|
mattyolmes 7:57 Wed Jun 6
Premier league finance by club
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/06/premier-league-finances-club-guide-2016-17
1st season in the OS.
We make 29 mill match day earnings only a bit more than the Boleyn. Begs the question why doesn't it?
Stone me Arsenal take 100 million from match day and B7rnely only 5 (6). Shows it's all about the tv dosh now. Us fans are extras in a show were watching
Bah.
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
SurfaceAgentX2Zero
12:43 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Lily Hammer 11:16 Thu Jun 7
Don't get me wrong, mate. I think the bloke's a total cunt.
|
Full Claret Jacket
12:25 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Lily Hammer 11:24 Thu Jun 7
I agree, the bullshit around distance to the pitch is appalling.
I think some of this has come since they didn't implement the proposed retractable seating they showed drawings of and went with some crap demountable scaffolding effort. The upper seating was always going to be miles back unless the thing was demolished.
It's hard to see how this stadium can ever be what it should have been if it stays multi purpose. The chance to make a decent fist of it was lost when they spent fortunes on post games conversion. Money wasted due to poor planning of post games use.
Still attended some good games in the bowl though. You just have to be in the right place and with the right crowd. Lets face it, often watching the game is the most depressing part of the event.
|
charleyfarley
12:00 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
tin pot to piss pot
|
Lily Hammer
11:24 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
FCJ
I backed the move based on the promise of much more Hammers able to go, at affordable cheaper prices, and with the fans as close to the pitch as at Upton Park.
The first twp points have been delivered, which I applaud, but the third point was the most important to me, and many others, (perhaps most), and has obviously not been delivered.
I wasn't interested in a bigger stadium at cheaper prices, if it meant being as far away as we now are.
|
Full Claret Jacket
11:18 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Does the match day earnings show the savings we make on not owning the ground and paying for ground staff, stewarding and policing?
I'm guessing a few tickets at LS are given away under the agreement and to give a little bit of credit the board did commit to keeping prices low for families and not fleecing fans like Arsenal do. Spurs are also set to hammer their fans and corporate financially in their new stadium.
For me this is the least of the problems. Keeping it affordable to attend should be something we all agree on, not complaining we aren't making enough money from the move.
|
Lily Hammer
11:16 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
I didn't twist his words though. I didn't say that he said we were a tinpot club. I got teh wording slightly right, but I also only said he said we "looked" tinpot.
Also, I'm not trying to suggest he lied, as he is only stating his opinion. I just happen to think his opinion is bollocks.
West Ham United FC, all the years I've followed us, never seemed or looked or were tinpot based on how our stadium was. We were based on some of the business, or lack of business, but not because of our old home. We had one of the best atmosphere's anywhere on our day, that garnered respect from supporters of all teams all over the world.
Not tinpot.
And let's not go round in circles anymore.
For the record, I give credit where it's due, which it is for getting Pellegrini in. I will give more credit come the end of the window, if he delivers.
|
MrSnoogans
11:02 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Wasn't it that Upton Park couldn't be trademarked? So G&S pushed the Boleyn Ground wording?
May just be made up to used as another anti-board weapon?
|
SurfaceAgentX2Zero
11:01 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Lily Hammer 10:12 Thu Jun 7
The crucial difference is that 'we WERE a tinpot club' is contemptuous. We 'looked like a tin-pot club' clearly implies that we actually weren't tin-pot but looked like it, in his specific context to players we were trying to sign..
If you'e using what he said against him, there's a massive difference. He's told enough outright porkies, half-truths and wildly over-optimistic promises to give plenty of reasons to have a go at him, without twisting his words in order to take further faux offence.
|
10thofMay
10:52 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
SurfaceAgentX2Zero 2:17 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
Lily Hammer 1:39 Thu Jun 7
'He said he thought we looked "tinpot" in the Boleyn Ground; his very words'
He was probably right. That's not to say the rest of your post is wrong. And it wasn't the Boleyn Ground to those of us that knew and loved it, it was Upton Park. The BG thing only gained currency in the final season,when know-all commentators started showing off about knowing the official, but barely used, name.
