300 season tickets sold (1 Viewer)

ccfcway · Jul 27, 2013

[h=1]Coventry City sell less than 300 season tickets so far for 'home' games at Northampton [/h]Coventry City have sold less than 300 season tickets for their proposed home games at Northampton Town.
The Sky Blues put tickets on sale a week ago amid widespread protests from fans about their groundshare plans, many of whom have vowed to boycott home games if they are at Sixfields Stadium, some 35 miles from Coventry.
Dan Walker, ticketing manager for Coventry City Football Club, said: “We are approaching the 300 mark when it comes to season ticket holders for
the coming season.
“We knew it was going to be tough – there is no getting away from that.
“Supporters have been asking us about travel arrangements and also other methods of payment, such as a finance option, and we hope to have more details on those soon.”

italiahorse · Jul 27, 2013

Why would anyone buy a season ticket yet ?
Would anyone admit to being brainwashed by SISU into buying one?
I don't know personally one person who has bought one !!
Finance option not yet available ?

Something wrong here

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 27, 2013

League 2 crowds for a League 2 stadium which before long will play host to a League 2 team. Superb planning by all involved at the Cobblers.

stupot07 · Jul 27, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
League 2 crowds for a League 2 stadium which before long will play host to a League 2 team. Superb planning by all involved at the Cobblers.

We're likely to see league two football if we return to the Ricoh and ACL reject the CVA.

Gint11 · Jul 27, 2013

This just highlights what are shite situation we are in. Surely all the parties involved can see that it needs correcting big time. Put aside your egos and your self righteous bullshit. Take note that you've sold 300 ST when this time last year it was about 9K-10K..Sort it out FFS

shmmeee · Jul 27, 2013

Gint11 said:
This just highlights what are shite situation we are in. Surely all the parties involved can see that it needs correcting big time. Put aside your egos and your self righteous bullshit. Take note that you've sold 300 ST when this time last year it was about 9K-10K..Sort it out FFS

What worries me is that its not about business now, its about not backing down. You don't name your company the equivalent of fortitude if you don't have a massive chip on your shoulder about compromising. Seppalas whole ego is about not backing down.

This is like when your mate has stopped loving his psycho GF and she says she'll kill herself if he leaves. Yeah she might, but he can't feel responsible for that.

Sisu might liquidate the club out of spite. But it'll only be their fault, not anyone who went or stayed away.

italiahorse · Jul 27, 2013

stupot07 said:
We're likely to see league two football if we return to the Ricoh and ACL reject the CVA.

Why ? .........

stupot07 · Jul 27, 2013

italiahorse said:
Why ? .........

Rejecting the CVA = 15 point deduction. Yes we only lost 10 last season but the whole psychology from starting on minus 15 will be different.

And without having to play the kids, most of our proper first team players are very young 20-23 years old - christie, Barton, fleck, moussa, Adams, Thomas

shmmeee · Jul 27, 2013

italiahorse said:
Why ? .........

-15 points I'd assume.

Lets ignore the fact that everything else aside we should be able to put out a team that finishes more than 15 points above relegation.

It's not ACL who signed the entire squad nor who refused to file the clubs accounts. Only one person is to blame for the current product on the pitch: Seppala. She's been in charge throughout, she is ultimately responsible for the fact that we're down where we are.

Jack Griffin · Jul 27, 2013

Club shop down again, now they realise that the booking interface is a window into seeing how poor the sales are.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

I think that we sold about 7,500 season tickets last year.

The poll that we had on this site, seemed to show a fairly consistent 8% support for going to watch games at Northampton.

Now this was very unscientific, but if it can be used as any kind of guide to this season, it'd suggest season ticket sales in the region of 600.

I'm honestly not sure if that will turn out to be accurate, high or low.

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
I'm honestly not sure if that will turn out to be accurate, high or low.

None of us know.

I do know the fact even if you wanted to, you couldn't buy tickets until last week won't exactly help, will it, even if we did end up back at the Ricoh!

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
None of us know.

I do know the fact even if you wanted to, you couldn't buy tickets until last week won't exactly help, will it, even if we did end up back at the Ricoh!

No.

There comes a point where it starts to get difficult to blame all of SISU's actions on ineptness, but what is the alternative?

Are they secretly supporting NOPM?

Conspiracy theories on a postcard please.....

