cityrebel Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 2:43 PM, Wee Eck said: Figures are available from Companies’ House website. The following are approximate losses made in the 2019 season: Leicester £30k Poole £16k Berwick £9k Belle Vue £84k Edinburgh £18k Redcar £35k Scunthorpe £3k Swindon £78k and the only profit I could find: Wolverhampton £7,000 Expand Scary stuff. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 5:28 PM, Fortythirtyeight said: Try doing some work for yourself, look on companies house. It’s all in the public domain, no big secrets. Expand I'm not that bothered tbh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 6:22 PM, cityrebel said: Scary stuff. Expand Especially for BV & Swindon. Leicester not too clever either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byker Biker Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 6:48 PM, iainb said: I'm not that bothered tbh Expand Are you Robert 72 reincarnated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Stadia Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 2:43 PM, Wee Eck said: Figures are available from Companies’ House website. The following are approximate losses made in the 2019 season: Leicester £30k Poole £16k Berwick £9k Belle Vue £84k Edinburgh £18k Redcar £35k Scunthorpe £3k Swindon £78k and the only profit I could find: Wolverhampton £7,000 Expand Not many could sustain a loss of 84k, without some kind of quid pro quoi! i.e. another business which is tied in with the same set up, that makes a profit and allows the loss to be offset against profits. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon1983 Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 These are only the figures they accounted for, if the world goes cashless then Speedway will be over If these were true losses they wouldn't do it Most probably saying they got 300 in the gate when it's more like 900, speedway is small enough to get away with being investigated 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 7:20 PM, Byker Biker said: Are you Robert 72 reincarnated? Expand Who he? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebv Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 (edited) On 7/19/2021 at 7:36 PM, Ray Stadia said: Not many could sustain a loss of 84k, without some kind of quid pro quoi! i.e. another business which is tied in with the same set up, that makes a profit and allows the loss to be offset against profits. Expand Which also means it becomes a 'plaything' that doesn't have to be sustainable in its own right.. Which can never be a good thing for collective organic growth... "Don't include Glasgow" was a comment re salaries further up the thread... Well you have to... The inference was I presume that they pay more, therefore, by doing so, they bring "heat" to the pay scales which then filters down to the rest, as riders expectations grow as the "going rate" increases.. Collectively the tracks spend literally hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds which is subsidised to a certain amount by hundreds and hundreds of thousands of income.. All to have a sport hardly anyone in the country knows about... Explain that one... Edited July 19, 2021 by mikebv 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Stadia Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 7:52 PM, Falcon1983 said: These are only the figures they accounted for, if the world goes cashless then Speedway will be over If these were true losses they wouldn't do it Most probably saying they got 300 in the gate when it's more like 900, speedway is small enough to get away with being investigated Expand Definitely another thought/angle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 8:14 PM, mikebv said: Which also means it becomes a 'plaything' that doesn't have to be sustainable in its own right.. Which can never be a good thing for collective organic growth... "Don't include Glasgow" was a comment re salaries further up the thread... Well you have to... The inference was I presume that they pay more, therefore, by doing so, they bring "heat" to the pay scales which then filters down to the rest, as riders expectations grow as the "going rate" increases.. Collectively the tracks spend literally hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds which is subsidised to a certain amount by hundreds and hundreds of thousands of income.. All to have a sport hardly anyone in the country knows about... Explain that one... Expand Glasgow +£20k.Wages £10/ point + brown envelope. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieman72 Posted July 19, 2021 Report Share Posted July 19, 2021 I wouldn't take too much notice of balance sheets unless they are a plc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnieg Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 On 7/19/2021 at 10:33 PM, Pieman72 said: I wouldn't take too much notice of balance sheets unless they are a plc. Expand And even then I'd be a bit cautious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waytogo28 Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 On 7/18/2021 at 2:37 PM, mikebv said: For me, five man teams and a league of 12 teams riding home and away twice is the only way to deliver the priority requirements for the sport... Expand Has to be the way forward - IF forward is the way the promoters are looking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch958 Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 I've had a fiddle about with formats and 5 is a bit repetitive but 6 works ok, 3 rides for 6, 4 for the others plus a nominated race making it 5. 