Would you pay more to stave off FFP restrictions?

[Sham67]

33 minutes ago, sibon said:

We throw away a few million each year with our policy on away fans. Charge them £30 a game, give them the entire Leppjngs Lane if they can fill it. Our policy of restricting their allocations and charging them a fortune do us no favours, especially with that vast, underused stand.

 

The result would be increased revenue for the club and a better atmosphere at games. There’s nothing better than a big away following to get the Kop going. A couple of million extra in the bank would be good news too.

 

At £30 each, we need 1449 away fans per game to generate £1 million income per season. I'm not sure your numbers stack up.

[sibon]

16 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

At £30 each, we need 1449 away fans per game to generate £1 million income per season. I'm not sure your numbers stack up.

 

At a glance, there are nine or ten teams who could sell all 7000 seats if the games were at the right times and if the price was right.

 

Last year, DC was offering Club 1867 membership to us, whilst restricting away numbers to about 3000.

 

Total madness. 

[Hookowl]

43 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

At £30 each, we need 1449 away fans per game to generate £1 million income per season. I'm not sure your numbers stack up.

 

Also having that many away fans would increase the cost of policing the matches, reducing that income drastically.

 

https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/revealed-the-1-1m-cost-of-policing-football-matches-in-south-yorkshire-1-8751755

[Athelwulf]

On 16/06/2018 at 16:25, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Udders took advantage of our inept tactical approach against a team we had beaten regularly up to that point.

 

I don't doubt it was inept.

 

I was sitting in the stand with some Huddersfield friends and we none of us could believe what we were seeing.

 

But if Hooper had remained fit, I assume that we'd have played in the same manner which had brought us 7 consecutive victories.

[torryowl]

4 hours ago, Mishowl said:

I’m not surprised it wasn’t obvious to you. 

 

Carlos had final say on the transfers. If he had been capable of identifying young players with both ability and a future sell on value we would be stuck with a squad full of journeymen crocks that no one will take off our hands.

maybe if the committee had put some young players on the list of who he could sign he would have done …..but that's by the by , carlos cannot be blamed for the financial state of the club which is what this thread is about . he was the head coach and the head coach is not the bloke who's in charge of financial matters …..take fletcher who was available for free , carlos tells chansiri he's a good player I wouldn't mind having , who do think does the deal that gives him  30k a week for 4 years  carlos or chansiri ? ….. 

[torryowl]

8 hours ago, Mishowl said:

Committee? There was no committee. It was disbanded after a few months. 

 

Fletcher? Horrific journeyman signing who is the the absolute prime example of why we are where we are.

that's not so ……….at the steering group meeting in oct/nov 2017 reported on here  chansiri said the carlos identifies a position he wants strengthening and the committee/advisors  give him a list of players for him to chose from ………..I'd agree with you that fletcher because of his injury problems isn't a good signing but stand by that his wages and length of contract as nothing to do with carlos ….