Basil Fawlty wrote:Far to simplistic- what about the issues surrounding the time when FC muppet Willby tried to bury the club. Sorry but to blame it on Hudge is pathetic.
Wait until Aunty Kath and the pork butchers call in the loans and FC will be without a paddle. It's funny how FC fans have more of an opinion than us Rovers fans!
lloyd got it wrong and was rightly vilified for it
Jake the Peg wrote:We're masive compared to you mate
In your tiny mind perhaps, ("We're massive compared to you") but then again,you probably still believe in father christmas and the fairies. I hope the realities dont hit you to hard when eventualy, you learn neither of the above are realy true but just simply figments of your imagination, now run along son and dont forget to leave the mince pie under the christmas tree
Last edited by Seventies red on Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Joined: Jan 15 2007 Posts: 11924 Location: Secret Hill Top Lair. V.2
I'm liking this new side to Seventies red, he used to be all conciliatory and diplomatic. Now he's WHAMMO! KAPOW! SCREEWALLOP!
Great work.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle.
Joined: Sep 18 2005 Posts: 8742 Location: 2017 City of Culture
Big Dave T wrote:and as i said earlier in this thread, thats entirely the right approach. The issue Rovers will have to content with though is the number of fans that may decide not to bother coming if the side on the pitch isn't as good due to running at a lower player cost to build your new stand etc. Could be that the income drops in relation to this and further adds to Rovers financial troubles.
Thats always a possiblity. The trouble with growing a fanbase rapidly, is that true loyalty (the sort that will put up with year after year of under-acheivement) takes a few years to become ingrained. However, its been established that Rovers gate money only makes up approx 35% of income. If gates were to drop to say 7,000 (we averaged more than this in 2007 when we only managed 3 home wins all season) that represents an 18% drop in gate numbers, which would only be a drop of 6% of total revenue. I would expect our outgoings to be slashed by much more than this figure by the 2011 season.
Lets be sure, there is not always a direct correlation between wages and quality. In 08 our centre pairing of Walker & Webster would have been costing us 200K (probably thereabouts). By 2011 it could be Weham & Ratu at a fraction of that cost. They would hopefully be capable of more quality than our 2008 centres.
The Goroka Gene-ius wrote:Thats always a possiblity. The trouble with growing a fanbase rapidly, is that true loyalty (the sort that will put up with year after year of under-acheivement) takes a few years to become ingrained. However, its been established that Rovers gate money only makes up approx 35% of income. If gates were to drop to say 7,000 (we averaged more than this in 2007 when we only managed 3 home wins all season) that represents an 18% drop in gate numbers, which would only be a drop of 6% of total revenue. I would expect our outgoings to be slashed by much more than this figure by the 2011 season.
Lets be sure, there is not always a direct correlation between wages and quality. In 08 our centre pairing of Walker & Webster would have been costing us 200K (probably thereabouts). By 2011 it could be Weham & Ratu at a fraction of that cost. They would hopefully be capable of more quality than our 2008 centres.
All good points. Didnt realise your income from gates were only 35% too, guess Hudge would prefer that to be up around 50-60%
Big Dave T wrote:All good points. Didnt realise your income from gates were only 35% too, guess Hudge would prefer that to be up around 50-60%
Surely our Chairman would rather our income from gates increased in monetry tems but remained the same as a percentage of our income, or even decreased?
R.B.A wrote:Surely our Chairman would rather our income from gates increased in monetry tems but remained the same as a percentage of our income, or even decreased?
Dont think so. Im pretty sure your chairman would rather your gates increase as a percentage of your income to reduce the percentage of your income that comes from cash investments from your money men. Ideally the money men would put nothing in with your gates been 50% and your sponsorship and other revenue streams making up the remaining 50%. 35% is too low but that is linked to your gates which are linked to your relatively low ground capacity. I guess Hudge is thinking that by changing the capacity the gates will go up meaning the % income from gates goes up too.
Seventies red wrote:In your tiny mind perhaps, ("We're massive compared to you") but then again,you probably still believe in father christmas and the fairies. I hope the realities dont hit you to hard when eventualy, you learn neither of the above are realy true but just simply figments of your imagination, now run along son and dont forget to leave the mince pie under the christmas tree
We are massive compared to you. Leeds turn over 10 million a year, Rovers didn't get a point on the franchise application for turning over 4 million. I don't know the figures but would guess that if Leeds turn 10 million we wont be far behind, with your less than 4 million thats makes us massive compared to you
Thank you Adam Pearson for giving the faithful hope
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
