The accounts - **Not for the faint hearted**

[BrettieAngell]

Way I see it is this ground gets the full go ahead within the next 6 months NO DELAYS

or

We get another investor

or

Ron sells the club

or

We go bust

Its been that way for at the very least the last 3 years.

 

[Jam_Man]

The Doncaster game was the first leg, this time wound was the second leg. That should make a massive difference in my opinion- so you are not comparing like with like.


We used to phone people to 'remind them' that there was a game on- we don't now
We used to phone people whi had not renewed season tickets- we don't now
We used to have 'Blues Country' advertising boards- we don't now
We don't advertise Southend united outisde of Southend i.e Wickford etc
We don't advertise the soccer schools (get them while they are young) outside of Southend
We don't have the Bluebelles advertising games at railstations - we ahve done so in the past.

I am not in marketing so there must be lots that we could be doing - but dont' . As I said I accept that this could just be down to money . But to imply that the marketing dept can not , given the correct budget and the correct team get up attendences is dumb in my opinion. There have been threads on this before where people have said that they did not renew season tickets, but a phone call and 'feeling wanted' might/would have been enought to ahve made them renew.

No Im not comparing like for like, that season our attendances on the whole were well above what they were last season.

The Doncaster game was in league one when we were getting higher attendances just due to the league positon, and also we still had the higher attendances that were hanging on from the Championship season

Our average attendance then was 7,850, last season 6,090 up from 5344 the year before.

So 1800 people less on average yet the playoff semi only had 1000 less. Even considering it was the first leg shows last seasons wasnt low.

AS for all the marketing department can do given the correct budget, we had to cut back on costs so we cant do all of that anymore and even if we did we would still not be getting big crowds as we are in league two.

It doesnt matter what song and dance you make, people dont want to come and watch Southend vs Burton as much as they would want to see Southend vs a league one side.

Even with that said and done we still had the 5th highest attendance in the league.

 

[Firestorm]

Hull were in Nationwide Divison 3 with us I went to boothferry park with just over 4k there in 2000 by 2001 in the same stadium they have over 8k there - the club raise the issue the fans responded its an example to behold

and Double our population with the nearest big club (leeds ) 60 mile away and the nearest Prem club over 100 Miles away

 

[TrueBlue]

and Double our population with the nearest big club (leeds ) 60 mile away and the nearest Prem club over 100 Miles away

Double??? not at all! 175k Southend Hull 260k so its not double and that figure is just for the borough of Southend

 

[united we stand]

No Im not comparing like for like, that season our attendances on the whole were well above what they were last season.

The Doncaster game was in league one when we were getting higher attendances just due to the league positon, and also we still had the higher attendances that were hanging on from the Championship season

Our average attendance then was 7,850, last season 6,090 up from 5344 the year before.

So 1800 people less on average yet the playoff semi only had 1000 less. Even considering it was the first leg shows last seasons wasnt low.

AS for all the marketing department can do given the correct budget, we had to cut back on costs so we cant do all of that anymore and even if we did we would still not be getting big crowds as we are in league two.

It doesnt matter what song and dance you make, people dont want to come and watch Southend vs Burton as much as they would want to see Southend vs a league one side.

Even with that said and done we still had the 5th highest attendance in the league.

I think you are missing my point. Your earlier post , and posts by others have insinuated that there is 'nothing' that can be done unless we get to league 1and/or have the new stadium. I am not looking to get back our league 1 crowds for league 2- but I do subscribe to the thought that we can add a few hundred more .My point is simple, there is stuff that could be done and has been done in the past. If the club has made a deliberate decision not to do this (as I noted in my first post) then I understand this . The club 'could' do this if they wanted to , but I can only assume that they believe that the expenditure needed does not make it worthwile, or simply we don't have the imagination to make it work .

I am not in marketing but here is a VERY simple idea.

There are thousands of people unemployed

There are posts on this site, and indeed on this sirte that state that getting calls from the club has lead people to buy tickets and season tickets that they may not have done so in the past
Why not have people work part time and pay them purely commission ?
I don't expect this to bring in thousands, but if it is just hundreds isn't it worth it ?

We did the cheap tickets last year, but it was poorly executed and lead to some people going to Every home league game with a cheap ticket. That was not the idea , but the implementation of the scheme was flawed and so this is what happened.

Maybe I am talking crap and none of this works , all I know is that in my workplace we look for innovative solutions to issues and not reasons why things can't be done. That outook leads to a lot getting done that otherwise would not happen.

 

[Jam_Man]

500 seats sold every single game would bring in 170,000 a year at £15 a ticket.

Would need to be a lot more than than that to make a difference.

 

[Shrimper51]

500 seats sold every single game would bring in 170,000 a year at £15 a ticket.

Would need to be a lot more than than that to make a difference.

£144,00 when you take off VAT...

 

[TrueBlue]

500 seats sold every single game would bring in 170,000 a year at £15 a ticket.

Would need to be a lot more than than that to make a difference.

pays 2 players wages for a year though!

 

[Jam_Man]

pays 2 players wages for a year though!

Yes it would, and any extra helps of course.

 

[SS3]

The answers TB arethat we are skint and losing money every year, we knew that already and as depressing as the figures are they are what we expected surely?

Sadly theres little as fans we can do. Can we fund raise a million a year ? No.

The club needs owners with money willing to subsidise the club until the ground is built, thats the only solution.

Well if 5000 supporters all paid £17 a month for a year then yes we could raise a Million a year!

