and also had fantastic discussions with private investors, football fans who had seen the model. They know the drive I have to take things forward and they supported me.

“I didn’t want to be the figurehead, I never want to be a figurehead, I didn’t want to be in the papers, I didn’t want to be in the pictures, I just wanted to help put a football club together.

“Then the news broke and the investors then said they would keep going if I would front it and everyone else had decided that I was fronting it before I decided I was fronting it. We felt that it was important from a football fan point of view to keep it that way.

“I know everyone is moaning about the time it was taking but for me I can tell you it felt like a week. The Football League were impeccable. The speed they moved this deal was incredible to make this happen.”

Having been constrained by the terms of a non-disclosure agreement during the weeks before the sale of the club was formally ratified by the Football League, McCrory is happy to be able to talk openly and honestly about the future.

“To be under an NDA and to be a human punchbag and not being able to talk was extremely frustrating but I think I’ve held my end of the bargain up,” he said. “I think I was one of the few people who didn’t talk.”

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:09am Tue 26 Feb 13

Davidsyrett says...

very sensible in all honesty, but I think it marks the end some of the high expectations some have had.

For me a decent 5 year plan for a sustainable Championship club.
very sensible in all honesty, but I think it marks the end some of the high expectations some have had. For me a decent 5 year plan for a sustainable Championship club. Davidsyrett
  • Score: 0

11:10am Tue 26 Feb 13

madterrier says...

Interesting. Would like a tighter definition of what a 'war chest' means...same as annual budget? I assume this includes player, manager and admin fees; transfer fees and agents' commission? Would that also include bonuses (to manager and players) for getting promotion?

How do they square the circle of that budget being loss-making, yet being determined to make the club sustainable at the same time?

All sounds positive news though.

Our wage bill must have reduced considerably over the past few weeks. We need loan players in quickly and I do hope we can revive the Pack deal.
Interesting. Would like a tighter definition of what a 'war chest' means...same as annual budget? I assume this includes player, manager and admin fees; transfer fees and agents' commission? Would that also include bonuses (to manager and players) for getting promotion? How do they square the circle of that budget being loss-making, yet being determined to make the club sustainable at the same time? All sounds positive news though. Our wage bill must have reduced considerably over the past few weeks. We need loan players in quickly and I do hope we can revive the Pack deal. madterrier
  • Score: 0

11:11am Tue 26 Feb 13

Pewsham Red says...

Seems a decent guy and has a good attitude towards the club.

I would have liked to have known the identities of the money men and their motives, but won't be losing too much sleep by not knowing.

I think he is right about the sustainability aspect which is why I would have liked a bit more comment on the stadium plan as this will be one of the crucial aspects in determining the ongoing sustainability.

For now, though, I am happy to let nature take it's course, as on field issues are probably more important for us at the moment.
Seems a decent guy and has a good attitude towards the club. I would have liked to have known the identities of the money men and their motives, but won't be losing too much sleep by not knowing. I think he is right about the sustainability aspect which is why I would have liked a bit more comment on the stadium plan as this will be one of the crucial aspects in determining the ongoing sustainability. For now, though, I am happy to let nature take it's course, as on field issues are probably more important for us at the moment. Pewsham Red
  • Score: 0

11:13am Tue 26 Feb 13

Dover Red says...

Lets all hope things can settle down and the whole' we are going bust' every couple of years can be consigned to the past
Lets all hope things can settle down and the whole' we are going bust' every couple of years can be consigned to the past Dover Red
  • Score: 0

11:20am Tue 26 Feb 13

Another view says...

So far so good. Ilke the fact that Jed said that the funds will be similar to before, but they will be handled carefully. With the benefit of hindsight the last board should have said they cannot just throw their money around.

It's also encouraging to hear elsewhere that they will put on rock concerts to bring in funds on non-match days, and that they are already looking for community and business groups to link up with.

Let's keep the excitement going, but less of the roller coaster.
So far so good. Ilke the fact that Jed said that the funds will be similar to before, but they will be handled carefully. With the benefit of hindsight the last board should have said they cannot just throw their money around. It's also encouraging to hear elsewhere that they will put on rock concerts to bring in funds on non-match days, and that they are already looking for community and business groups to link up with. Let's keep the excitement going, but less of the roller coaster. Another view
  • Score: 0

11:23am Tue 26 Feb 13

Oxon-Red says...

Sam,

Can you confirm in an article at some point that we no longer have the debt owed to the holding company.

If this is the case, this is a very good deal for Town and the statement makes very good reading, particularly:

“The first thing is settling down the team, getting that commitment from the lads to take the club forward which is what I believe we’ve got. It’s also about making the balance right so it’s sustainable going forward in winning and aiming towards promotion.”

Let's stay in the black, no pun intended, and take this football club forward one step at a time.

COYMR
Sam, Can you confirm in an article at some point that we no longer have the debt owed to the holding company. If this is the case, this is a very good deal for Town and the statement makes very good reading, particularly: “The first thing is settling down the team, getting that commitment from the lads to take the club forward which is what I believe we’ve got. It’s also about making the balance right so it’s sustainable going forward in winning and aiming towards promotion.” Let's stay in the black, no pun intended, and take this football club forward one step at a time. COYMR Oxon-Red
  • Score: 0

11:27am Tue 26 Feb 13

Stilloyal says...

