|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Mar 10, 2004 19:17:35 GMT 1
then why give us extra space and charge higher prices?
I said all along he's a good businessman and those 1000 extra town fans are worth over £10,000 to him on the night, fair play. It is funny how some of the TUFC fans on here just couldn't see it.
That is one thing that concerns me about Colin Poole. "maximising revenue" comes at a cost of both pride and money, and we the real fans are the ones who may be hardest hit.
and as for West Mercia's policy of not being all ticket. Hilarious. the whole thing is a farce.
|
|
|
Post by LeeTUFC on Mar 10, 2004 19:20:50 GMT 1
chrisH said the police made it all ticket and made us give ALL the east terrace
and andy doesnt need the money but obviously like a good business man wouldnt turn it down
|
|
|
Post by Stevenelsonfanclub on Mar 10, 2004 19:22:36 GMT 1
I can't really see a justified reason for raising the ticket prices for this game
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Mar 10, 2004 19:22:39 GMT 1
bit of a contradiction there lee
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2004 19:26:56 GMT 1
Throb, remember we actually get half the net receipts (so £10,000 becomes £5,000), so we're not losing out either.......
This is more political than a fund-raiser I reckon.
|
|
|
Post by LeeTUFC on Mar 10, 2004 19:28:07 GMT 1
i mean he hasnt raised them so he doesnt go out of business but has spotted an opportunity to gain more moolah he doesnt NEED it he just WANTS it and i dont agree with it as the home fans are out of pocket to
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Mar 10, 2004 19:31:13 GMT 1
of course he needs the money
if he was rolling in it, a new pitch would have been laid long ago
|
|
|
Post by El Huracán!!!! on Mar 10, 2004 19:32:58 GMT 1
And he need the money to spend another year "rebuilding" after this years disaster
|
|
|
Post by Chris H on Mar 10, 2004 19:43:15 GMT 1
Does nobody believe what I write on here or in the paper?! It was the police that wanted the game to be all-ticket. They sent me a press release today as well giving their reasons. Telford wanted it to be pay on the night as they thought the gate would be higher this way. As for the reasons for the higher prices, you get very different versions of this depending on wich club you speak to! I don't think Mr Shaw and Mr Wycherley are exactly the best of friends...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 10, 2004 19:49:50 GMT 1
I'm sure both clubs are happy to take the extra revenue.
They COULD have agreed to play extra time in the first match, but why do that when there is another bumper gate to come.
|
|
|
Post by faginy on Mar 10, 2004 19:52:28 GMT 1
As for the reasons for the higher prices, you get very different versions of this depending on wich club you speak to! I don't think Mr Shaw and Mr Wycherley are exactly the best of friends... Telford, as the home team, must have initiated the price increase, but the Town still get a wagging finger for agreeing with it telford probably said "if its all ticket, we want to raise the admission prices so we can cover any lost revenue from the changed decision"
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Mar 10, 2004 20:23:27 GMT 1
Does nobody believe what I write on here or in the paper?! It was the police that wanted the game to be all-ticket. They sent me a press release today as well giving their reasons. Telford wanted it to be pay on the night as they thought the gate would be higher this way. I don't know what you mean Chris. I said the police were wrong to change their minds and make it all ticket.
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Mar 10, 2004 20:32:46 GMT 1
We dont doubt your paper tells the truth Chris. They just completely ignore one side of the argument....... Think of the letters page and article on Council meetings....or the lack of them.
|
|
|
Post by LeeTUFC on Mar 10, 2004 20:40:01 GMT 1
of course he needs the money if he was rolling in it, a new pitch would have been laid long ago the trouble was caused at the end of the last pre season - when on earth do you suggest we laid a new pitch? we didnt know about the drains breaking untill the rain came, its only been a problem this season. new pitch is being laid at the end of the season - he is rolling in it and shouldnt be conning us out of more money
|
|
|
Post by warbiesbread on Mar 10, 2004 20:55:20 GMT 1
I think it make total sense to make it all ticket and raise the admission, not just because town get 50% of the gate. The other reason is telford, they need the cash how the club can pay the wages out on certain players, against the modest gate income it easy to see that they need the cash?
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Mar 10, 2004 21:52:42 GMT 1
We dont doubt your paper tells the truth Chris. They just completely ignore one side of the argument....... Think of the letters page and article on Council meetings....or the lack of them. Letters page - taken over a long period we print as many for as against. The paper is pro New Meadow and has run a number of editorials saying so. But it is not just sold to Town fans and the views of people who don't agree have a right to be heard. Lack of articles on council meetings? Don't know what you're on about. We cover councils very extensively. I'm still in the office now writing up a report from a Telford & Wrekin Council meeting I've just been to. It's easy to sit at home and knock without thinking but we are bought by more than 85,000 people every night and read by more than 240,000. With that many people, you will never come even close to keeping everyone happy. Anyway, that's all my defending of the paper done for one night. Off to finish writing up my stories so I can be home in time for Footballers' Wives! Why is that cr@p programme so addictive?!?!?!
