The club sells tickets to a match for £20. If the team loses, all supporters who attended the match get £10 back. If the team wins, all the supporters that attended the match pay an additional £10.
Seems fair to me. I think the amount supporters pay should be directly related to the performance on the pitch.
So the club could play 23 home games charge everyone £20 ,but lose all the games, meaning they give back half of their seasons gate receipts with presumably lower crowds and no money to keep being competitive! Most ridiculous suggestion ive heard in a long time unless the aim is to close down the club.
Given that we often have runs of games where we dont win in 15 I think this would be a financial disaster for the club. As said above how do you work it for season ticket holders?
I wouldnt want to pay extra because we won ...... I buy the season ticket in the stupid expectation we will in the first place so its included in the price ( so is the reality of losing )
So the club could play 23 home games charge everyone £20 ,but lose all the games, meaning they give back half of their seasons gate receipts with presumably lower crowds and no money to keep being competitive! Most ridiculous suggestion ive heard in a long time unless the aim is to close down the club.
With such an innovative and unworkable idea I welcome Mr Leonard Brody to Sky Blue Talk - any news of the bank account number you want us to pay into to buy the club a player?
How about performance related pay - the players get a basic 25-30% of their wage as standard and only get another 30% for a draw and 100% when they win. That way if we lose all season, at least the club will make money for future transfers!
How about performance related pay - the players get a basic 25-30% of their wage as standard and only get another 30% for a draw and 100% when they win. That way if we lose all season, at least the club will make money for future transfers!
How about performance related pay - the players get a basic 25-30% of their wage as standard and only get another 30% for a draw and 100% when they win. That way if we lose all season, at least the club will make money for future transfers!
I've always thought that players pay should be linked to performance, guess the problem is how you gauge it. You would end up with nobody any good wanting to come here as the rest of the squad isn't up to standard!
Another thing I've often wondered is why you can't sack players? If I don't do my job I will end up getting the push but players can put no effort in and collect a wage with the club not being able to do anything.
The sad truth is that I do not think even if tickets were £5 regardless of results gates would substantially increase. Proprtionately compared to clubs of similar catchment potential (Leicester, Norwich, Forest etc.) we have always had a poorer ratio of supporters. Such is the apathy now (created by the boardroom) and the access issues of the ground there is no real solution. Season tickets are very cheap and yet we still have a poor amount in relative terms.
should try the Hartlepool way , average attendance 1700 so they lowered season tickets to £100 and sold 8000 season tickets. More shirt sales more beer and pies etc sales better atmosphere more intimidating for opposing team and MORE INCOME, Oh well sisu are financial experts
All results should be on the basis of a performance related pay scale. Not for the supporters mind you but for the grossly overpaid footballers who parade themselves on a Saturday afternoon.............or a Friday night, Saturday lunchtime, Sunday lunchtime and afternoon, Monday night (in fact any night that SKY see fit to televise live games).