Thanks for that Steve. I'm still completely confused about the Harman bid and what went on and what the problem was. Can either side make a statement that makes sense? As for my seat it was safe and as for crisps as I recall I ws responding to someone else's crisp complaint and kept running with it for (diminishing) comic effect. For the record I am in my unbroken seat in plenty of time to purchase crisps. If I wanted them. Which to be honest. I don't.??
@Chris said: @marlowchair Why would you praise the club for bringing in more revenue from change shirt sponsorship through smart off the field activity (which has been one of the key themes you post about) when instead you could turn it into a criticism about communication? Sure makes me think you are a neutral observer just interested in the facts.
I am indeed an neutral observer and you make a really good point. The extra money from Bringing in a change shirt sponsor is not new , that was done I believe 2 or 3 seasons ago ?
Communicating it off the cuff in such an inflated and boastful way the like of which politicians who are butchering a brexit campaign do daily is my point and why I say the behaviour makes Theresa May look competent.
@Steve_Peart said: @marlowchair, just to clarify as I didn't make it clear. MD said that the combined value of home and away shirt sponsorship would be nearly double the previous highest combined value. Presumably you still disagree with that claim.
MD has also stood in those meetings and promised many things would change and improve over the past 2 years under his watch and guidance.
@mooneyman said:
You can categorically confirm that Marlow's claims regarding the shirt sponsorship are false then Mr Parry? As the self-professed expert on all WWFC matters, your response would be helpful to us poor mortals to get the true picture of the situation.
You really should read posts more carefully before commenting. I can’t categorically confirm or deny his/her claims nor did I try to. I pointed out the irony of someone who has made so many unproven accusations himself then accusing club officials of blatantly false claims and propaganda.
I have never professed to be an expert on all WWFC matters, unlike some posters who claim to have insider knowledge.
So many unproven claims, like when I told you a loan had been taken using Adams Park as security in direct breach of or model rules
Or that there was another bidder who hadn’t been given the time of day 12 months ago ...
Both which you denied and accused me of making things up and tried to discredit me until you were positively seething with rage.
The comedy is gold when you open your mouth, thanks for the entertainment as always.
@marlowchair am I right in thinking your view is sack the board get new excellent people in place and more efficient management will.mean we don't need outside investment? Serious question.
@mooneyman said:
You can categorically confirm that Marlow's claims regarding the shirt sponsorship are false then Mr Parry? As the self-professed expert on all WWFC matters, your response would be helpful to us poor mortals to get the true picture of the situation.
You really should read posts more carefully before commenting. I can’t categorically confirm or deny his/her claims nor did I try to. I pointed out the irony of someone who has made so many unproven accusations himself then accusing club officials of blatantly false claims and propaganda.
I have never professed to be an expert on all WWFC matters, unlike some posters who claim to have insider knowledge.
So many unproven claims, like when I told you a loan had been taken using Adams Park as security in direct breach of or model rules
Or that there was another bidder who hadn’t been given the time of day 12 months ago ...
Both which you denied and accused me of making things up and tried to discredit me until you were positively seething with rage.
The comedy is gold when you open your mouth, thanks for the entertainment as always.
Is there any chance that you could actually get your facts right when throwing accusations around? I did not deny that a loan had been taken out, I said that I had no knowledge of it happening. Equally, I had no initial knowledge of an alternative bid although one did subsequently materialise only to be withdrawn.
@mooneyman said:
You can categorically confirm that Marlow's claims regarding the shirt sponsorship are false then Mr Parry? As the self-professed expert on all WWFC matters, your response would be helpful to us poor mortals to get the true picture of the situation.
You really should read posts more carefully before commenting. I can’t categorically confirm or deny his/her claims nor did I try to. I pointed out the irony of someone who has made so many unproven accusations himself then accusing club officials of blatantly false claims and propaganda.
I have never professed to be an expert on all WWFC matters, unlike some posters who claim to have insider knowledge.
