Newcastle 2019

[ruffdiamond]

2 minutes ago, soupy said:

Nobody remembers losers though but winners are different.Surely the bears will lie low so Newcastle will win silverware for the 90th

Everyone remembers winners, but if Redcar lose, will we ever let them forget ? 

[Diamondlil]

If they win we will never here the last of it 

[Aceslider]

2 hours ago, StevePark said:

One set of fans from both clubs and two lots of points money to pay out, though.  

So the second lot of points money is more than the saved rent?

What about increased revenues from Track Shop and Bar?

What about the increased attendance from other fans who might be attracted by a Double Header (Workington/Berwick etc).

Just wondering as it does seem to make sense to run this as a Double Header

 

 

[Fortythirtyeight]

5 minutes ago, Aceslider said:

So the second lot of points money is more than the saved rent?

What about increased revenues from Track Shop and Bar?

What about the increased attendance from other fans who might be attracted by a Double Header (Workington/Berwick etc).

Just wondering as it does seem to make sense to run this as a Double Header

 

 

Can't believe any fan thinks a double header is a good idea.

Same income , double wages.

How does that make any sense to anybody???

Then add any possible injuries in the first match, or delays or any incidents whatsoever....No, running it as a double header is a ridiculous idea. We at Workington were forced into running them and look where we are now!

[StevePark]

14 minutes ago, Aceslider said:

So the second lot of points money is more than the saved rent?

What about increased revenues from Track Shop and Bar?

What about the increased attendance from other fans who might be attracted by a Double Header (Workington/Berwick etc).

Just wondering as it does seem to make sense to run this as a Double Header

 

 

We don't get ANY of the bar takings.  What increased takings at the track shop ( a few extra cups of tea?).

Would get more neutral fans wanting to pay £17 for a cup final, than say £30 for a double header including a meeting they have no interest in (in my opinion).

It makes no sense whatsoever (again, in my opinion).

[ruffdiamond]

36 minutes ago, StevePark said:

We don't get ANY of the bar takings.  What increased takings at the track shop ( a few extra cups of tea?).

Would get more neutral fans wanting to pay £17 for a cup final, than say £30 for a double header including a meeting they have no interest in (in my opinion).

It makes no sense whatsoever (again, in my opinion).

Run the cup match first, to get a proper full result, then drag the league match to ht 10 and, save 5 races worth of points money, 'BINGO' 

[leander]

13 minutes ago, ruffdiamond said:

Run the cup match first, to get a proper full result, then drag the league match to ht 10 and, save 5 races worth of points money, 'BINGO' 

Unfortunately the original fixture takes priority (i.e. the league match). 

[IronScorpion]

4 hours ago, ruffdiamond said:

Do ye think it would make much difference???,,, a think the writing is on the wall anyway 

but worst case scenario, we'll be able to say we were second in the cup 

That attitude might sway some people to stay away.

[Aceslider]

3 hours ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

Can't believe any fan thinks a double header is a good idea.

Same income , double wages.

How does that make any sense to anybody???

Then add any possible injuries in the first match, or delays or any incidents whatsoever....No, running it as a double header is a ridiculous idea. We at Workington were forced into running them and look where we are now!

Very bold statement of opinion but not backed up with any real form of financial evidence apart from a general statement about the financial demise of Workington.

Any actual figures available?

[ruffdiamond]

2 hours ago, leander said:

Unfortunately the original fixture takes priority (i.e. the league match). 

Yeah, but isn't the league match a rearranged fixture anyway ?

am sure they could make a new rule up 

Edited September 8, 2019 by ruffdiamond

[Fortythirtyeight]

17 minutes ago, Aceslider said:

Very bold statement of opinion but not backed up with any real form of financial evidence apart from a general statement about the financial demise of Workington.

Any actual figures available?

Are you completely devoid of any common sense.?

Having worked behind the scenes at a number of tracks I have experience of how tracks finances work. You clearly have no understanding of incomings versus outgoings. 

