Ted Fenton wrote:
Makes sense, but won't stop the "enemy within" on this site.
Come on Ted, man up, name some names .
Alternatively just accept that others have a different opinion to you and try not to post using sly digs .
Your choice .
Chris BMU wrote:This is really stretching to try to find negatives. Each club gets "millions" more for each higher league place. Last year it was £1.25m per place, next year under the new TV deal it will be much more. So we agree a deal where we say we can't afford to pay much, but if we do better and earn more we will pay more. The better we do, the more we earn, and the better the taxpayer does too.
Sounds to me like a sensible deal and one in keeping with the political realities of the stadium's ownership (which, remember, we get to use having paid almost nothing for it).
There is a flaw or two in your argument however .
1.David Gold is on record as saying in principle he is in favour of cheaper tickets but we as a club cannot act in isolation as it would impact on our ability to pay for players in the market place .
The more rent we pay the lower the income .......
2. Are you happy with the club having structured a deal whereby we achieve significantly diminishing returns based upon performance ? Tenth place is over the course of history our average league finish , and it appears the Board have capped our ambition at that .
Cup runs ? Costs us more .
High league position ? Costs us more .
It's against the very ethos of a competitive sport .