|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 10, 2016 12:03:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Feb 10, 2016 12:18:02 GMT
Good efforts Malcolm despite what some people on the oatcake will have you believe, this is really getting noticed in the media right and the supporters are putting pressure in the right places.
The time is now
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 10, 2016 12:19:18 GMT
To be fair Malcolm, aren't Stoke doing the same as EVERYBODY else (bar Watford with conditions)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2016 12:22:34 GMT
Hard to understand Malcolm why they adopt this no comment stance. The supporters should be aware of what's happening. This is football, the peoples game. It is not the bloody Freemasons!. Same with all this undisclosed transfer fee bollocks and the secret society that is the refs union.
|
|
|
|
Post by Theninjabadger on Feb 10, 2016 12:24:52 GMT
To be fair Malcolm, aren't Stoke doing the same as EVERYBODY else (bar Watford with conditions)?
Not every club. Everyone's favourite club Arsenal openly admitted to not wanting to cap prices |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 10, 2016 12:25:47 GMT
To be fair Malcolm, aren't Stoke doing the same as EVERYBODY else (bar Watford with conditions)?
Not every club. Everyone's favourite club Arsenal openly admitted to not wanting to cap prices
Malcolm was complaining about the ones that "wouldn't say" fella.
There must be a reason why they all collectively wouldn't say, a bit harsh to single out Stoke City, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokesaint1 on Feb 10, 2016 12:36:07 GMT
Now here's a question for you. The phone rings and the voice at the other end claims to be from some high powered organisation or other and asks you to take part in a survey concerning your income and outgoings. Is your answer, certainly here are all the answers you want, or a polite I don't take part in surveys, or more likely it's sod off, or words to that effect. I know what mine is. Sorry guys, I think the Stoke answer is spot on.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 10, 2016 12:40:43 GMT
I think that the responses tell you that the issue of prices is firmly on the table but the people who run football clubs have instead booked a table at Claridge's and supporters can fuck off.........unless they have Claridge"s money that is.
Nothing will change I'm afraid until people stop (to use a Premier League word) consuming.
|
|
|
|
Post by JetBlack on Feb 10, 2016 13:14:59 GMT
My guess would be that the last thing Clubs want is transparency. Look at the 'undisclosed fees' after every transfer window. I wouldn't be surprised in any way if a away ticket price cap is voted down. There's a HUGE trough coming and Clubs already have their backsides in the air, readying themselves to stick their noses into it as deeply as possible. The long suffering fan is there to be milked, and we go along with it with the possibly misguided thought that the money we spend on pies, beer, programmes etc is helping our club out in some way. Everything is overpriced, £2.70 for a pie or such like, when the same thing can be bought outside of football stadia for less than a quid?
We do this in the mistaken notion the 'our Club' loves us, it doesn't, it loves our money and wants as much of it as it can get.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 10, 2016 13:23:05 GMT
Now here's a question for you. The phone rings and the voice at the other end claims to be from some high powered organisation or other and asks you to take part in a survey concerning your income and outgoings. Is your answer, certainly here are all the answers you want, or a polite I don't take part in surveys, or more likely it's sod off, or words to that effect. I know what mine is. Sorry guys, I think the Stoke answer is spot on. I don't think that personal income and outgoings are at all comparable with a football club, which is part of the cultural heritage of its community and relies upon the supporters, answering a simple question about its views on an issue which is of great interest and concern to its supporters and those of other clubs. The more so since both the Chairman and the CEO have taken to the airwaves in the last couple of days talking about importance of keeping football affordable. This is a potential PR win for the club, and I find the response a little mystifying. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Feb 10, 2016 13:25:35 GMT
Malcolm, did you see Patrick Barclay's piece on the 'twenty plenty' campaign in last nights Evening Standard? Too moderateHe says you are too moderate by only backing away fans with the campaign. I must admit I read it twice and I am not convinced he quite gets it? You can't charge more for equivalent seats for home and away fans can you, so if away fans win then home fans win too, at least pay on the day folks do. Or is it me that doesn't get it  |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 10, 2016 13:38:36 GMT
Malcolm, did you see Patrick Barclay's piece on the 'twenty plenty' campaign in last nights Evening Standard? Too moderateHe says you are too moderate by only backing away fans with the campaign. I must admit I read it twice and I am not convinced he quite gets it? You can't charge more for equivalent seats for home and away fans can you, so if away fans win then home fans win too, at least pay on the day folks do. Or is it me that doesn't get it At present pay by the game home fans and away fans must be charged the same for the same standard of seats. If twenty's plenty was introduced for away fans I assume the rule would be scrapped to allow a differential between home and away tickets. |
|
|
|
Post by stokesaint1 on Feb 10, 2016 13:38:40 GMT
Now here's a question for you. The phone rings and the voice at the other end claims to be from some high powered organisation or other and asks you to take part in a survey concerning your income and outgoings. Is your answer, certainly here are all the answers you want, or a polite I don't take part in surveys, or more likely it's sod off, or words to that effect. I know what mine is. Sorry guys, I think the Stoke answer is spot on. I don't think that personal income and outgoings are at all comparable with a football club, which is part of the cultural heritage of its community and relies upon the supporters, answering a simple question about its views on an issue which is of great interest and concern to its supporters and those of other clubs. The more so since both the Chairman and the CEO have taken to the airwaves in the last couple of days talking about importance of keeping football affordable. This is a potential PR win for the club, and I find the response a little mystifying. Malcolm, this is exactly the point. They will discuss it and have discussed it and have been brand leaders in keeping football affordable, in comparison to many other clubs. What they are not prepared to do is take part in surveys and I applaud that. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 10, 2016 13:45:30 GMT
I don't think that personal income and outgoings are at all comparable with a football club, which is part of the cultural heritage of its community and relies upon the supporters, answering a simple question about its views on an issue which is of great interest and concern to its supporters and those of other clubs. The more so since both the Chairman and the CEO have taken to the airwaves in the last couple of days talking about importance of keeping football affordable. This is a potential PR win for the club, and I find the response a little mystifying. Malcolm, this is exactly the point. They will discuss it and have discussed it and have been brand leaders in keeping football affordable, in comparison to many other clubs. What they are not prepared to do is take part in surveys and I applaud that. Do you refuse to take part in the 10 year census by the Government? |
|
|
|
Post by The Stubborn Optimist on Feb 10, 2016 14:00:40 GMT
I don't think that personal income and outgoings are at all comparable with a football club, which is part of the cultural heritage of its community and relies upon the supporters, answering a simple question about its views on an issue which is of great interest and concern to its supporters and those of other clubs. The more so since both the Chairman and the CEO have taken to the airwaves in the last couple of days talking about importance of keeping football affordable. This is a potential PR win for the club, and I find the response a little mystifying. Malcolm, this is exactly the point. They will discuss it and have discussed it and have been brand leaders in keeping football affordable, in comparison to many other clubs. What they are not prepared to do is take part in surveys and I applaud that. I agree. Some seem to overlook the fact that Stoke City is a commercial enterprise, owned and managed by some very commercially astute business people. It isn't a public body run by a committee. Apart from complying with relevant corporate governance requirements the owners/board of directors are free disclose as much, or as little, information as they wish. If anyone wishes to lecture a self made multi millionaire, owner of a world renowned enterprise, on how to run their business please feel free to do so. I'm far more concerned about what's going to happen on Saturday than whether the club have responded to some random survey. I'd prefer the 3 points at Bournemouth rather than winning the PR star of the week award. |
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Feb 10, 2016 14:13:38 GMT
Like it or not Football is entertainment/service industry and the primary customers are the TV Companies with the fans a distant second. As the relative contribution to stadium revenue to the total turnover goes down the power of the fans goes down. Empty seats and poor atmosphere at the ground will get the owners attention. Black out of 3 o'clock kick-off is arguably one of the main things that keeps the seats full. I wonder what attendance would be at the Brit if the match were on the TV? Especially when we are in slump. Not saying I like it, or it's right - just stating my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 10, 2016 14:35:38 GMT
