It's not a case of leaving seats empty for safety if you can walk up to a turnstile every home game and buy a ticket. I have friends there that are doing exactly that most home games.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of LEESE Matthew Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 1:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified] You also have to allow seats left empty for safety/segregation. Marcus - I'd like to who are the teams who should be in the 4th quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Millward Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 1:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified] 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. 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.
