Blackpool has been at 98% capacity this season in a ground of 16,000.

Very few clubs fill more than 98% of the ground.  It's hard to do.  There
comes a point when you are full and expand.  That point is less than 100%.
We have been at 96% capacity and it's time to expand.

On 19 May 2011 12:36, Morris, Lee SGT <[email protected]> wrote:

>  The ground is defiantely not full every week...far from it.
>
> I also though the prize money increases significantly eg - I read that
> Stoke throwing in the towel this week could cost them a fair bit..although I
> ahven't checked up on that.
>
> With the squad we have...we are about where we should be.....maybe a little
> higher.
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
>
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>
>   How can a more successful team generate more cash?  The ground is full
> every week and most people buy shirts.  The prize money and TV increase is
> relatively small for finishing a few places higher.
>
> Where do you think we should be in the table Lee, with the squad we have?
>
> On 19 May 2011 11:09, Morris, Lee SGT <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  I always thought a successful team, even relatively, is what brings in
>> the cash. Wolves fans are amongst the most fickle in the land and the loss
>> of revenue through relegation this year would be enormous....Notice I said
>> "would" I think we will stay up by the skin of out teeth and the slowly
>> slowly routine can continue.
>>
>> Not for one moment would I suggest an all or nothing approach which is
>> what cost the likes of Leeds so dearly.
>>
>> At the end of the day its just debate, my club is in Morgan's hands, and
>> thats good enough for me....the team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>>
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>>
>>   The new stadium is actually an opportunity to generate more money, not
>> only through increased capacity/ticket sales but through the 'non football'
>> facilities that will be included and allowing an income stream from the
>> stadium that is not so limited to match days. I'm aware there's already
>> facilities there for non match related activities but these will
>> (apparently) be substantially enhanced as part of the stadium upgrade.
>> Again, it comes down to a long term strategy for progress as opposed to a
>> 'quick fix'. If we invest the money in the short term in the team how does
>> that help us achieve longer term/sustained success? We may finish a couple
>> of places higher up the table in the first season but that doesn't generate
>> any more money to allow you to keep on building from there (OK a little bit
>> for each placing in the final table, but nothing substantial). The argument
>> then may be 'wouldn't that money have been better invested in upgrading the
>> stadium to allow us to build over the long term'.
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>>
>>  I've got nothing against the short slow steps, as long as progress is
>> being made. Morgan is obviously no mug, and I do understand Matty's
>> reasoning behind teh timing of the stadium redevelopment. Did we really need
>> it though? Morgan obvioulsy know best but why wouldn't he wait until our
>> safety is guaranteed?
>>
>> Its great for the fans to have a fantastic new stadium to watch football
>> in, but I for one would prefer to watch PL action in the current stadium
>> rather than championship football in the all singing dancing stadium.
>>
>> Maybe what I'm trying to say is, wouldn't that money be better spent on
>> team building?
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>>
>>  Agree.
>>
>> I don't understand where everyone gets these lofty expectations from.  We
>> spent 30 years in the wilderness where the goal each and every crushing
>> season was simply to get back to the Premier League.  Now we are there, some
>> people seem to think we should be pushing for Europe.
>>
>> Marcus, you say that it will be 100 years until we get to near the top of
>> the table.  What makes you think that it is at all realistic for Wolves to
>> get near the top of the table?  What makes you even think that a top half
>> finish is realistic?  I assume you either expect money to be thrown at the
>> squad from some mysterious benefactor or that we will somehow magically make
>> more of the meagre squad that we have now.  I believe we are already
>> punching above our weight based on value of squad and wages.
>>
>> The news for everyone is that there are 19 other clubs who have the same,
>> or higher, ambitions.  Which clubs should we 'by right' finish higher
>> than? And for what reason?  I'd love to know where people think we should be
>> in the table relative to the teams above us and their teams.  If we expect
>> to finish 10th then presumably we clearly have a better team than ten other
>> teams?  Which teams are they?
>>
>> The only club that has outperformed us is West Brom.  Let's see how they
>> do next season before we claim the miracle of Hodgson.
>>
>> Wolves are no longer a big club and don't have any more money to spend
>> than other clubs.  In fact we have less.  We have a small stadium so
>> potential revenue growth is linked to telly money and inflation.  The
>> sensible thing to do is to invest in infrastructure that will generate
>> revenue.
>>
>> Seems everyone has got used to the golden tit where money was pumped in.
>> Morgan clearly doesn't want to spunk a load of money on players and that's
>> sensible.  I certainly wouldn't if it was my money.
>>
>> It's harsh to say that we haven't made progress.  Take where we were when
>> Hoddle left five years ago as a starting point.  As a mid-point look at the
>> side we started the first Premiership season with, with Keogh as our striker
>> and Halford on the wing.
>>
>> By the way Marcus, enjoy your last four days of blaming Mick for
>> everything because it will all stop come Monday morning.
>>
>> :D
>>
>> On 19 May 2011 09:38, LEESE Matthew <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>  I'd say the small step approach seems a sensible and proven one - look
>>> at teams like Stoke and Sunderland and compare their recent history with
>>> that of clubs who have over committed financially such as Portsmouth, Hull
>>> and Leeds. Unless you've got a Man City type owner where you're not bound by
>>> the club's ability to generate money its not worth the risk. I don't doubt
>>> Morgan's business acumen for a moment and I think he's taking the club in
>>> the right direction with a sensible, sustainable approach. Morgan has
>>> pointed out that now is a perfect time to be redeveloping the stadium in
>>> terms of the financials as the building industry (and many others) in the UK
>>> is on its arse and so its a buyer's market where he can get the work done
>>> for a knock down price. The first stages of the re-development don't
>>> significantly increase the capacity of a stadium that was never half full
>>> (save for Carling Cup games), even in the super depressing Hoddle era.
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:26 AM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* [NSWolves] Progress [sec=unclassified]
>>>
>>>   I've changed the title because it would have been too long with my
>>> extra bit added.
>>>
>>> Anyway, Morgan seems to be working on the small step theory, which
>>> totally baffles me because he's just about to spend a fortune on a stadium
>>> which will be half full if the small step we made this year isn't
>>> enough???????????????????????????????????????
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>>> Behalf Of *mark worrall
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 09:13
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick
>>> McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.
>>>
>>> Maybe thats based on Morgan only planning on putting in small amounts of
>>> money each year, and measuring MM on what he achieved with it ?
>>>
>>> He wont get a big name manager in as they will expect lots of money to
>>> spend, which he obviously doesnt want to pay.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Marcus Chantry <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  What worries me is that Morgan has stated that Mick has made progress
>>>> every year since he took over but when you look at how he’s measured that 
>>>> it
>>>> is the context of very small fractions or single points, so based on that
>>>> run rate Morgan will be 100 years old before he sees us getting anywhere
>>>> near the top of the table (assuming everyone else stays stagnant for that
>>>> entire period).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can’t Morgan accept that Mick has reached the limit of his ability
>>>> and take the plunge.  5 years is long enough in most roles.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>>>> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:00 AM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick
>>>> McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good to see we’re both on the ball Mark.  I just posted a link to the
>>>> same story on ESPN.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>>>> Behalf Of *mark worrall
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick
>>>> McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13440664.stm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>>>
>>>> The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not
>>>> the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this
>>>> email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not 
>>>> guarantee
>>>> the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions
>>>> expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of
>>>> Macquarie.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>> Before printing, please consider the environment. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This
>>> e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or used by the
>>> named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
>>> information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
>>> mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any
>>> unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views expressed
>>> in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily
>>> the views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
>>> immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not
>>> disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended
>>> recipient.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>
>> --
>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>> Before printing, please consider the environment. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This
>> e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or used by the
>> named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
>> information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
>> mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any
>> unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views expressed
>> in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily
>> the views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
>> immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not
>> disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended
>> recipient.
>>
>> --
>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>
>> --
>> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
>> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>>
>
> --
> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>
> --
> Q: If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
> A That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.
>

-- 
Q:  If you could change one thing about Wolves history, what would it be?
A  That Peter Knowles was on the bog when the door was knocked.

Reply via email to