Fisher on Talksport (1 Viewer)

shmmeee said:

And if my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle. But the reality is you won’t ever get those extra 8k, because that’s what happens when you move away from your customer base. I know it’s cool to blame the fan base here, but any business that blames its customers for its lack of success is a poor business IMO. We don’t have a right to anyone’s time and money.

Click to expand...

But you can't compare a football club to an "normal" business as we are blinded by emotion towards where we go to watch football, as opposed to where you do your weekly shop

shmmeee said:

Brass tacks: do you reckon we are better off financially with say 8k fewer fans at St Andrews at £1m/year or at the Ricoh with those fans on £300k/year but receiving half the F&B benefit? (Based on Fisher saying we got about the same at SA as we did with twice as many fans at the Ricoh)

I don’t see any way this can be defended on financial grounds unless you include the potential bigger prize down the line of the Ricoh itself (which I still have doubts would be the actual outcome of a successful state aid complaint).

Click to expand...

The truth is we have no idea. We can do back of a fag packet maths until we are blue in the face but it's assumptions on top of assumptions on top of assumptions.

Besides, negotiation is all about maximising value, and this is what the owners will be trying to do...for the long term. They are not stupid and they are not going to be throwing away money solely out of spite.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:

but This club has worth now, they should not just return for the sake of returning. I want SISU to work damn hard to make sure wasps don’t benefit from us without giving something back.

if our fans don’t want the same, and just want to prop up the Arena because “KeEp CoV iN CoV” then they’re fucking morons

Click to expand...

Exactly

You’ve got to love some of our fans that love to bang-on about attendance numbers.

I remember feeling fucking embarrassed about all the empty seats at HR in the Division 1 and Premiership days...(unless, of course, we were playing United, Liverpool or Villa.) We couldn’t satisfy Coventry fans then, even in the Premiership, even with a proper football stadium...that was actually in fucking Coventry.

I hate the Ricoh and I hate Wasps....and you can throw Richardson and McGinnity in there too.

As for Fisher? All noise and no action. I don’t know why you bothered tuning in.

shmmeee said:

Brass tacks: do you reckon we are better off financially with say 8k fewer fans at St Andrews at £1m/year or at the Ricoh with those fans on £300k/year but receiving half the F&B benefit? (Based on Fisher saying we got about the same at SA as we did with twice as many fans at the Ricoh)

I don’t see any way this can be defended on financial grounds unless you include the potential bigger prize down the line of the Ricoh itself (which I still have doubts would be the actual outcome of a successful state aid complaint).

Click to expand...

ha ha I always thought the saying was brass tax I’ve never seen it written down learned something new

robbiekeane said:

The truth is we have no idea. We can do back of a fag packet maths until we are blue in the face but it's assumptions on top of assumptions on top of assumptions.

Besides, negotiation is all about maximising value, and this is what the owners will be trying to do...for the long term. They are not stupid and they are not going to be throwing away money solely out of spite.

Click to expand...

Agree with most of this, but the last sentence is IMO open for debate. As I’ve said all along if we come back owning the Ricoh or on far better terms that net us millions more a year than we would’ve got then great. Anything else and the gamble has failed.

The emotional context that governs a lot of what is posted here will be completely missing from any thoughts that Sisu have in negotiations. They approach everything from a sustainable business point of view, if it's worth doing it and it fits their model we will come back, if it doesn't we stay at SA.

Just listened. Shouldnt let him talk. Sounds like his gameplay is to use wasps words agaisnt them from a tweet lol

better days said:

I wonder if this interview was tactical
Dave Boddy is handling the negotiations with Wasps
Perhaps Fisher was using this as a signal to Wasps that SISU want to do a deal to strengthen Boddy's hand?
We all know the sticking point was the legal action and Wasps demand for an indemnity
Without the indemnity there's a deal

Click to expand...

Are wasps dropping the indemnity request now?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

usskyblue said:

You’ve got to love some of our fans that love to bang-on about attendance numbers.

I remember feeling fucking embarrassed about all the empty seats at HR in the Division 1 and Premiership days...(unless, of course, we were playing United, Liverpool or Villa.) We couldn’t satisfy Coventry fans then, even in the Premiership, even with a proper football stadium...that was actually in fucking Coventry.

I hate the Ricoh and I hate Wasps....and you can throw Richardson and McGinnity in there too.

As for Fisher? All noise and no action. I don’t know why you bothered tuning in.

Click to expand...

Yup, 13,353 average in '93-94 - Premier League 1993/1994 - Attendance

shmmeee said:

I didn’t say “OK”, I said “Commercially beneficial”. Point is current deal is costing us more than £4m/season in reality.

