Simon Jordan Interview - Part 2. (3 Viewers)

[Nick]

That is like asking Joy Seppala for her thoughts on Ann Lucas.

I was only really on about the stadium bit rather than all of it.

 

---

[robbiethemole]

This isn't going to be popular but we need to change the age that the senior tickets start I believe they start at 60 yet people work on until 65 minimum also some not all have far more spare income than the fans than pay the most the 18-60 bracket this will start to produce more money for the club as our fan base is old.

We could get 5m from ticket revenue if the product on the field was better as more would turn up.

TGP, you can fuck right off ;-) it's my 50th anniversary of going this year and I deserve to pay less than the youngsters..................I've suffered far more than most of them!!!!!

(just having a laugh before going to freeze my nuts off in Chesterfield) PUSB

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Interesting when searching Simon Jordan stadium rent.

I read Simon Jordan's book and it's a load of rubbish, says Ron Noades

It makes sense that increased crowds equals increased income. Simon Jordan is right. Get a winning team and crowds will increase. Commercial common sense. I wish Simon Jordan really would form a consortium and take us over.

 

[Nick]

Has there been any club ever who's fan's have purchased enough tickets to pay for a premier league push? How much would ticket prices need to be to do that? How big would a grounds capacity have to be to do that?

It's investment that ultimately get most if not all teams to the premier league. Some manage it on less such as Burnley but then you have clubs like Newcastle at the opposite end of the scale.

Not sure what point you're trying to make. It's investment that gets teams promoted not ticket sales and I don't believe you're stupid enough to not realise that so presumably you think everyone else is and you can get away with making a pointless, fact less statement like you did

So who is going to invest enough and never expect it back unless we get there? It's ok you keep mentioning Burnley but what about the Brightons and the Forests who are also chasing it?

All SJ is basically saying is ignore the revenues and just pile loads of money into a squad to get to the premier league.

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

TGP, you can fuck right off ;-) it's my 50th anniversary of going this year and I deserve to pay less than the youngsters..................I've suffered far more than most of them!!!!!

(just having a laugh before going to freeze my nuts off in Chesterfield) PUSB

Said it might not be popular have good day today I would have gone but I have employment issues as in I don't have any at the moment:emoji_stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

 

[SkyBlueZack]

I've never understood owning a stadium is crucial. It's always a benefit and especially when a London rugby club owns the stadium with your name in the seats but I wouldn't let me stop my football club from succeeding. 100k rent is nothing SJ is right.

The problem here is sisu and they are running the club into the ground and selling any player worth a penny to break even. It's a model destined to fail and where we are in the table suggests so.

The 1m profit doesn't matter to the average fan and it was only achieved by selling our best players again I.e Maddison. It's not a success. We are destined for league two and even if we stay up this season it's next season Imo.

It doesn't have to be like this, it could be very different with different views and different owners. Sorry but Jordan makes sense without being 100% correct I accept. Without sisu we have half a chance with sisu well to quote Jordan "Christ knows what will happen"

So what model would you suggest? Investment? What if the investment is wanted back at some point? What if the investment becomes a debt burden? I can't fathom how we have ended up in this situation, yet fans seem to still advocate spending money we don't have. What is it they say about doing the same thing and expecting different results?

Jordan also said he thinks we could get back into the PL in 5 years. Sorry but that doesn't make sense. Look at all the other teams who have bigger crowds and more money who get nowhere near promotion every year. Forest and Derby to name two. They also have the envious position of only requiring one promotion.

 

[Gosford Green]

So who is going to invest enough and never expect it back unless we get there? It's ok you keep mentioning Burnley but what about the Brightons and the Forests who are also chasing it?

All SJ is basically saying is ignore the revenues and just pile loads of money into a squad to get to the premier league.

According to some SISU have pumped in £70 million, only to take us to the edge of L2.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

According to some SISU have pumped in £70 million, only to take us to the edge of L2.

Who claims the 70 million? Apart from Fisher and SISU?

Compared to people claiming money being taken out the club, SISU making profit because they sold Maddison etc.

 

[skybluetony176]

This ain't going to happen whilst Wasps own the Ricoh. They need all the income they can to pay the bonds off, finance their biggest team in Europe ambition and most importantly fund their real estate aspirations.

