Not really. We're tens of millions of pounds in debt (due to loans from Allam Marine) and we haemorrhage money.
To the suggestion that we raise adult prices by £100 and return concessions.who do you think pays for the kids passes.last years price for our three (two adult and one 14 year old in east stand)passes was approx £1300.under the scheme it is £1500.with your proposal it would be £1700 less the concession.it had better be a large concession to get me on board.
Bates might be viable. From the point of view of the Stadium he can evidence his Chelsea Village development years back and the Council would want the comfort of someone with a development track record if they were to allow development around the stadium. May be Ehab should call Ken if no buyer is lined up. From a football point of view I think it would be a steady ship but don't expect spectacular investments in players unless we get to PL.
I don't know what the concession level was this season, but from the starting point of the current membership in your section using £100 increase 50% would be break even at £1500 for you (£500 each now becoming 2x£600 and 1x£300), a single adult/single child would be £100 better off (£900 instead of £1k), a 2 adult/2kid family would be £200 better off (£1,800 instewad of £2k), and a single adult/2 kids would be £300 better off (£1,200 instead of £1,500). Pensioners, and teenagers going on their own/with friends rather than family would be £200 each better off (£300 instead of £500). Obviously a group of adults would be paying £100 more each, but I'd like to think that an adult that was prepared to pay £500 in the first place was prepared to pay £600 to restore the concessions, that is pretty much the main objection to the scheme.You also couldn't apply the full £100 to zones currently paying less than £25/mth. For an adult and child £100 a year on top of that and 50% is break even, so anything less a month and it would be an increase, which is against the principle of making the changes. Personally I think £600 is more than we should be charging, but taking over the club with the scheme as it is and likely too late to be able to change it until next summer, I think the increase from adults and returning fans would generate more revenue than the reductions given to the "concessions" that had stayed paying full price for a season cost the club, particularly as it is zonal at the moment and people priced out of a higher zone would move more willingly if they felt there was a 'good' reason behind the increase in their price. Again, not what I'd like to see happening, but what I feel would be possible to come across as a positive scheme overall in a year's time whilst also increasing the total revenue. It doesn't look that great now, but in a year's time I think it would be very spinnable by new owners. If the Allams had any PR interest or credibility with fans even they would be able to say they'd addressed the concerns of fans and were making changes and come out of it looking reasonably good. As it is they've gone so far down the road it would immediately be suggested they'd planned it all along as a way to increase all the prices again in a cynical manner. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The zonal thing and the general level of pricing are obviously issues, they can be addressed either with the concession issue or separately, depending on whether a new owner wanted to maintain/increase revenue or go for a full on win over the fans approach. Personally I think I would want to reintroduce concessions at half price without adding the extra charge on. I'd want rid of the zones, but there's such a huge difference between the top and bottom prices I'd have to do that over a number of years. Commit to capped prices at £500 a season (in PL we can only get £570 for each seat in the away end due to the £30 a ticket rule so it has to be less than that) and then increase the cheaper zones over time. Doing it this way would obviously cost us more in revenue, but it's more in the middle of what I'd like to see and what I think is the minimum that can be done to make any changes look good.
I got told it was an Anglo Dutch consortium headed up by Roger De Vries, and with Craig Norrie and Rob McDonald.
For what it's worth have had a text from a friend saying " a reliable source" has told him that a deal is in place to buy city. The new owners will be a partnership with Americans (with a merchant banking background).3 possible deals in place depending on city's status at end of season.
Heard on Thursday night that a deal had been done. A consortium had met with club officials at one of the Cottingham golf clubs. Burnsy knows all about it but can't say owt. The golf club pro is also ITK for some reason.
That's quite a poor understanding of business finance... We are capable of servicing the debt and our losses are not beyond our means to cope. If we go up we get income. If we stay where we are we have a decent foundation. That statement is just typical know nowt gibber.
Time for everyone to get to the KC and Wembley and get behind City then. This is the best way to ensure new owners.
It was a very brief text of "hot news." But as understand it it is the same consortium but the deal terms depend on on city's status at the end of the season.