Malcolm, this is exactly the point. They will discuss it and have discussed it and have been brand leaders in keeping football affordable, in comparison to many other clubs. What they are not prepared to do is take part in surveys and I applaud that. I agree. Some seem to overlook the fact that Stoke City is a commercial enterprise, owned and managed by some very commercially astute business people. It isn't a public body run by a committee. Apart from complying with relevant corporate governance requirements the owners/board of directors are free disclose as much, or as little, information as they wish. If anyone wishes to lecture a self made multi millionaire, owner of a world renowned enterprise, on how to run their business please feel free to do so. I'm far more concerned about what's going to happen on Saturday than whether the club have responded to some random survey. I'd prefer the 3 points at Bournemouth rather than winning the PR star of the week. It's not a question of "lecturing" the owner (who incidentally himself went on radio 5 yesterday to talk about the issue), but commenting on the club declining to answer a question about their support for a specific proposal which we know was put before a PL meeting, and take an opportunity to showcase what they have done to keep football affordable. Football clubs are not just like other commercial enterprises. That's a significant part of the point. I'm just surprised that the almost pavlovian resistance to any sort of transparency in football leads to what, in my perception, is a missed PR opportunity for the club. Strangely enough, I too would like 3 points at Bournemouth on Saturday, but I don't see it as being a choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Feb 10, 2016 14:44:43 GMT
I agree. Some seem to overlook the fact that Stoke City is a commercial enterprise, owned and managed by some very commercially astute business people. It isn't a public body run by a committee. Apart from complying with relevant corporate governance requirements the owners/board of directors are free disclose as much, or as little, information as they wish. If anyone wishes to lecture a self made multi millionaire, owner of a world renowned enterprise, on how to run their business please feel free to do so. I'm far more concerned about what's going to happen on Saturday than whether the club have responded to some random survey. I'd prefer the 3 points at Bournemouth rather than winning the PR star of the week. It's not a question of "lecturing" the owner (who incidentally himself went on radio 5 yesterday to talk about the issue), but commenting on the club declining to answer a question about their support for a specific proposal which we know was put before a PL meeting, and take an opportunity to showcase what they have done to keep football affordable. Football clubs are not just like other commercial enterprises. That's a significant part of the point. I'm just surprised that the almost pavlovian resistance to any sort of transparency in football leads to what, in my perception, is a missed PR opportunity for the club. Strangely enough, I too would like 3 points at Bournemouth on Saturday, but I don't see it as being a choice. Perhaps they're under some kind of Premier League 'gag' and would be fined if they spoke out. |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 10, 2016 14:49:06 GMT
Malcolm, did you see Patrick Barclay's piece on the 'twenty plenty' campaign in last nights Evening Standard? Too moderateHe says you are too moderate by only backing away fans with the campaign. I must admit I read it twice and I am not convinced he quite gets it? You can't charge more for equivalent seats for home and away fans can you, so if away fans win then home fans win too, at least pay on the day folks do. Or is it me that doesn't get it At present pay by the game home fans and away fans must be charged the same for the same standard of seats. If twenty's plenty was introduced for away fans I assume the rule would be scrapped to allow a differential between home and away tickets. You may well be right, John. I think Paddy hasn't quite understood the campaign. Nobody is saying that ONLY away fans should benefit. Indeed the Liverpool walk-out was entirely about home prices. It's more about focus and starting points. There are various differences between home and away fans. Away fans - obviously - can't benefit from the discounts in cost per game enjoyed by home season ticket holders, and they don't have access to any consultative forums about prices. And, on the whole, they are the industry's best "customers", because most of them go regularly to home games as well. In other words, they are a good place to start for a national campaign. The need for local campaigns on home prices will vary from club to club, and we will support those who do, such as Liverpool fans |
|
|
|
Post by johnnysoul60 on Feb 10, 2016 15:54:05 GMT
They really are a sad bunch arent they , keep up the good work MC the pressure will bring some concession Im sure but like most of the players they overpay they live on another planet to the supporters
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 10, 2016 16:04:23 GMT
At present pay by the game home fans and away fans must be charged the same for the same standard of seats. If twenty's plenty was introduced for away fans I assume the rule would be scrapped to allow a differential between home and away tickets. You may well be right, John. I think Paddy hasn't quite understood the campaign. Nobody is saying that ONLY away fans should benefit. Indeed the Liverpool walk-out was entirely about home prices. It's more about focus and starting points. There are various differences between home and away fans. Away fans - obviously - can't benefit from the discounts in cost per game enjoyed by home season ticket holders, and they don't have access to any consultative forums about prices. And, on the whole, they are the industry's best "customers", because most of them go regularly to home games as well. In other words, they are a good place to start for a national campaign. The need for local campaigns on home prices will vary from club to club, and we will support those who do, such as Liverpool fans Yes, I understand that Malcolm. Like you I was not sure that Gods (Paddy) did. |
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Feb 10, 2016 16:09:40 GMT
Ticket prices was on sports TV here in Canada last night. FSF got a mention and major focus on the Liverpool walk out. There was even talk about a potential weekend of all fans walking out? How do you sell that to the tourists? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2016 16:12:27 GMT
Now here's a question for you. The phone rings and the voice at the other end claims to be from some high powered organisation or other and asks you to take part in a survey concerning your income and outgoings. Is your answer, certainly here are all the answers you want, or a polite I don't take part in surveys, or more likely it's sod off, or words to that effect. I know what mine is. Sorry guys, I think the Stoke answer is spot on. Agree, actions speak louder than words. Stoke shouldn't feel the need to comment as long as they're being reasonably fair with ticket prices. |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 10, 2016 16:28:28 GMT
Ticket prices was on sports TV here in Canada last night. FSF got a mention and major focus on the Liverpool walk out. There was even talk about a potential weekend of all fans walking out? How do you sell that to the tourists? This is what is needed IMO. Mass boycott of a massive weekend of football like Easter or the opening game of the season. Imagine the horror on the faces of Murdoch et al.......all the money they have showered on PL clubs to provide entertainment and the grounds are empty. No atmospher, no nothing just the hollow sound of boot on ball and a few shouts from players and the dug outs. The goose that lays the golden egg would not be pleased. |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Feb 10, 2016 16:50:14 GMT
Ticket prices was on sports TV here in Canada last night. FSF got a mention and major focus on the Liverpool walk out. There was even talk about a potential weekend of all fans walking out? How do you sell that to the tourists? This is what is needed IMO. Mass boycott of a massive weekend of football like Easter or the opening game of the season. Imagine the horror on the faces of Murdoch et al.......all the money they have showered on PL clubs to provide entertainment and the grounds are empty. No atmospher, no nothing just the hollow sound of boot on ball and a few shouts from players and the dug outs. The goose that lays the golden egg would not be pleased. Would you really like them to withdraw their funding LL |
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Feb 10, 2016 17:14:36 GMT
This is what is needed IMO. Mass boycott of a massive weekend of football like Easter or the opening game of the season. Imagine the horror on the faces of Murdoch et al.......all the money they have showered on PL clubs to provide entertainment and the grounds are empty. No atmospher, no nothing just the hollow sound of boot on ball and a few shouts from players and the dug outs. The goose that lays the golden egg would not be pleased. Would you really like them to withdraw their funding LL And there hangs the dilemma. The Premier League was the holy grail.It took us 16 years to achieve it and having done that we fought and scratched and kicked like wildcats to maintain it. Now we've become a bit complacent, it's ok to say we hate Sky and the Murdoch Empire of Evil but where would the Premier League be without him? And more importantly where would we be without the Premier League and would we like it? |
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Feb 10, 2016 17:22:58 GMT