It's all good though as SISU are the only enemy and threat to the football club.

Depends on the other details of a rent agreement really. If it was stepped based on league it might be worth their while. A bigger share of the income should in theory increase our chances of promotion and if the rent agreement would land them a big fat juicy bonus every season we're in the premier league it would be worth their while, you could even link in a bonus to parachute payments should we come straight back down sweetening the deal.

You've rather sarcastically then said that SISU are the only enemy to the club but here's the rub. Without ambitious owners willing to invest in the club there's no motivation for wasps to do anything to encourage growth at CCFC. Why would they hand over revenue when they're not going to gain anything from it?

 

[shmmeee]

Also will need investment from proper owners and that is isn't the trust.

So you're happy having no say at all in the direction of the club? Accepting that it's not actually our club but a privately owned business we are customers of?

Surprised at that, but each to their own I guess. Personally I like CCFC to be ours not our owners. That doesn't preclude outside investment or even majority ownership by a third party.

Hook, line and sinker. Sisu must be laughing all the way back to London.

 

[skybluetony176]

Who's defending?

Isn't the West ham deal a bit different to ours?

As is West Hams owners.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

As is West Hams owners.

No answer to the question then?

Depends on the other details of a rent agreement really. If it was stepped based on league it might be worth their while. A bigger share of the income should in theory increase our chances of promotion and if the rent agreement would land them a big fat juicy bonus every season we're in the premier league it would be worth their while, you could even link in a bonus to parachute payments should we come straight back down sweetening the deal.

You've rather sarcastically then said that SISU are the only enemy to the club but here's the rub. Without ambitious owners willing to invest in the club there's no motivation for wasps to do anything to encourage growth at CCFC. Why would they hand over revenue when they're not going to gain anything from it?

Well, according to you all energy should be focused on SISU, so does not that not kind of say they are the only enemy? Rather than fighting everyone who attacks the club? There is no motivation for Wasps to have a successful CCFC. Why would they hand over revenue when they have bonds to pay, also Beale and Cipriani salaries? Or will they stop signing marquee players so CCFC can try and become more successful?

If CCFC became successful, what do you think would be the result to Wasps ambitions?

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

So you're happy having no say at all in the direction of the club? Accepting that it's not actually our club but a privately owned business we are customers of?

Surprised at that, but each to their own I guess. Personally I like CCFC to be ours not our owners. That doesn't preclude outside investment or even majority ownership by a third party.

Hook, line and sinker. Sisu must be laughing all the way back to London.

Sorry what I mean is 100% ownership for the trust, they could hold a small percentage but not own it we can't agree on here about trivial things imagine making the big decisions at the club.

I would rather see 75% rich man or woman 25% fan owned roughly

 

[Nick]

Also how will he get £5m just from ticket sales on 10,000 like he says? We turned over less than that in total didn't we last accounts?

 

[skybluetony176]

So who is going to invest enough and never expect it back unless we get there? It's ok you keep mentioning Burnley but what about the Brightons and the Forests who are also chasing it?

All SJ is basically saying is ignore the revenues and just pile loads of money into a squad to get to the premier league.

Forest have been mismanaged at every level for decades same as us. Can't say I know too much about Brighton to be honest but I don't think it's unreasonable to look at clubs like Burnley and say that promotion isn't possible even with limited revenue streams (Burnley's limiting factor being footfall and small audience to sell things like merchandise to) if a club is run correctly the right amount of investment doesn't need to be hundreds of millions like you're trying to convince people it needs to be. Burnley have proved this twice in three seasons. They didn't blow their premier league money on wages to get them straight back up, they invested it in the club. New training facilities being the big one and it's paid dividends before it's even finished as the club is ran with a real pride and passion and that transpires into the pitch.

If we were in the championship and serious title contenders I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that we could get near filling the Ricoh that potentially could put us on similar revenue income's as Burnley at the same level (parachute payments excluded) despite not owning our ground.

 

[shmmeee]

Sorry what I mean is 100% ownership for the trust, they could hold a small percentage but not own it we can't agree on here about trivial things imagine making the big decisions at the club.

