|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Jan 13, 2019 8:31:42 GMT
I have an idea too. Answer the question posed to you first! (Of course we all know the answer, but two can play the pedantic card). As you have pushed, yes I have contributed funds by buying 50/50 tickets on chuckash!the matchdays and not attended the match. I'm lucky, I live close to the ground. I'm hoping some funds will find it's way back to the club. I've done this in person alone, plus by proxy with another member of this forum. I think there's a difference between doing what you think is right and placarding the point. They're two different points. One is principled and discreet, the other is just brash and inviting possibly the wrong sort of attention. If you're honest and with integrity, you've probably pondered over this equation long and hard and with some sort of heart made your decision. That's fine either way. I'm just showing you my way. Ok I will answer it doesn't make any difference at all Clubs and or the EFL don't look at why people aren't attending games just the overall figures and if the sponsorship makes more money than the drop in attendances then they are happy.no amount of argument on minority forums will make any difference to those organisations decisions.so in the vernacular you are peeing into the wind Disagree. Not with your sponsorship issue, I think that's very relevant. I disagree with your underestimation of fan power. If attendance was higher, the EFL would be highlighting that as a success. If it's lower, they choose to ignore it. By not attending, you are taking away an important revenue stream for them as they take their cut from clubs, plus you take away a string of their argument. If literally no one went to Wembley for the final (!), the cost to host such an event would be astronomical and the embarrassment more. Of course this won't happen, but the vernacular of pi$$ing in the wind would be right, just as in reality and life sometimes by hook or by crook the wind changes direction..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2019 12:29:52 GMT
Ok I will answer it doesn't make any difference at all Clubs and or the EFL don't look at why people aren't attending games just the overall figures and if the sponsorship makes more money than the drop in attendances then they are happy.no amount of argument on minority forums will make any difference to those organisations decisions.so in the vernacular you are peeing into the wind Disagree. Not with your sponsorship issue, I think that's very relevant. I disagree with your underestimation of fan power. If attendance was higher, the EFL would be highlighting that as a success. If it's lower, they choose to ignore it. By not attending, you are taking away an important revenue stream for them as they take their cut from clubs, plus you take away a string of their argument. If literally no one went to Wembley for the final (!), the cost to host such an event would be astronomical and the embarrassment more. Of course this won't happen, but the vernacular of pi$$ing in the wind would be right, just as in reality and life sometimes by hook or by crook the wind changes direction.. As I stated on another thread blackpool fans have been boycotting games and protesting about the owners and what effect has it had?lower income and the owners are still there after how many years? 2 or 3 sof if it hasn't worked with a high profile demonstration then how do you think it will work when the income for the clubs is higher from sponsorship than the loss of gate revenue.what you have to accept is that fans especially those in the lower reaches of the league have little or no impact on the decision makers no matter how much you think it has
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Jan 15, 2019 11:22:20 GMT
Disagree. Not with your sponsorship issue, I think that's very relevant. I disagree with your underestimation of fan power. If attendance was higher, the EFL would be highlighting that as a success. If it's lower, they choose to ignore it. By not attending, you are taking away an important revenue stream for them as they take their cut from clubs, plus you take away a string of their argument. If literally no one went to Wembley for the final (!), the cost to host such an event would be astronomical and the embarrassment more. Of course this won't happen, but the vernacular of pi$$ing in the wind would be right, just as in reality and life sometimes by hook or by crook the wind changes direction.. As I stated on another thread blackpool fans have been boycotting games and protesting about the owners and what effect has it had?lower income and the owners are still there after how many years? 2 or 3 sof if it hasn't worked with a high profile demonstration then how do you think it will work when the income for the clubs is higher from sponsorship than the loss of gate revenue.what you have to accept is that fans especially those in the lower reaches of the league have little or no impact on the decision makers no matter how much you think it has I don't think that's a fair analysis. Blackpool (and more topically Coventry) owner's boycott and the policy of EFL are very different. Steve Harvey does not own EFL, and can't subsidise anything himself. It's his controversial policy, which can easily be outvoted or cities if there's a collective organisation. If your point is there's nothing you can do about it, I do beg to differ. England and Wales are quite unique as in 5 tiers of professional football are supported by thousands of fans. Obviously, three divisions for EFL, and that's a cute amount of funds that EFL take their cut from..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 14:50:33 GMT
Bet it doesn't match the amount they receive from the sponsors of this cup bearing in mind that championship clubs wont be affected by the so called boycott.If you take the last 16 games year on year attendances are down by about 1000 at a reduced gate receipts of say 10 per fan their take is 15% of that figure which is a nett deficit of approx. 25000 you can bet they are getting more from the sponsors for that,so you can or should see why they will take no notice of a boycott. It has become increasingly more difficult over the last 5 to 10 years to get sponsors for this competition so if when this deal runs out and they walk away they cannot get sponsors then you are cutting off potential revenue for the poorest of clubs. I don't know if it was you or maybe bambi who asked how much it costs to put on a game at the mem the last quote I got when I tried to arrange a game there was 1250
|
|