Club Revenue Generators

[JHRover]

47 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Is there any way the club could raise revenue from the fan base without there being uproar? 

Get shirts on sale early so people buy them during a heatwave before they go away on holiday, rather than waiting until late July when everyone will be back.

Produce a matchday programme worth buying/reading.

Have a greater range and quality of merchandise available in the shop.

Encourage people to attend games at the last minute by removing a needless £3 surcharge for tickets bought on the day.

Make it easier to attend matches on a game by game basis by installing a cash turnstile to avoid the need to queue in the rain for 20 minutes for tickets.

Don't move kick off times to noon to accommodate large away followings (guaranteed to diminish the number of home fans in attendance).

Don't close 2 stands in 3 years in the process upsetting numerous groups of people.

If they did any of those things there wouldn't be uproar, yet they won't do any of them, and instead spend their time coming up with schemes to try and lever a few quid more out of those who go.

If 1000 people buy 1875 membership then that's an extra £10,000 for the club.

I reckon the impact of moving PNE alone to a noon kick off will cost the club more than £10,000 in lost ticket receipts. If we get 5,000 less people turning up e.g. 16,000 on instead of 21,000 and those people are paying £10 a head on average then straight away the club is missing out on £50,000, before corporate, food, drink etc. Fair enough stewarding would be more expensive at 21,000 but it does highlight just how ultimately insignificant these schemes are when on the other hand they're needlessly moving kick off times around.

Even if it doesn't affect the home crowd but knocks 2000 away fans off, say because Leeds fans can't get a train over for noon or whatever, that's still £40,000 in lost ticket sales through moving the kick off, way more than they get back through pointless schemes like £3 extra for a ticket on matchday.

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by JHRover

[perthblue02]

52 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Is there any way the club could raise revenue from the fan base without there being uproar? 

A 10 quid donation scheme to re-establish the official forum?  Seems some people miss the  safe space it created

[Stuart]

3 hours ago, bob fleming said:

Ah yes, no doubt aided by “shameful” “apologists”, aka “people fans”.

And they say it’s Venkys who divide the fan base ? 

Didn’t realise I had so much influence over people.

Stop being deliberately obtuse to look clever and stick to telling funnies.

[JBiz]

16 hours ago, Stuart said:

Having a slow one today?

Venkys are buying all of our players. Fans are keeping the lights on.

Just about.

I don’t think there’s much difference. If they set a budget, the more we make the more we spend.

Selling the whole Darwen end to away supporters and bringing prices up marginally could actually add one or two decent signings, 3 games of 5000+ away fans @ 30 quid is 450/500k with food/drink on top - these decisions would impact the team - whereas the owners practically as a maximum; keep the lights on at a cost to them. 

If that’s all they are guaranteeing, then the nearer our turnover is to cost = the better the investment on pitch. 

The jump to premier league money obviously means that these things are completely negligible but for me it’s sensible club management at this time.

I still can’t fathom this “I want Venkys to invest” alongside this “I want Venkys out”... two very clear and distinct things that do not tally together.

[Bigdoggsteel]

21 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Get shirts on sale early so people buy them during a heatwave before they go away on holiday, rather than waiting until late July when everyone will be back.

Produce a matchday programme worth buying/reading.

Have a greater range and quality of merchandise available in the shop.

Encourage people to attend games at the last minute by removing a needless £3 surcharge for tickets bought on the day.

Make it easier to attend matches on a game by game basis by installing a cash turnstile to avoid the need to queue in the rain for 20 minutes for tickets.

Don't move kick off times to noon to accommodate large away followings (guaranteed to diminish the number of home fans in attendance).

Don't close 2 stands in 3 years in the process upsetting numerous groups of people.

If they did any of those things there wouldn't be uproar, yet they won't do any of them, and instead spend their time coming up with schemes to try and lever a few quid more out of those who go.

If 1000 people buy 1875 membership then that's an extra £10,000 for the club.

I reckon the impact of moving PNE alone to a noon kick off will cost the club more than £10,000 in lost ticket receipts. If we get 5,000 less people turning up e.g. 16,000 on instead of 21,000 and those people are paying £10 a head on average then straight away the club is missing out on £50,000, before corporate, food, drink etc. Fair enough stewarding would be more expensive at 21,000 but it does highlight just how ultimately insignificant these schemes are when on the other hand they're needlessly moving kick off times around.

Even if it doesn't affect the home crowd but knocks 2000 away fans off, say because Leeds fans can't get a train over for noon or whatever, that's still £40,000 in lost ticket sales through moving the kick off, way more than they get back through pointless schemes like £3 extra for a ticket on matchday.

