UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 On the metro to the game so can't reply in detail. But here's what I base the per game increase on... http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/increased-cost-tickets-since-mike-ashley-bought-newcastle/ Its almost imperceptible like. Well exactly. How does this: http://www.themag.co.uk/assets/Newcastle-United-Ticket-Prices-Under-Mike-Ashley-NUFC.png translate to: Ashley has reduced seasonal matchday income since buying the club. But he's grown matchday income per game. Only 2 seasons out of 6 (one post-relegation) where it hasn't gone down. Edit: As an aside, I'm dubious about the average attendance figure for 2013 considering there were 7 Europa league games which were typically getting 30k crowds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Will just be about to tuck into his breakfast buffet after being rimmed and fellated by Penfold and Charver. Money rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 On the metro to the game so can't reply in detail. But here's what I base the per game increase on... http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/increased-cost-tickets-since-mike-ashley-bought-newcastle/ Its almost imperceptible like. Well exactly. How does this: http://www.themag.co.uk/assets/Newcastle-United-Ticket-Prices-Under-Mike-Ashley-NUFC.png translate to: Ashley has reduced seasonal matchday income since buying the club. But he's grown matchday income per game. Only 2 seasons out of 6 (one post-relegation) where it hasn't gone down. Edit: As an aside, I'm dubious about the average attendance figure for 2013 considering there were 7 Europa league games which were typically getting 30k crowds. The average. Shepherd £1.18m, Ashley £1.20m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Adjusted for inflation that becomes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 On the metro to the game so can't reply in detail. But here's what I base the per game increase on... http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/increased-cost-tickets-since-mike-ashley-bought-newcastle/ Its almost imperceptible like. Well exactly. How does this: http://www.themag.co.uk/assets/Newcastle-United-Ticket-Prices-Under-Mike-Ashley-NUFC.png translate to: Ashley has reduced seasonal matchday income since buying the club. But he's grown matchday income per game. Only 2 seasons out of 6 (one post-relegation) where it hasn't gone down. Edit: As an aside, I'm dubious about the average attendance figure for 2013 considering there were 7 Europa league games which were typically getting 30k crowds. The average. Shepherd £1.18m, Ashley £1.20m You're comparing averages over a period where we were regularly in Europe & tried in cups (an average of 7.5 extra home games per season) to a period where we avoid Europe and cups (an average of 2.5 extra home games per season). These cup games are often relatively poorly attended and have lower ticket prices, thus lowering the average income per game. You're basically praising Ashley for the club's cupaphobia. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 UV Happy Face seems to be playing devil's advocate for Ashley at the moment in the same way he did for Pardew for years, for reasons I can't understand. I appreciate the effort he puts into everything but the point of this current work completely escapes me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It gives him something to do, clearly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You don't think the first set of accounts to show an operating profit in 10 years is a sea change moment that presents opportunities to be considered? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You don't think the first set of accounts to show an operating profit in 10 years is a sea change moment that presents opportunities to be considered? No. Did we see opportunities considered in Summer? Did we see opportunities considered in January? The accounts when they come out relate to the state of the club on 30/6/14. They will not be a shocking revelation to the people running the club when the auditors sign them off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 On the metro to the game so can't reply in detail. But here's what I base the per game increase on... http://www.themag.co.uk/2015/02/increased-cost-tickets-since-mike-ashley-bought-newcastle/ Its almost imperceptible like. Well exactly. How does this: http://www.themag.co.uk/assets/Newcastle-United-Ticket-Prices-Under-Mike-Ashley-NUFC.png translate to: Ashley has reduced seasonal matchday income since buying the club. But he's grown matchday income per game. Only 2 seasons out of 6 (one post-relegation) where it hasn't gone down. Edit: As an aside, I'm dubious about the average attendance figure for 2013 considering there were 7 Europa league games which were typically getting 30k crowds. The average. Shepherd £1.18m, Ashley £1.20m Do these figures stack up when adjusted for inflation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You don't think the first set of accounts to show an operating profit in 10 years is a sea change moment that presents opportunities to be considered? No. Did we see opportunities considered in Summer? Did we see opportunities considered in January? The accounts when they come out relate to the state of the club on 30/6/14. They will not be a shocking revelation to the people running the club when the auditors sign them off. Net Spend goes up in line with operating Profit..... http://i59.tinypic.com/2ms0v29.png (conservatively guessed 13/14 profit) The 13/14 profit we announce won't be a surprise which is why we spent over £21m in 14/15. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You can get all you need to know from the first and last set of figures in the article. 2001 - 22 games, income £24.9 2014 - 22 games, income £25.9 Both seasons we had 3 home cup games and finished slap bang in the middle of the table. Matchday revenue has gone up by only £1m over 13 years, 4% overall, around 0.3% per year. In that time (in less time than that in fact) Spurs have more than doubled their matchday income from a starting point significantly below ours to one nearly £20m ahead of us today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You can get all you need to know from the first and last set of figures in the article. 