James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.
James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose. Stilloyal
  • Score: 0

11:30am Tue 26 Feb 13

batch says...

Obviously delighted with Town not going down the pan, and the noises are encouraging, but it would be good to know more about the "two private investors" - individuals or companies.

I thought he said in the press conference the investment was from businesses.

Not trying to put a downer on things, more once bitten twice as shy in such important matters.
Obviously delighted with Town not going down the pan, and the noises are encouraging, but it would be good to know more about the "two private investors" - individuals or companies. I thought he said in the press conference the investment was from businesses. Not trying to put a downer on things, more once bitten twice as shy in such important matters. batch
  • Score: 0

11:41am Tue 26 Feb 13

MITTED says...

Sounds all very sensible and positive. What a marked difference from the previous chairman.
COYR
Sounds all very sensible and positive. What a marked difference from the previous chairman. COYR MITTED
  • Score: 0

11:50am Tue 26 Feb 13

Oxon-Red says...

Stilloyal wrote:
James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.
?
[quote][p][bold]Stilloyal[/bold] wrote: James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.[/p][/quote]? Oxon-Red
  • Score: 0

11:58am Tue 26 Feb 13

London Red says...

Terrier - when he says a £4.5m war chest I think he will be referring to Note 7 in the Accounts (or 9 in 2010) which looks at Playing Staff costs
.
2009 - £3.9m
2010 - £4.3m
2011 - £4.4m
2012 - ?????
2013 - £4.5m
.
Clearly shows PdC has not blown our cash as we have had pretty much the same budget every season in L1
.
Agree with the comment above - can we please have an update on the Debt situation as it needs to be put out in the public demain to stop people like Turner and Exeter's CEO bad mouthing us
.
We were led to believe debt is now only the interest free loans secured against the CG leasehold - totaling only £1.2m in the last accounts
Terrier - when he says a £4.5m war chest I think he will be referring to Note 7 in the Accounts (or 9 in 2010) which looks at Playing Staff costs . 2009 - £3.9m 2010 - £4.3m 2011 - £4.4m 2012 - ????? 2013 - £4.5m . Clearly shows PdC has not blown our cash as we have had pretty much the same budget every season in L1 . Agree with the comment above - can we please have an update on the Debt situation as it needs to be put out in the public demain to stop people like Turner and Exeter's CEO bad mouthing us . We were led to believe debt is now only the interest free loans secured against the CG leasehold - totaling only £1.2m in the last accounts London Red
  • Score: 0

12:10pm Tue 26 Feb 13

London Red says...

Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses
.
Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!!
.
Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc
.
Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011!
.
Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans)
.
Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still
.
So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again
Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses . Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!! . Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc . Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011! . Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans) . Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still . So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again London Red
  • Score: 0

12:25pm Tue 26 Feb 13

onecharliehenry says...

Does anyone think one of these secret investors could be Fitton ?
This sounds like his exact business plan he wanted for Swindon, he didn't so we're led to believe want PDC as manager, is he still owed money ? He and Black fell out so he would of needed someone like Jed to front a takeover bid, STFC again under the control of AF but this time strictly on his terms, just my thoughts, I'm sure some of the forum mafia will shoot me down though.
Does anyone think one of these secret investors could be Fitton ? This sounds like his exact business plan he wanted for Swindon, he didn't so we're led to believe want PDC as manager, is he still owed money ? He and Black fell out so he would of needed someone like Jed to front a takeover bid, STFC again under the control of AF but this time strictly on his terms, just my thoughts, I'm sure some of the forum mafia will shoot me down though. onecharliehenry
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Tue 26 Feb 13

stfclondon says...

So who owns the other 1%?
So who owns the other 1%? stfclondon
  • Score: 0

12:41pm Tue 26 Feb 13

mickry says...

Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it?
Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know?
Mick.
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick. mickry
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

London Red wrote:
Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses
.
Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!!
.
Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc
.
Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011!
.
Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans)
.
Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still
.
So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again
Pretty sure the new FL TV deal is lower than the current one, so it would be less than this £5m.

Gate receipts would be higher in the FLC, but the board would probably *have* to take the difficult decision of significantly raising prices + season tickets in we're to have any chance of staying up:

another 2000 on the gates is probably the best we could hope for given the capacity and the situation on the Bank. That's £1m a season.

£1m/season gives you an extra £20k a week to spend on wages. With a 20 man squad that's not even £1k extra per player per week and I think the average FLC player earns more than a grand a week more than the average FL1 one.

There needs to be some decision on the ground ASAP.

Just replacing the TE and the Bank (if we can) probably gives us no more than 16-18000.

There are relatively few potential sites for a new ground, which leaves us with:

rehouse the cricket club and turn the pitch round, keeping the Shrivvy Road as an end

rehouse the cricket club and build a new ground on the cricket pitch. Maybe the football ground could be converted to/replaced by a 2-3000 seat arena?
[quote][p][bold]London Red[/bold] wrote: Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses . Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!! . Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc . Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011! . Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans) . Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still . So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again[/p][/quote]Pretty sure the new FL TV deal is lower than the current one, so it would be less than this £5m. Gate receipts would be higher in the FLC, but the board would probably *have* to take the difficult decision of significantly raising prices + season tickets in we're to have any chance of staying up: another 2000 on the gates is probably the best we could hope for given the capacity and the situation on the Bank. That's £1m a season. £1m/season gives you an extra £20k a week to spend on wages. With a 20 man squad that's not even £1k extra per player per week and I think the average FLC player earns more than a grand a week more than the average FL1 one. There needs to be some decision on the ground ASAP. Just replacing the TE and the Bank (if we can) probably gives us no more than 16-18000. There are relatively few potential sites for a new ground, which leaves us with: rehouse the cricket club and turn the pitch round, keeping the Shrivvy Road as an end rehouse the cricket club and build a new ground on the cricket pitch. Maybe the football ground could be converted to/replaced by a 2-3000 seat arena? Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Tue 26 Feb 13

didntshedoswell says...

Fitton is the only previous shareholder that refused to write the debt off according to Black. I doubt Black would have allowed Fitton to be part of the deal.
Fitton is the only previous shareholder that refused to write the debt off according to Black. I doubt Black would have allowed Fitton to be part of the deal. didntshedoswell
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

mickry wrote:
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it?
Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know?
Mick.
In the short term, filling in the front of the North Stand and trying to fit extra seats in the corners seems an obvious "win".

If we get promotion I'd look at the sort of temporary exec boxes that Derby and/or Cov had at their old grounds - those ones on stilts in the corners. Who cares if it looks rubbish - the CG is hardly going to win an award for architecture as it is!

Anything to try to eek out every penny from the ground - even putting boxes at the back of the Bank (if they think they could sell them at an end - other clubs seem to manage it).
[quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]In the short term, filling in the front of the North Stand and trying to fit extra seats in the corners seems an obvious "win". If we get promotion I'd look at the sort of temporary exec boxes that Derby and/or Cov had at their old grounds - those ones on stilts in the corners. Who cares if it looks rubbish - the CG is hardly going to win an award for architecture as it is! Anything to try to eek out every penny from the ground - even putting boxes at the back of the Bank (if they think they could sell them at an end - other clubs seem to manage it). Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Tue 26 Feb 13

ShearerShearer says...

mickry wrote:
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap.

As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
[quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing......... ShearerShearer
  • Score: 0

12:55pm Tue 26 Feb 13

sideshow says...

Gary Hooper worked with a company called Ameriturf who wanted to invest in Port Vale i believe a while back, its on the internet somewhere
Gary Hooper worked with a company called Ameriturf who wanted to invest in Port Vale i believe a while back, its on the internet somewhere sideshow
  • Score: 0

12:55pm Tue 26 Feb 13

chrystovski says...

stfclondon wrote:
So who owns the other 1%?
The STFC trusts own about 30k's worth of shares which equals to approx 1%.
[quote][p][bold]stfclondon[/bold] wrote: So who owns the other 1%?[/p][/quote]The STFC trusts own about 30k's worth of shares which equals to approx 1%. chrystovski
  • Score: 0

12:56pm Tue 26 Feb 13

1STFC! says...

For me I want a well managed club so that we never have to go through the last few months again.
We have a great chance for championship football next season, so if we can get a couple of new loan signings to see us over the line that would be great.
If we get to the championship, we'd need to add a few players to ensure we stay there, but that's the league you need to be in to truly consolidate - J Wray suggested as much. Just need the new board to see us over the line
For me I want a well managed club so that we never have to go through the last few months again. We have a great chance for championship football next season, so if we can get a couple of new loan signings to see us over the line that would be great. If we get to the championship, we'd need to add a few players to ensure we stay there, but that's the league you need to be in to truly consolidate - J Wray suggested as much. Just need the new board to see us over the line 1STFC!
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Tue 26 Feb 13

chrystovski says...

sideshow wrote:
Gary Hooper worked with a company called Ameriturf who wanted to invest in Port Vale i believe a while back, its on the internet somewhere
I raised this with Sam on twitter last night who advised that Gary Hooper was an innocent party in the whole fiasco.

The 2 guilty parties (Deakin & Miller) are not invovled in anyway with Jed's consortium.
[quote][p][bold]sideshow[/bold] wrote: Gary Hooper worked with a company called Ameriturf who wanted to invest in Port Vale i believe a while back, its on the internet somewhere[/p][/quote]I raised this with Sam on twitter last night who advised that Gary Hooper was an innocent party in the whole fiasco. The 2 guilty parties (Deakin & Miller) are not invovled in anyway with Jed's consortium. chrystovski
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

ShearerShearer wrote:
mickry wrote:
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap.

As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses.

think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.
[quote][p][bold]ShearerShearer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........[/p][/quote]I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses. think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more. Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

1:13pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Oxon-Red says...

stfclondon wrote:
So who owns the other 1%?
Fans ?

The STFC Trust Fund ?

Just thoughts.