 

Some very good, practical suggestions there.

Just on the following 

Matchday programme- Do you think people would buy a match day program though? There was a segment on the radio about it here the other day, which was interesting. For league of Ireland , GAA or international game here they usually cost around €5. I think that is a bit much, but it would be hard to manufacture a good one for less. The Rovers fanzine is apparently doing well though? What can an official program be only bland and generic though? I bought the one at Ireands play-off drubbing to Denmark, full of ads with absolutely nothing of interest in it. 

Surcharge- Do you really think people don't turn up late to save 3 pounds? Is this money not to pay the wages of whoever works in the ticket office?

Merchandise- I am trying to buy the 94/95 kit which is advertised on the online store but am unable to. They told em they don't have a manufacturer. This annoying. I totally agree about this seasons jersey. Hurry up already! 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[Bigdoggsteel]

13 minutes ago, perthblue02 said:

A 10 quid donation scheme to re-establish the official forum?  Seems some people miss the  safe space it created

As long as the money doesn't go to Lee Grooby ??

[perthblue02]

Just now, Biz said:

 

I still can’t fathom this “I want Venkys to invest” alongside this “I want Venkys out”... two very clear and distinct things that do not tally together.

Invest to get the club back to where it was (position/funds etc) upon their and their friends arrival and then sell up ?

Edited July 4, 2018 by perthblue02

[Mattyblue]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

 

Surcharge- Do you really think people don't turn up late to save 3 pounds? Is this money not to pay the wages of whoever works in the ticket office?

 

It was only brought in last season.

The only reason I can think it was introduced was to help flog 1875 memberships, as members are exempt.

[OJRovers]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Is there any way the club could raise revenue from the fan base without there being uproar? 

Have a better system for serving drinks at half time on the concourses. I don't spend any money at half time, mainly because the game would have kicked off again before I got to the front of the coffee/beer queue. If I could quickly get a drink, i'd probably buy one every game.

 

[JHRover]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Some very good, practical suggestions there.

Just on the following 

Matchday programme- Do you think people would buy a match day program though? There was a segment on the radio about it here the other day, which was interesting. For league of Ireland , GAA or international game here they usually cost around €5. I think that is a bit much, but it would be hard to manufacture a good one for less. The Rovers fanzine is apparently doing well though? What can an official program be only bland and generic though? I bought the one at Ireands play-off drubbing to Denmark, full of ads with absolutely nothing of interest in it. 

Surcharge- Do you really think people don't turn up late to save 3 pounds? Is this money not to pay the wages of whoever works in the ticket office?

Merchandise- I am trying to buy the 94/95 kit which is advertised on the online store but am unable to. They told em they don't have a manufacturer. This annoying. I totally agree about this seasons jersey. Hurry up already! 

The matchday programme has been substandard for as long as I can remember. I think we're now at a stage where only the ardent programme collectors bother with it because nobody would buy it to read or browse such is the dreadful standard and poor value for money. I understand that Waggott is talking to fans at the moment about how to rectify this but I think he would be better getting on the phone to Bristol Rovers or Rochdale and asking how it is they manage to produce a quality product every other week on gates of a fraction of ours.

No club is ever going to make a massive profit on programmes. I don't think that is the idea. But we're never going to sell many as they are. If they're so disinterested in it then they should knock it down to £1 and approach it that way. Continuing at £3 is an insult.

The talk about falling sales and breaking even is all well and good but if I were Waggott I'd be asking myself why it is that a club of this size is incapable of making a do on programmes whilst clubs in the Conference can come up with better for the same price.

In terms of the surcharge I can safely say that one thing it will not achieve is more people turning up. It may not actively dissuade people from going, but it won't make people get up on a Saturday in greater numbers and go down to Ewood. As I've suggested above whatever additional cash the club rakes in through doing it is so utterly insignificant when compared against lost revenues through moving Leeds/PNE unnecessarily that it makes the whole thing pointless.

I've no idea where the £3 goes but there were ticket office staff getting paid before it was introduced and tickets are still £20 odd even without the surcharge so their wages should come out of that.

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, OJRovers said:

Have a better system for serving drinks at half time on the concourses. I don't spend any money at half time, mainly because the game would have kicked off again before I got to the front of the coffee/beer queue. If I could quickly get a drink, i'd probably buy one every game.

 

Is there any football stadium where this is actually possible? 20-30 min queue at most stadiums I have been at. 

[OJRovers]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Is there any football stadium where this is actually possible? 20-30 min queue at most stadiums I have been at. 

Not many. But it seems worse than most at Rovers because they have to pull the pints one at a time as you wait. 

I saw that Tottenham's new ground is going to be able to serve 10,000 pints per minute!

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, OJRovers said:

Not many. But it seems worse than most at Rovers because they have to pull the pints one at a time as you wait. 

I saw that Tottenham's new ground is going to be able to serve 10,000 pints per minute!

Nothing worse. It's the same at music festivals. Just give me my pint!

10,000 per minute. The future is now. I wonder how they manage that? 

Now we are cutting to the core of the issue that really matter 

[Bigdoggsteel]

11 minutes ago, JHRover said:

The matchday programme has been substandard for as long as I can remember. I think we're now at a stage where only the ardent programme collectors bother with it because nobody would buy it to read or browse such is the dreadful standard and poor value for money. I understand that Waggott is talking to fans at the moment about how to rectify this but I think he would be better getting on the phone to Bristol Rovers or Rochdale and asking how it is they manage to produce a quality product every other week on gates of a fraction of ours.

No club is ever going to make a massive profit on programmes. I don't think that is the idea. But we're never going to sell many as they are. If they're so disinterested in it then they should knock it down to £1 and approach it that way. Continuing at £3 is an insult.

The talk about falling sales and breaking even is all well and good but if I were Waggott I'd be asking myself why it is that a club of this size is incapable of making a do on programmes whilst clubs in the Conference can come up with better for the same price.

In terms of the surcharge I can safely say that one thing it will not achieve is more people turning up. It may not actively dissuade people from going, but it won't make people get up on a Saturday in greater numbers and go down to Ewood. As I've suggested above whatever additional cash the club rakes in through doing it is so utterly insignificant when compared against lost revenues through moving Leeds/PNE unnecessarily that it makes the whole thing pointless.

I've no idea where the £3 goes but there were ticket office staff getting paid before it was introduced and tickets are still £20 odd even without the surcharge so their wages should come out of that.

 

It seems the bigger the clubs, the more boring and generic the programs get. 

I suppose at the end of the day with regards to revenue from fans, everything is just window dressing outside of getting bums on seats week in, week out. 

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, OJRovers said:

Have a better system for serving drinks at half time on the concourses. I don't spend any money at half time, mainly because the game would have kicked off again before I got to the front of the coffee/beer queue. If I could quickly get a drink, i'd probably buy one every game.

 

At least you don't leave your seat 10 mins before half time and return ten mins after just to grab a pint of over priced horse piss like seems to be the eternal habit in grounds ?

Edited July 4, 2018 by tomphil

[JBiz]

3 hours ago, perthblue02 said:

Invest to get the club back to where it was (position/funds etc) upon their and their friends arrival and then sell up ?

Invest what? More “share capital”? 

All that means is more debt. More debt = less likely to ever get rid.

[JHRover]

Just now, Biz said:

Invest what? More “share capital”? 

All that means is more debt. More debt = less likely to ever get rid.

Think we are way past that point. If they weren't going to get rid at 50 or 100 million I doubt they ever will.

[JBiz]

6 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Think we are way past that point. If they weren't going to get rid at 50 or 100 million I doubt they ever will.

I disagree. 100m is two season in the top flight profit (if you’re Burnley and don’t spend it).

Push up the wage bill to 200% turnover  (aka 2012/13) and DON’T get promoted.. see 14/15 and 15/16 for examples of what happens in that scenario.

I’d personally rather we built up slowly to a position of value and strength, without the sudden need to drop wages to meet FFP or keep facilities. 

[perthblue02]

Just now, Biz said:

Invest what? More “share capital”? 

All that means is more debt. More debt = less likely to ever get rid.

Most of the debt is owed to the family, most of the debt as been racked up by them and their mates. Easy to wipe it off if they were really sorry for their disgraceful ownership of the club.

As for investing in the actual team ,other clubs seem to have found a way around FFP, but for some reason our lot welcome the restrictions with open arms.

 

 

[JBiz]

Just now, perthblue02 said:

Most of the debt is owed to the family, most of the debt as been racked up by them and their mates. Easy to wipe it off if they were really sorry for their disgraceful ownership of the club.

As for investing in the actual team ,other clubs seem to have found a way around FFP, but for some reason our lot welcome the restrictions with open arms.

 

 

You seem to be forgetting the wage and facility cost will rack up debts, without any investment. Hence why maximising turnover can only be good if it’s not too harsh on customers. As for FFP, a examples have skirted the rules but when a few have also been in embargo, and one or two are facing huge fines.

See it as an excuse if you must, but I personally would rather they continued to give an annual playing budget and allowed the club to function at arms lengths with a reasonable budget for keeping our grade 1 academy and other important aspects of JW’s legacy going.

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Biz

[JHRover]

Just now, Biz said:

You seem to be forgetting the wage and facility cost will rack up debts, without any investment. Hence why maximising turnover can only be good if it’s not too harsh on customers. As for FFP, a examples have skirted the rules but when a few have also been in embargo, and one or two are facing huge fines.

See it as an excuse if you must, but I personally would rather they continued to give an annual playing budget and allowed the club to function at arms lengths with a reasonable budget for keeping our grade 1 academy and other important aspects of JW’s legacy going.

 

Nobody has been in an embargo for years now. Nobody who has stayed in the Championship has been fined. Leicester were fined loose change for a Premier League club and QPR were fined yet haven't paid a penny of it. It's a sham.

Either the rules are so slack that clubs can dance round them at will or the people responsible for enforcing them aren't doing their jobs.

Lots of rumours, suggestions and speculation about various clubs being in trouble at some non-specified point in the future if something doesn't change and yet right here right now none of them have been punished. Wolves, Derby, Wednesday, QPR, Birmingham - just a few examples of clubs frequently spending beyond their natural means who have dodged any punishment. Then there's Villa who last time I checked haven't been punished either despite lots of rumours of it.

Facilities/academy nothing to do with FFP rules so they could be funded to a limitless amount if desired. If Venkys wanted to spend £50 million on Ewood Park and Brockhall they could do and it would be exempt from FFP calculations.

Edited July 4, 2018 by JHRover

[perthblue02]

Just now, Biz said:

You seem to be forgetting the wage and facility cost will rack up debts, without any investment. Hence why maximising turnover can only be good if it’s not too harsh on customers. As for FFP, a examples have skirted the rules but when a few have also been in embargo, and one or two are facing huge fines.

See it as an excuse if you must, but I personally would rather they continued to give an annual playing budget and allowed the club to function at arms lengths with a reasonable budget for keeping our grade 1 academy and other important aspects of JW’s legacy going.

 

Agree with your second paragraph , boom or bust is too risky at the moment for us ,and if the current strategy gets us back to where the club was then fine, but they still need to wipe off the debt that they have created.

Think the post above from JH covers the first paragraph very well.

[JBiz]

Just now, perthblue02 said:

Agree with your second paragraph , boom or bust is too risky at the moment for us ,and if the current strategy gets us back to where the club was then fine, but they still need to wipe off the debt that they have created.

Think the post above from JH covers the first paragraph very well.

I’ve had some great (imo, he might hate them!  ) discussions  with JHR on investing/FFP - I think that there is obviously scope for finding ways around FFP through sponsoring but I just differ in view on the risk-factor and potential outcome of it. I’m convinced we’ve got weak owners who could be swayed again, I’m not convinced of their actual wealth or ability to invest as much as someone similar to the Wolves/Leicester/ scenarios (no parachutes) either.

Running the club (like the second paragraph) is more likely to bring the success of promotion in the long term for me IMHO! Stacking up wages/more debt in fees and a pressure to return quickly  before FFP can bite or losses curved... I just think that would be less likely to be successful (because of aforementioned ownership problems) and more likely to be another load of nails in the coffin.

 

 

[JBiz]

8 minutes ago, JHRover said:

 

Facilities/academy nothing to do with FFP rules so they could be funded to a limitless amount if desired. If Venkys wanted to spend £50 million on Ewood Park and Brockhall they could do and it would be exempt from FFP calculations.

Hence why we’ve still got a grade 1 academy- that’s a minimum of 2.3m a year investment per season, would that and the contracts of all u23s and scholars be roughly our entire ST turnover?

Either way, I can understand why you and others see FFP as convenient but I also feel it’s convenient for me (and other fans) who are concerned about the agents/spending involved in our clubs.

[JHRover]

https://www.efl.com/news/2018/july/efl-statement-afc-bournemouth/?utm_source=Direct

Another pay-off on the quiet of just £4.7 million. Not bad in exchange for 4 seasons in the Premier League bringing in hundreds of millions.

Not bad business for the EFL either who have now raked in nearly £10 million from Leicester and Bournemouth whilst boxing off a potential headache and embarrassment. Wolves will no doubt be next in a couple of years.