If one meeting brings in , say £8,000 and the cost of that meeting including wages is £6,000 then you have a small profit. Do you understand this so far?

Now run the same meeting with your income of £8,000 but double your wage bill and say that cost now comes to £10,000.

Youve just lost £2,000.

get it???

[ruffdiamond]

What's happened to the extra gate money for a double header, or does that bit not count ?

Also, maybe less stadium rental, 1 day instead of 2.

Edited September 8, 2019 by ruffdiamond

[Aceslider]

6 minutes ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

Are you completely devoid of any common sense.? 

Having worked behind the scenes at a number of tracks I have experience of how tracks finances work. You clearly have no understanding of incomings versus outgoings. 

If one meeting brings in , say £8,000 and the cost of that meeting including wages is £6,000 then you have a small profit. Do you understand this so far?

Now run the same meeting with your income of £8,000 but double your wage bill and say that cost now comes to £10,000.

Youve just lost £2,000.

get it???

Having been a qualified accountant for over 40 years I find your offensive comment actually quite amusing as well as your elementary explanation of a profit and loss account.

But hey ho, don't let your ignorance stand in the way of your rudeness or inability to provide any factual evidence other than speculative numbers!!

 

[Fromafar]

Don’t think double header would attract  the neutral fans that a Cup Final might.

[Tsunami]

54 minutes ago, Aceslider said:

Very bold statement of opinion but not backed up with any real form of financial evidence apart from a general statement about the financial demise of Workington.

Any actual figures available?

There are several variables in the comparison. Assuming the wage bill is roughly the same for both meetings, the saving from only paying one track rent, say £1600, for two meetings is partially offset by the increase in the admission price, which is never twice but something like £25 instead of the usual £17. The track only gets the income from the merchandising and tea stall, with the stadium getting all the income from the upper bar and the food and bar downstairs. Only one programme to sell as well, so less profit from selling 2 separate Proggies.

Hope that helps AS.

[Aceslider]

23 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

There are several variables in the comparison. Assuming the wage bill is roughly the same for both meetings, the saving from only paying one track rent, say £1600, for two meetings is partially offset by the increase in the admission price, which is never twice but something like £25 instead of the usual £17. The track only gets the income from the merchandising and tea stall, with the stadium getting all the income from the upper bar and the food and bar downstairs. Only one programme to sell as well, so less profit from selling 2 separate Proggies.

Hope that helps AS.

Thanks Tsunami for your wise input.

Based on that kind of model, and estimating a crowd of say 800, then you could afford to give a discount of £2 per head on twice the normal admission price, i.e. £32 instead of £34. In your theoretical example a discount of £9 would be excessive and would need to be offset by other forms (if any) of additional income if the Double Header was to be a feasible proposition.

The numbers in taking a proper view would need to be informed and a prudent estimate of the crowd size which could increase or decrease the affordable discount.

 

[Tsunami]

11 minutes ago, Aceslider said:

Thanks Tsunami for your wise input.

Based on that kind of model, and estimating a crowd of say 800, then you could afford to give a discount of £2 per head on twice the normal admission price, i.e. £32 instead of £34. In your theoretical example a discount of £9 would be excessive and would need to be offset by other forms (if any) of additional income if the Double Header was to be a feasible proposition.

The numbers in taking a proper view would need to be informed and a prudent estimate of the crowd size which could increase or decrease the affordable discount.

 

One problem with a small £2 discount is that the paying fans would see it as profiteering and be turned off coming to the double meeting at a high price, One saving not mentioned is that our riders travel would be for once instead of 2 separate meetings. As can be seen and you can see, it's not an exact science but a series of assumptions possible based on previous double headers and of course the pulling power of the opposition.

[geoff100]

Bit of a p*** take edinburgh having a guest for masters in poland another in a long line of nails!!

[Mr Blobby]

21 minutes ago, geoff100 said:

Bit of a p*** take edinburgh having a guest for masters in poland another in a long line of nails!!

How is it? Poland has always took priority.

[geoff100]

Pretty sure we had to use lower league guests last season but could be wrong!,poland has first call because???