maxjak Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 We should storm his Mansion. I have my torch already lit. . ........... Seriously though, it's just another sad example of an overpaid footballer jizzing over his Gas Guzzler? I am guessing that IS semen all over the floor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Hunt-Hertz Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 1 minute ago, maxjak said: We should storm his Mansion. I have my torch already lit. . ........... Seriously though, it's just another sad example of an overpaid footballer jizzing over his Gas Guzzler? I am guessing that IS semen all over the floor? Well if it is, I'm mightily impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 12 hours ago, Lrrr said: Merely acknowledging that the way clubs now receive income the phrase 'we pay your wages' doesn't hold the weight it used to as the club are no longer so reliant on fans to do so Unrelated to this slightly weird thread, on your point of club income - while I think everyone would accept the change to the cliche that you highlight due to modern football economics, I do think there's a tendency now to go to the other extreme. By that I mean there's always several people now who will point out that diversified revenue streams seriously marginalise the impact or influence we supporters have to how the club spends its money or pays its wages - but that's just not true. Fans are absolutely integral to the value chain and the operating model well well beyond ticket purchases - perhaps the old cliche should be subtly different but just as direct: "your wages depend on me" (which helpfully also fits the tune too!) Very approximately: Match day spend + merchandising doubles the value from ticket sales from about 12% to 25% of our revenue TV 25-30% of revenue + just not fair to pretend has nothing to do with us. Who are Sky trying to broadcast to? Commercial remaining 50% of revenue - always quickly made out to be nothing to do with us, really? If title sponsor is a consumer brand - as ours has been last 2x - they're absolutely here because of us All the other sponsors around the stadium, and in all the media channels, only exist because we exist Some proportion of corporate attendance or non-matchday stadium uses are from fan connections Even if there's a whole lot else using AG, this only happens because of us, because if we only had 500 supporters, we would currently have a ground like the one in Horfield, hired out for car boot sales Let's be really clear (as MA would say) being well supported subsidises the money making infrastructure So okay, we don't directly fund more than about 10-20% of wages, but most of the remainder is directly attributable and completely dependent on our existence. One for a @Mr Popodopolous thread really, but let's not undersell ourselves! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepers Ball Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 Im not annoyed he posted this. More so he how the hell he can afford it. He's done nothing in terms of being a footballer so what wage is he on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 9 minutes ago, Olé said: Unrelated to this slightly weird thread, on your point of club income - while I think everyone would accept the change to the cliche that you highlight due to modern football economics, I do think there's a tendency now to go to the other extreme. By that I mean there's always several people now who will point out that diversified revenue streams seriously marginalise the impact or influence we supporters have to how the club spends its money or pays its wages - but that's just not true. Fans are absolutely integral to the value chain and the operating model well well beyond ticket purchases - perhaps the old cliche should be subtly different but just as direct: "your wages depend on me" (which helpfully also fits the tune too!) Very approximately: Match day spend + merchandising doubles the value from ticket sales from about 12% to 25% of our revenue TV 25-30% of revenue + just not fair to pretend has nothing to do with us. Who are Sky trying to broadcast to? Commercial remaining 50% of revenue - always quickly made out to be nothing to do with us, really? If title sponsor is a consumer brand - as ours has been last 2x - they're absolutely here because of us All the other sponsors around the stadium, and in all the media channels, only exist because we exist Some proportion of corporate attendance or non-matchday stadium uses are from fan connections Even if there's a whole lot else using AG, this only happens because of us, because if we only had 500 supporters, we would currently have a ground like the one in Horfield, hired out for car boot sales Let's be really clear (as MA would say) being well supported subsidises the money making infrastructure So okay, we don't directly fund more than about 10-20% of wages, but most of the remainder is directly attributable and completely dependent on our existence. One for a @Mr Popodopolous thread really, but let's not undersell ourselves! I don’t know why, but your post weirdly reminded me of this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted February 14, 2021 Report Share Posted February 14, 2021 1 hour ago, Olé said: Unrelated to this slightly weird thread, on your point of club income - while I think everyone would accept the change to the cliche that you highlight due to modern football economics, I do think there's a tendency now to go to the other extreme. By that I mean there's always several people now who will point out that diversified revenue streams seriously marginalise the impact or influence we supporters have to how the club spends its money or pays its wages - but that's just not true. Fans are absolutely integral to the value chain and the operating model well well beyond ticket purchases - perhaps the old cliche should be subtly different but just as direct: "your wages depend on me" (which helpfully also fits the tune too!) Very approximately: Match day spend + merchandising doubles the value from ticket sales from about 12% to 25% of our revenue TV 25-30% of revenue + just not fair to pretend has nothing to do with us. Who are Sky trying to broadcast to? Commercial remaining 50% of revenue - always quickly made out to be nothing to do with us, really? If title sponsor is a consumer brand - as ours has been last 2x - they're absolutely here because of us All the other sponsors around the stadium, and in all the media channels, only exist because we exist Some proportion of corporate attendance or non-matchday stadium uses are from fan connections Even if there's a whole lot else using AG, this only happens because of us, because if we only had 500 supporters, we would currently have a ground like the one in Horfield, hired out for car boot sales Let's be really clear (as MA would say) being well supported subsidises the money making infrastructure So okay, we don't directly fund more than about 10-20% of wages, but most of the remainder is directly attributable and completely dependent on our existence. One for a @Mr Popodopolous thread really, but let's not undersell ourselves! Agreed, and the proof of the pudding is how much clubs realise they need fans in the stadium now, and even the big tv sports broadcasters realise they cannot keep charging extortionate amounts. When lockdown is over, City are going to have a he'll of job convincing fans back as the "product" on offer just isn't worth it. Crikey, we're getting it for a tenner per match at the moment, can anyone realistic see people paying nearly £30 for a pay on the day ticket? or maybe even £400 Up front for a season ticket? The club needs a team for the fans to get behind, and sharpish, otherwise fans will turn away in their droves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.