Just pointing out that we didn’t move because of the rental cost, but because we thought it’d strengthen our hand elsewhere. Similarly we aren’t staying away due to cost, but because the demands placed on us to return (no state aid case) Would hamper our hopes for a future return.

The idea that we broke a £1.2m/year lease for a £1m/year lease plus £2-4m in lost revenue for financial reasons doesn’t stack up. Even less so when you consider the reports our last deal was £300k/season.

Click to expand...

On your assumptions it looks like an additional promotion/ Ricoh return premium of an additional £4.68 million. You say a rent of £3.999 million would be commercially beneficial which would be giving Wasps 85% of that premium. May be marginally commercially beneficial but still doesn’t make sense for CCFC. It also doesn’t give any financial credit for an increase in stadium naming rights( although any potential sponsor would need a cast iron guarantee that we would stay.)

Highly beneficial to wasps, it would save their bacon. It really isn’t going to happen on those figures.

Wasps have had falling crowds losing supporters form hasn’t been great then we’ve had the virus with us now in the championship they would be mad not to get us back I think we will be pulling 15k at the Ricoh next season my worry is if sisu play hard ball and ruin any chances

cc84cov said:

Wasps have had falling crowds losing supporters form hasn’t been great then we’ve had the virus with us now in the championship they would be mad not to get us back I think we will be pulling 15k at the Ricoh next season my worry is if sisu play hard ball and ruin any chances

Click to expand...

But what’s hard ball? Getting the best deal possible?

cc84cov said:

Wasps have had falling crowds losing supporters form hasn’t been great then we’ve had the virus with us now in the championship they would be mad not to get us back I think we will be pulling 15k at the Ricoh next season my worry is if sisu play hard ball and ruin any chances

Click to expand...

The argument over players wages isn’t going to help wasps. How do you define hard ball?

shmmeee said:

Agree with most of this, but the last sentence is IMO open for debate. As I’ve said all along if we come back owning the Ricoh or on far better terms that net us millions more a year than we would’ve got then great. Anything else and the gamble has failed.

Click to expand...

Remember "owning" part of the Ricoh will bring with it debt and we have seen what that has done to WASPS
It also means CCFC takes on part of the overdue maintenance and safety costs
Also what happens if WASPS fold or flap their wings and fly away?

MalcSB said:

On your assumptions it looks like an additional promotion/ Ricoh return premium of an additional £4.68 million. You say a rent of £3.999 million would be commercially beneficial which would be giving Wasps 85% of that premium. May be marginally commercially beneficial but still doesn’t make sense for CCFC. It also doesn’t give any financial credit for an increase in stadium naming rights( although any potential sponsor would need a cast iron guarantee that we would stay.)

Highly beneficial to wasps, it would save their bacon. It really isn’t going to happen on those figures.

Click to expand...

Significant the Ricoh valuation dropped on CCFC leaving?

oldfiver said:

Remember "owning" part of the Ricoh will bring with it debt and we have seen what that has done to WASPS
It also means CCFC takes on part of the overdue maintenance and safety costs
Also what happens if WASPS fold or flap their wings and fly away?

Click to expand...

I’ve got no problem with maintenance and safety costs as long as they’re split 50/50 and we can maximise our income.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:

I’ve got no problem with maintenance and safety costs as long as they’re split 50/50 and we can maximise our income.

Click to expand...

What about the renovations etc up to the date of any move back? There are those on here who will tell you they are very significant
The valuation report also states it does not include and dilapidation costs

MusicDating said:

Yup, 13,353 average in '93-94 - Premier League 1993/1994 - Attendance

Click to expand...

Exactly.

By mysterious coincidence the PSB 'Group' disappear every time someone uses facts:

Frostie said:

Exactly.

By mysterious coincidence the PSB 'Group' disappear every time someone uses facts:

Click to expand...

Just ignore him. He's banged on about boycotting all season, but lo and behold rocks up at Broadgate to celebrate promotion...

This thread is exactly why Fisher shouldn't come out. Same tired old arguments and infighting.

oldfiver said:

Remember "owning" part of the Ricoh will bring with it debt and we have seen what that has done to WASPS
It also means CCFC takes on part of the overdue maintenance and safety costs
Also what happens if WASPS fold or flap their wings and fly away?

Click to expand...

Ask the people who want us to own the Ricoh. My position has been a new ground is needed for some time.

Liquid Gold said:

This thread is exactly why Fisher shouldn't come out. Same tired old arguments and infighting.

Click to expand...

Nice to get back to normal though

Frostie said:

Exactly.

By mysterious coincidence the PSB 'Group' disappear every time someone uses facts:

Click to expand...

That reply guy is talking utter shite too. We averaged 21k in the Championship in 2006.

And 17-18k is a sensible estimate based on historic trends, hardly wild speculation.

Edit: just realised its you. Sorry.

covcity4life said:

Just listened. Shouldnt let him talk. Sounds like his gameplay is to use wasps words agaisnt them from a tweet lol

Click to expand...

Yep definitely part of it

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:

the rent was going to go up. Besides the argument wasn’t paying 1.2 million - it was paying 1.2 million and not received any kind of benefit from the stadium. We do receive income from St Andrews albeit on a limited scale

Click to expand...

But the financial argument is does it make more money to receive more gate receipts from higher crowds but little/no FB money etc, or the FB money from a much smaller crowd which reduces gate receipts?

Couldn't give a flying fk where we are or how many are around me, I simply can't wait to get back to watching my team play and in the Championship. The off field bollocks can take care of itself and if anyone hasn't realised by now that they can't influence it then I'm afraid they never will.

PUSB!

MusicDating said:

Yup, 13,353 average in '93-94 - Premier League 1993/1994 - Attendance

Click to expand...

I think around this time there was still a dark stain on football from hooliganism it was trying to shake off. Not exactly seen as a place to take the family for many. Plus we were perennial strugglers much of the time - for a non die-hard going to watch a team get beaten wouldn't likely have felt great entertainment or a day out.

EDIT: Also a time when many of the major employers were leaving/had left and there was not a huge amount of money around or what was was insecure. Luxuries like football tickets weren't a major consideration.

You simply can’t compare attendances after decades of struggle thirty years ago with what we’d get today after (by definition) years of success.

To think we’d pull in 11k in the Prem now is just insane. Aside from anything else the city itself is far more populous than it was in the 90s.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:

But what’s hard ball? Getting the best deal possible?

Click to expand...

But last time it was supposedly about a better deal then just when it looked like something might be happen they pushed further and wanted more. We want lower rent - we want FB money - we want leasehold - we want unencumbered freehold.

shmmeee said:

Nice to get back to normal though


That reply guy is talking utter shite too. We averaged 21k in the Championship in 2006.

And 17-18k is a sensible estimate based on historic trends, hardly wild speculation.

Edit: just realised its you. Sorry.

Click to expand...

Ha ha, none taken! :emoji_grin:

Yes we did, not sure how that contradicts what I said though?

He said we'd have averaged over 18k in League 1 for half a season, I pointed out we'd only ever averaged over that 3 times since the Ricoh move.

Average away attendance in L1, excluding our own, is just 800 & that's massively swayed by Sunderland taking over 2k per game. So we'd have needed 17,200 home fans every week.

For context, the Mowbray season when we were flying & unbeaten at home; our highest attendance was 17,779 (including away fans) on boxing day when there's always inflated numbers.

History would show 18k is possible but for it to be sustained for half of the season, including midweek games etc as claimed is unlikely.

Fact is he's making claims like that whilst saying utter drivel that we had attendances between 2,000 & 4,000 at St Andrews - it's totally disingenuous.

Wasps are going to be desperate to get cash but there are downsides of playing at the Ricoh rather than St Andrews. The pitch being torn up by rugby players doesn't help and I'm sure Wasps will be keen for some concerts and events to take place further wrecking the playing surface.
I think some of our success this season has been down to having a decent pitch to play on. The best solution is for wasps to go tits up and SISU actually pay a going rate for it instead of fannying around the courts for another 5 years.
I'm wondering how this whole pandemic has hit Arvo Masterfund and SISU financially?

so we now have Robins and Fisher talking about new stadium and Boddy about Ricoh...

doesn't give me much faith about either happening

Sky Bet Championship | Average Attendances | Home Matches | Football Web Pages even the lowest average is above 10k

Thought there was already the basis of a deal ready to go except for the indemnity scuppering it. I assume that means it was commercially agreeable to all if so. It might need tweeking but surely that isn't too hard to do

The indemnity is still an issue.

The egos and objectives of the two owners is still the biggest obstacle .... and it is they who will sign off any deal

Can't help feeling that as usual Fisher is playing with words, and posturing. Not my fault guv honest. It would not surprise me to be at St Andrews again next season

shmmeee said:

I didn’t say “OK”, I said “Commercially beneficial”. Point is current deal is costing us more than £4m/season in reality.

Just pointing out that we didn’t move because of the rental cost, but because we thought it’d strengthen our hand elsewhere. Similarly we aren’t staying away due to cost, but because the demands placed on us to return (no state aid case) Would hamper our hopes for a future return.

The idea that we broke a £1.2m/year lease for a £1m/year lease plus £2-4m in lost revenue for financial reasons doesn’t stack up. Even less so when you consider the reports our last deal was £300k/season.

Click to expand...

The £300k a year was a forced figure as part of the 4 year deal on return and the accounts indicate it was actually double that - it’s not relevant to this discussion - the £1m lease was nearer to £1.3m with zero other revenue and was an insane arrangement