Author Topic: SC's EDP article  (Read 1231 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TonyM

  • Posts: 1248
    • View Profile
SC's EDP article
« on: March 18, 2023, 12:23:23 PM »
Latest article from SC in the EDP today - https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/23393420.stephen-cleeve-big-day-kings-lynn-town-youngsters/

Positives around the academy but still doesn't want to seem to face the reality when it comes to crowd numbers.  For me it seems pretty straightforward, a lot of 'diehards' were lost when the old folded, new fans have replaced them but we are unlikely to 'double the gate', particularly in the short to medium term, which SC says is what is required to make us sustainable (I have my doubts on that as think it is would probably need more).  SC makes some reasonable arguments, particularly in relation as to what happens to the club should something happen to him but what the article fails to acknowledge that many of the issues are as a result of choices he has made - full time status, push for NL without supporting infrastructure etc. 

I have seen calls on Facebook for more investment or additional investors - why can't people say it for what it is - they want our club to be financially doped to a false position out of someone else's pocket, that can't work for every club and can't be right long term for the good of football as a whole.  Hopefully a football regulator will be in place sooner than later and allow a reset button to be pressed on club finances throughout the pyramid.



Blue_and_Gold

  • Independent Moderator
  • Posts: 4905
  • It's a right Kerfuffle.
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2023, 02:13:47 PM »
Latest article from SC in the EDP today - https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/23393420.stephen-cleeve-big-day-kings-lynn-town-youngsters/

Positives around the academy but still doesn't want to seem to face the reality when it comes to crowd numbers.  For me it seems pretty straightforward, a lot of 'diehards' were lost when the old folded, new fans have replaced them but we are unlikely to 'double the gate', particularly in the short to medium term, which SC says is what is required to make us sustainable (I have my doubts on that as think it is would probably need more).  SC makes some reasonable arguments, particularly in relation as to what happens to the club should something happen to him but what the article fails to acknowledge that many of the issues are as a result of choices he has made - full time status, push for NL without supporting infrastructure etc. 

I have seen calls on Facebook for more investment or additional investors - why can't people say it for what it is - they want our club to be financially doped to a false position out of someone else's pocket, that can't work for every club and can't be right long term for the good of football as a whole.  Hopefully a football regulator will be in place sooner than later and allow a reset button to be pressed on club finances throughout the pyramid.

My thoughts exactly.

What happens when he walks away, or is no longer prepared to pump money in? Its got to happen at sometime, and as Tony says this is a problem of his own making (and is more often than not the case with the sole benefactor model).

Why do people expect others (such as Cleeve) to pump money in so they can watch a higher level of football than the club can really afford?

I find it strange that we embarked on the quest for a higher level of football without the infrastructure in place at the club to support it.

It's no good to keep going on about the gates. If he requires 1600 to break even or wants the gates to double, I'm afraid that's not going to happen. I just can't see it. We are a circa 1000-1,100 gate club.

Positives around the Academy which is good, as apparently its a good source of income for the Club.

Whereas the edp article didn't really ask any questions, and seems to be continuing  along the same theme as we have heard in recent weeks, neither did it give any answers.

I don't do drugs and I don't drink.
At my age I can get the same effect just by standing up too fast.

rod

  • Posts: 2063
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2023, 10:09:09 AM »
Latest article from SC in the EDP today - https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/23393420.stephen-cleeve-big-day-kings-lynn-town-youngsters/

Positives around the academy but still doesn't want to seem to face the reality when it comes to crowd numbers.  For me it seems pretty straightforward, a lot of 'diehards' were lost when the old folded, new fans have replaced them but we are unlikely to 'double the gate', particularly in the short to medium term, which SC says is what is required to make us sustainable (I have my doubts on that as think it is would probably need more).  SC makes some reasonable arguments, particularly in relation as to what happens to the club should something happen to him but what the article fails to acknowledge that many of the issues are as a result of choices he has made - full time status, push for NL without supporting infrastructure etc. 

I have seen calls on Facebook for more investment or additional investors - why can't people say it for what it is - they want our club to be financially doped to a false position out of someone else's pocket, that can't work for every club and can't be right long term for the good of football as a whole.  Hopefully a football regulator will be in place sooner than later and allow a reset button to be pressed on club finances throughout the pyramid.