I would rather see 75% rich man or woman 25% fan owned roughly

Oh then I agree. 100% isn't needed. But the last few years have shown us some ownership definitely is IMO.

Also fan ownership doesn't literally mean a bunch of fans sit around and make the decisions. Look at Barcelona or the German clubs.

Even if we were 100% owned we could just elect a Chairman to run the club on a two year appointment with season ticket or bond holders getting a vote.

 

[skybluetony176]

No answer to the question then?



Well, according to you all energy should be focused on SISU, so does not that not kind of say they are the only enemy? Rather than fighting everyone who attacks the club? There is no motivation for Wasps to have a successful CCFC. Why would they hand over revenue when they have bonds to pay, also Beale and Cipriani salaries? Or will they stop signing marquee players so CCFC can try and become more successful?

If CCFC became successful, what do you think would be the result to Wasps ambitions?

That is answering the question. There is nothing comparable between us and West Ham. Including the owners. We can look to them for inspiration though. They have a rental agreement that gives them access to revenues including naming rights. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own rental negotiation's? They have forward thinking owners who saved the club from the edge of disaster by investing. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own situation? Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it isn't an answer.

SISU will kill the club long before any of the other "enemies" so therefore should be our priority. If you can't see that then I don't know what else to say to you.

 

[Nick]

Forest have been mismanaged at every level for decades same as us. Can't say I know too much about Brighton to be honest but I don't think it's unreasonable to look at clubs like Burnley and say that promotion isn't possible even with limited revenue streams (Burnley's limiting factor being footfall and small audience to sell things like merchandise to) if a club is run correctly the right amount of investment doesn't need to be hundreds of millions like you're trying to convince people it needs to be. Burnley have proved this twice in three seasons. They didn't blow their premier league money on wages to get them straight back up, they invested it in the club. New training facilities being the big one and it's paid dividends before it's even finished as the club is ran with a real pride and passion and that transpires into the pitch.

If we were in the championship and serious title contenders I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that we could get near filling the Ricoh that potentially could put us on similar revenue income's as Burnley at the same level (parachute payments excluded) despite not owning our ground.

Yes, it's the jump between now and title contenders in the championship. How do we get there?

 

[pastythegreat]

West Ham don't lease 365day, they lease match day only. Not even allowed to train on it. They have shop and offices there that they have 365day access to but they do get access to all match day revenue and a share of the the naming rights. This is the basis that the club should be looking at as a deal at the Ricoh, ain't going to happen under SISU though.

They also sold 50000 season tickets! Yeah let's compare us to West Ham

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

That is answering the question. There is nothing comparable between us and West Ham. Including the owners. We can look to them for inspiration though. They have a rental agreement that gives them access to revenues including naming rights. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own rental negotiation's? They have forward thinking owners who saved the club from the edge of disaster by investing. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own situation? Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it isn't an answer.

SISU will kill the club long before any of the other "enemies" so therefore should be our priority. If you can't see that then I don't know what else to say to you.

Do you really think any other club will get a deal like West hams rental one?

 

[skybluesam66]

of course 50000 would go to Wembley

we got up to18000 last year
people want success achievement and excitement

its not rocket science
you invest and build a profitable model, or you let what you have die, which will eventually be a break even model with virtually no revenue or cost

sj is proposing the former, sisu choose the latter

 

[stupot07]

Nick nothing happens with ffp it just doesn't matter you get around it, look at Man City with massive sponsorship deals it's called imagination. Ffp is just a thing that our owners hide behind.

FFP rules are different in league one. Its 60% turnover compared with thr championship and premier league which is allowable losses.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Yes, it's the jump between now and title contenders in the championship. How do we get there?

Personally, Id go the route Sisu say they want to go. Problem is that fans don't trust them to actually do it and it appears they are totally incompetent at doing it.

We have put ourselves into a position where we are too big for all local options and too small for the Ricoh. We are probably going to have to suck it up and pay more than we need to at the Ricoh and try and get up.

We don't need to be Championship contenders. A promotion season would more than likely put us at a level of attendances where the Ricoh is sustainable. Once you're there it's a lottery really, but income and exposure goes up. You can't look to the ten years we were on the slide and getting fucked over as an indicator of what it'd be like after a successful season.

Basically we are in limbo right now. We either need to drop another level so our crowds fit in a smaller stadium, or spend some cash to get up to a level where the Ricoh is viable.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

That is answering the question. There is nothing comparable between us and West Ham. Including the owners. We can look to them for inspiration though. They have a rental agreement that gives them access to revenues including naming rights. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own rental negotiation's? They have forward thinking owners who saved the club from the edge of disaster by investing. Why can't we use that as a blueprint in our own situation? Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it isn't an answer.

SISU will kill the club long before any of the other "enemies" so therefore should be our priority. If you can't see that then I don't know what else to say to you.

There is nothing comparable between us and West Ham. Yet you consistently state we should get a deal like West Hams. It can't be used as we are tenants to another sporting club who require the revenue to pay the bonds back, as I have already said. I would suggest you don't like the answer that Wasps won't give us access to revenue as they need it themselves, far easier for you to just say SISU.

Why will SISU kill the club and their investment, thus crystalizing their losses? Wasps, on the other hand would kill competition for peoples money whilst not losing too much income as we only pay 100k rent and don't bring in much F & B. The club is dying, SISU will kill it, is over dramatic nonsense.

 

[stupot07]

Also how will he get £5m just from ticket sales on 10,000 like he says? We turned over less than that in total didn't we last accounts?

IIRC our largest ticket income in thr last 10-15 years was in our first season at thr Ricoh averaging over 21k with cup games was about £5.2m. In our last accounts ticket income/match reciepts with c10k plus cup games was £1.8m in fact our entire turnover was only £4.7m yet Simon Jordan thinks we should get £5m ticket income from 10k fans.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

IIRC our largest ticket income in thr last 10-15 years was in our first season at thr Ricoh averaging over 21k with cup games was about £5.2m. In our last accounts ticket income/match reciepts with c10k plus cup games was £1.8m in fact our entire turnover was only £4.7m yet Simon Jordan thinks we should get £5m ticket income from 10k fans.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

The fans wouldn't be too happy with the price increase then?

 

[Moff]

For the usual few on here not going to Chesterfield this will keep them busy trying to defend SISU's absurb position. .

Who the fuck is defending SISU.

I am not going to Chesterfield. Apologies my 11 year old daughter is playing academy football in Staffordshire and its a bit far for her to walk, if that's ok with you. :banghead:

 

[shmmeee]

IIRC our largest ticket income in thr last 10-15 years was in our first season at thr Ricoh averaging over 21k with cup games was about £5.2m. In our last accounts ticket income/match reciepts with c10k plus cup games was £1.8m in fact our entire turnover was only £4.7m yet Simon Jordan thinks we should get £5m ticket income from 10k fans.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Not antagonising, genuine question.

What do you reckon our crowds would be if we were top 6 all season?

 

[Moff]

Has there been any club ever who's fan's have purchased enough tickets to pay for a premier league push? How much would ticket prices need to be to do that? How big would a grounds capacity have to be to do that?

Blackpool, or did the Oystons invest millions?

Not every club gets to the Premier League investing shit loads of cash, but it does help.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

I havent bothered reading this thread yet.
But I'm guessing, has Nick tried to smear Simon Jordan yet??

 

[Nick]

Not antagonising, genuine question.

What do you reckon our crowds would be if we were top 6 all season?

I reckon it would be 12-13 for a couple of months, 13-15 and then 17-19 if it looks bang on to win and then play offs would shoot up for the occasion.

 

[Nick]

I havent bothered reading this thread yet.
But I'm guessing, has Nick tried to smear Simon Jordan yet??

Read the thread, there are some interesting points using actual facts. You might learn something instead of making shit up to suit.

 

[Skybluefaz]

Blackpool, or did the Oystons invest millions?

Not every club gets to the Premier League investing shit loads of cash, but it does help.

That was more everything going just right wasn't it? Like Leicester winning the premier league last season and Yeovil getting into the championship the other season

 

[shmmeee]

I reckon it would be 12-13 for a couple of months, 13-15 and then 17-19 if it looks bang on to win and then play offs would shoot up for the occasion.

So an average of about 15k. Would that be enough?

 

[Nick]

So an average of about 15k. Would that be enough?

To get £5m?

I guess it depends on ticket prices.