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Mar 10, 2004 21:54:50 GMT 1
I don't know what you mean Chris. I said the police were wrong to change their minds and make it all ticket. Sorry Dave, that's not how I understood what you wrote. My apologies! Thought you were still under the impression the police did not want the game to be all-ticket and Telford United did. I have read that a few times on here and the exact opposite is true.
|
|
High Ercall Lilywhite
Guest
|
Post by High Ercall Lilywhite on Mar 10, 2004 22:02:20 GMT 1
Andy Shaw probably does need the money. Plus he's not a good business man when it comes to football anyway. He runs Telford as a one man show, and over the last 4 years has literally given away a title winning side, and forced a new manager to start from scratch. The game at the Bucks Head should be for the Telford fans, we have effectively given away home advantage. You've had your turn and you werent good enough to beat us. Another PR disaster by TUFC IMO.
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Mar 10, 2004 22:08:51 GMT 1
I just ment that article that was uncovered by kickin about the council knowing the full facts and that the cheapest option to build the Theartre was infact upon Gay meadow. He had the minutes and everything.
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Mar 10, 2004 22:17:30 GMT 1
Sorry ChrisH but the Shropshire Star has totally mis-reported the whole New Meadow/ New Theatre saga and opted instead to report untruths.
Your poll on the Star website is Fundamentally flawed and was subject to vote rigging, so why were the results from it used as a front page story?
Why have the true facts about the New Meadow/ Smithfield road / New theatre costs not been reported?
The Shropshire Star is failing its readers by not reporting hard facts and continually allowing untruths to be read as fact.
Why is this happening if as you say the paper is un-biased?
I await your reply
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Mar 10, 2004 22:35:20 GMT 1
Sorry ChrisH but the Shropshire Star has totally mis-reported the whole New Meadow/ New Theatre saga and opted instead to report untruths. Your poll on the Star website is Fundamentally flawed and was subject to vote rigging, so why were the results from it used as a front page story? Why have the true facts about the New Meadow/ Smithfield road / New theatre costs not been reported? The Shropshire Star is failing its readers by not reporting hard facts and continually allowing untruths to be read as fact. Why is this happening if as you say the paper is un-biased? I await your reply I am bored with reading such nonsense. Some people just want to believe the paper is anti the club. The poll you refer to could only be rigged if someone is sad enough to go about deleting cookies or whatever it was you have to do and then voting hundreds of times. I know you did this but I'm sure most people have better things to do. Certainly on my computer, it was only posible to vote once. You say it was subject to vote rigging but the only person who definitely tried to rig it on any large scale was you! We have reported the various changes to the theatre plan and I am sure you would find directors at STFC would not be annoyed by the coverage. We speak to them on a regular basis and they are quick to let us know when they are not content. The sports reporting has sometimes been a bone of contention (Ratcliffe's long-standing refusal to talk to us) but to the best of my knowledge there has never been a problem with the news angle. The New Meadow has been backed on numerous occasions. I do not work in the Shrewsbury office so do not know exactly what has been said about the costing of the two sites for the theatre as I have not read every story we write. All I can be sure of is that this paper has consistently backed the plan for a new stadium. If you want to go on believing we are against the club or are not doing our jobs properly then fine, that is your right. I know the people who work as reporters here and they are most certainly not right-wing anti-football types. In the Shrewsbury office alone are two Shrewsbury supporters who go to games on a regular basis. I am sure you will reply with some technical comments about the cost of this or the technicalities of that but that is enough from me so I will be leaving it there. I know how ianwhit feels at timesnow!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2004 22:52:53 GMT 1
The point re: the poll is a valid one. It could be rigged quite easily by either side.
While I don't believe the Star is anti the club Kickin is right regarding the online and poll and it's questionable validity.
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Mar 10, 2004 22:55:33 GMT 1
Thankyou for admitting that the poll was open to rigging, how about reporting this as a front page story just like you reported the results? I fully admit to voting several times and the reason was to show that the results were unreliable and as such should not be used as a Shropshire Star headline grabbing story. By the way im far from sad, just very concerned when my local rag decides to employ bad journalism against my football club. You still havnt answered the question of why the Shropshire Star has failed in its duty to report the true costings and recomendations for the New thaetre projoct on both sites. The facts are there in black and white in the minutes of the relevant meeting, instead the Shropshire Star chose to report complete bollox from Albie Fox. Start reporting the facts then everyone will get off the stars case, its as simple as that. By the way chris, i have no problem with you so dont take it the wrong way
|
|
|
Post by gregtheshrew on Mar 11, 2004 0:57:25 GMT 1
If Andy Shaw doesn't need the money then he should give me some so i can make a packet on my banker at Cheltenham next week.
|
|
|
Post by telfordSHREWS on Mar 11, 2004 0:59:36 GMT 1
He's got a Porsche you know
|
|
|
Post by LeeTUFC on Mar 11, 2004 21:28:52 GMT 1
and an aston martin
|
|
|
Post by telfordSHREWS on Mar 11, 2004 21:31:27 GMT 1
and a BMW (the range rover lookalike type) , same matching blue metallic colour as the porsche, with a similar private plate
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Mar 11, 2004 21:42:04 GMT 1
The Shrop Star is a 'news' paper not a factual paper, in the world we live in now what makes the news is not always fact, its what will sell, be it a paper like the star or even the TV news its all sales, the truth doesn't sell, that is fact. This principle also works for Cllrs, Cllr Mansel Williams has used it to good effect.
|
|
|
Post by Old Bill on Mar 12, 2004 0:19:19 GMT 1
with a 25K Police bill, perhaps it was they who instigated the price rise?
|
|