Spirit of 37 - display v Newcastle

[Northumberland Rocks]

I don't think it would generate much, if any extra income when you consider the extra costs that comes with having a larger away attendance; policing/stewards/caterers would be the obvious example of fixed cost increases. There'd likely be loads of background costs too: licensing, insurance, admin etc.

We already get gates of roughly 41,000-42,000 on matchdays, an extra 1,000 away fans likely isn't worth the hassle and cost.

I agree with the BCB, atleast we've charged them £600 per head for it though.

Aye I appreciate that view, however, I think for the bigger clubs it should be looked at. I think 3-3,5000 away supporters shouldn’t be an issue.

It’s the hypocrisy of the club that disappoints when we have bent over backwards to appease the Saudis.

 

[Missplaced Childhood]

Probably not, but we’re better than them aren’t we?

By some distance mate.

 

[Idle Mackem]

I don't think it would generate much, if any extra income when you consider the extra costs that comes with having a larger away attendance; policing/stewards/caterers would be the obvious example of fixed cost increases. There'd likely be loads of background costs too: licensing, insurance, admin etc.

We already get gates of roughly 41,000-42,000 on matchdays, an extra 1,000 away fans likely isn't worth the hassle and cost.

I agree with the BCB, atleast we've charged them £600 per head for it though.

Which is fine but we wouldn't like it if our away numbers were being reduced for the same reasons.

 

[tunstallhill]

Fair enough mate. I have no issue with giving them the 6,000 it’s the Black Cats Bar that annoys me.

Giving an extra thousand or two to bigger away teams to fill seats and generate income needs to be looked at.

The hypocrisy of the club is disappointing and you can understand supporters being annoyed when it looks like we are bending over backwards to keep the Saudis happy. We should have grown some balls.

this is the bit i just can't get my head around. the likes of leeds, boro, coventry having their allocations constantly cut because 3000 isn't safe. it must have cost the club £1000s in unsold tickets over the years.

but now we find out its actually safe to accommodate 6000 of the worst f*ckers in the country

 

[WBM]

this is the bit i just can't get my head around. the likes of leeds, boro, coventry having their allocations constantly cut because 3000 isn't safe. it must have cost the club £1000s in unsold tickets over the years.

but now we find out its actually safe to accommodate 6000 of the worst f*ckers in the country

in a bubble trip...there's a big difference

 

[Get Into Em]

Aye I appreciate that view, however, I think for the bigger clubs it should be looked at. I think 3-3,5000 away supporters shouldn’t be an issue.

It’s the hypocrisy of the club that disappoints when we have bent over backwards to appease the Saudis.

Completely agree. We were told it's impossible to have away fans in the lower bowl, and that it is completely safe to have away fans above home fans with very limited H&S changes implemented after multiple incidents of home fans being put in danger. Yet here we are with ~4,000 away fans in the lower bowl as it was deemed unsafe for them to be above our home fans. Clearly bent the 'rules' for them.

Complete and utter hypocritical, contradicting, and ignorant shite from those in charge.

My finger points to Steve Neil as iirc it was him that said away fans categorically can't be in the lower, and it was unneccessary to implement further changes such as netting. Arsehole.

 

[Northumberland Rocks]

this is the bit i just can't get my head around. the likes of leeds, boro, coventry having their allocations constantly cut because 3000 isn't safe. it must have cost the club £1000s in unsold tickets over the years.

but now we find out its actually safe to accommodate 6000 of the worst f*ckers in the country

As the lad above probably rightly pointed out there would be extra costs of more away support was allowed I still think that would be out balanced with the extra income.

Higher attendances more advertising revenue, better catering contracts etc etc

 

[tunstallhill]

in a bubble trip...there's a big difference

makes fuck all difference once inside the ground

I don't think it would generate much, if any extra income when you consider the extra costs that comes with having a larger away attendance; policing/stewards/caterers would be the obvious example of fixed cost increases. There'd likely be loads of background costs too: licensing, insurance, admin etc.

We already get gates of roughly 41,000-42,000 on matchdays, an extra 1,000 away fans likely isn't worth the hassle and cost.

I agree with the BCB, atleast we've charged them £600 per head for it though.

absolutely no way does it cost the club to host away fans. no chance

they'll make a profit on every ticket sold. why do the likes of Wigan and Barsley etc.. constantly give absolutely massive away allocations to any visiting team who will sell them? because its pay-day for them.

if it costs the club money to host 3000, then why not just restrict them to 100 tickets?

if it costs the club money, are we saying SAFC is going to be massively out of pocket by selling 6000 tickets to the mags, plus all the food and drink?

 

[Northumberland Rocks]

Completely agree. We were told it's impossible to have away fans in the lower bowl, and that it is completely safe to have away fans above home fans with very limited H&S changes implemented after multiple incidents of home fans being put in danger. Yet here we are with ~4,000 away fans in the lower bowl as it was deemed unsafe for them to be above our home fans. Clearly bent the 'rules' for them.

Complete and utter hypocritical, contradicting, and ignorant shite from those in charge.

My finger points to Steve Neil as iirc it was him that said away fans categorically can't be in the lower, and it was unneccessary to implement further changes such as netting. Arsehole.

I don’t know the officers - is he the mag?

As you say hypocritical and these people have cost the club a lot of money imho. H&S suits when it suits them.

Banning the banners is disgraceful. If they are mags making the decision at the club they need to be reminded we live by uk law not Shi’a law. Grow some balls.

Good luck to all who take their own banners in and if stopped get the name of every single SAFC employee who stops you. We need to name and shame.

 

[Get Into Em]

absolutely no way does it cost the club to host away fans. no chance

they'll make a profit on every ticket sold. why do the likes of Wigan and Barsley etc.. constantly give absolutely massive away allocations to any visiting team who will sell them? because its pay-day for them.

if it costs the club money to host 3000, then why not just restrict them to 100 tickets?

if it costs the club money, are we saying SAFC is going to be massively out of pocket by selling 6000 tickets to the mags, plus all the food and drink?

Because they get such low home attendences in comparison to ours. An extra 1,000 tickets at the SoL is roughly 2% of the attendance. Based on this season's Wigan and Barnsley's home attendances, 1,000 tickets is 10% (Wigan), and 8% (Barnsley) - that extra income from 1,000 tickets would be massive for them, especially in contrast to what it'd be for us. Comparing it to them is daft.

We don't restrict all allocation either, we restrict allocations of clubs that NP have likely advised that it would cost more to police, and would be an increased risk. If NP advise that they can police it without extra funding and at low risk if the away attendance is 2,000, then the natural thing to do would be to cap it at 2,000. Is an extra 2% of ticket income (1000 tickets) from one match really worth the hassle? Likely not, which is evident as we don't give them it.

Why on earth would the club just say "nah fuck that, we could easily give them more, but we don't want the extra money"? There's obviously more in the decision making than just that.

It's been done to death on why the mags have been given 6,000 and I refuse to believe you've not seen it. We are obliged to offer 15% of the SoL capacity (7,800), it is then up to the SAG on how many tickets they get, not SAFC. Again uncomparable I've gave my stance on it a few posts ago here.

 

[rubberface]

Nobs, tits, and wankers is what I sing.

I've never heard of anyone singing puffs either, so I'm presuming it's just a few morons in the South Stand.

....just since 1986 when i started going in The Fulwell End...

 

[Freddie the Greek]

He's not a mag ffs!!!!!

He's got a dog called Marcelinho man.

 

[CARLOS CLASS]

He's got a dog called Marcelinho man.

His father black n white, mother and brother red n white. He's been at safc for a decade.

Perhaps his father named the dog?

 

[Wearside Wanderer II]

Completely agree. We were told it's impossible to have away fans in the lower bowl, and that it is completely safe to have away fans above home fans with very limited H&S changes implemented after multiple incidents of home fans being put in danger. Yet here we are with ~4,000 away fans in the lower bowl as it was deemed unsafe for them to be above our home fans. Clearly bent the 'rules' for them.

Complete and utter hypocritical, contradicting, and ignorant shite from those in charge.

My finger points to Steve Neil as iirc it was him that said away fans categorically can't be in the lower, and it was unneccessary to implement further changes such as netting. Arsehole.

I have it on very good authority it wasn’t Neil, let’s just say a few barneys have taken place between him and the fella that looks into things who wanted the scum top and bottom.

 

[tunstallhill]

It's been done to death on why the mags have been given 6,000 and I refuse to believe you've not seen it. We are obliged to offer 15% of the SoL capacity (7,800), it is then up to the SAG on how many tickets they get, not SAFC. Again uncomparable I've gave my stance on it a few posts ago here.

Exactly, cos the SAG, NP and all the other fuckers who are involved in what must be a very complex process are influenced by the fact they are mostly mags. So they'll make judgement calls on what is best for NUFC and what is worst for SAFC

I refuse to believe and I'll never ever be convinced otherwise that if we got the away draw we would have been given 6000 at SJP including their equivalent of the BCB if necessary. The entire process of meetings and discussions and compromises and decisions would have been entirely carried out with what is best for NUFC at the heart of it

 

[superhans1]

Actually black and white striped would be better

Logon or register to see this image

I know the official one got banned but have we got any anti-saudi/sportwashing stuff planned? There were some good flags and ideas like red gloves mentioned on here. I'm planning to take some copies of the black and white pound sign.

 

[Guinness Guzzler]

I have it on very good authority it wasn’t Neil, let’s just say a few barneys have taken place between him and the fella that looks into things who wanted the scum top and bottom.

He might be crap normally (I have no idea, I've never had dealings with him personally) but on this one I think Neil is getting a bit of undeserved criticism. Not sure if he's a proper mag or not, but even if he is it's wrong to think that he'd happily risk his reputation by actively trying to increase their numbers in the ground. I'm trying to move on from the debate for now as the game is around the corner, but if people want to point fingers they're pointing in the wrong direction with him

 

[UaeExile]

You said the overwhelming majority were singing about puffs, how would you know that?

There is people just on this thread who all sign different versions of it

Because I can hear them sing “puffs shits and wankers”.

It’s really that simple. When a majority sing something - you don’t hear the minority.

 

[hardtackle]

Strange fella. Admitted to only having a passing interest in Newcastle, yet loves coming on here having snidey digs. What a life

Ah Skylon...making things up again eh? Show me where I said I only have a passing interest in NUFC.

Oh and don't try to claim that because (literally once) I was at a snooker club during an NUFC game that this can rationally be counted as a "passing interest"

 

[Doberman]

I have it on very good authority it wasn’t Neil, let’s just say a few barneys have taken place between him and the fella that looks into things who wanted the scum top and bottom.

a man who banned paper for the Boro display is not likely to be actively encouraging 6000 from Geordie Arabia to be allowed into the North Stand on Saturday.