So many unproven claims, like when I told you a loan had been taken using Adams Park as security in direct breach of or model rules
Or that there was another bidder who hadn’t been given the time of day 12 months ago ...
Both which you denied and accused me of making things up and tried to discredit me until you were positively seething with rage.
The comedy is gold when you open your mouth, thanks for the entertainment as always.
Is there any chance that you could actually get your facts right when throwing accusations around? I did not deny that a loan had been taken out, I said that I had no knowledge of it happening. Equally, I had no initial knowledge of an alternative bid although one did subsequently materialise only to be withdrawn.
Withdrawn AFTER it was dismissed by the board.
There are a lot of posts suggesting Harman pulled the plug leaving the Americans a clear path during the Board’s deliberations. I can’t find any evidence in support of this view.
@Wendoverman said: @marlowchair am I right in thinking your view is sack the board get new excellent people in place and more efficient management will.mean we don't need outside investment? Serious question.
Yes.
By definition even the board and Americans suggest that a huge part of their plan is “getting the right people in place and better management and operations” in place , in order to alter the yearly losses.
So we have a ridiculous scenario where a club that at the end of 2017 was close to trading at a break even capacity, having battled and worked hard to get there, having the benefit of also having paid off its major debt so would no longer have the burden ( cash flow burden ) of servicing it ....having lost the input of two or three key high level performers who were making that difference, runs of a downward slide for 18 months at an alarming rate , racks up new debts to cover their failings , and tells members that the only possible way to survive is to sell the club , losing control of it totally, to a couple of “ good guys “ who will bring expertise and key personnel to set things right and run the club well ...
We conceded we couldn’t organise a basic kiosk food service on matchdays so sold that part of our farm off to wash our hands of it ... how well has that worked out ? At least prior it was bang average at best but we got the margin into our club coffers... now it’s as bad as ever but a contractor takes whatever margin there is.... genius.
The club sale is exactly the same scenario but with he entire box and dice now.
We have conceded that under he current board and management we can’t run a sustainable football club so are selling it to someone else who says they can . It’s that simple.
The fact is 2-3-4 years ago we could run a sustainable club and did.
@Wendoverman said: @marlowchair am I right in thinking your view is sack the board get new excellent people in place and more efficient management will.mean we don't need outside investment? Serious question.
Aren't the new excellent people intended to be the Americans and wasn't their aim to make the club self sufficient? By implication, surely this means we are currently being run inefficiently?
@marlowchair said:
So we have a ridiculous scenario where a club that at the end of 2017 was close to trading at a break even capacity, having battled and worked hard to get there, having the benefit of also having paid off its major debt so would no longer have the burden ( cash flow burden ) of servicing it
Is this the story that is told by the year-on-year figures in the accounts? I know there was messaging alongside the accounts which seemed to suggest we were heading towards stability (presumably for the benefit of potential lenders and purchasers), but was this ever really the case?
We conceded we couldn’t organise a basic kiosk food service on matchdays so sold that part of our farm off to wash our hands of it ... how well has that worked out ? At least prior it was bang average at best but we got the margin into our club coffers... now it’s as bad as ever but a contractor takes whatever margin there is.... genius.
Presumably the contractors are paying the club a fee to be given the opportunity to deliver the service, and that is where the income now comes from? That is how I'd expect the model to work (and how shirt sales works too I think?), although I have no knowledge of the deal in this case.
We have conceded that under he current board and management we can’t run a sustainable football club so are selling it to someone else who says they can . It’s that simple.
I do agree with you here - it's nearly impossible to run a sustainable lower league football club. The current trust are unable to, and the new owners won't be able to either. I don't know how football has ended up in this situation, and I don't know how long it can go on for.
The fact is 2-3-4 years ago we could run a sustainable club and did.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Thanks for the update @Steve_Peart . The season ticket launch was poor with not enough time given to people budgeting the high one off cost. To lose the seat you might have sat in for years because of it is not a good enough service from the club.
This is exactly what a Fans Council should be able to stop happening but if the club don't include them early enough in the process I am not sure what be done.
If the need for cash was that desperate I wonder why the two year season ticket was not put forward again.
Totally agree, I'd have said the end of May was a fair date, not two months before. Think there will be a lot of people leaving it till the last minute in the hope that the club changes their mind.
ST renewal decision certainly took me by surprise at a very tricky time...having to juggle finances and still not sure I will have the money. (I don't like buying on HP)
@Wendoverman said:
ST renewal decision certainly took me by surprise at a very tricky time...having to juggle finances and still not sure I will have the money. (I don't like buying on HP)
Stick £20 on us to beat Oxford 4-0 and your home and dry with season ticket renewal.
@DevC - This is NOT my prediction for your competition
Thanks for the tip @mooneyman does that mean you've got the pre-match team catering contract for that game? ('Course the chicken has been thoroughly cooked!')
Today the club have sent out a reminder email to STHs who haven't renewed yet, still saying that "your place is reserved for you until this date" (31 March). So no change as yet on allowing you to keep your seat(s) if you cannot afford to renew by then, or on extending the early bird deadline as the Fans' Council have requested.
Thanks Steve. What a poor way to treat your most loyal fans purely in the quest for cash.
That cash could have been considered almost guaranteed under normal deadlines but now they run the risk of losing a section altogether.
Changing the deadline now would be pathetic too.
Damage is done now @eric_plant
Extending the deadline would help me but it would make mugs of those who took it at face value.
For what it is worth I think they will extend the deadline as the 'discounted' price is the perceived value for many and the full price is seen as expensive as a result.
Trouble is I can't risk losing my seat and the clu are using that to get cash.
Also in the STH reminder email: "Head to our website for full details, including the price table, different ways to buy your season ticket, and our pledge that we'll offer a full refund before June 30th if you change your mind over the summer."
The bigger issue for me at the moment is that, even though I've had no problem in the past being able to purchase cup match tickets online, the system won't let me renew my existing season ticket seat by this method. It'll only let me buy one for an unallocated seat! Anyone else had this problem? I've raised the issue with the club, as I did last year when the same thing happened, but have not had a reply.
I did mine online easily enough - log in to the ticket website and then go to "INVOICES / RESERVATIONS" at the top under Orders. Should have your specific seat in there which you can click through on to buy.
@FmG doesn't work for me I'm afraid, as my specific seat is not shown. It shows my past orders, but not my STH seat - possibly because I've never previously purchased it online.
@marlowchair said:
So we have a ridiculous scenario where a club that at the end of 2017 was close to trading at a break even capacity, having battled and worked hard to get there, having the benefit of also having paid off its major debt so would no longer have the burden ( cash flow burden ) of servicing it
Is this the story that is told by the year-on-year figures in the accounts? I know there was messaging alongside the accounts which seemed to suggest we were heading towards stability (presumably for the benefit of potential lenders and purchasers), but was this ever really the case?
We conceded we couldn’t organise a basic kiosk food service on matchdays so sold that part of our farm off to wash our hands of it ... how well has that worked out ? At least prior it was bang average at best but we got the margin into our club coffers... now it’s as bad as ever but a contractor takes whatever margin there is.... genius.
Presumably the contractors are paying the club a fee to be given the opportunity to deliver the service, and that is where the income now comes from? That is how I'd expect the model to work (and how shirt sales works too I think?), although I have no knowledge of the deal in this case.
We have conceded that under he current board and management we can’t run a sustainable football club so are selling it to someone else who says they can . It’s that simple.
I do agree with you here - it's nearly impossible to run a sustainable lower league football club. The current trust are unable to, and the new owners won't be able to either. I don't know how football has ended up in this situation, and I don't know how long it can go on for.
The fact is 2-3-4 years ago we could run a sustainable club and did.
I disagree.
But we did under Howard at his peak day to day influence 2015-2017 he club made his strides. The Leeds mid week friendly cashed in big money , kiosks were open and edible without being brilliant, sponsorship boomed with Origin Global , utilita , cherry red , bmi health , Wycombe leisure , Lords etc all coming in.
The club was moving in a great direction in improving its bottom line as reducing costs and growing revenue.
Re point on catering , the new arrangement sees he club give 50% of poor profit away to he caterer. Before we kept 100% of the poor profit .
There’s been no change , no upgrades, no better matchday experience .
Comments
Thanks for that Steve. I'm still completely confused about the Harman bid and what went on and what the problem was. Can either side make a statement that makes sense? As for my seat it was safe and as for crisps as I recall I ws responding to someone else's crisp complaint and kept running with it for (diminishing) comic effect. For the record I am in my unbroken seat in plenty of time to purchase crisps. If I wanted them. Which to be honest. I don't.??
Why is @marlowchair not in charge? He needs to get Andy Harman sorted out for when the yanks lose the vote.
I suspect that if the Americans do go through with a bid and fail, they will look to take a minority stake as per the Harman model.
I believe they've said in a previous meeting that it's a majority stake or nothing
I am indeed an neutral observer and you make a really good point. The extra money from Bringing in a change shirt sponsor is not new , that was done I believe 2 or 3 seasons ago ?
Communicating it off the cuff in such an inflated and boastful way the like of which politicians who are butchering a brexit campaign do daily is my point and why I say the behaviour makes Theresa May look competent.
MD has also stood in those meetings and promised many things would change and improve over the past 2 years under his watch and guidance.
So many unproven claims, like when I told you a loan had been taken using Adams Park as security in direct breach of or model rules
Or that there was another bidder who hadn’t been given the time of day 12 months ago ...
Both which you denied and accused me of making things up and tried to discredit me until you were positively seething with rage.
The comedy is gold when you open your mouth, thanks for the entertainment as always.
@marlowchair am I right in thinking your view is sack the board get new excellent people in place and more efficient management will.mean we don't need outside investment? Serious question.
Is there any chance that you could actually get your facts right when throwing accusations around? I did not deny that a loan had been taken out, I said that I had no knowledge of it happening. Equally, I had no initial knowledge of an alternative bid although one did subsequently materialise only to be withdrawn.
Withdrawn AFTER it was dismissed by the board.
There are a lot of posts suggesting Harman pulled the plug leaving the Americans a clear path during the Board’s deliberations. I can’t find any evidence in support of this view.
And you could try to be less insulting, but I know that is unlikely to change!
Yes.
By definition even the board and Americans suggest that a huge part of their plan is “getting the right people in place and better management and operations” in place , in order to alter the yearly losses.
So we have a ridiculous scenario where a club that at the end of 2017 was close to trading at a break even capacity, having battled and worked hard to get there, having the benefit of also having paid off its major debt so would no longer have the burden ( cash flow burden ) of servicing it ....having lost the input of two or three key high level performers who were making that difference, runs of a downward slide for 18 months at an alarming rate , racks up new debts to cover their failings , and tells members that the only possible way to survive is to sell the club , losing control of it totally, to a couple of “ good guys “ who will bring expertise and key personnel to set things right and run the club well ...
We conceded we couldn’t organise a basic kiosk food service on matchdays so sold that part of our farm off to wash our hands of it ... how well has that worked out ? At least prior it was bang average at best but we got the margin into our club coffers... now it’s as bad as ever but a contractor takes whatever margin there is.... genius.
The club sale is exactly the same scenario but with he entire box and dice now.
We have conceded that under he current board and management we can’t run a sustainable football club so are selling it to someone else who says they can . It’s that simple.
The fact is 2-3-4 years ago we could run a sustainable club and did.
Sad times and utterly avoidable.
Aren't the new excellent people intended to be the Americans and wasn't their aim to make the club self sufficient? By implication, surely this means we are currently being run inefficiently?
Is this the story that is told by the year-on-year figures in the accounts? I know there was messaging alongside the accounts which seemed to suggest we were heading towards stability (presumably for the benefit of potential lenders and purchasers), but was this ever really the case?
Presumably the contractors are paying the club a fee to be given the opportunity to deliver the service, and that is where the income now comes from? That is how I'd expect the model to work (and how shirt sales works too I think?), although I have no knowledge of the deal in this case.
I do agree with you here - it's nearly impossible to run a sustainable lower league football club. The current trust are unable to, and the new owners won't be able to either. I don't know how football has ended up in this situation, and I don't know how long it can go on for.
I disagree.
Totally agree, I'd have said the end of May was a fair date, not two months before. Think there will be a lot of people leaving it till the last minute in the hope that the club changes their mind.
ST renewal decision certainly took me by surprise at a very tricky time...having to juggle finances and still not sure I will have the money. (I don't like buying on HP)
Stick £20 on us to beat Oxford 4-0 and your home and dry with season ticket renewal.
@DevC - This is NOT my prediction for your competition
Thanks for the tip @mooneyman does that mean you've got the pre-match team catering contract for that game? ('Course the chicken has been thoroughly cooked!')
Today the club have sent out a reminder email to STHs who haven't renewed yet, still saying that "your place is reserved for you until this date" (31 March). So no change as yet on allowing you to keep your seat(s) if you cannot afford to renew by then, or on extending the early bird deadline as the Fans' Council have requested.
Thanks Steve. What a poor way to treat your most loyal fans purely in the quest for cash.
That cash could have been considered almost guaranteed under normal deadlines but now they run the risk of losing a section altogether.
Changing the deadline now would be pathetic too.
So you think it's not right, but you also don't want them to change it?
Damage is done now @eric_plant
Extending the deadline would help me but it would make mugs of those who took it at face value.
For what it is worth I think they will extend the deadline as the 'discounted' price is the perceived value for many and the full price is seen as expensive as a result.
Trouble is I can't risk losing my seat and the clu are using that to get cash.
Extending deadlines on offers isn't exactly unheard of, I don't see the problem in WW doing so.
They should definitely extend it. March is ridiculously early
Particularly when we don't know which division we'll be playing in (which was part of the decision making process I suspect)
We don't know what division we will be in...and a decision about who will be running the joint may not have been settled!
Also in the STH reminder email: "Head to our website for full details, including the price table, different ways to buy your season ticket, and our pledge that we'll offer a full refund before June 30th if you change your mind over the summer."
The bigger issue for me at the moment is that, even though I've had no problem in the past being able to purchase cup match tickets online, the system won't let me renew my existing season ticket seat by this method. It'll only let me buy one for an unallocated seat! Anyone else had this problem? I've raised the issue with the club, as I did last year when the same thing happened, but have not had a reply.
I did mine online easily enough - log in to the ticket website and then go to "INVOICES / RESERVATIONS" at the top under Orders. Should have your specific seat in there which you can click through on to buy.
@FmG doesn't work for me I'm afraid, as my specific seat is not shown. It shows my past orders, but not my STH seat - possibly because I've never previously purchased it online.
But we did under Howard at his peak day to day influence 2015-2017 he club made his strides. The Leeds mid week friendly cashed in big money , kiosks were open and edible without being brilliant, sponsorship boomed with Origin Global , utilita , cherry red , bmi health , Wycombe leisure , Lords etc all coming in.
The club was moving in a great direction in improving its bottom line as reducing costs and growing revenue.
Re point on catering , the new arrangement sees he club give 50% of poor profit away to he caterer. Before we kept 100% of the poor profit .
There’s been no change , no upgrades, no better matchday experience .
What a crock of a deal