roppa
Striker
I agree, how on earth we lost money doing them I don't know, but let's concentrate on what's important and be a football club that we can all be proud of.
-
The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
No more concerts at SOL
- Thread starter Brett
- Start date
- Status
martinlumley
Striker
It means the mags are council tenants.
WASTID
Striker
It would be extremely easy to declare they made a profit or a loss depending on just a few cost allocations. Suspect Bain may have done just that to declare the loss as the reason.
Butcher's Coat
Striker
Or maybe "The Hair" was totally inept at his job, and fucked up royally?
From a barman over at the SOL to a director with such power, he wasn't exactly the best in the business to book large acts.
He didn't last long after Bain arrived mind.
Paddy O'Dors
Striker
Isn't it a bit more complicated than that.
SJH owns the stands but not the ground they stand on?
The Beautiful Game
Striker
He wasn't let go. He left to take up a similar job at Wembley so he must be doing something right.
Forty
Winger
If he was that bad at his job how come he is now doing the same job at the National Stadium?
Butcher's Coat
Striker
Martin F
Striker
The promoters.
This is what I don't understand why people on here believe we lost money - The promoter hired the stadium, the promoter booked the bands the promoter took the money, the promoter put their own beer and catering in and the promoter had to return the stadium to the way it was. . All we did was receive 4,000 tickets as payment to use the ground and any corporate hospitality was Sunderland's. The rest was all to do with the promoter.
The Beautiful Game
Striker
Where was it actually reported they made a loss? The only thing I remember is an echo article saying they made us about £1m. I thought we got rid of the idea because Moyes wanted a home friendly and first game of the season at home?
Sideshow Bob2
Striker
I think Sunderland Live made a loss (council owned), but I don’t see how the club could have either.
Butcher's Coat
Striker
So who were they?
Was it 1879 Events Ltd, the club’s external event management which Gary the Hair set-up?
And what part did Sunderland Council play in the funding for these gigs? Like the £375,000 they paid to SAFC to "help" them get the Beyoncé & 1 Direction gigs?
Just asking like.
That's part of my point - it was only ever on here that people suggested they made a loss- if DCCC can make a profit on Rod and Little Mix we could have done the same and not had to put up and take down the stage between each performance lowering the overheads
Cappuccino Kid
Striker
There certainly is something amiss.
The likes of the Etihad & Emirates have had similar acts, and apparently turn a healthy profit. Whatever the promoter will charge will all be proportionate based on capacity - so its not like they will be demanding twice as much to play in Sunderland. And ticket prices will generally be the same.
I wonder if it has something to do with the council.
The likes of the Etihad & Emirates have had similar acts, and apparently turn a healthy profit. Whatever the promoter will charge will all be proportionate based on capacity - so its not like they will be demanding twice as much to play in Sunderland. And ticket prices will generally be the same.
I wonder if it has something to do with the council.
and this is the council wanting to be City of Culture.
Move then mate. Move to a country with the rest of the anti-tax nuggets like yourself, where you can all be individualists, er, together.
FIVE
Striker
*BELCH
- Status