COYMR
[quote][p][bold]stfclondon[/bold] wrote: So who owns the other 1%?[/p][/quote]Fans ? The STFC Trust Fund ? Just thoughts. COYMR Oxon-Red
  • Score: 0

1:16pm Tue 26 Feb 13

oldlegtrailer says...

Similar funding to the predecessors must mean they are bound to go down the pan
Similar funding to the predecessors must mean they are bound to go down the pan oldlegtrailer
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Wonder Strike says...

Sounds like a nice guy. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
Sounds like a nice guy. Let's keep our fingers crossed. Wonder Strike
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Oxon-Red says...

ShearerShearer wrote:
mickry wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
We did a ground tour recently and it was mentioned that they could re-develop the bank but there was a height limit.

Have a look tonight, there are two flag poles at either end. These represent the maximum height of a structure that Town could build.

COYMR
[quote][p][bold]ShearerShearer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........[/p][/quote]We did a ground tour recently and it was mentioned that they could re-develop the bank but there was a height limit. Have a look tonight, there are two flag poles at either end. These represent the maximum height of a structure that Town could build. COYMR Oxon-Red
  • Score: 0

1:23pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Swindon1984 says...

Totally different topic but this has to be the least inspiring pre-match statement from a manager I've ever heard -

"The more games you go, the more games you have to win and then you've got to be playing like a championship-winning side. We're not a championship-winning side.

"For 60 minutes at Notts County we were alright. We're OK for long spells, and then the ball goes into our box and it invariably ends up in our net. It's been happening all season.

"There's only so much you can do with the tools you've got available and I've got to try and make the best of what I've got."

Guessing this is an attempt at mind games from Monsieur Blackwell but very defeatist nonetheless!
Totally different topic but this has to be the least inspiring pre-match statement from a manager I've ever heard - "The more games you go, the more games you have to win and then you've got to be playing like a championship-winning side. We're not a championship-winning side. "For 60 minutes at Notts County we were alright. We're OK for long spells, and then the ball goes into our box and it invariably ends up in our net. It's been happening all season. "There's only so much you can do with the tools you've got available and I've got to try and make the best of what I've got." Guessing this is an attempt at mind games from Monsieur Blackwell but very defeatist nonetheless! Swindon1984
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Dover Red says...

stfclondon wrote:
So who owns the other 1%?
London Red !!!
[quote][p][bold]stfclondon[/bold] wrote: So who owns the other 1%?[/p][/quote]London Red !!! Dover Red
  • Score: 0

1:52pm Tue 26 Feb 13

dreamofacleansheet2 says...

London from yesterday I wasn't saying Wes needs a curfew just making the point that I hope we don't go back to the dark days of the team on the lash all the time.

I genuinely don't mind who the manager is just want the same standards kept going forward if hard work and discipline. Clearly with Ward and Miller we have that in the short term (one hopes).

They should buy up the shrine ham road houses and then use them for match day hospitality and then get over the right to light. Either that or rent them out to tenants with the prospect off redevelopment.

Can't wait for tonight. Hope we sign some players shortly.
London from yesterday I wasn't saying Wes needs a curfew just making the point that I hope we don't go back to the dark days of the team on the lash all the time. I genuinely don't mind who the manager is just want the same standards kept going forward if hard work and discipline. Clearly with Ward and Miller we have that in the short term (one hopes). They should buy up the shrine ham road houses and then use them for match day hospitality and then get over the right to light. Either that or rent them out to tenants with the prospect off redevelopment. Can't wait for tonight. Hope we sign some players shortly. dreamofacleansheet2
  • Score: 0

2:03pm Tue 26 Feb 13

billbst says...

On the Stratton bank discussion I would favour the idea of a clear enclosure something like at Landsdowne Road. Allied to this the ideas on filling in the corners at least at that end would give us much better usuability. Concerts (or even outdoor theatre productions) would have to use the stands for the audience and just worry about the stage on the pitch. A bit of creative design of the stage could make it useable through the season too. Permanent lighting and sound fixtures set up in the stands would minimise set up times, etc. Anything that saves us sharing with a rugby club!
On the Stratton bank discussion I would favour the idea of a clear enclosure something like at Landsdowne Road. Allied to this the ideas on filling in the corners at least at that end would give us much better usuability. Concerts (or even outdoor theatre productions) would have to use the stands for the audience and just worry about the stage on the pitch. A bit of creative design of the stage could make it useable through the season too. Permanent lighting and sound fixtures set up in the stands would minimise set up times, etc. Anything that saves us sharing with a rugby club! billbst
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Tue 26 Feb 13

the wizard says...

Seems like a decent philosophy, go careful and gather confidence as you go. A bit of prudence right now while the new board consolidate their position isn't such a bad thing, I'd rather that and a club to support opposed to fire sales of players to keep us going. Learning from the mistakes of the previous owners is not such a bad thing. It seems to me these new guys are in it for the long haul, lets see how it goes first.
Seems like a decent philosophy, go careful and gather confidence as you go. A bit of prudence right now while the new board consolidate their position isn't such a bad thing, I'd rather that and a club to support opposed to fire sales of players to keep us going. Learning from the mistakes of the previous owners is not such a bad thing. It seems to me these new guys are in it for the long haul, lets see how it goes first. the wizard
  • Score: 0

2:34pm Tue 26 Feb 13

London Red says...

