chesterfield, and all that new ground = non-football related income | Vital Football

chesterfield, and all that new ground = non-football related income

They were seen as a beacon by Bob and co .There facilities are first class im told however the major driver of everything is the football and thats been dire combined with stupid wages being paid as well .
 
It makes you wonder how much longer Chesterfield will be viable.

Mind you, you could say that about practically any professional or semi football club.

In the past week Morecambe and Bolton haven't been able to pay the wages, and now the Leeds owner's sports streaming company looks like it's on the verge of failing, so where's that going to leave them?

There could be a domino effect if one or two clubs go.
 
Whilst on the subject of Chesterfield my favourite stat of the season (apologies if this has been mentioned already) :

Until last week they had gone 19 games without a win in the league - a club record.
At the same time, their last 9 games they had drawn - also a club record.
BUT, also at the same time they had gone 12 games unbeaten in all competitions - one of the best runs in clubs history.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-record-low-12-year-high-draws-fa-cup-grimsby
 
Redimps1 said:
They were seen as a beacon by Bob and co .There facilities are first class im told however the major driver of everything is the football and thats been dire combined with stupid wages being paid as well .
Click to expand...
why would the quality of the football affect a conference centre, bookings for parties, and bookings for weddings? i thought that was the whole point of additional facilities,,, that they are not affected by the performance of the football team.
 
nlondonimp said:
why would the quality of the football affect a conference centre, bookings for parties, and bookings for weddings? i thought that was the whole point of additional facilities,,, that they are not affected by the performance of the football team.
Click to expand...
They'll soon have the best conference facilities in National League North. Not something I aspire to!
 
nlondonimp said:
i thought they were a beacon for non-football related facilities + income created by a new ground propping up a club...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46507929

surprised to see that even after a terrifying run, their crowd was still 5k at the weekend, so attendance dropping off can't be blamed.
Click to expand...
They may well be, especially compared to us which is what the it was.

It also doesn't matter how good they are if you pay silly wages, as they have done for many years. That's the crux of the issue.
 
The theory is is extra income not dependent on the success on pitch to be successful but if the same people that have failed to run the football club run the extra facilities then ...........
 
They got their ground at a fantastically reasonable price, having worked for some years with their local council, the County Council and residential and commercial developers. It is a good facility in a good location.

The new facilities seem to have made the Board blind to the economic realities of running a football club. They have appear to not have been able to cover wage (player and staff) costs, never mind having enough left over for new investment and maintenance. It is possibly not ridiculous individual wages but more due to general increases in wages and staff numbers. What is probably of just as much concern though is the worsening loan position.

Before we get too high and mighty about their announced losses, we need to see what ours are come April. We still need the cup run; that said, our balance sheet and loan position should be strong.
 
Luke Imp said:
They may well be, especially compared to us which is what the it was.

It also doesn't matter how good they are if you pay silly wages, as they have done for many years. That's the crux of the issue.
Click to expand...

Overextended their finances to build the new stadium when it overran costs. Asked one of their investors to front up the extra, he grew disenchanted and resigned with a lot of the other directors. And as Luke says, paid well over the odds in wages compared to their performance..

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/may/02/chesterfield-relegation-from-football-league
 
It doesn't matter how much money you make from those extra facilities if you run the club in a profligate fashion with no regard to your overall income. The amount of debt at Chesterfield is almost impossible to relate to a lower division club. As I have said before, they are the Bev Nicholson of football.

For some reason, some people seem to think that the fate that has (entirely deservedly) befallen Chesterfield is sufficient reason for Lincoln to stay at Sincil Bank. That has no basis in reality whatsoever. Why not take a look at the dozens of clubs that have made very successful stadium moves instead?
 
The demise of Chesterfield seems to be based around money and the owners & directors falling out over a number of years. I don't think the cost of the stadium helped either. A good pal of mine is a ST holder and I went as his guest to the Imps game there last year (the helicopter match) and the hospitality & staff were first class but he says there is an underlying problem with how the club is run from the top......allegedly. We must be very thankful for Bob & Clive.
 
Why not take a look at the dozens of clubs that have made very successful stadium moves instead?[/QUOTE]

Any chance you can share some of dozens that have been successful?
Apart from Arsenal and Brighton I can’t name the other 24+
I can though add Oxford, Colchester, Scunthorpe and Coventry to the not so good list.
 
mightyimps said:
Why not take a look at the dozens of clubs that have made very successful stadium moves instead?
Click to expand...

Any chance you can share some of dozens that have been successful?
Apart from Arsenal and Brighton I can’t name the other 24+
I can though add Oxford, Colchester, Scunthorpe and Coventry to the not so good list.[/QUOTE]

King Power, KC Stadium, New Den Stadium, New York Stadium, Amex Stadium or The Hive
 
mightyimps said:
Why not take a look at the dozens of clubs that have made very successful stadium moves instead?
Click to expand...

Any chance you can share some of dozens that have been successful?
Apart from Arsenal and Brighton I can’t name the other 24+
I can though add Oxford, Colchester, Scunthorpe and Coventry to the not so good list.[/QUOTE]
Not great examples.

Oxford - Don't own their ground, their ex-Chairman does. They take very little of any profits from the Stadium (catering, advertising boards etc)

Colchester's new ground allowed their Chairman to put less money in every year

Scunthorpe you'd struggle to class as a new Stadium, albeit only 30-35 years old.

Coventry speaks for itself.

It's the ownership and funding of the Stadium that's the important bit, as shown above, and as Clive and Liam have already alluded to in Q&A's/fan forums.
 
i am also interested to know where these shining examples are …
there are 11 clubs - at approximately our size/level - that have made ground moves in the last twenty years:


league 2
2010 morecambe.
6k stadium. cost 12million. constantly struggling at the bottom of league two. is the stadium making lots of money for them?

2008 colchester
i believe they have around circa30million of debt, presumably connected to the stadium build.

[2007 mk dons
30,000 seater is a bit beyond us. 9.7 million debt in last accounts. propped up by winkleman.]

2006 forest green
tiny stadium. propped up by eco money.


league 1
2007 doncaster
with liam in mind, are doncaster the new beacon?
a club with conference dark days, that have since flirted with the championship and the top end of league 1. but have also dropped back into league 2.
sports complex cost 32m
complex paid for and owned by local district council
99yr lease by the club to manage the complex negotiated in 2012. i believe we have stated that we want to own the ground?
doncaster r fc losses:
2016; 2m
2017; 2m


2007 shrewsbury capacity 10k + design for expansion
ring road stadium. are they making loads from off-field activities?

2005 burton
ground[land] donated by pirelli, in exchange for ground naming rights.
cost £7m
capacity 7k. seats 2k. 300 seat conference facility.
on a roll football-wise. until this season.
2012 300k loss
2013 101k profit
2014 94k profit
2015 … promotion
2016 162k profit [first ever year in league 1] promotion again
2017 1.3m profit [first ever year in championship]

[2005 coventry
nope!!! enough said]

2001 oxford
3 sided stadium + hotel… but ring road stadium. could they be the ones making money. would the imps be able to build a hotel into the new complex? i am sure better equipped companies would be lined up to build any hotel within our new complex.


championship
2012 rotherham [capacity 12,000] any off-field facilites?
and brentford [capacity 17,250] are in the process of moving…
 
Last edited:
Oxford is very successful, but unfortunately only for the freehold owner. Not only a successful hotel but also bowling and fast food outlets on the site. The football club is beholden to its poor status as tenant:

September 2018:
United owner Sumrith 'Tiger' Thanakarnjanasuth and managing director Niall McWilliams told supporters on Saturday they were considering alternative venues to play their home matches, largely because of a fraught relationship with the stadium company.

Now freehold owner Mr Kassam has said the disagreements have been brought on by the club, and until they pay him the money he believes his company is owed – a figure he claims is in excess of £600,000 – there will be no chance of a reconciliation.

Their rent is generally reported as somewhere between £300-500,000 per annum plus a healthy service charge. However U's owner stated:“We were very poorly treated by the stadium company. For example now the rent has gone up from half a million to almost £1m."

Oxford United manager Karl Robinson also expressed his frustration at the arrangement, claiming the team were unable to train on the pitch without paying a £3,000 fee. The U’s boss also called the three-sided ground ‘probably the worst-designed stadium in the country'.


Freehold ownership for LCFC is a must. Oh, and preferably a four sided stadium.
 
Last edited:
Sincilbanks said:
Any chance you can share some of dozens that have been successful?
Apart from Arsenal and Brighton I can’t name the other 24+
I can though add Oxford, Colchester, Scunthorpe and Coventry to the not so good list.
Click to expand...

King Power, KC Stadium, New Den Stadium, New York Stadium, Amex Stadium or The Hive[/QUOTE]
leicester and brighton are not really a comparison to us though are they.
the new den was opened in 1993. not so new.

i noticed hull were currently getting around 12k for home games, so amazing to think we are not that far off them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.