2001 - 22 games, income £24.9 2014 - 22 games, income £25.9 Both seasons we had 3 home cup games and finished slap bang in the middle of the table. Matchday revenue has gone up by only £1m over 13 years, 4% overall, around 0.3% per year. In that time (in less time than that in fact) Spurs have more than doubled their matchday income from a starting point significantly below ours to one nearly £20m ahead of us today. YAY!!! let's charge Spurs prices Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Matchday revenue isn't a very relevant measure IMO, since the only way to increase it is to exploit your fans more. That said, does it include the fact that we've outsourced catering and retail, or the advertising lost? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Honestly not sure what that graph's meant to show except a net zero spend over 8 seasons, and that we made a big transfer profit selling Cabaye in 2014 knowing we were already making a massive profit in that season. The 13/14 profit we announce won't be a surprise which is why we spent over £21m in 14/15. The actual profit will be £50m+ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You can get all you need to know from the first and last set of figures in the article. 2001 - 22 games, income £24.9 2014 - 22 games, income £25.9 Both seasons we had 3 home cup games and finished slap bang in the middle of the table. Matchday revenue has gone up by only £1m over 13 years, 4% overall, around 0.3% per year. In that time (in less time than that in fact) Spurs have more than doubled their matchday income from a starting point significantly below ours to one nearly £20m ahead of us today. 24.9m in 2001 is about 36m today Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You can get all you need to know from the first and last set of figures in the article. 2001 - 22 games, income £24.9 2014 - 22 games, income £25.9 Both seasons we had 3 home cup games and finished slap bang in the middle of the table. Matchday revenue has gone up by only £1m over 13 years, 4% overall, around 0.3% per year. In that time (in less time than that in fact) Spurs have more than doubled their matchday income from a starting point significantly below ours to one nearly £20m ahead of us today. YAY!!! let's charge Spurs prices Or, you know, we could make more because we have 16000 more seats. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It's for your own good, Happy Face Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Honestly not sure what that graph's meant to show except a net zero spend over 8 seasons, and that we made a big transfer profit selling Cabaye in 2014 knowing we were already making a massive profit in that season. The 13/14 profit we announce won't be a surprise which is why we spent over £21m in 14/15. The actual profit will be £50m+ How can he link last summer transfers to our profit with a straight face? Its almost as though Cabaye was never sold for about that amount just 6 months earlier Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Honestly not sure what that graph's meant to show except a net zero spend over 8 seasons, and that we made a big transfer profit selling Cabaye in 2014 knowing we were already making a massive profit in that season. The 13/14 profit we announce won't be a surprise which is why we spent over £21m in 14/15. The actual profit will be £50m+ How can he link last summer transfers to our profit with a straight face? Its almost as though Cabaye was never sold for about that amount just 6 months earlier You don't think the £21m net spend in 14/15 had something to do with turning a £30m+ Operating profit in 13/14? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Honestly not sure what that graph's meant to show except a net zero spend over 8 seasons, and that we made a big transfer profit selling Cabaye in 2014 knowing we were already making a massive profit in that season. The 13/14 profit we announce won't be a surprise which is why we spent over £21m in 14/15. The actual profit will be £50m+ How can he link last summer transfers to our profit with a straight face? Its almost as though Cabaye was never sold for about that amount just 6 months earlier You don't think the £21m net spend in 14/15 had something to do with turning a £30m+ Operating profit in 13/14? We sold Cabaye for £17m in that same year, something you are ignoring. Its a £4m net spend plus we raked in another £10m 6 months later but yeah lets ignore that too as it also fucks your bizarre argument. No idea why you insist on banging this drum ad nauseum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Because people disagree that spending goes up with profits and seem to think Ashley is pocketing money from transfers. Just because you have cash in your pocket it doesn't mean it needs spent immediately. Everyone has been raging about january and the need to spend to survive, but we're as good as safe with 10 games left. Summer is the time to spend as it drives season ticket sales and starts the season on a high. Throwing money around in January only leaves less available in the summer. I'm just excited at being able to spend at the same level as our other bottom 14 competitors at last, or a little higher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Nice that the club can take money off people at the start of the season, then once its safe in the league, it just gives up and expects people to be happy with it. Any, NUFC isnt a football club anymore. Its just advertising space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Does the oily Keith Bishop fella have more of a role at the club than just PR Guru? He seems to be at every home game and is looking on smugly, sitting next to the two fatties. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Does the oily Keith Bishop fella have more of a role at the club than just PR Guru? He seems to be at every home game and is looking on smugly, sitting next to the two fatties. He'll be advising Carver on what to say to the media. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts