ASK THE CHAIRMAN - PART 9 - Catering and stadium naming rights

[Sham67]

12 hours ago, room0035 said:

DC should run for parliament he is brilliant at not answering the question asked, why did you bring the catering in house - the steering groups fault, ever fan I know cannot understand why the club got rid of beres.

 

Would we get a sponsorship deal for the stadium, no because of the economic climate but yesterday he was slagging business off for not buying the corporate boxes as the economy changed that much from part 8 to 9.

 

Could Thai foods or John West owned by DC daddy not help his son out with FFP. I would do it if it was my son and I had the cash.

 

As for moving the stadium, spend some money on developing the stadium so we can sit in all the seats we have lost revenue every game because we have 15,000 empty seats even selling them at £10 would get us £150,000 a match FFP sorted over the season not including the match day revenue from food and other from the extra fans.

 

The previous Chairman ended the Beres contract.

[markowl]

12 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

The previous Chairman ended the Beres contract.

 

12 hours ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

Don’t let facts get in the way of a DC bash  

 

[sonofbert2]

The previous one introduced it as well as spending a lot of money on the World Cup plans that everyone here is talking about and giving away the shirt sponsorship to charity in a really nice gesture (even if it was questionable from a business point of view) but later became "soiled" when he told the media we (the club) hadn't paid up.

 

The chairman at that time had a background in IT and successfully sorted out the ticketing system yet failed to produce a half decent club shop website and a bloke who posts on here used to take and upload photos of merchandise that set the standard for theshite we currently put up with.

 

Anyway.......

 

Gi' Beres (but not the proper ones) back.

[markowl]

Owlstalk law.

 

Anyone other than current incumbents are better.

 

E.g.- Strafford, Megson, McGugan etc etc.

 

So boring and predictable.

[sonofbert2]

Owlstalk Motto

 

Words speak louder than actions.

[markowl]

Five top class strikers in the squad.

 

Owlstalk decides a skinny 19 year old with less than 90 minutes under his belt is the answer.

[sonofbert2]

90% of those who wanted to flog Joao close season are the ones posting he is the answer.

 

McGugan was both the answer for some and a Carlos Bat last year. He is currently tearing it up at Northampton after being told to do one by Colin (the same posters' replacement for CC) at Cardiff.

 

Owlstalk at its finest.

 

Home of contradictions and full of oxyMORONS.

[Tamworthowl]

1 hour ago, SiJ said:

Pretty much. 

 

I mean each statement is obviously open to interpretation, but if we are looking to find fault in them inevitably we will. 

 

Out of the 9 or so I’ve read so far, the most provocative was the one about exec boxes i.e., some box holder only wanted it when it was cheap, or words to that affect.

 

Truth be told, the responses have been pretty much what I expected and haven’t told me all that much which I didn’t know or assume. It’s a PR exercise intended to bring a bit of clarity. Those who were expecting Chansiri to concede on certain points or admit he’s been wrong on this or that were always going to be dissapointed. 

 

Perhaps that is why the nitpicking is going on? At no point in part 9 does Chansiri state we’re moving, yet some have reached the conclusion we’re moving next week. 

 

 

 

I wonder if anyone thought to send in a question along the lines: "after nearly three years in charge, what do you regard as your biggest mistake at SWFC?". 

 

Would he have answered? After all, there was a promise to reply to all questions.

[sonofbert2]

1 minute ago, Tamworthowl said:

 

I wonder if anyone thought to send in a question along the lines: "after nearly three years in charge, what do you regard as your biggest mistake at SWFC?". 

 

Would he have answered? After all, there was a promise to reply to all questions.

 

If he reads half the stuff on here he would have probably said, "Not buying Wolves."

[SiJ]

It is a bit odd after all the genuine sh*t we've had to put up with over the years that now all of a sudden people have decided enough is enough.

 

Chansiri isn't perfect (there are things that do concern me, particularly the POTD ticket prices), but his investment has seen us drastically improve within a very short space of time.

 

The club, in so many respects, is in a far better place than it was.

 

 

[markowl]

1 minute ago, SiJ said:

It is a bit odd after all the genuine sh*t we've had to put up with over the years that now all of a sudden people have decided enough is enough.

 

Chansiri isn't perfect (there are things that do concern me, particularly the POTD ticket prices), but his investment has seen us drastically improve within a very short space of time.

 

The club, in so many respects, is in a far better place than it was.

 

 

We've got more than our fair share of mardy, needy fans though these days.

[sonofbert2]

Misery leeches.  Addicted to failure, living in the past, enjoying being big fish in a small pond and having the run of the place.