Malcolm, this is exactly the point. They will discuss it and have discussed it and have been brand leaders in keeping football affordable, in comparison to many other clubs. What they are not prepared to do is take part in surveys and I applaud that. I agree. Some seem to overlook the fact that Stoke City is a commercial enterprise, owned and managed by some very commercially astute business people. It isn't a public body run by a committee. Apart from complying with relevant corporate governance requirements the owners/board of directors are free disclose as much, or as little, information as they wish. If anyone wishes to lecture a self made multi millionaire, owner of a world renowned enterprise, on how to run their business please feel free to do so. I'm far more concerned about what's going to happen on Saturday than whether the club have responded to some random survey. I'd prefer the 3 points at Bournemouth rather than winning the PR star of the week award. you are kind of stating the obvious there. Everyone knows its a private limited business, but you are missing the fact that supporters are not customers in the traditional sense. There is a sense of tribalism and community to all football clubs in England. The legal structures in the UK do not reflect this. In Germany 20% of every club is owned by the supporters and it should also happen here. In the meantime the continual alienation that club owners are doing in The Prem is forcing life-long supporters to actually question the value of their loyalty. Peter Coates and co. would be wise to heed these concerns and formally agree to price freeze/drops for coming years. Just stop paying parasitic Agents so much and profits will not be effected. |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Feb 10, 2016 17:27:58 GMT
Would you really like them to withdraw their funding LL And there hangs the dilemma. The Premier League was the holy grail.It took us 16 years to achieve it and having done that we fought and scratched and kicked like wildcats to maintain it. Now we've become a bit complacent, it's ok to say we hate Sky and the Murdoch Empire of Evil but where would the Premier League be without him? And more importantly where would we be without the Premier League and would we like it? Careful what you wish for springs to mind . It's all very well to blame sky for all that's wrong with football but it's worth remembering we receive £100 m next season from them |
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 10, 2016 17:40:37 GMT
I agree. Some seem to overlook the fact that Stoke City is a commercial enterprise, owned and managed by some very commercially astute business people. It isn't a public body run by a committee. Apart from complying with relevant corporate governance requirements the owners/board of directors are free disclose as much, or as little, information as they wish. If anyone wishes to lecture a self made multi millionaire, owner of a world renowned enterprise, on how to run their business please feel free to do so. I'm far more concerned about what's going to happen on Saturday than whether the club have responded to some random survey. I'd prefer the 3 points at Bournemouth rather than winning the PR star of the week award. you are kind of stating the obvious there. Everyone knows its a private limited business, but you are missing the fact that supporters are not customers in the traditional sense. There is a sense of tribalism and community to all football clubs in England. The legal structures in the UK do not reflect this. In Germany 20% of every club is owned by the supporters and it should also happen here. In the meantime the continual alienation that club owners are doing in The Prem is forcing life-long supporters to actually question the value of their loyalty. Peter Coates and co. would be wise to heed these concerns and formally agree to price freeze/drops for coming years. Just stop paying parasitic Agents so much and profits will not be effected. It's actually 50% in Germany, and I agree with your points. To be fair, I'm sure Peter Coates does 'get it' ( indeed he has said so in the media) which is why I was surprised ( probably a better word than disappointed in the thread title, which I'll change) at the club's unwillingness to do so in the Guardian. As a general point, we would like to see more transparency in clubs' dealings with their supporters - and indeed the recently published 'Expert Working Group' report on supporter engagement from a body set up by the Government has endorsed this. Why are clubs called 'clubs' not 'companies' ? Why isn't it "stoke city football company" - it's because of the history and the fact that they aren't just like other commercial companys. In football if all your competitors go out of business, you haven't got a business, whereas in the normal commercial world, you're laughing. In football fans have a "100% brand loyalty" to use the marketing jargon, which again is unlike other commercial enterprises. |
|
|
|
Post by bogus on Feb 10, 2016 18:39:07 GMT
Didn't I hear Scholes say that it was a secret ballot and the club didn't want to comment simply because of that?
|
|
I will bet my bottom dollar that Stoke were one of the 11/12 clubs who voted in favour of a £30 cap on away prices ( short of 2/3 i.e 14 required to get it through) at last week's meeting, so why not say so ? 
