1. A drop in sponsorship income, from £1.2m to £833,000. Where are all these rich southerners supposedly enticed by our game at Millwall? Does that mean the London experiment has failed spectacularly?
2. Nearly £165,000 in contract termination payments to former players and coaches. Who has been released (at the request of the club) last year whilst still in their contract?
1. A drop in sponsorship income, from £1.2m to £833,000. Where are all these rich southerners supposedly enticed by our game at Millwall? Does that mean the London experiment has failed spectacularly?
2. Nearly £165,000 in contract termination payments to former players and coaches. Who has been released (at the request of the club) last year whilst still in their contract?
I’d assume Lee Mossop / Greg Burke with Mossop getting a chunk of it after the Bateman debacle. The sponsorship loss is not good enough given IL’s reasoning for branching the club out.
I’d assume Lee Mossop / Greg Burke with Mossop getting a chunk of it after the Bateman debacle. The sponsorship loss is not good enough given IL’s reasoning for branching the club out.
Not sure we can say that to be fair to IL. We've just announced sponsorship with 3 organisations and unless u are part of the inner sanctum, how do we know they are not connected to the Millwall game?
What it does show is that all those who say our chairman is tight are wrong. The loss will come out of his private funds and he doesn't appear to be running for the hills and trying sell his share of the club.
The club does need to address the falling attendances though, it's a huge issue for us.
Not sure we can say that to be fair to IL. We've just announced sponsorship with 3 organisations and unless u are part of the inner sanctum, how do we know they are not connected to the Millwall game?
What it does show is that all those who say our chairman is tight are wrong. The loss will come out of his private funds and he doesn't appear to be running for the hills and trying sell his share of the club.
The club does need to address the falling attendances though, it's a huge issue for us.
The simple fact is that we are not very pretty to watch. You can't rely on fan loyalty to keep bums on seats, you have to entertain people in order for them to keep coming back. It's ok saying ancient and loyal and all that, that's fine for the older more established fans that live and breathe the game. I'm talking about new people to the sport, to the Wigan club and brand, unless they feel entertained they aren't going to keep coming back.
To a lot it's sport, it's something to do on weekend that you enjoy, it is something to look forward to and a reason to spend your hard earned. Even some of the most hardened fans at the are finding it tedious to watch games, imagine what the new-comers must think?
I note that rental of the stadium has also gone up.
I wonder if this is in relation to Latics' gradual demise.
I'm sure I remember it being said at a fans forum once that if Latics got relegated, we would have to carry more of the costs - think this was one reason why IL wanted them to stay up.
I agree on both of your above post Cruncher. Getting bums on seats has to be a major consideration and concern for the club moving forward and the match day experience has to be exciting and entertaining which sadly over the last few years, it mostly hasn't been.
Latics demise is without doubt the cause of the rental cost increase.
Warrington led 16-2 in Saturday's Grand Final, but their joy was short-lived as Wigan roared back to win the Super League title and extend the Wire's 58-year wait to be champions
We've lost around 2,000 fans per game on average in recent years. Suppose each match day fan is worth around £20 to the club, that's over £500k in lost revenue. There's the shortfall right there.
What it does show is that all those who say our chairman is tight are wrong. The loss will come out of his private funds and he doesn't appear to be running for the hills and trying sell his share of the club.
I doubt it. When was the last time you heard of a company CEO bailing out a loss making organisation out of their personal wealth? He might have done this but it's just as likely the club has borrowed money (as all business do) to finance their operations.
The club does need to address the falling attendances though, it's a huge issue for us.
Needs to factor in even more cash for severance pay then.
The whole sponsorship of our shirts has been a mystery to me, we seem to have unheard of or parochial companies whereas some other SL clubs have managed to attract national household brands.
We should be casting the net to catch a Vodafone (tie up to NZ warriors?), a Samsung (PL and SL champions link), Emirates (deep pockets) etc. etc.
Are we the most famous club in the world or not?
selling land and assets is not a viable long term model