Membership schemes, aka monetised tickets

[NewNestCarrow 191]

A local club of similar size to ours has just launched a revamped Membership Scheme.

£40 per adult, lots of previously-acquired loyalty points being lost and lots of other problems being highlighted by fans. Lots of moans.

And apparently all our decent staff went to work there because our club is such a basket-case 

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,167]

44 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

A local club of similar size to ours has just launched a revamped Membership Scheme.

£40 per adult, lots of previously-acquired loyalty points being lost and lots of other problems being highlighted by fans. Lots of moans.

And apparently all our decent staff went to work there because our club is such a basket-case 

 

 

Details here.

https://www.twtd.co.uk/ipswich-town-news/45206/town-launch-new-membership-scheme

 

[essex canary 496]

Designed by staff mentored by Ben Kensell. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Fans protesting about their club squeezing as much money out of them as loyalty permits. Nothing new here.

[stratton canary 134]

Perhaps the Pension fund needs are increasing, after all they do own that little club 🤣

[nutty nigel 7,537]

Anyone here gonna buy one

[Greavsy 2,415]

19 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Anyone here gonna buy one

Im waiting for their bond scheme! 

[TIL 1010 4,748]

No mention of any fan consultation before this was implemented.

[pete 319]

Norwich didn't consult fans about the £50  membership for PL in 2019/20.  We arer not immune to try to rip off the fans.  Ipswich just do it more underhanded.

[A Load of Squit 5,167]

3 hours ago, stratton canary said:

Perhaps the Pension fund needs are increasing, after all they do own that little club 🤣

The form of 'English' used in these statements seems like it's a foreign language to me so my question is.

Have they issued more shares to get some money into the club?

https://www.twtd.co.uk/ipswich-town-news/45208/town-make-companies-house-filings

[GenerationA47 752]

3 hours ago, Greavsy said:

Im waiting for their bond scheme! 

We’re talking a licence to make a killing

[Greavsy 2,415]

13 minutes ago, GenerationA47 said:

We’re talking a licence to make a killing

Essex will be shaken and stirred! 

[TheRock 171]

 

19 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

No mention of any fan consultation before this was implemented.

Not surprised, a terrible mechanism that is nothing more than a greedy cash grab for more money out of supporters, under the guise of a "prestigious" Membership Scheme. Any objection and dissent to this system by our supporters was (unsurprisingly) flagrantly ignored by the club, and it looks like they've fully gone full copycat too.

 

Edited July 14, 2023 by TheRock

[GMF 745]

19 hours ago, Greavsy said:

Im waiting for their bond scheme! 

Make sure, if you happen to be abroad at the time of launch, your Wi-Fi is on. We wouldn’t want you to miss out and then have to endure your endless bleating thereafter… 

[essex canary 496]

On 13/07/2023 at 16:26, Greavsy said:

Im waiting for their bond scheme! 

Have Ipswich undertaken any fan finance schemes?

I recently received my £100 loyalty bonus from the Nationwide Building Society. Now there is an organisation who truly understands the principles of business and customer loyalty.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Have Ipswich undertaken any fan finance schemes?

I recently received my £100 loyalty bonus from the Nationwide Building Society. Now there is an organisation who truly understands the principles of business and customer loyalty.

So, just to be clear..... nationwide give investors bonus = good.  norwich give investors in bond scheme bonus = bad.

with the difference being that you didnt geton board for one of them, hmmm.

transparent, much?

[essex canary 496]

8 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

So, just to be clear..... nationwide give investors bonus = good.  norwich give investors in bond scheme bonus = bad.

with the difference being that you didnt geton board for one of them, hmmm.

transparent, much?

Because the ultimate members at NCFC are the shareholders NOT the bondholders. The latter were paid from what would otherwise be shareholders funds. 

[Greavsy 2,415]

I used to bank at Nationwide years ago, when takeovers etc were rife. Had been a customer for  many years, but the lady behind the counter took great delight in telling me, when I enquired, that if they went down that route (which they didnt plan on at that time, and still haven't) the multiple accounts I had wouldn't qualify me for any bonus such an event would have attracted. 