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Conspiracy theories on a postcard please.....

I hesitate to say it, especially on this board but make it impossible to buy tickets, wind the club up as nobody buys tickets, devolves some responsibility from yourself.

It makes no rational sense though (I know much of what they've done lately hasn't been 'rational', but it has fit a certain template) so I'd be surprised if that was a deliberate aim.

Might be the consequence mind you.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
I hesitate to say it, especially on this board but make it impossible to buy tickets, wind the club up as nobody buys tickets, devolves some responsibility from yourself.

It makes no rational sense though (I know much of what they've done lately hasn't been 'rational', but it has fit a certain template) so I'd be surprised if that was a deliberate aim.

Might be the consequence mind you.

My tongue was firmly in my cheek, as you know.

I'm generally a great believer in the cock-up theory of history, rather than the conspiracy version and SISU's recent track record lends much weight to that view.

The lack of rationality is certainly an issue though.

In my view our only hope is that at some point SISU will realise that the lack of support for their plans will translate into financial pain and that they will then accept sensible money (i.e. not very much) to sell the club. But again, that requires a degree of rationality....

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
My tongue was firmly in my cheek, as you know.

I'm generally a great believer in the cock-up theory of history, rather than the conspiracy version and SISU's recent track record lends much weight to that view.

The lack of rationality is certainly an issue though.

In my view our only hope is that at some point SISU will realise that the lack of support for their plans will translate into financial pain and that they will then accept sensible money (i.e. not very much) to sell the club. But again, that requires a degree of rationality....

Of course I know

the problem is, the rational POV from their perspective is not as you say. Their perspective does have a certain legitimacy within financial markets too, it just doesn't coincide with ours.

hence the unholy mess!

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Of course I know

the problem is, the rational POV from their perspective is not as you say. Their perspective does have a certain legitimacy within financial markets too, it just doesn't coincide with ours.

hence the unholy mess!

But that's what I don't get.

I think that had they behaved sensibly, SISU would have been able to buy the Ricoh over the last few years - I can't prove that, but I can't see any reason why the Council/Higgs wouldn't want to sell to a "trusted partner".

If we accept that that opportunity has now gone (although it may be resurrected in the current talks???), I can see a case for SISU wanting to build their own stadium. I'm not convinced that the case is as strong as some seem to think (need more evidence to draw firm conclusions), but I can accept that there is a case.

But if that really is the plan, why would you move the club to Northampton in the intervening period?

What will that do to short and medium term revenues?

- Attendances capped at 7,000 (What might we have got for Wolves at home?)
- Average attendances cut to ???
- Average ticket prices cut
- Support paid for transport costs?

If SISU were acting rationally (back to previous posts....), surely they'd have gone cap in hand to ACL to do a deal for the 3 (?) years. They could have paid way over the offered £400k p.a. and still been massively better off than going to Northampton.

Not to mention, they could have avoided the probable medium term damage done to the supporter base, by taking the club away for 3 years.

Just can't see the logic.

SkyBlueBlood · Jul 27, 2013

Lucky to get 300, they must have the IQ of a Lemming

jaytskyblue · Jul 27, 2013

The 300 may well include the reserved sections for club staff/family - the number 'sold' may be under 100...

sky_blue_up_north · Jul 27, 2013

jaytskyblue said:
The 300 may well include the reserved sections for club staff/family - the number 'sold' may be under 100...

That is my thinking as well, we should ask how many have actually paid for season tickets, your guess of 100 maybe about right. This is one hell of amess that seems to have no end.

Noggin · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
I hesitate to say it, especially on this board but make it impossible to buy tickets, wind the club up as nobody buys tickets, devolves some responsibility from yourself.

It makes no rational sense though (I know much of what they've done lately hasn't been 'rational', but it has fit a certain template) so I'd be surprised if that was a deliberate aim.

Might be the consequence mind you.

Why would they wind the club up though? they can sell the club for a few million, sure it's a massive loss to them but it's less of a loss than just winding it up. Especially since they would get absolutely nothing from winding the club up as the players contracts being paid out would be worth more than anything they got from selling players and this would cause an investigation from the liquidator which they potentially don't want.

I'm sure they hate us now, with all the abuse fisher has received (deservedly imo) and the fact things surely haven't gone at all to plan for them I would think they loath us and would enjoy seeing us suffer more, but still they would prefer 3 million pounds instead.

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

Noggin said:
Why would they wind the club up though? they can sell the club for a few million, sure it's a massive loss to them but it's less of a loss than just winding it up. Especially since they would get absolutely nothing from winding the club up as the players contracts being paid out would be worth more than anything they got from selling players and this would cause an investigation from the liquidator which they potentially don't want.

You wind the club up first and foremost because negotiating tactics elsewhere don't work unless people believe you hold the cards you carry on you at the time. It's not about hate, or other emotions, it's about a bigger game than CCFC who are, ultimately, nothing. The big risk has already been played, this is now the small risk that ultimately costs little to enact relative to what has gone before.

You say they wouldn't want an investigation but, why not? They wouldn't be the first hedge fund to come a cropper legally, true, but far more important hedge funds wielding far more power have caused far more friction elsewhere, all perfectly legally. Personally I would say looking for illegal acts from our owners is wishful thinking. There's a difference between illegal acts and bending the financial rules to your advantage. A fine line, true, and examples can be found where people cross the line... but far more, don't than do.

Noggin · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
You wind the club up first and foremost because negotiating tactics elsewhere don't work unless people believe you hold the cards you carry on you at the time. It's not about hate, or other emotions, it's about a bigger game than CCFC who are, ultimately, nothing. The big risk has already been played, this is now the small risk that ultimately costs little to enact relative to what has gone before.

You say they wouldn't want an investigation but, why not? They wouldn't be the first hedge fund to come a cropper legally, true, but far more important hedge funds wielding far more power have caused far more friction elsewhere, all perfectly legally. Personally I would say looking for illegal acts from our owners is wishful thinking. There's a difference between illegal acts and bending the financial rules to your advantage. A fine line, true, and examples can be found where people cross the line... but far more, don't than do.

None of that answers the main point though that there is no benefit to them in liquidation compared to selling the club. The simple fact of the matter is winding the club up completely gets them nothing, selling the club brings them a few mill most likely.

I did say they only potentially don't want the investigation, but that was only a secondary point.

They have never threatened to completely wind up the club have they? so they don't need to do it to show they mean business in other avenues of business if thats what you mean? they have threatened to wind up limited sure.

If they don't want us anymore they should sell it's best for everyone especially them.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
You wind the club up first and foremost because negotiating tactics elsewhere don't work unless people believe you hold the cards you carry on you at the time. It's not about hate, or other emotions, it's about a bigger game than CCFC who are, ultimately, nothing. The big risk has already been played, this is now the small risk that ultimately costs little to enact relative to what has gone before.

You say they wouldn't want an investigation but, why not? They wouldn't be the first hedge fund to come a cropper legally, true, but far more important hedge funds wielding far more power have caused far more friction elsewhere, all perfectly legally. Personally I would say looking for illegal acts from our owners is wishful thinking. There's a difference between illegal acts and bending the financial rules to your advantage. A fine line, true, and examples can be found where people cross the line... but far more, don't than do.

I think that there's a valid argument there.

The way to fight that is to use all the weapons at our disposal, given that "football clubs are different".

I'd paraphrase your argument to be that SISU would liquidate the club if the benefit (in their mind) of showing how you don't back down, is greater than the "few million" that they might otherwise get from a sale.

What I believe we have to do is to introduce another variable to the equation - that being the political and media pressure that comes from "messing with a football club".

We already have MPs and an MEP mobilised, just based on a ground share. You'd have to think that pressure would be massively stepped up in the scenario you outline.

More questions in the House, more pressure on Seppala in person etc etc.

Up the stakes so that SISU realise that liquidation would involve a lot more than turning down some cash.

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
I think that there's a valid argument there.

The way to fight that is to use all the weapons at our disposal, given that "football clubs are different".

I'd paraphrase your argument to be that SISU would liquidate the club if the benefit (in their mind) of showing how you don't back down, is greater than the "few million" that they might otherwise get from a sale.

What I believe we have to do is to introduce another variable to the equation - that being the political and media pressure that comes from "messing with a football club".

We already have MPs and an MEP mobilised, just based on a ground share. You'd have to think that pressure would be massively stepped up in the scenario you outline.

More questions in the House, more pressure on Seppala in person etc etc.

Up the stakes so that SISU realise that liquidation would involve a lot more than turning down some cash.

It is indeed true that a football club brings a greater spotlight.

However look at it another way, and that greater spotlight makes winding the club up to show you mean business all the more appealing than businesses nobody hears about. What better way to demonstrate when you enter the endgame, people should take what you say very seriously.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
It is indeed true that a football club brings a greater spotlight.

However look at it another way, and that greater spotlight makes winding the club up to show you mean business all the more appealing than businesses nobody hears about. What better way to demonstrate when you enter the endgame, people should take what you say very seriously.

As I say, depends what cost it comes at.

I gather that Joy sits on the Takeover Panel. Might get a bit embarrassing if she's called in by a Select Committee for example.

Perhaps there might be a bit more focus on their investors, something that they might not welcome.

Etc, etc.

Some people don't like bright light being shone in their direction.

Jack Griffin · Jul 27, 2013

Since my last check a week ago they've sold 50 tickets, £10K.

That will pay 1 month of Carl Baker's wages or 10% of Sixfields rent.

Noggin · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
It is indeed true that a football club brings a greater spotlight.

However look at it another way, and that greater spotlight makes winding the club up to show you mean business all the more appealing than businesses nobody hears about. What better way to demonstrate when you enter the endgame, people should take what you say very seriously.

Does it show you mean business? or does it show that you shouldn't even think about doing business with them under any circumstances because once they decide they want something they will do anything to get it even continuing doing so even once any chance of success has gone and that they are willing to do something foolish for no good business reason? It would show them to be completely irrational and that doesn't make for a good business partner.

The fact is that winding up the club doesn't show they mean business anyway, in fact quite the opposite, it would show that everything they have said about building a new stadium and being willing to fund the losses while it happened was bluster after all and so anyone in negotiations with them in future will know they don't actually mean what they say and if it looks like on the face of it that what they are doing is hurting them then actually it probably is.

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 27, 2013

Noggin said:
Does it show you mean business? or does it show that you shouldn't even think about doing business with them under any circumstances because once they decide they want something they will do anything to get it even continuing doing so even once any chance of success has gone and that they are willing to do something foolish for no good business reason? It would show them to be completely irrational and that doesn't make for a good business partner.

The fact is that winding up the club doesn't show they mean business anyway, in fact quite the opposite, it would show that everything they have said about building a new stadium and being willing to fund the losses while it happened was bluster after all and so anyone in negotiations with them in future will know they don't actually mean what they say and if it looks like on the face of it that what they are doing is hurting them then actually it probably is.

It doesn't show them to be irrational in the slightest. On the copntrary, it shows them to be hyper-rational.

Rhetoric and use of rhetoric is a very different thing from bluster, watch this unfold for a particular example, if we're unlucky...

And as for not doing business with them under any circumstances, it shows the opposite. it shows if you have interests which intersect with them, you *must* do business with them.

Worked for George Soros...

Astute · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
It doesn't show them to be irrational in the slightest. On the copntrary, it shows them to be hyper-rational.

Rhetoric and use of rhetoric is a very different thing from bluster, watch this unfold for a particular example, if we're unlucky...

And as for not doing business with them under any circumstances, it shows the opposite. it shows if you have interests which intersect with them, you *must* do business with them.

Worked for George Soros...

It would show them to be a bunch of pricks to me.

robbieray · Jul 27, 2013

I think we need another march

Johnnythespider · Jul 27, 2013

robbieray said:
I think we need another march

We could but we would probably find the 300 blocking our entry to Broadgate, and building a wall out of our bodies as they slaughter us.

stupot07 · Jul 27, 2013

robbieray said:
I think we need another march

There's only another 7 months or so till March....

robbieray · Jul 27, 2013

There's only another 7 months or so till March....

Stupid ................are you new to this forum ? .....lol

Noggin · Jul 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
It doesn't show them to be irrational in the slightest. On the copntrary, it shows them to be hyper-rational.

Rhetoric and use of rhetoric is a very different thing from bluster, watch this unfold for a particular example, if we're unlucky...

And as for not doing business with them under any circumstances, it shows the opposite. it shows if you have interests which intersect with them, you *must* do business with them.

Worked for George Soros...

winding up the club instead of taking millions is irrational. It doesn't show that they do what they say as that isn't what they have said they are doing or going to do.

300 season tickets sold (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency