SWFC & Sustainability

[mike312]

For me dc is looking in the wrong area for money. Fans have relatively low levels of investment into a football club albeit in greater numbers. Where were are losing out is on the sponsorship side. I can't believe sponsorship income can't be counted towards p&s if so why does tv money count? What any other club at our level and everything is sponsored.

Shorts, backs of shirts, arms of shirts, training kit, stands, dugout seats, ground ffs.

 Our advertising hoardings inside the ground on match days are mainly advertising tickets and shirts and packages to fans who are most likely to either have got them already or most likely know about them. We have boxes going empty and even players not sponsored (the last time I looked.) We have no local company hoardings any more, with no electronic board solution for this. This is all lost income and shows a badly run commercial side of the business which could and should raise more than any fan based scheme.

[theowlsman]

I’m not a big fan of FFP / P&S.

 

I still believe the PL is behind it to restrict wealthy club owners of football league clubs, from keeping clubs who are most likely able to compete with the current elite, away from the Premier League.

 

The PL is a cartel. The wealth available to those at the top is disproportionate to the rest of the English football structure. 

 

If they really wanted to help lower league clubs there are multiple ways to help them. Instead we see the elite clubs influencing a restriction of trade, effectively stealing young talent, and failing to authorise a wider sharing of Premier League incomes that would protect grass roots football.

 

Pure greed. What goes around comes around. Let’s hope a major restructure of English football takes place that helps all involved in the game, not just the few priveleged PL clubs, and that Sky goes belly up.

 

It was a breath of fresh air watching Wimbledon trounce West Ham last night. Let’s bring back the days when there was a level playing field for all involved in the game.

[parkfieldowl14]

On 26/01/2019 at 12:56, gbear05 said:

My intention here is to highlight my concerns in the hope to get our great club back on track, not to add to the negativity;

 

Whether you agree with the profit and sustainability rules or not, they are there to stop clubs gambling on promotion and then getting into financial trouble if that doesn’t happen.

 

Yet with Club 1867, Chansiri is yet again gambling with our future, with a scheme showing no respect for the fans (I posted elsewhere that it feels more like a scam than an offer to me).

 

Imagine if all Championship clubs offered a similar 1867 scheme?

 

24 clubs basing their future finances on the presumption that they will get 1 of 3 promotion spots avaialble.

 

Chansiri; it isn’t sustainable. It is a gamble. You did this before, it didn’t work and look where we are now.

 

I am sure most fans would much rather we started the-building with a focus on youth players, building a club and squad that won’t ‘be in a lot of trouble if we don’t get promotion’.

 

This is a passionate plea for Chansiri to stop being so naieve, learn from the past and to show more respect for the fans; by this I mean, no more ‘offers’ which aren’t actually good value and no more of those ridiculous surveys we saw in the summer.

Great post that.Couldn't put it better myself.