My thoughts exactly.

What happens when he walks away, or is no longer prepared to pump money in? Its got to happen at sometime, and as Tony says this is a problem of his own making (and is more often than not the case with the sole benefactor model).

Why do people expect others (such as Cleeve) to pump money in so they can watch a higher level of football than the club can really afford?

I find it strange that we embarked on the quest for a higher level of football without the infrastructure in place at the club to support it.

It's no good to keep going on about the gates. If he requires 1600 to break even or wants the gates to double, I'm afraid that's not going to happen. I just can't see it. We are a circa 1000-1,100 gate club.

Positives around the Academy which is good, as apparently its a good source of income for the Club.

Whereas the edp article didn't really ask any questions, and seems to be continuing  along the same theme as we have heard in recent weeks, neither did it give any answers.

Two voices of reason and common sense but something of an oasis in a desert.

Mallard

  • Trusted User
  • Posts: 6738
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2023, 10:48:53 AM »
When did Liam and Noel play the Sahara ? :laughcry:
What if the Hokey Cokey really is what itís all about ?

Blue_and_Gold

  • Independent Moderator
  • Posts: 4905
  • It's a right Kerfuffle.
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2023, 10:54:48 AM »
When did Liam and Noel play the Sahara ? :laughcry:

Don't forget ya coat on the way out!   :laughcry:
I don't do drugs and I don't drink.
At my age I can get the same effect just by standing up too fast.

Mallard

  • Trusted User
  • Posts: 6738
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2023, 11:13:28 AM »
On a serious note back on the subject of SCís Column in the EDP itís interesting that he is surprised that the gates are averaging around 1200 ( should be after the Fylde game) and claims they need to be double that to square the circle.

The last time we were at this level, we were part time with a decent basis of local talent wearing the shirt we averaged around 1400.  This was on the back of ( IMHO) a far more attractive brand of football and a squad that the fans bought into.

With Culverhouse and his backroom team, locally based part time squad did we just strike lucky or was it a well planned on field operation.  ?  I guess SC didnít feel comfortable that he could find another Coach who could repeat that with a part time operation.

So why SC feels disappointed that The crowd are not up by a 1,000 a week is baffling.  I would suggest he has got his numbers badly wrong and the only ways the shortfall gap can be bridged is by a Commercial enterprise and SC sticking his hand in his pocket.  If he doesnít want to continue down that route then he needs a serious rethink on his ambitions and indeed the way the Club is run.
What if the Hokey Cokey really is what itís all about ?

Squire of Langham

  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2023, 06:23:24 PM »
What absolute hogwash from Mr Cleeve in his recent EDP article.

1. Was installing a scoreboard at a cost of £45,000 a necessity?  Most fans are quite capable of keeping track of the score.

2, Kidderminster's admission prices are above ours.  Not true, more spin from Mr Cleeve.

The adult standing and seating price is the same £17 and £19.

Concessions £13 standing £15 seating at Kidderminster so £2 cheaper than Lynn.

U/16 £4 standing £5 seating at Kidderminster, £5 and £10 at Lynn so more expensive.

Kidderminster also offer a ticket for 16-21 year olds £11 standing £13 seating.  No such thing at Lynn, if you're over 16 at Lynn you pay the adult rate.

Admittedly if you pay on the day at the gate at Kidderminster you pay £3 more EXCEPT Junior tickets but for MR Cleeve to say Kidderminster's prices are above Lynn's is total balderdash.

Let's not forget the Premier seating at Lynn, £22 for Adult's, concessions and children!  Unbelievable,

Less spin more truthful facts Mr Cleeve,

NORFOLKAND LYNN

  • Moderated
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: SC's EDP article
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2023, 10:17:01 PM »
The attendance was only 1500 on Saturday because we ;et in 500 kids in free, who most where playing on their phones rather than watching the game. Reduce the tickets to £10 and see if more adults come, I very much doubt it, the brand of football is so dire at the moment, only us diehards turn up.

We don't have the players like Marriot, Gash, Burrows who played and entertained us, IC didn't end well, but for two years we had a team who played to the crowd, we will never get 4000 crowd v Flyde when we had that v York. I would hope we get 1000 or more, but at the prices we charge there is no chance. It cost me £12 v York, only 3 years ago, now its 50% more.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal