Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
essex canary

How many Away members? How much income?

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Our gain is cambridge's loss. 

 

Fixed for you...

 

@essex canary (for some reason there are 6 of you) have you raised these issues at the AGM? If so what was their response? Getting all harumphy about it on here isn't actually going to change anything, if you feel so undervalued as a shareholder (and fair play to you for putting your money in when the club needed it) then you should be raising this at the AGM and they will provide a response. If you continue to feel so alienated from the club and have even purchased a season ticket elsewhere perhaps consider selling your shares and enjoying the club that gives you the validation that you feel you deserve.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I'm referring to the Archives re. the point about Director's travel to away games. 

In the archive, back in the 30's it specifically list one of the duties of a director as being to travel to away games with the team (I have only got to 1938 at the moment so cannot determine whether such a clause still exists, but likely it hasn't been edited out, these things rarely are). 

I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the current Director's terms and conditions, but if such a stipulation remains, there is no argument on this one. They have a duty to travel with the team to away games, however the team travels!  🙂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

Fixed for you...

 

@essex canary (for some reason there are 6 of you) have you raised these issues at the AGM? If so what was their response? Getting all harumphy about it on here isn't actually going to change anything, if you feel so undervalued as a shareholder (and fair play to you for putting your money in when the club needed it) then you should be raising this at the AGM and they will provide a response. If you continue to feel so alienated from the club and have even purchased a season ticket elsewhere perhaps consider selling your shares and enjoying the club that gives you the validation that you feel you deserve.

I have raised issues ad infinitum with the Club including at the AGM. The problem is they have a Johnsonian style of response. For example when they remove something that has been in force for 20 years without consultation rather than apologising and resolving they claim it was just an informal agreement. 

At the end of the day no-one changes football allegiance. I am forever NCFC albeit at times I watch other teams.

I won't let them drive me away from my Club. Nonetheless I resent the Johnsonian nature and all it stands for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Again I'm referring to the Archives re. the point about Director's travel to away games. 

In the archive, back in the 30's it specifically list one of the duties of a director as being to travel to away games with the team (I have only got to 1938 at the moment so cannot determine whether such a clause still exists, but likely it hasn't been edited out, these things rarely are). 

I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the current Director's terms and conditions, but if such a stipulation remains, there is no argument on this one. They have a duty to travel with the team to away games, however the team travels!  🙂

I wonder if that's in the Articles of Association?

Perhaps it also states that under no circumstances must the Directors be seen to make any contributions to their travel or pleb supporters be allowed to travel with them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, essex canary said:

I wonder if that's in the Articles of Association?

Perhaps it also states that under no circumstances must the Directors be seen to make any contributions to their travel or pleb supporters be allowed to travel with them?

This would be in the contract with the director's, cannot see a reason for such detail in the AofA.  As a duty therefore it falls to the cost of the club, how would you re-apportion the cost to charge a director for the share of the travel especially if this placed an unnecessary burden on that director. 

Reading between the lines this clause was introduced because there was a lack of engagement between the directors and the playing squad - there were numerous references to meet the directors events for players during the early years of the club. Interesting that there was such a focus on "we're all in this together" team building in the early part of the 20th century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

This would be in the contract with the director's, cannot see a reason for such detail in the AofA.  As a duty therefore it falls to the cost of the club, how would you re-apportion the cost to charge a director for the share of the travel especially if this placed an unnecessary burden on that director. 

Reading between the lines this clause was introduced because there was a lack of engagement between the directors and the playing squad - there were numerous references to meet the directors events for players during the early years of the club. Interesting that there was such a focus on "we're all in this together" team building in the early part of the 20th century.

Indeed. 

In many ways that is exactly the point that the "we're all in this together" with supporters and minority shareholders aspect of the early part of S&J's tenure is not being adhered to now and they are making no efforts to restore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

This would be in the contract with the director's, cannot see a reason for such detail in the AofA.  As a duty therefore it falls to the cost of the club, how would you re-apportion the cost to charge a director for the share of the travel especially if this placed an unnecessary burden on that director. 

Reading between the lines this clause was introduced because there was a lack of engagement between the directors and the playing squad - there were numerous references to meet the directors events for players during the early years of the club. Interesting that there was such a focus on "we're all in this together" team building in the early part of the 20th century.

I find it very hard to believe that there is a current duty on our directors to attend all games or that if there is then it is enforced. If there is then perhaps yes there is an argument for reasonable travel expenses to be re-imbursed.

I guess we will never find out whether they pay them themsleves or they are covered by the club but I would hazard a guess that the expenses incurred by the "entourage" on a weekly basis go well beyond that.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I find it very hard to believe that there is a current duty on our directors to attend all games or that if there is then it is enforced. If there is then perhaps yes there is an argument for reasonable travel expenses to be re-imbursed.

I guess we will never find out whether they pay them themsleves or they are covered by the club but I would hazard a guess that the expenses incurred by the "entourage" on a weekly basis go well beyond that.  

Well, looking at it externally, once a coach or plane is booked, free spaces are available to offset the total cost.  It's my experience however, that directors like our MP's, tend to claim for anything they can get and woe betide the FD that ****s up any of their claims, their days are numbered!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For their time, effort and commitment to running our football club, and everything that goes with it, I really don't care if they're paying for their trips to follow us around the country or not!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/07/2022 at 14:04, TIL 1010 said:

Oh go on then i will indulge you and say that from a reliable source the figure going into the final week that gave you a !0% discount which from memory was around 17th June it stood at 3,500.

Someone on twitter a few weeks ago posted they'd sold  around 3500, not sure how many we sold last season but 6500 rings a bell , but that was for our premier campaign 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, essex canary said:

As I pointed out to you yesterday some of the stances you take are simply not consistent.

At least your posts are consistent Ethics  .....consistently dull, tedious and self serving. How have you let yourself become so sour? Don't try to blame the Club, you are obviously deeply unhappy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hogesar said:

For their time, effort and commitment to running our football club, and everything that goes with it, I really don't care if they're paying for their trips to follow us around the country or not!

Well said Hoggy - as Ive said before we dont always agree, but on this occasion I do 100%. (ill try not to let it become a habit!) 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, essex canary said:

Indeed. 

In many ways that is exactly the point that the "we're all in this together" with supporters and minority shareholders aspect of the early part of S&J's tenure is not being adhered to now and they are making no efforts to restore it.

Maybe, just maybe, you're not that important to the Club. 

Once a marriage has gone sour and you can no longer see the beauty in the one you once adored, just the faults....ITS TIME FOR A DIVORCE!! ... What's more The Club won't be entitled to 50% of all your lovely precious possessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, hogesar said:

For their time, effort and commitment to running our football club, and everything that goes with it, I really don't care if they're paying for their trips to follow us around the country or not!

Perhaps I wouldnt mind either providing they were treating all fellow shareholders with the same principles.

When they first joined they said that shareholding was the way forward. Now they do their utmost to try to minimise any rewards to minority shareholders even though essentially it costs the club peanuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Diane said:

Someone on twitter a few weeks ago posted they'd sold  around 3500, not sure how many we sold last season but 6500 rings a bell , but that was for our premier campaign 

So 20% down second time round perhaps another 20% down third time round. The fans are voting with their feet because they don't get a vote with their hands.

Edited by essex canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, essex canary said:

So 20% down second time round perhaps another 20% down third time round. The fans are voting with their feet because they don't get a vote with their hands.

Youre not comparing like with like Essex. 

Keep looking for those sticks.... 

Do cambridge have a forum you can post on? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Perhaps I wouldnt mind either providing they were treating all fellow shareholders with the same principles.

When they first joined they said that shareholding was the way forward. Now they do their utmost to try to minimise any rewards to minority shareholders even though essentially it costs the club peanuts.

You think you put as much into the running of the club as members of the board?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hogesar said:

You think you put as much into the running of the club as members of the board?

Seems to be confusing a shareholder with Director. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hogesar said:

You think you put as much into the running of the club as members of the board?

You don't disagree with my point then but rather decided to change the subject.

I don't think their input is very transparent on the administrative side of the Club. I could be wrong but they seem to delegate absolutely everything with no obvious scrutiny.

Edited by essex canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Youre not comparing like with like Essex. 

Keep looking for those sticks.... 

Do cambridge have a forum you can post on? 

What isn't like for like. 8,000 away members in season 1. 6,500 in season 2. 20% decline.

Perhaps 5,000 in season 3. 20% decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, essex canary said:

What isn't like for like. 8,000 away members in season 1. 6,500 in season 2. 20% decline.

Perhaps 5,000 in season 3. 20% decline.

We are in a different league now. Not to mention a cost of living crisis that will be affecting some fans expenditure.

Keep looking for that stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, essex canary said:

You don't disagree with my point then but rather decided to change the subject.

I don't think their input is very transparent on the administrative side of the Club. I could be wrong but they seem to delegate absolutely everything.

I do disagree with your point - you seem to think a Director at board level is no different to a shareholder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hogesar said:

I do disagree with your point - you seem to think a Director at board level is no different to a shareholder.

Careful Hoggy, you'll have him on a point of accuracy! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, essex canary said:

You don't disagree with my point then but rather decided to change the subject.

I don't think their input is very transparent on the administrative side of the Club. I could be wrong but they seem to delegate absolutely everything with no obvious scrutiny.

 

chrome_image_7 Jul 2022 09_49_36 BST.png

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at Away Membership last season and for some reason missed the deadline - boring and complicated and for no apparent gain over what had gone before. As an exile I won't be bothering this year either as only two away matches are technically South of the Thames. Cup matches are another thing. If there's any down this way, I'll phone up the club ticket office 🙄

The Brighton match was so popular last year, Norwich apparently returned 1500 allocation WTF? I went, sat in the Blue end for £25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hogesar said:

I do disagree with your point - you seem to think a Director at board level is no different to a shareholder.

Of course they are different IF they are transparent about what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, essex canary said:

Of course they are different IF they are transparent about what they do.

So if a director isn't transparent then they are just a shareholder? Is that like if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there does it make a sound?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Greavsy said:

We are in a different league now. Not to mention a cost of living crisis that will be affecting some fans expenditure.

Keep looking for that stick.

I think you have answered your own question

1  can't pay won't pay.

2. Many supporters said in would never work in the Championship. They are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

I think you have answered your own question

1  can't pay won't pay.

2. Many supporters said in would never work in the Championship. They are right.

So by your definition its there to make money for the club - rightly or wrongly. 

6500 paying members for this upcoming season, according to people on here, so that has brought in some income for the club. mission accomplished surely? 

agreeing if the system is right / wrong or fair is a different argument altogether, but it is working in its sole objective to bring money in to the club. i dont expect you to see that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

So by your definition its there to make money for the club - rightly or wrongly. 

6500 paying members for this upcoming season, according to people on here, so that has brought in some income for the club. mission accomplished surely? 

agreeing if the system is right / wrong or fair is a different argument altogether, but it is working in its sole objective to bring money in to the club. i dont expect you to see that. 

 

Charging casual supporters nearly 50% more achieves the same objective but like me you object to that one. What is the difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...