12 teams x 6 riders = 72 blokes needed graded ABCD like Denmark, no fannying around with fractions of a point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve roberts Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 (edited) On 7/20/2021 at 7:24 AM, ch958 said: I've had a fiddle about with formats and 5 is a bit repetitive but 6 works ok, 3 rides for 6, 4 for the others plus a nominated race making it 5. 12 teams x 6 riders = 72 blokes needed graded ABCD like Denmark, no fannying around with fractions of a point Expand Agree on this point...speedway has been notorious in the past concentrating on "fractions of a point" when deciding team make-ups. A rider being denied a team spot because his average is .02 or whatever above the recognised cut off point is nonsense in my view. Perhaps a 5% (?) flexibilty option either side of any chosen rider's average when declaring a team? No doubt the statisticians out there will tell me different offering issues that I'm obviously not able to see? I recall a grading system was in place many years ago? Edited July 20, 2021 by steve roberts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest compost Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 On 7/20/2021 at 7:24 AM, ch958 said: I've had a fiddle about with formats and 5 is a bit repetitive but 6 works ok, 3 rides for 6, 4 for the others plus a nominated race making it 5. 12 teams x 6 riders = 72 blokes needed graded ABCD like Denmark, no fannying around with fractions of a point Expand The problem then becomes that teams will want a non-riding reserve (doesn't matter if you say the No.6 is the reserve) so you'll end up needing 7 (or even 8) riders per team. They tried this back at the start of League racing - 6 man teams which needed 7 or 8. I still think that tinkering with rules, team and/or race formats and averages is just tinkering and that the 'sport' needs a more radical shake up to attract new, old and former punters. Though I freely admit that I don't have the answer to it other than to say that the bikes need to be slower, cheaper, easier to ride and completly standard to attract more people to take up the sport and to participate in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch958 Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 On 7/20/2021 at 8:04 AM, compost said: The problem then becomes that teams will want a non-riding reserve (doesn't matter if you say the No.6 is the reserve) so you'll end up needing 7 (or even 8) riders per team. They tried this back at the start of League racing - 6 man teams which needed 7 or 8. I still think that tinkering with rules, team and/or race formats and averages is just tinkering and that the 'sport' needs a more radical shake up to attract new, old and former punters. Though I freely admit that I don't have the answer to it other than to say that the bikes need to be slower, cheaper, easier to ride and completly standard to attract more people to take up the sport and to participate in it. Expand completely agree with everything you say, I'm just trying to figure out how we can get a decent sized division of at least 12 teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 (edited) On 7/20/2021 at 7:39 AM, steve roberts said: Agree on this point...speedway has been notorious in the past concentrating on "fractions of a point" when deciding team make-ups. A rider being denied a team spot because his average is .02 or whatever above the recognised cut off point is nonsense in my view. Perhaps a 5% (?) flexibilty option either side of any chosen rider's average when declaring a team? No doubt the statisticians out there will tell me different offering issues that I'm obviously not able to see? I recall a grading system was in place many years ago? Expand You could, for team building, leave out fractions. It does, perhaps, leave some riders exposed. You could, for example, have all riders from 6.50 to 7.49 rated as a 7.00 riders, but is that fair on riders who average 6.50? Perhaps base in on 0.50 of a point. So 6.75 to 7.24 become 7.00. Riders from 6.25 to 6.74 become 6.50. This would be for team building only. They would still retain a proper average for team positions. In case you haven't guessed, I actually quite enjoy the fractions of a point! But it can cause problems in team building where riders miss out by the smallest of margins. Then again, it's open to manipulation, but what isn't? So, for example, Belle Vue: Kurtz 7.5 Bewley 7.0, Wright 6.0, S. Worrall 5.5, R. Worrall 5.0, Etheridge 5.0 Kings Lynn: Jorgensen 6.5, Riss 6.0, Lawson 6.0, Heeps 6.0, Kerr, 6.0, Wells 4.0 Edited July 20, 2021 by Grachan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 Gradings never work (as has been proven before) because of the value range of a grade. Teams will always go for the highest rider in a grade, as was seen before, and you could have a disparity between the top and bottom teams of around 4 - 5 points. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieman72 Posted July 20, 2021 Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 On 7/20/2021 at 6:59 AM, arnieg said: And even then I'd be a bit cautious. Expand Speedway promoters are a slippery lot and many of Speedway's problems could be aligned with their attitude to riders, supporters and the sport in general. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.