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

It' s a lot of money for a small club but almost nothing for the likes of Sainsbury's or the premiership big boys. One day soon the FA will have to wake up and sort out the way money gets distributed in order to protect its own long term viability that is based on the pyramid (with a wide base). Transfers and youth set ups need review; and I have read on here and in periodic publications of the short term benefits/long term harm of the loan system. There are few clubs outside of the prem who aren't or won't be suffering and it is down to the clubs, FA and PFA to get the whole of its business in order. Maybe with less scheming owners the clubs would receive better government (local & national) support. As supporters we can only pay for our seats, pies, programmes, shirts etc and support initiatives (like frankie banks did so well) to get others with us.

 

[Beefy]

Complaining about the distribution of income is pointless as:
a) it's not going to change
b) even if it did change it wouldn't suddenly make lower league clubs into sound businesses.

No matter what income a club earns they tend to spend more than that every year. If you give League One and Two clubs more then they'll spend more.

Clubs at all levels should earn more than enough to break even but it would mean paying players at a level which would make it unattractive a proposition compared to the other 91 clubs, and/or cutting back elsewhere.

 

[Norwichshrimper]

Complaining about the distribution of income is pointless as:
a) it's not going to change
b) even if it did change it wouldn't suddenly make lower league clubs into sound businesses.

No matter what income a club earns they tend to spend more than that every year. If you give League One and Two clubs more then they'll spend more.

Clubs at all levels should earn more than enough to break even but it would mean paying players at a level which would make it unattractive a proposition compared to the other 91 clubs, and/or cutting back elsewhere.

Unless a sensible wage cap were introduced to allow clubs to to be on a more equal footing when trying to attract players?

Though in reality I appreciate this would result in us watching 22 Peter Gilberts hoofing the ball around the pitch and anyone with any appreciable footballing ability would bugger off to europe to earn a better wage. Either that or they'd sign for Steve Evans on £100 per week and claim £5k per week travelling expenses :sad:.

 

[Jam_Man]

Complaining about the distribution of income is pointless as:
a) it's not going to change
b) even if it did change it wouldn't suddenly make lower league clubs into sound businesses.

No matter what income a club earns they tend to spend more than that every year. If you give League One and Two clubs more then they'll spend more.

Clubs at all levels should earn more than enough to break even but it would mean paying players at a level which would make it unattractive a proposition compared to the other 91 clubs, and/or cutting back elsewhere.

Indeed, it will just mean they can afford bigger wages, players will demand bigger wages and we will end up with the same squads but be paying them more.

With the distribution as it is, clubs like Bolton and Blackburn simply ran at huge losses knowing they could do so.

Unless a sensible wage cap were introduced to allow clubs to to be on a more equal footing when trying to attract players?

Though in reality I appreciate this would result in us watching 22 Peter Gilberts hoofing the ball around the pitch and anyone with any appreciable footballing ability would bugger off to europe to earn a better wage. Either that or they'd sign for Steve Evans on £100 per week and claim £5k per week travelling expenses :sad:.

In which case players would be getting big signing on fees and other loopholes.

 

[united we stand]

500 seats sold every single game would bring in 170,000 a year at £15 a ticket.

Would need to be a lot more than than that to make a difference.

Could it pay for 2 players wages- yes,
would it have stopped some of the fines we had for late VAT/PAYE payements 2 years ago- Yes

following your logic, if someone was to offer us £150,000 for one of our fringe players who might/might not make it we shouldn't bother accepting as , 'Would need to be a lot more than than that to make a difference'

I'm not looking a for the solution to all of our issues, my point has always been on could we get higher attendences through any other way than promotion.

 

[Beefy]

Unless a sensible wage cap were introduced to allow clubs to to be on a more equal footing when trying to attract players?

Though in reality I appreciate this would result in us watching 22 Peter Gilberts hoofing the ball around the pitch and anyone with any appreciable footballing ability would bugger off to europe to earn a better wage. Either that or they'd sign for Steve Evans on £100 per week and claim £5k per week travelling expenses :sad:.

No need for a wage cap. Just need properly penalties for clubs spending what they can't afford.

 

[Firestorm]

Isn't that what UEFA are trying to do with the financial fair play, as well as trying to stop clubs being underpinned by wealthy owners just throwing money in. (The idea is to prevent Free fall should the owner abrubtlt stop the funding)
Which was immediately abused by Man City and the way above market value shirt and sponsorship "deal" they got last season

 

[Beefy]

I personally believe that FPP is less about sorting out football finances and it more about about protecting the position of the top clubs by making it almost impossible for smaller clubs to ever be able to challenge them.

Man City can afford to buy the players who they sign and pay them the huge wages that they pay them. I don't have any objection to what they or Chelsea do.

It's clubs who spend what they can't afford who are the problem. HMRC are thankfully get hot now on anyone skipping tax payments, as they should be, but there's still no significant punishment for going into administration. 10 points isn't a deterrant to stop teams from using financial steroids. A two division relegation may make Clubs think twice before they sign that fifth striker instead of paying their bills.

 

[hockleyeast1964]

Isn't that what UEFA are trying to do with the financial fair play, as well as trying to stop clubs being underpinned by wealthy owners just throwing money in. (The idea is to prevent Free fall should the owner abrubtlt stop the funding)
Which was immediately abused by Man City and the way above market value shirt and sponsorship "deal" they got last season

Perhaps someone should be calling stellios and get him to sponsor us for a massive fee.Would you still watch us if we were playing in orange?

 

[Bluesmanager]

hearing that we're 10mil in the red.

Eeek.