 

Like the boring bloke who stands in the same corner in the same boozer and can tell the same stories again and again about the old days.  The bloke who moaned about Caffreys then Magners and then fruit flavoured cider and the cocktail menu and slags of the young uns who come in early when they go "down town."

 

The bloke who spends years moaning about the lights, the carpet, the toilets, the bar staff and then goes on one about how nice everything was after the expensive refurbishment.

 

 

[room0035]

13 hours ago, SiJ said:

You don't like the chairman. 

 

We get it. 

Nothing like that mate - every other foreign chairman coming to the championship is here for one reason to get to the riches of the Premier league - to do this they spend a fortune and get the teams up look at Wolves, Leicester, Watford, Bournemouth etc as example of this teams traditionally that were not one of the teams you would expect to be their (Wolves will be this season).

 

These guys have spent the money and the teams have gone up then these chairman reap the rewards or sell the team on. We then get to DC he come in gives Gray £1m to buy a few cheap foreigners then sacks him after he work wonders with the team he had and the signing he made including Lees, Lee, Loovens, Westwood and Hutch and replacing him with a no one journeyman (13 clubs in 15 years) was this done because he was a great manager or because he would do as he was told. I don't know but the first season with the help of Roeder recriuting a good nucleus of players in fessi, Bannan, Hunt, Wallace etc we created a good attacking team that played for each other. Then for the last 18 months the recruitment has been awful and added nothing to the team and the play has become more boring than under Stuart Gray on a sand pit in January but at double the price.

 

The chairman though has financed this by doubling the ticket prices, increase the cost of merchandise and corporate element of the club. Getting fans to pay for 3 year season tickets early or a new low getting fans to loan the club money for three years if we get promoted.

 

In the meantime we have no stadium sponsor, no shirt sponsor except the company making the shirts, no shirts until 10 weeks into the season, no sponsorship except £0.9m put in by the director, no stadium naming rights. The club is basically being run like a shambles but if you read the directors statement he has good processes in place the problem is he is not following any of them. A group of Agents seem to have control over incoming and out going players and have also been allowed to sign up our best young talent then stop them signing for the club.

 

No it is not a case of i don't like him but what he is doing is the same as what has been done at Blackburn, Coventry, Portsmouth, Sunderland and Hull in the last few years and we can all see how well that has turned out.

 

Lets hope for 3 points on Saturday and pushing into the play off over the next few months.

 

 

[room0035]

1 hour ago, Sham67 said:

 

The previous Chairman ended the Beres contract.

I still get one on the way to the match but maybe with the new rules released this week i won't be able to in case i have hid something other than pork in it.

[room0035]

7 hours ago, vulva said:

I think it's been explained on here before that TUF, as PLC, can't just pump money into a football club, as they are accountable to shareholders. And I'm fairly sure they wouldn't approve. 

Understand that but the majority shareholder in Thai food group is DC daddy and he is reportedly worth 100's of millions. If your Son ran a football club and you could help him out would you or not bother.

 

I would like to think if it was me i would.

 

In the same way all the other deals in place for places like the Ethihad (a company owned by their chairman and shareholders)

 

Below was how MCFC got round the laws

 

UEFA have already ruled that City’s business relationship with Etihad is not a ‘related party’ arrangement, despite their Abu Dhabi connection, and therefore it does not break their Financial Fair Play Regulations.

[room0035]

13 hours ago, torryowl said:

.how the feck can we sell 15000 empty seats at 10 quid a time when we are selling all the others at 30 to 49 quid a time ........how would you advertise it ...."get your tickets for Bristol from 36 quid if they all sell out we have another 15k available at 10 quid "........chuck in the away support cant pay anymore than the home fans so it would be a tenner for them .....all that apart not a bad post  

Torry calm down I used this as a very basic example of something the club could do ie. get the SAG issues sorted in order to generate extra money into the club and giving the seats away at £10 each would net the club £150,000 a game.

 

I was in no way suggest they get better treatment.

 

The one thing you have to love about owlstalk you post something people don't read it then take one bit out of context and go half cOcked in the wrong direction.

[oldtawnyowl]

14 hours ago, SiJ said:

You don't like the chairman. 

 

We get it. 

 

14 minutes ago, room0035 said:

Nothing like that mate - every other foreign chairman coming to the championship is here for one reason to get to the riches of the Premier league - to do this they spend a fortune and get the teams up look at Wolves, Leicester, Watford, Bournemouth etc as example of this teams traditionally that were not one of the teams you would expect to be their (Wolves will be this season).

 

These guys have spent the money and the teams have gone up then these chairman reap the rewards or sell the team on. We then get to DC he come in gives Gray £1m to buy a few cheap foreigners then sacks him after he work wonders with the team he had and the signing he made including Lees, Lee, Loovens, Westwood and Hutch and replacing him with a no one journeyman (13 clubs in 15 years) was this done because he was a great manager or because he would do as he was told. I don't know but the first season with the help of Roeder recriuting a good nucleus of players in fessi, Bannan, Hunt, Wallace etc we created a good attacking team that played for each other. Then for the last 18 months the recruitment has been awful and added nothing to the team and the play has become more boring than under Stuart Gray on a sand pit in January but at double the price.

 

The chairman though has financed this by doubling the ticket prices, increase the cost of merchandise and corporate element of the club. Getting fans to pay for 3 year season tickets early or a new low getting fans to loan the club money for three years if we get promoted.

 

In the meantime we have no stadium sponsor, no shirt sponsor except the company making the shirts, no shirts until 10 weeks into the season, no sponsorship except £0.9m put in by the director, no stadium naming rights. The club is basically being run like a shambles but if you read the directors statement he has good processes in place the problem is he is not following any of them. A group of Agents seem to have control over incoming and out going players and have also been allowed to sign up our best young talent then stop them signing for the club.

 

No it is not a case of i don't like him but what he is doing is the same as what has been done at Blackburn, Coventry, Portsmouth, Sunderland and Hull in the last few years and we can all see how well that has turned out.

 

Lets hope for 3 points on Saturday and pushing into the play off over the next few months.

 

 

 

So SIG was right then.

[Whatahoot]

Whilst I accept the main body of Statement 9, I do have some misgivings on some of the contents of his final paragraph.

 

"I do not like to look to far ahead"     " Focus on one season at a time "   "I am very aware of our heritage"

 

Surely he should be working to a 3-5 year plan and have a joined up strategy for all parts of the club ? By focusing on one season at a time, does this lead to buying unnecessary players and a team needs building over a longer period than one season ? Does this mean he does not take into account the potential of George Hirst ? Does not our heritage include stripes on our shirts ? Why did he elect to go with the current strip on our 150th Anniversary Year and not a strip that had stripes, which had been worn for over 125 of the years before.?

He does not look very far ahead when he immediately puts his prices up on everything, without any success having been seen first.

Don't jump on me for pointing out some contradictions here.

[room0035]

2 hours ago, SiJ said:

Pretty much. 

 

I mean each statement is obviously open to interpretation, but if we are looking to find fault in them inevitably we will. 

 

Out of the 9 or so I’ve read so far, the most provocative was the one about exec boxes i.e., some box holder only wanted it when it was cheap, or words to that affect.

 

Truth be told, the responses have been pretty much what I expected and haven’t told me all that much which I didn’t know or assume. It’s a PR exercise intended to bring a bit of clarity. Those who were expecting Chansiri to concede on certain points or admit he’s been wrong on this or that were always going to be dissapointed. 

 

Perhaps that is why the nitpicking is going on? At no point in part 9 does Chansiri state we’re moving, yet some have reached the conclusion we’re moving next week. 

 

 

SiJ

 

I worked for a company that used to trade with the owls we were only allowed to make 2% mark up on what we sold them, and we had to have a corporate box as part of any trade. This cost us in 2014/15 £19,750 for the season, the season after it went up to £28,000 and we could not say it was worth it to have as at this point Stuart Gray was in charge and our customers spent more time getting drunk than watching the football.

 

Then the club got in touch and told us it would be £35,000 for 2016/17 or we could get a (6ft) pitch side advert board for £11,000 at this point we got rid of our box as it was a basic rip off when we ask what the mark up was as we could only charge 2% they were unable to provide the information but we were told by a staff member we dealt with that the figures was more than double what it cost.

 

This season I understand they are now £48,000 each. We are in Sheffield not London and without Premier League football they boxes simple are not worth it, we would have to sell £1,200,000 of good to the club to brake even on a £48,000 box with the profit margin they allowed us. So our directors got a box at Rotherham instead which works out at about £2k per person for the season , they are not fans they use it purely for customers so they have no allegiance like fans would so this is why I question the chairman's stance on the treatment of all the corporate companies. it will take years to build any relationship up and the only losers in all of this is the club as a lot of the match day sponsors came from the corporate boxes.

[room0035]

12 minutes ago, oldtawnyowl said:

 

 

So SIG was right then.

I just hope we don't do the way of the others I mentioned and the signs are all there. This season the money is getting tight with our insane stance on keeping players who don't play on the off chance the manager might play them.