Surface, absolutely spot on.
Lead by the biggest cunt of commentators John Motson.
|
Lily Hammer
10:12 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
SurfaceAgentX2Zero 2:59 Thu Jun 7
“I just think we feel like a big club,” Sullivan says. “Not a tinpot club. When players come to look at West Ham, they look at where you play.”
That doesn't sound any better than what I said. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that he thinks things are so much better with an athletics stadium with fans so far from the pitch makes us seem or feel like a big club goes to show his taste in stadium is as tacky and vulgar as his taste in home decor.
I, and nobody I know, West Ham or visiting fan, thought Upton Park made us seem a tinpot club.
|
stewie griffin
8:05 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
It's the one thing i don't think you can criticise Sullivan for. He was quite open that moving wouldn't make a huge difference financially - and the accounts proved that long before this article.
I'm never quite sure where people got the idea that it would. Probably Cuntrozzz and his GRAPHS
|
RBshorty
7:18 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Next Level.!
|
SurfaceAgentX2Zero
2:59 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Lily Hammer 2:45 Thu Jun 7
Actually, he didn't called us 'a tin-pot club'. He said (implied actually) the old ground made us look tin-pot.
The two things are a world apart.
“I just think we feel like a big club,” Sullivan says. “Not a tinpot club. When players come to look at West Ham, they look at where you play.”
|
Lily Hammer
2:45 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
*IN contempt.
|
Lily Hammer
2:45 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
We were in the Boleyn Ground, we called it Upton Park, or West Ham, as in "Are you going West Ham at the weekend?"
I don't think we looked tinpot at UP. It may have been lopsided for the last part of its life, but it was a pukka football ground still, with loads of history and loads of respect from visiting fans from all over. To call us a tinpot club at the home of Moore, Brooking, Bonds and the rest of them, is the words of someone who has no idea what we were about, and held our very identity on comtempt.
|
SurfaceAgentX2Zero
2:17 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Lily Hammer 1:39 Thu Jun 7
'He said he thought we looked "tinpot" in the Boleyn Ground; his very words'
He was probably right. That's not to say the rest of your post is wrong. And it wasn't the Boleyn Ground to those of us that knew and loved it, it was Upton Park. The BG thing only gained currency in the final season,when know-all commentators started showing off about knowing the official, but barely used, name.
|
Lily Hammer
1:39 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
It does beg the question why. Sullivan said why, regarding that very point of not earning much more than at Upton Park. He said he thought we looked "tinpot" in the Boleyn Ground; his very words. He said he thinks we now "look the part" at the athletics stadium. Again, his very words.
With today's transfer costs, the extra money hardly makes a differance to singing capabilities. The main change is we are now better positioned to sign players that prefer playing in an athletics stadium rather than a football satdium. So we need to find the best players with that particular weird fetish and we will reach the next level.
|
claret on my shirt
12:54 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Yeah it is weird, CFC said the extra 20,000 seats they were going to put in each year would make the 50m a year, yet we put in 25,000 new seats and get about 5m more
|
Jaan Kenbrovin
12:13 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
Our matchday revenue was regularly around 18/19 for years before the last season, which was always going to be more profitable.
|
Long Lost
12:06 Thu Jun 7
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
How many kids at £99 though. Loads round near me
|
ludo21
8:11 Wed Jun 6
Re: Premier league finance by club
|
29m doesn't really add up... probably not a lot more but should be at least 40m I would have thought.
52k ST at an average of 600 is 31.2m add in the remaining ticket sales and some corporate uplift and must be higher than 29m.
Boleyn only had 20k STs at higher prices and 15k matchday tickets at higher prices... that's why it's not so much more.
|
|
|
|