I do own a slice of that 1% but based on the last set of accounts my holding was whopping 0.01%
.
Considering AB did 2 further Equity injections since that it will be even smaller now!
.
Basically the remainder is spread out over numerous small shareholders like myself - which is not worth the mainholders (STFC Holdings and now Seebeck 86) to worry about
.
As for shareholdings - Jed says he is wanting to be aligned with the fans
.
If Fans are really interesting in holding a significant proportion why don't the Trust or the Supporters club propose to the new board a share sell off of 10-20% of thier holdings
.
They remain in control (79-88%) - but on top it would also boost our revenue stream as we would see an inflow of money
.
Finally it would put to bed the debate over whether fans ownership is possible once and for all at STFC
.
If there was take up it would show it could work
.
But I do fear like last time when Fitton offered the same thing - it would not see any interest
I do own a slice of that 1% but based on the last set of accounts my holding was whopping 0.01% . Considering AB did 2 further Equity injections since that it will be even smaller now! . Basically the remainder is spread out over numerous small shareholders like myself - which is not worth the mainholders (STFC Holdings and now Seebeck 86) to worry about . As for shareholdings - Jed says he is wanting to be aligned with the fans . If Fans are really interesting in holding a significant proportion why don't the Trust or the Supporters club propose to the new board a share sell off of 10-20% of thier holdings . They remain in control (79-88%) - but on top it would also boost our revenue stream as we would see an inflow of money . Finally it would put to bed the debate over whether fans ownership is possible once and for all at STFC . If there was take up it would show it could work . But I do fear like last time when Fitton offered the same thing - it would not see any interest London Red
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Davidsyrett says...

London Red wrote:
Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses
.
Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!!
.
Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc
.
Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011!
.
Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans)
.
Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still
.
So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again
LR, a far more sensible post than your last few stating that promotion will mean us making money next season, it wont, but by reducing the losses year on year may one day mean we get down to a break even figure.

I think you will find the revenue from Sky is going down next season so I think £5M is optimistic.

Hoping to host 6 concerts a year will certainly bring in extra revenue, maybe discounts for ST holders going to the gig's may also boost ST's sales.

I think they should also re-instate the 10% discount ST holders were able to claim in the club shop, and maybe opening a shop in the Town centre that
sell's matchday tickets could also increase revenue.

A lot of positives at the moment.
[quote][p][bold]London Red[/bold] wrote: Squaring the circle is via the other articles - better commercial management and boosting income to cover the losses . Sponsor deals - look to improve our current ones and get new ones in - our income of only £228k in 2011 was pitiful!!!! . Also Concerts - up to 6 to be hosted to boost revenue and add another source of income etc . Promotion - will see massive boost in TV and League payment - havig looked at both Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts we know this will be near £5m - which was some £3m higher thanour 2011 receipts and matched our total income in 2011! . Thats before Gate receipts - as price rises will follow if we go up (as we will need to match the other Championship clubs) as well as go up (if only by away fans) . Also surely it will be a gradual thing and if we had budgetted losses now we would look to reduce them over a few years to prevent progess from coming to a stand still . So if its £1.5m this year aim for £1m next - £0.5m the year after and into the black from there on in - especially if the stadium is then looking at being developed and adding more revenue again[/p][/quote]LR, a far more sensible post than your last few stating that promotion will mean us making money next season, it wont, but by reducing the losses year on year may one day mean we get down to a break even figure. I think you will find the revenue from Sky is going down next season so I think £5M is optimistic. Hoping to host 6 concerts a year will certainly bring in extra revenue, maybe discounts for ST holders going to the gig's may also boost ST's sales. I think they should also re-instate the 10% discount ST holders were able to claim in the club shop, and maybe opening a shop in the Town centre that sell's matchday tickets could also increase revenue. A lot of positives at the moment. Davidsyrett
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Tue 26 Feb 13

NewburyRobin says...

A pretty good interview, BBC sport. Seems a normal type of guy. He said he wanted to save our great football club. Sounds good to me. I am taking this at face value & wish the new board huge success.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/sport/0/football/21
588183
A pretty good interview, BBC sport. Seems a normal type of guy. He said he wanted to save our great football club. Sounds good to me. I am taking this at face value & wish the new board huge success. http://www.bbc.co.uk /sport/0/football/21 588183 NewburyRobin
  • Score: 0

3:18pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Exmouth_red69 says...

I would just like a manager, a few of the players were under performing saturday, especially McCormack.
The game was crying out for a tactical change long before our subs came on and the goal was from a mistake.

Talk of concerts and theatre at the cg can take a back seat for now in my eyes.
I would just like a manager, a few of the players were under performing saturday, especially McCormack. The game was crying out for a tactical change long before our subs came on and the goal was from a mistake. Talk of concerts and theatre at the cg can take a back seat for now in my eyes. Exmouth_red69
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Tue 26 Feb 13

London Red says...

Think the whole point of the articles are to show the diverse set up of the new board which is designed to allow the club to prosper - after all its long term prosperity is the most important thing!
.
Each member has their own expertise and own area to focus on to boost revenue - Rice Entertainment, Hooper Sponsorship etc
.
Players is the managers job and as we don't have one we can't get any in
.
The manager position is to be discussed tomorrow as has been said lots of times by Jed already
Think the whole point of the articles are to show the diverse set up of the new board which is designed to allow the club to prosper - after all its long term prosperity is the most important thing! . Each member has their own expertise and own area to focus on to boost revenue - Rice Entertainment, Hooper Sponsorship etc . Players is the managers job and as we don't have one we can't get any in . The manager position is to be discussed tomorrow as has been said lots of times by Jed already London Red
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Tue 26 Feb 13

London Red says...

David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed
.
I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money)
.
I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they?
.
So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level)
.
If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings
.
I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell
.
We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue
.
However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above
.
However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month!
.
I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion
David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed . I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money) . I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they? . So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level) . If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings . I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell . We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue . However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above . However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month! . I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion London Red
  • Score: 0

4:07pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Oxon-Red says...

London Red wrote:
David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed . I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money) . I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they? . So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level) . If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings . I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell . We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue . However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above . However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month! . I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion
London,

Tried to find a web page that spelt out the earnings from TV in the championship and came across the following.

http://www.twst.com/
interview/8326

Didn't read it all but it does say in there that the increase in TV money is massive, £2.5M extra a few years back.

There are some good questions and answers, worth a read.

COYMR
[quote][p][bold]London Red[/bold] wrote: David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed . I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money) . I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they? . So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level) . If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings . I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell . We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue . However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above . However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month! . I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion[/p][/quote]London, Tried to find a web page that spelt out the earnings from TV in the championship and came across the following. http://www.twst.com/ interview/8326 Didn't read it all but it does say in there that the increase in TV money is massive, £2.5M extra a few years back. There are some good questions and answers, worth a read. COYMR Oxon-Red
  • Score: 0

4:11pm Tue 26 Feb 13

bradley red 1 says...

Exmouth_red69 wrote:
I would just like a manager, a few of the players were under performing saturday, especially McCormack.
The game was crying out for a tactical change long before our subs came on and the goal was from a mistake.

Talk of concerts and theatre at the cg can take a back seat for now in my eyes.
Here here!! agree all i have heard is how this guy is going to put on music events to help fund the club! really not sure what to make of it to be honest without being too negative.
[quote][p][bold]Exmouth_red69[/bold] wrote: I would just like a manager, a few of the players were under performing saturday, especially McCormack. The game was crying out for a tactical change long before our subs came on and the goal was from a mistake. Talk of concerts and theatre at the cg can take a back seat for now in my eyes.[/p][/quote]Here here!! agree all i have heard is how this guy is going to put on music events to help fund the club! really not sure what to make of it to be honest without being too negative. bradley red 1
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Tue 26 Feb 13

The Jockster says...

Stilloyal wrote:
James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.
Is he back from the posting grave then?
[quote][p][bold]Stilloyal[/bold] wrote: James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.[/p][/quote]Is he back from the posting grave then? The Jockster
  • Score: 0

4:47pm Tue 26 Feb 13

faringdon matt says...

i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.
i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone. faringdon matt
  • Score: 0

4:59pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Swindon1984 says...

faringdon matt wrote:
i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.
Wow, bit harsh don't you think?
[quote][p][bold]faringdon matt[/bold] wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.[/p][/quote]Wow, bit harsh don't you think? Swindon1984
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

Oxon-Red wrote:
London Red wrote:
David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed . I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money) . I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they? . So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level) . If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings . I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell . We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue . However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above . However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month! . I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion
London,

Tried to find a web page that spelt out the earnings from TV in the championship and came across the following.

http://www.twst.com/

interview/8326

Didn't read it all but it does say in there that the increase in TV money is massive, £2.5M extra a few years back.

There are some good questions and answers, worth a read.

COYMR
That interview is from 2001 - isn't that just before ITV Digital went bankrupt after overpaying for the FL TV rights.

The new TV deal is £195m for three seasons from August, so £65m-26% DOWN on the current one. This includes the FL Cup, the FL Trophy, all 3 divisions and the play-offs. They might be able to sell highlights later but that's going to be for a miniscule amount.