So they reward SOME loyalty. I have no doubt you would have bleating on about how unfair it was if you hadn't got the bonus / reward from them this time. Funny how peoples judgement gets clouded by if they benefit or not. 

I didn't meet their criteria back then certainly dont now, as I closed the accounts, I've move on. 

Maybe the total amount they have just paid in loyalty bonus would have been better going to reduce interest rates on mortgages, or increase rates on savings. So its representative of the products held? Or give it to the needy who possibly dont bank at Nationwide. Its all a bit self egotistical (Which reminded me of someone on a forum I read!)   

You have moaned previously that you didnt enter the bond, as it sold out before you had a chance to, and thus its unfair. and now you are saying that the bond benefits were paid from what should have been shareholders funds - but by implication you would have been happy to have taken a slice of that had you entered the bond in time, adn not bothered about the shareholders getting less. Me Me Me. I didn't benefit so is not fair. 

Surely the ultimate members at NCFC are the supporters, the fans, the ones who pay to watch a game, home and away, to be entertained and seek no recompense. IF you are investing in shares in a football club to get a financial return, more fool you.  

Edited July 15, 2023 by Greavsy

[essex canary 496]

On 15/07/2023 at 12:01, Greavsy said:

I used to bank at Nationwide years ago, when takeovers etc were rife. Had been a customer for  many years, but the lady behind the counter took great delight in telling me, when I enquired, that if they went down that route (which they didnt plan on at that time, and still haven't) the multiple accounts I had wouldn't qualify me for any bonus such an event would have attracted. 

So they reward SOME loyalty. I have no doubt you would have bleating on about how unfair it was if you hadn't got the bonus / reward from them this time. Funny how peoples judgement gets clouded by if they benefit or not. 

I didn't meet their criteria back then certainly dont now, as I closed the accounts, I've move on. 

Maybe the total amount they have just paid in loyalty bonus would have been better going to reduce interest rates on mortgages, or increase rates on savings. So its representative of the products held? Or give it to the needy who possibly dont bank at Nationwide. Its all a bit self egotistical (Which reminded me of someone on a forum I read!)   

You have moaned previously that you didnt enter the bond, as it sold out before you had a chance to, and thus its unfair. and now you are saying that the bond benefits were paid from what should have been shareholders funds - but by implication you would have been happy to have taken a slice of that had you entered the bond in time, adn not bothered about the shareholders getting less. Me Me Me. I didn't benefit so is not fair. 

Surely the ultimate members at NCFC are the supporters, the fans, the ones who pay to watch a game, home and away, to be entertained and seek no recompense. IF you are investing in shares in a football club to get a financial return, more fool you.  

Great that the Nationwide didn't go down that route. They stuck to their principles as a mutual Building Society which means they have only 1 set of members who also happen to be the customers (both savers and mortgagees). Unlike Football Clubs they haven't sought an ever expanding bewildering array of membership categories (Home, Away, Season Ticket, Shareholders, Bondholders etc.) They paid their bonus to those members. There was still qualifying criteria such as you needed £100 in your account at x date to receive the £100 bonus but that seems fair enough. By the same token you would expect that a Football Club with a high profile match which only 2,000 supporters could attend would insist on double figure attendance of matches the previous season as an access criteria.     

A promotion bonus paid to Bondholders owners can only be paid from Shareholders Funds as the latter are the ultimate owners. That wouldn't matter if all the owners were Board members and party to the decision but with 6,800 shareholders that isn't the case at NCFC. That is doubtless a similar reason to that with which they are in difficulties with the Takeover Panel. Keep it simple you don't have a problem, make it complicated you do have one.    

[GMF 745]

@essex canary just for context, the bond issue didn’t impact shareholder equity, so there was no need to consult with shareholders.

It also carried greater risk, as it was unsecured debt, and was priced accordingly. Had the club gone into administration, it would have ranked below both preference and ordinary shares in terms of creditor priorities.

Anyone was free to apply for the bond, which was clearly stated as first come, first served, at the time of launch. Yes, the promotion bonus was high, but the prospects of promotion at the time of launching, given that we had just finished 14th after Daniel’s first season, I would suggest seemed pretty remote.

Not that that will stop you from moaning about it ever since.

Edited July 21, 2023 by GMF
Typo

[essex canary 496]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

@essex canary just for context, the bond issue didn’t impact shareholder equity, so there was no need to consult with shareholders.

It also carried greater risk, as it was unsecured debt, and was priced accordingly. Had the club gone into administration, it would have ranked below both preference and ordinary shares in terms of creditor priorities.

Anyone was free to apply for the bond, which was clearly stated as first come, first served, at the time of launch. Yes, the promotion bonus was high, but the prospects of promotion at the time of launching, given that we had just finished 14th after Daniel’s first season, I would suggest seemed pretty remote.

Not that that will stop you from moaning about it ever since.

How could a 25% promotion bonus paid only 18 months later possibly be the cheapest cost of capital available? Then they impose scrounger schemes such as Away Membership.  Such scrounger methods could come back to haunt them if they need that shareholders vote.

[A Load of Squit 5,167]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

How could a 25% promotion bonus paid only 18 months later possibly be the cheapest cost of capital available? Then they impose scrounger schemes such as Away Membership.  Such scrounger methods could come back to haunt them if they need that shareholders vote.

I've been using the bonus from the bond scheme to buy my Away Membership, I'm not planning to use my shareholding to haunt anyone.

I think people trying to scrounge tickets for themselves due to some perceived entitlement for them and their family are not thinking of what's best for the football club, the board and the excellent executive team.

 

[GMF 745]

21 minutes ago, essex canary said:

How could a 25% promotion bonus paid only 18 months later possibly be the cheapest cost of capital available? Then they impose scrounger schemes such as Away Membership.  Such scrounger methods could come back to haunt them if they need that shareholders vote.

The bonus provisions were clearly set out in the offer documents, as was the club’s entitlement to defer repayment for a year (if the club had been relegated to League One).

Yes, as I’ve said before, it proved an expensive form of debt, but only because the club had the audacity to be promoted at the end of that season, securing £90m in extra money, which renders any debate about affordability irrelevant.

No rules broken, whatsoever. Anyone could have purchased bonds, whether an existing shareholder, or not, a season ticket holder or casual fan.

You either opted in, or you didn’t. Sorry, but there’s no point bleating about it retroactively.

 I have some empathy with regards to the away membership, as I’ve said before, but, again, shareholder consent wasn’t necessary, only Board approval, and the fact that the original scheme only lasted a year is indicative of its faults.

[GMF 745]

16 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

I've been using the bonus from the bond scheme to buy my Away Membership, I'm not planning to use my shareholding to haunt anyone.

I think people trying to scrounge tickets for themselves due to some perceived entitlement for them and their family are not thinking of what's best for the football club, the board and the excellent executive team.

 

You were doing so well until your last five words! (Winks) 

[essex canary 496]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

I've been using the bonus from the bond scheme to buy my Away Membership, I'm not planning to use my shareholding to haunt anyone.

I think people trying to scrounge tickets for themselves due to some perceived entitlement for them and their family are not thinking of what's best for the football club, the board and the excellent executive team.

 

What's best for the Football Club then must include running an over 75 years old admission as distinct from an under 25 which many Clubs operate, a ludicrously high average age of shareholders and treating some of the younger ones they have as second class citizens. The old chrony philosophy rules ok.

[A Load of Squit 5,167]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

What's best for the Football Club then must include running an over 75 years old admission as distinct from an under 25 which many Clubs operate, a ludicrously high average age of shareholders and treating some of the younger ones they have as second class citizens. The old chrony philosophy rules ok.

Yes, and well done to the excellent executive team, they've certainly made us all feel the club couldn't be better placed to move forward, they should be commended for routing out the 'fans in name only'.