Based on that, and assuming we're not going to be featured any more than average and probably will be towards the bottom of the division (newly promoted, smaller fish in a bigger pond) then I doubt we'd get any more than £1.5m a year - in total, not on top of what we're making right now (which admittedly isn't going to be a lot).
[quote][p][bold]Oxon-Red[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]London Red[/bold] wrote: David - think you need to read my previous posts again - I said promotion would give us a real CHANCE of a profit as long as costs were managed . I did a breakdown of my expected income £10.5-12m (based on info in Millwall and Sh1tty's accounts as references - i.e. TV money) . I then said that our admin costs (£3m) shouldn't move too much - why would they? . So based on that our playing budget could be £7.5-9m (reasonable and in line with Millwall's and above Doncaster and Scuntorpe's - who survived for a few years at that level) . If we stick to that then we wouldn't make a loss and could make a profit if we were to get a decent cup run or some positive net transfer dealings . I have always said and stick by it that Fitton was right and a club like us needs to sell . We just need to do it right - get a proper value for them (Cox not Ritchie) and then reinvest some wisely to improve the squad and allow the cycle to continue . However - should Jed and the backers wich to ensure safety and are prepared to make a budgeted loss they could increase the wage bill by that amount above the estimate above . However, that is a slippery slope as we have seen as if they get fed up we end up back where we were last month! . I personally would only advise that if redevelopment is about to start and it is designed to take us to where we will be in terms of revenue post completion[/p][/quote]London, Tried to find a web page that spelt out the earnings from TV in the championship and came across the following. http://www.twst.com/ interview/8326 Didn't read it all but it does say in there that the increase in TV money is massive, £2.5M extra a few years back. There are some good questions and answers, worth a read. COYMR[/p][/quote]That interview is from 2001 - isn't that just before ITV Digital went bankrupt after overpaying for the FL TV rights. The new TV deal is £195m for three seasons from August, so £65m-26% DOWN on the current one. This includes the FL Cup, the FL Trophy, all 3 divisions and the play-offs. They might be able to sell highlights later but that's going to be for a miniscule amount. Based on that, and assuming we're not going to be featured any more than average and probably will be towards the bottom of the division (newly promoted, smaller fish in a bigger pond) then I doubt we'd get any more than £1.5m a year - in total, not on top of what we're making right now (which admittedly isn't going to be a lot). Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

5:23pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

Since I can't edit the above:

£195m for 3 years = £65m a year.
Since I can't edit the above: £195m for 3 years = £65m a year. Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Tue 26 Feb 13

HOOKEY says...

Swindon1984 wrote:
faringdon matt wrote:
i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.
Wow, bit harsh don't you think?
You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage
[quote][p][bold]Swindon1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]faringdon matt[/bold] wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.[/p][/quote]Wow, bit harsh don't you think?[/p][/quote]You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage HOOKEY
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Tue 26 Feb 13

JoeCool4 says...

Jeremy Hilary Boob wrote:
ShearerShearer wrote:
mickry wrote:
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap.

As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses.

think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.
We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ?
[quote][p][bold]Jeremy Hilary Boob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShearerShearer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........[/p][/quote]I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses. think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.[/p][/quote]We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ? JoeCool4
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Tue 26 Feb 13

stfclondon says...

HOOKEY wrote:
Swindon1984 wrote:
faringdon matt wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.
Wow, bit harsh don't you think?
You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage
Wembley twice?
[quote][p][bold]HOOKEY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swindon1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]faringdon matt[/bold] wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.[/p][/quote]Wow, bit harsh don't you think?[/p][/quote]You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage[/p][/quote]Wembley twice? stfclondon
  • Score: 0

5:39pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Swindon1984 says...

JoeCool4 wrote:
Jeremy Hilary Boob wrote:
ShearerShearer wrote:
mickry wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses. think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.
We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ?
I'd rather go in the Stratton Bank than the Arkell's to be honest.
[quote][p][bold]JoeCool4[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jeremy Hilary Boob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShearerShearer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........[/p][/quote]I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses. think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.[/p][/quote]We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ?[/p][/quote]I'd rather go in the Stratton Bank than the Arkell's to be honest. Swindon1984
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Tue 26 Feb 13

SAPFanSTFC says...

Davidsyrett wrote:
very sensible in all honesty, but I think it marks the end some of the high expectations some have had.

For me a decent 5 year plan for a sustainable Championship club.
I'd be very happy with that!
[quote][p][bold]Davidsyrett[/bold] wrote: very sensible in all honesty, but I think it marks the end some of the high expectations some have had. For me a decent 5 year plan for a sustainable Championship club.[/p][/quote]I'd be very happy with that! SAPFanSTFC
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Tue 26 Feb 13

HOOKEY says...

stfclondon wrote:
HOOKEY wrote:
Swindon1984 wrote:
faringdon matt wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.
Wow, bit harsh don't you think?
You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage
Wembley twice?
sounds better
[quote][p][bold]stfclondon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HOOKEY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swindon1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]faringdon matt[/bold] wrote: i'm just glad that money wasting italian t**t has gone, didn't help that wray was a hammers fan as well. lets get someone in who can actually manage rather than someone who throws cash at anyone who will lick pdc's boot's. Pdc treated the players like S**t, and deserves nothing from anyone.[/p][/quote]Wow, bit harsh don't you think?[/p][/quote]You for real got us to wembley twice won promotion left us top dont sound like a bloke who cant manage[/p][/quote]Wembley twice?[/p][/quote]sounds better HOOKEY
  • Score: 0

5:52pm Tue 26 Feb 13

joey butler says...

The Jockster wrote:
Stilloyal wrote:
James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.
Is he back from the posting grave then?
Stilloyal,

You have confused Oxon, Malky and me on your post. Would you be good enough to expand it a bit please?
[quote][p][bold]The Jockster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stilloyal[/bold] wrote: James Altea's negativity gets right up my nose.[/p][/quote]Is he back from the posting grave then?[/p][/quote]Stilloyal, You have confused Oxon, Malky and me on your post. Would you be good enough to expand it a bit please? joey butler
  • Score: 0

5:57pm Tue 26 Feb 13

SAPFanSTFC says...

Just a comment on the concerts - if you cover the pitch for such an event you impact on the day-to-day maintenance and recovery - if these are through the summer then again the pivotal months for preparation is disrupted.
..
To make it work they will need to invest in an alternative pitch structure to today - possibly even to a high grade Championship level such as fibre woven grades up to those at clubs such as the Madjeski Stadium which also caters for rugby....
.
.....or we may need to expect a slight degradation of the playing surface from it's current levels.
---
Not knocking it as would love to go to concerts at the County Ground again but just laying out the realism of such a move.
Just a comment on the concerts - if you cover the pitch for such an event you impact on the day-to-day maintenance and recovery - if these are through the summer then again the pivotal months for preparation is disrupted. .. To make it work they will need to invest in an alternative pitch structure to today - possibly even to a high grade Championship level such as fibre woven grades up to those at clubs such as the Madjeski Stadium which also caters for rugby.... . .....or we may need to expect a slight degradation of the playing surface from it's current levels. --- Not knocking it as would love to go to concerts at the County Ground again but just laying out the realism of such a move. SAPFanSTFC
  • Score: 0

6:10pm Tue 26 Feb 13

Jeremy Hilary Boob says...

JoeCool4 wrote:
Jeremy Hilary Boob wrote:
ShearerShearer wrote:
mickry wrote:
Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.
Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap.

As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........
I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses.

think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.
We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ?
If we got promoted we would be able to sell it out - give the Bank to the away fans and keep the North Stand for home ones. As it stands now, we could be top of the FLC and people aren't going to want to sit/stand out in this sort of weather.

Even if we didn't sell out every week we'd be pushing the capacity some weeks in the FLC. We'd get more Town fans going and away teams would be bringing a lot more than half the teams in FL1 do.

Plus being in a higher division gives you more chance of drawing a PL team in a cup, and we can't cash in with the CG as it is now.

Look at Bradford - L2 but they got 24000 v Arsenal and 23000 v Villa. We'd have got no more than 14000 for either. They get 10000 on average in the league, so that's an extra 10-12000 home fans. If only 5% of them become fans, that's 500-600 people.

We get 8500, and we might have sold out against either AFC or Villa. That's about 4000 extra Town fans - if 5% came back for more, that's only 200 people.

A bigger ground means more possibility of cashing in when the club is doing well and more casual spectators who you can try to convert into long-term fans.
[quote][p][bold]JoeCool4[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jeremy Hilary Boob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShearerShearer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mickry[/bold] wrote: Regarding the ground, it strikes me that a lot could be done by tidying up the present facilites. Get rid if the floodlight pillars and install floodlights along the stand roofs, then fill in the space created in the corners. It would be a relatively inexpensive start, wouldn't it? Alternatively, assuming that Town will never get planning permission from the Council for a green (or brown) field development, might it not be possible to approach Supermarine for the development of their ground together with a groundshare? On the other hand, what do I know? Mick.[/p][/quote]Also can't see why some sort of covering can't be put over the bank, it doesn't have to be that big or even permanent to give fans shelter, the canvas type stand covers as used at Silverstone (and I think Crawley had the same over one of their stands) must be relatively cheap. As for the residents of the houses behind the bank, they all purchased those houses with a football ground at the end of their garden, it's like buying a house next to a church and complaining when the bells ring or buying a house next to open farmland and complaining about the cows mooing.........[/p][/quote]I can see why people living behind the Bank would object to a stand anywhere near as high as Shrivvy Road, so in the long term we need to get the pitch further away (rotating it, shifting it towards County Road) or buy up those houses. think they should consider anything in the short term to get the seats on the Bank saleable on a regular basis. They'd even be able to take down a canvas roof during the summer (and maybe leave it off at the start/end of the season), so the residents would be less inconvenienced. Anything to get those seats on sale more.[/p][/quote]We can,t fill the other 3 stands why would the club waste money converting stratton bank when no-one wants to go in it anyway. ?[/p][/quote]If we got promoted we would be able to sell it out - give the Bank to the away fans and keep the North Stand for home ones. As it stands now, we could be top of the FLC and people aren't going to want to sit/stand out in this sort of weather. Even if we didn't sell out every week we'd be pushing the capacity some weeks in the FLC. We'd get more Town fans going and away teams would be bringing a lot more than half the teams in FL1 do. Plus being in a higher division gives you more chance of drawing a PL team in a cup, and we can't cash in with the CG as it is now. Look at Bradford - L2 but they got 24000 v Arsenal and 23000 v Villa. We'd have got no more than 14000 for either. They get 10000 on average in the league, so that's an extra 10-12000 home fans. If only 5% of them become fans, that's 500-600 people. We get 8500, and we might have sold out against either AFC or Villa. That's about 4000 extra Town fans - if 5% came back for more, that's only 200 people. A bigger ground means more possibility of cashing in when the club is doing well and more casual spectators who you can try to convert into long-term fans. Jeremy Hilary Boob
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree