Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[mark worrall]

Idiots. Looks like they'll be showing Villa v Liverpool and Bolton v Man
City from the voting. 2 matches that dont mean anything to relegation, just
because of the volume of fans. They could easily just show the relegation
matches + ManUtd (anyway).

btw, If they are recording IPs, just try voting from a different machine or
connection (e.g. mobile, laptop, etc).

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Marcus Chantry <
marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> wrote:

> I just did the same to most of my address book.  We’ve got a lot of ground
> to make up to make it the main game but we’re giving it a late go!!  Voting
> closes tomorrow at lunchtime.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Parkes Jim - Sydney-MHA
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 4:03 PM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
>
>
>
> Have sent it out to around 30 clients and asked that they pass it on.
>
>
>
> *Jim *
> --
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 4:01 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
>
>
>
> Yes I’ve been voting non-stop for the past 10 minutes but the numbers
> haven’t changed so they must have something setup to prevent multiple
> votes.
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *mark worrall
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:54 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches
>
>
>
> I just got 3 of my lot to vote 3 times each. They usually set those things
> to record IP addresses to prevent duplicate voting.
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Crowe 
> wrote:
>
> Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.
>
>
>
> Paul Crowe
>
> Sales Manager - Asia Pacific
>
>
>
> ConTech (Sydney Office)
>
>
>
> PO Box 3517
>
> Rhodes Waterside
>
> Rhodes NSW  2138
>
> Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542
>
> Mob: 0406009562
>
> Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com
>
> Website: www.contechengineering.com
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
> please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-broadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* [NSWolves] TV Matches
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Guys,
>
>
>
> Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
> shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
> taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know to
> go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marcus
>
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
> --
>
> CAUTION: This message is intended only for the named addressee. It is
> confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and may be
> unlawful. By opening any attachment, you agree that the Munich Re Group will
> not be liable for any loss resulting from viruses or other defects. Any
> views in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the
> sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the
> Munich Re Gro

RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[Marcus Chantry]

I just did the same to most of my address book.  We've got a lot of
ground to make up to make it the main game but we're giving it a late
go!!  Voting closes tomorrow at lunchtime.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Parkes Jim - Sydney-MHA
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 4:03 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

 

Have sent it out to around 30 clients and asked that they pass it on.

 

Jim 



 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 4:01 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

 

Yes I've been voting non-stop for the past 10 minutes but the numbers
haven't changed so they must have something setup to prevent multiple
votes.  

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:54 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches

 

I just got 3 of my lot to vote 3 times each. They usually set those
things to record IP addresses to prevent duplicate voting.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Crowe
 wrote:

Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:

 

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives
-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-br
oadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366

 

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

Guys,

 

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know
to go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!


Cheers,

Marcus

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.

-- 
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.

 



CAUTION: This message is intended only for the named addressee. It is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and
may be unlawful. By opening any attachment, you agree that the Munich Re
Group will not be liable for any loss resulting from viruses or other
defects. Any views in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be
the views of the Munich Re Group. The Munich Re Group will not be liable
for any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance upon the
contents of this message.

-- 
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.

RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[Parkes Jim - Sydney-MHA]

Have sent it out to around 30 clients and asked that they pass it on.

Jim


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 4:01 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

Yes I've been voting non-stop for the past 10 minutes but the numbers haven't 
changed so they must have something setup to prevent multiple votes.

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:54 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches

I just got 3 of my lot to vote 3 times each. They usually set those things to 
record IP addresses to prevent duplicate voting.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Crowe 
mailto:pcr...@contechengineering.com>> wrote:
Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.

Paul Crowe
Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

ConTech (Sydney Office)

PO Box 3517
Rhodes Waterside
Rhodes NSW  2138
Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542
Mob: 0406009562
Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com
Website: www.contechengineering.com

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you please 
post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-broadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

Guys,

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for 
our match to be shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, 
they are taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you 
know to go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!

Cheers,
Marcus

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.
--
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.


CAUTION: This message is intended only for the named addressee. It is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended 
recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and may be 
unlawful. By opening any attachment, you agree that the Munich Re Group will 
not be liable for any loss resulting from viruses or other defects. Any views 
in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender 
expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the Munich Re 
Group. The Munich Re Group will not be liable for any action taken, or omitted 
to be taken, in reliance upon the contents of this message.

-- 
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.

RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[Marcus Chantry]

Yes I've been voting non-stop for the past 10 minutes but the numbers
haven't changed so they must have something setup to prevent multiple
votes.  

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:54 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches

 

I just got 3 of my lot to vote 3 times each. They usually set those
things to record IP addresses to prevent duplicate voting.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Crowe
 wrote:

Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:

 

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives
-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-br
oadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366

 

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

Guys,

 

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know
to go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!


Cheers,

Marcus

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.

-- 
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.

Re: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[mark worrall]

I just got 3 of my lot to vote 3 times each. They usually set those things
to record IP addresses to prevent duplicate voting.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Crowe
wrote:

> Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.
>
>
>
> Paul Crowe
>
> Sales Manager - Asia Pacific
>
>
>
> ConTech (Sydney Office)
>
>
>
> PO Box 3517
>
> Rhodes Waterside
>
> Rhodes NSW  2138
>
> Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542
>
> Mob: 0406009562
>
> Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com
>
> Website: www.contechengineering.com
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
> please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-broadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* [NSWolves] TV Matches
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Guys,
>
>
>
> Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
> shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
> taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know to
> go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marcus
>
> 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.

RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[Paul Crowe]

Just voted 3 x times and we have stayed at 11.4%.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:

 

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives-use
rs-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-broadcast/
story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366

 

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

Guys,

 

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be shown
on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are taking
votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know to go
online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!


Cheers,

Marcus

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.

RE: [NSWolves] TV Matches

[Marcus Chantry]

If any of you are still on the worldwide Wolves list or MolMix can you
please post this link and get everyone to vote for our match:

 

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/premier-league/foxsportscomau-gives
-users-the-chance-to-vote-on-which-barclays-premier-league-matches-to-br
oadcast/story-e6frf4a3-1226056393366

 

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:39 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] TV Matches
Importance: High

 

Guys,

 

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know
to go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!


Cheers,

Marcus

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.

[NSWolves] TV Matches

[Marcus Chantry]

Guys,

 

Everyone needs to go to foxsports.com.au and vote for our match to be
shown on Sunday.  As there are too many matches for multi-view, they are
taking votes for the matches to be shown so get everybody that you know
to go online and vote for our match PLEASE!!!


Cheers,

Marcus


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.

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[Marcus Chantry]

I'm definitely not providing the same services as your wife if we do happen to 
win!!!

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Paul Crowe
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 3:33 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

 

>From a recent article in the Daily telegraph "Wolves' most recent accounts 
>revealed a £9 million profit on £61 million turnover, including £39 million 
>from broadcast revenue, a reminder of the vital importance of staying up".

 

Therefore, besides TV income our remaining turnover is $22 million.

 

Let's work on an average attendance of 28,500 and average ticket price of $30 
(Steve's figure from earlier today) over 19 home games gives us 30 x 19 x 
28,500 = 16.245 million pound.

 

Let's say 16 million pound, giving us 6 million from other commercial 
activities.

 

So, if we build a new Stadium with 37,000 capacity we will most likely attain 
an average season attendance of 35,000. Equating to an extra yearly income of 
$30 x 19 x 6,500 = 3.7million.

 

Over the medium to long term this makes sense to me, our major source of 
income, apart from TV, is through the turnstiles. We need to try and increase 
this income as best we can.

 

By the way, I would have been happy with 17th place this season, consolidation 
was the sole aim in my book. If we stay up, then kick on next season and try to 
break into that 3rd quadrant Marcus is talking about.

 

Marcus, I am torn between accepting your very kind invitation to watch the game 
at your house or continue with my sad routines at home that have been 
successful these last 2 x games.

 

Best Regards

 

Paul.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

 

The same West Ham who have been paying ridiculous wages to people like Robbie 
Keane and Wayne Bridge during the second half of the season in a failed attempt 
to ensure their survival, who have the football writer's player of the year 
(Scott Parker) turning out for them as well as England internationals such as 
Carlton Cole, Matthew Upson and Robert Green? 

 

Wigan have been building their squad over the last few years whilst in the 
Premiership and have outlayed way more than us on players. I wouldn't agree 
they have a weaker squad than us and would imagine their fans would be highly 
critical if they were. Maybe even more so than people on this list?!

 

Blackpool are a given and have done unbelievably well with the squad they have. 
Fantastic start to the season and may just manage to hang on, although if the 
season were a few games longer they'd probably be doomed given their form over 
the second half of the season.

 

Newcastle shed very few players when they went down to the Championship where 
they went the entire season unbeaten at home. The squad they went down 
with/came back up with was/is, in my opinion, stronger than ours and I'd hazard 
a guess was assembled with more of an outlay than ours.

 

Albion have done very well with the squad they've got, which is probably about 
on a par with ours. Odemwingye has to be one of the bargains of the season. 
Their success has been built on the 'slowly slowly' approach being questioned 
earlier - they've never over committed financially and have been prepared to 
accept relegations as part of a longer term plan to progress. Seems to be 
working.

 

 



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:16 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and 
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

· West Ham

· Wigan

· Blackpool

· Newcastle

· West Brom

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

 

Marcus

 

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd 
quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th quadrant on 
account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think of 5.

 

Matt

 

 

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 lo

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[Paul Crowe]

>From a recent article in the Daily telegraph “Wolves’ most recent accounts
revealed a £9 million profit on £61 million turnover, including £39 million
from broadcast revenue, a reminder of the vital importance of staying up”.

 

Therefore, besides TV income our remaining turnover is $22 million.

 

Let’s work on an average attendance of 28,500 and average ticket price of
$30 (Steve’s figure from earlier today) over 19 home games gives us 30 x 19
x 28,500 = 16.245 million pound.

 

Let’s say 16 million pound, giving us 6 million from other commercial
activities.

 

So, if we build a new Stadium with 37,000 capacity we will most likely
attain an average season attendance of 35,000. Equating to an extra yearly
income of $30 x 19 x 6,500 = 3.7million.

 

Over the medium to long term this makes sense to me, our major source of
income, apart from TV, is through the turnstiles. We need to try and
increase this income as best we can.

 

By the way, I would have been happy with 17th place this season,
consolidation was the sole aim in my book. If we stay up, then kick on next
season and try to break into that 3rd quadrant Marcus is talking about.

 

Marcus, I am torn between accepting your very kind invitation to watch the
game at your house or continue with my sad routines at home that have been
successful these last 2 x games.

 

Best Regards

 

Paul.

 

Paul Crowe

Sales Manager - Asia Pacific

 

ConTech (Sydney Office)

 

PO Box 3517

Rhodes Waterside

Rhodes NSW  2138

Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542

Mob: 0406009562

Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com

Website: www.contechengineering.com

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:42 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

 

The same West Ham who have been paying ridiculous wages to people like
Robbie Keane and Wayne Bridge during the second half of the season in a
failed attempt to ensure their survival, who have the football writer's
player of the year (Scott Parker) turning out for them as well as England
internationals such as Carlton Cole, Matthew Upson and Robert Green? 

 

Wigan have been building their squad over the last few years whilst in the
Premiership and have outlayed way more than us on players. I wouldn't agree
they have a weaker squad than us and would imagine their fans would be
highly critical if they were. Maybe even more so than people on this list?!

 

Blackpool are a given and have done unbelievably well with the squad they
have. Fantastic start to the season and may just manage to hang on, although
if the season were a few games longer they'd probably be doomed given their
form over the second half of the season.

 

Newcastle shed very few players when they went down to the Championship
where they went the entire season unbeaten at home. The squad they went down
with/came back up with was/is, in my opinion, stronger than ours and I'd
hazard a guess was assembled with more of an outlay than ours.

 

Albion have done very well with the squad they've got, which is probably
about on a par with ours. Odemwingye has to be one of the bargains of the
season. Their success has been built on the 'slowly slowly' approach being
questioned earlier - they've never over committed financially and have been
prepared to accept relegations as part of a longer term plan to progress.
Seems to be working.

 

 

  _  

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:16 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

· West Ham

· Wigan

· Blackpool

· Newcastle

· West Brom

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

 

Marcus

 

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd
quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th quadrant
on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think of 5.

 

Matt

 

 

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 m

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[LEESE Matthew]

The same West Ham who have been paying ridiculous wages to people like Robbie 
Keane and Wayne Bridge during the second half of the season in a failed attempt 
to ensure their survival, who have the football writer's player of the year 
(Scott Parker) turning out for them as well as England internationals such as 
Carlton Cole, Matthew Upson and Robert Green?

Wigan have been building their squad over the last few years whilst in the 
Premiership and have outlayed way more than us on players. I wouldn't agree 
they have a weaker squad than us and would imagine their fans would be highly 
critical if they were. Maybe even more so than people on this list?!

Blackpool are a given and have done unbelievably well with the squad they have. 
Fantastic start to the season and may just manage to hang on, although if the 
season were a few games longer they'd probably be doomed given their form over 
the second half of the season.

Newcastle shed very few players when they went down to the Championship where 
they went the entire season unbeaten at home. The squad they went down 
with/came back up with was/is, in my opinion, stronger than ours and I'd hazard 
a guess was assembled with more of an outlay than ours.

Albion have done very well with the squad they've got, which is probably about 
on a par with ours. Odemwingye has to be one of the bargains of the season. 
Their success has been built on the 'slowly slowly' approach being questioned 
earlier - they've never over committed financially and have been prepared to 
accept relegations as part of a longer term plan to progress. Seems to be 
working.



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:16 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] League Position

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and 
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

* West Ham

* Wigan

* Blackpool

* Newcastle

* West Brom


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

Marcus

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd 
quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th quadrant on 
account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think of 5.

Matt


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.

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.

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.

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[Marcus Chantry]

I only named 5 because Matt said he was struggling to think of 5.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:37 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] League Position

 

But you think we should be at the bottom of that quadrant as you can
only name five teams that have a poorer squad than us.  


 

On 19 May 2011 14:31, Marcus Chantry 
wrote:

Position wise about right (11th to 15th constitutes 3rd
quadrant/quartile), but not above some of the teams that I thought we
would be above.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:27 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] League Position

 

So if we win on Saturday and finish 15th you would then agree that
Wolves have finished exactly where you expected them to finish in the
league table?

 

 

On 19 May 2011 14:15, Marcus Chantry 
wrote:

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

* West Ham

* Wigan

* Blackpool

* Newcastle

* West Brom

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

 

Marcus

 

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League
3rd quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th
quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to
think of 5.

 

Matt

 

 

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.

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.

-- 
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.

Re: [NSWolves] League Position

[Steven Millward]

But you think we should be at the bottom of that quadrant as you can only
name five teams that have a poorer squad than us.


On 19 May 2011 14:31, Marcus Chantry  wrote:

>  Position wise about right (11th to 15th constitutes 3rdquadrant/quartile), 
> but not above some of the teams that I thought we would
> be above.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:27 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] League Position
>
>
>
> So if we win on Saturday and finish 15th you would then agree that Wolves
> have finished exactly where you expected them to finish in the league table?
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 May 2011 14:15, Marcus Chantry  wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
> therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:
>
> · West Ham
>
> · Wigan
>
> · Blackpool
>
> · Newcastle
>
> · West Brom
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* [NSWolves] League Position
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> You say that 'With the *squad* we have we should be in the Premier League
> 3rd quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th
> quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think
> of 5.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> 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.

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[Marcus Chantry]

Position wise about right (11th to 15th constitutes 3rd
quadrant/quartile), but not above some of the teams that I thought we
would be above.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:27 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] League Position

 

So if we win on Saturday and finish 15th you would then agree that
Wolves have finished exactly where you expected them to finish in the
league table?

 

 

On 19 May 2011 14:15, Marcus Chantry 
wrote:

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

* West Ham

* Wigan

* Blackpool

* Newcastle

* West Brom

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

 

Marcus

 

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League
3rd quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th
quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to
think of 5.

 

Matt

 

 

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.

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.

Re: [NSWolves] League Position

[Steven Millward]

So if we win on Saturday and finish 15th you would then agree that Wolves
have finished exactly where you expected them to finish in the league table?


On 19 May 2011 14:15, Marcus Chantry  wrote:

>  My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
> therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:
>
> · West Ham
>
> · Wigan
>
> · Blackpool
>
> · Newcastle
>
> · West Brom
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* [NSWolves] League Position
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> You say that 'With the *squad* we have we should be in the Premier League
> 3rd quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th
> quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think
> of 5.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> 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.

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

With property development you generally borrow money and as long as the
yield on the development is greater than the cost of capital then you make
money.

It's a pretty simple calculation to do in fact.

   - It's said to cost 16m for the first stage.
   - It adds 2,500 seats.
   - 30 quid a seat is 75,000
   - Times 19 games is 1.45m
   - That's a 9% yield.  Fairly reasonable for property development.
   - I assume not all seats are filled but that the hospitality will offset
   that and I haven't included that.  9% seems about right though.
   - The expansion is being funded from cash flow though, so if the return
   on the expansion is better than the return on other forms of investment then
   you would expand

Now try it when buying players so we can compare the returns and understand
Morgan's logic.

   - Spend X million on a player?
   - Residual value of Y million?
   - Wages of say 1.5m a year?
   - What does it get you as a return?
   - What are the risks associated with getting those returns as it affects
   the rate of return you'd want.  The risk is much higher so you'd want a much
   higher rate of return than for expanding the stadium


On 19 May 2011 13:05, Marcus Chantry  wrote:


>  You do the same ROI calculations on the cost for the stadium development
> (make sure you factor in the lost revenue from being relegated ie ticket
> sales, sponsorship deals, corporate functions etc) and the payback period to
> get back to breakeven and then we can compare numbers.  What period would
> you like to run the projections over and also what is the ROC demanded of
> the Board?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:56 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
>   *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> OK.  And what's the cost in terms of players to move up a few places in
> your view?
>
>
>
> And then what's the ROI?
>
> On 19 May 2011 12:51, Marcus Chantry  wrote:
>
> Here is the prize money split for last season.  So places make a fairly big
> difference for two-bob clubs like ours (£800,000 per place):
>
>
>
> Chelsea - £16,000,000 (WINNERS)
> Manchester United - £15,200,000
> Arsenal - £14,400,000
> Totenham Hotspur - £13,600,000
> Manchester City - £12,800,000
> Aston Villa - £12,000,000
> Liverpool - £11,200,000
> Everton - £10,400,000
> Birmingham - £9,600,000
> Blackburn - £8,800,000
> Stoke - £8,000,000
> Fulham - £7,200,000
> Sunderland - £6,400,000
> Bolton - £5,600,000
> Wolves - £4,800,000
> Wigan - £4,000,000
> West Ham - £3,200,000
> Burnley - £2,400,000
> Hull - £1,600,000
> Portsmouth - £800,000
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:37 PM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> 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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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 

RE: [NSWolves] League Position

[Marcus Chantry]

My personal opinion is that we currently have a better squad than, and
therefore should be ahead of, the following teams:

* West Ham

* Wigan

* Blackpool

* Newcastle

* West Brom

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:09 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: [NSWolves] League Position

 

Marcus

 

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League
3rd quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th
quadrant on account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to
think of 5.

 

Matt

 

 

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.


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.

[NSWolves] League Position

[LEESE Matthew]

Marcus

You say that 'With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd 
quadrant'. I'm curious to know who you think should be in the 4th quadrant on 
account of having weaker squads than us? I'm struggling to think of 5.

Matt



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.

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Marcus Chantry]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 1:04 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 1:00 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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  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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward

Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23 


To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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  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 enormousNotice
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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.

 



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04 


To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: n

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[LEESE Matthew]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 1:00 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
mailto:lee.mor...@defence.gov.au>> 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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23

To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
mailto:lee.mor...@defence.gov.au>> 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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04

To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

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  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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>>
>>  --
>> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>>
>> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
>> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
>> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
>> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
>> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
>> *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

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

I'm sure Morgan has not bothered looking at forecasts of attendances or
anything like that.  You're probably the first person to work out that it's
a huge mistake

On 19 May 2011 12:48, Marcus Chantry  wrote:

>  I would probably update the menu and the quality of the food to ensure
> that it was booked out 100% for months in advance like The Fat Duck or
> Bulli, and because people want to get into places that are consistently full
> I would put up my prices to make more profit.  Simple economics.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:40 PM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> Capacity is 29,195
>
> Baggies game had 28,510
>
> So it was at 98% capacity.
>
>
>
> You reckon that the absences were because no one else wanted to go or
> because a few STH and people that cought a ticket couldn't make it.
>
>
>
> We are consistenly over 95% capacity.
>
>
>
> If you had a restaurant with 100 tables, 50 of which were booked in advance
> and 95 of them were full all the time, would you say
>
>
>
> a) expand the restaurant
>
> b) not expand until 100% full.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 May 2011 12:31, Marcus Chantry  wrote:
>
> Strange statement Steve.
>
>
>
> Fact is that for almost every home game this season you have been able to
> walk up on the day and get a ticket, including the crunch match against the
> Baggies 2 weeks ago.  That surely is a reflection of the fact that people
> aren’t enjoying watching Wolves play under McCarthy.
>
>
>
> If the team were winning more regularly, you would attract higher calibre
> sponsors who would be willing to pay more to be associated with a successful
> club. As demand for tickets increases then you have the supply and demand
> benefit of being able to increase ticket prices.  So quite clearly the more
> successful the team, the more money you generate.
>
> Statement here from Morgan “"But we were the third-highest net spenders in
> the Premier League last summer with £18 million, so it’s not as if we’re not
> spending on players. And Mick will have money to spend again this summer.
> It’s all about balance. “  Does that sound like a team that should only be
> making tiny, tiny steps of progress when we’re the 3rd highest net
> spenders?
>
> With the *squad* we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd quadrant.
> With the team that McCarthy plays week in week out we should be in the
> Championship.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23 PM
>
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

OK.  And what's the cost in terms of players to move up a few places in your
view?

And then what's the ROI?

On 19 May 2011 12:51, Marcus Chantry  wrote:

>  Here is the prize money split for last season.  So places make a fairly
> big difference for two-bob clubs like ours (£800,000 per place):
>
>
>
> Chelsea - £16,000,000 (WINNERS)
> Manchester United - £15,200,000
> Arsenal - £14,400,000
> Totenham Hotspur - £13,600,000
> Manchester City - £12,800,000
> Aston Villa - £12,000,000
> Liverpool - £11,200,000
> Everton - £10,400,000
> Birmingham - £9,600,000
> Blackburn - £8,800,000
> Stoke - £8,000,000
> Fulham - £7,200,000
> Sunderland - £6,400,000
> Bolton - £5,600,000
> Wolves - £4,800,000
> Wigan - £4,000,000
> West Ham - £3,200,000
> Burnley - £2,400,000
> Hull - £1,600,000
> Portsmouth - £800,000
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:37 PM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> 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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Marcus Chantry]

Here is the prize money split for last season.  So places make a fairly big 
difference for two-bob clubs like ours (£800,000 per place):

 

Chelsea - £16,000,000 (WINNERS) 
Manchester United - £15,200,000 
Arsenal - £14,400,000 
Totenham Hotspur - £13,600,000 
Manchester City - £12,800,000 
Aston Villa - £12,000,000 
Liverpool - £11,200,000 
Everton - £10,400,000 
Birmingham - £9,600,000 
Blackburn - £8,800,000 
Stoke - £8,000,000 
Fulham - £7,200,000 
Sunderland - £6,400,000 
Bolton - £5,600,000 
Wolves - £4,800,000 
Wigan - £4,000,000 
West Ham - £3,200,000 
Burnley - £2,400,000 
Hull - £1,600,000 
Portsmouth - £800,000 





 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:37 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

 

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.

 



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04 


To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 Premie

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Morris, Lee SGT]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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  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
enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another
matter.



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04 

To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

Capacity is 29,195
Baggies game had 28,510
So it was at 98% capacity.

You reckon that the absences were because no one else wanted to go or
because a few STH and people that cought a ticket couldn't make it.

We are consistenly over 95% capacity.

If you had a restaurant with 100 tables, 50 of which were booked in advance
and 95 of them were full all the time, would you say

a) expand the restaurant
b) not expand until 100% full.



On 19 May 2011 12:31, Marcus Chantry  wrote:

>  Strange statement Steve.
>
>
>
> Fact is that for almost every home game this season you have been able to
> walk up on the day and get a ticket, including the crunch match against the
> Baggies 2 weeks ago.  That surely is a reflection of the fact that people
> aren’t enjoying watching Wolves play under McCarthy.
>
>
>
> If the team were winning more regularly, you would attract higher calibre
> sponsors who would be willing to pay more to be associated with a successful
> club. As demand for tickets increases then you have the supply and demand
> benefit of being able to increase ticket prices.  So quite clearly the more
> successful the team, the more money you generate.
>
> Statement here from Morgan “"But we were the third-highest net spenders in
> the Premier League last summer with £18 million, so it’s not as if we’re not
> spending on players. And Mick will have money to spend again this summer.
> It’s all about balance. “  Does that sound like a team that should only be
> making tiny, tiny steps of progress when we’re the 3rd highest net
> spenders?
>
> With the *squad* we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd quadrant.
> With the team that McCarthy plays week in week out we should be in the
> Championship.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23 PM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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 sta

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[LEESE Matthew]

Who are the teams who should be in the 4th quadrant on account of having weaker 
squads than us?


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:31 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

Strange statement Steve.

Fact is that for almost every home game this season you have been able to walk 
up on the day and get a ticket, including the crunch match against the Baggies 
2 weeks ago.  That surely is a reflection of the fact that people aren't 
enjoying watching Wolves play under McCarthy.

If the team were winning more regularly, you would attract higher calibre 
sponsors who would be willing to pay more to be associated with a successful 
club. As demand for tickets increases then you have the supply and demand 
benefit of being able to increase ticket prices.  So quite clearly the more 
successful the team, the more money you generate.

Statement here from Morgan ""But we were the third-highest net spenders in the 
Premier League last summer with £18 million, so it's not as if we're not 
spending on players. And Mick will have money to spend again this summer. It's 
all about balance. "  Does that sound like a team that should only be making 
tiny, tiny steps of progress when we're the 3rd highest net spenders?
With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd quadrant.  With 
the team that McCarthy plays week in week out we should be in the Championship.


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
mailto:lee.mor...@defence.gov.au>> 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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.


From: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04

To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 tryi

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Marcus Chantry]

Strange statement Steve.

 

Fact is that for almost every home game this season you have been able to walk 
up on the day and get a ticket, including the crunch match against the Baggies 
2 weeks ago.  That surely is a reflection of the fact that people aren't 
enjoying watching Wolves play under McCarthy.

 

If the team were winning more regularly, you would attract higher calibre 
sponsors who would be willing to pay more to be associated with a successful 
club. As demand for tickets increases then you have the supply and demand 
benefit of being able to increase ticket prices.  So quite clearly the more 
successful the team, the more money you generate.

Statement here from Morgan ""But we were the third-highest net spenders in the 
Premier League last summer with £18 million, so it's not as if we're not 
spending on players. And Mick will have money to spend again this summer. It's 
all about balance. "  Does that sound like a team that should only be making 
tiny, tiny steps of progress when we're the 3rd highest net spenders? 

With the squad we have we should be in the Premier League 3rd quadrant.  With 
the team that McCarthy plays week in week out we should be in the Championship.

 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:23 PM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.

 



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04 


To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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.  N

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

Players are generally depreciating assets.  They are usually worth less once
they've been used than they are when you buy them.  That means an operating
club loses cash through depreciation.  I've said before that I think Morgan
has wanted to stop players depreciating by buying them young so they are
less liekly to fall in value and are more likely to increase.

We also know that we have the money to spend on players but we don't spend
more on wages than the club can afford.

Our wage structure is defined by the profit of the club.  If we don't make
more money as a  business, we won't spend more on wages.  If we invest in
the ground we get more profit and so can spend more on wages and get better
players.




On 19 May 2011 10:46, Morris, Lee SGT  wrote:

>  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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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  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.

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

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  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 enormousNotice 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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.
>
>  --
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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 inflati

[NSWolves] New home shirt revealed

[Marcus Chantry]

Just looked at the new Home shirt for next season.  Must say I think
it's ok and better than this years effort.

 

http://www.wolves.co.uk/page/News/0,,10307~2362661,00.html

 


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.

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Morris, Lee SGT]

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 enormousNotice
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 methe team in Macarthy's is another matter.



From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of LEESE Matthew
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:04
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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
K

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[LEESE Matthew]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:46 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
mailto:matthew_le...@rta.nsw.gov.au>> 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 

RE: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Morris, Lee SGT]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steven Millward
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:36
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:26 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 09:13
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Wo

Re: [NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

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  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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:26 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *mark worrall
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 09:13
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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 <
> marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> 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 th

[NSWolves] RE: Progress [sec=unclassified]

[LEESE Matthew]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Morris, Lee SGT
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:26 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of 
mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 09:13
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 
mailto:marcus.chan...@macquarie.com>> 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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:00 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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 c

[NSWolves] Progress [sec=unclassified]

[Morris, Lee SGT]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 09:13
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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
 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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:00 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com
[mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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.

Re: [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.

[mark worrall]

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 <
marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> 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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:00 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *mark worrall
> *Sent:* Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *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.

RE: [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.

[Marcus Chantry]

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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Marcus Chantry
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 9:00 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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.

RE: [NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.

[Marcus Chantry]

Good to see we're both on the ball Mark.  I just posted a link to the
same story on ESPN. 

 

From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of mark worrall
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:55 AM
To: nswolves@googlegroups.com
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.

[NSWolves] We're screwed either way

[Marcus Chantry]

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/921039/mick-mccarthy-won't-
lose-job-if-wolves-are-relegated?cc=3436

 


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.

[NSWolves] Wolves owner Steve Morgan says he wants Mick McCarthy to stay on as the club's manager even if they are relegated.

[mark worrall]

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.

Re: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]

[Steven Millward]

Have you done this yet Rog?

The problem is that we could lose by four goals and two of the other teams
draw or win and we still go down.  So there are lots and lots more than six
combinations and that ruins the odds.

I was just about to place my bets when I noticed.

On 18 May 2011 10:12, Rog & Reet  wrote:

> This way takes a bit more time to throw your money away.
>
> One of the trebles returns a little less than putting $6 at $7.50
>
> The other 5 trebles all return more.
>
> If all 4 results go against us then you’ll win with 3 of the trebles and
> pick up either $192 or $250 for your $6 total outlay.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Morris, Lee SGT
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 18 May 2011 9:40 AM
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> So better odds putting on individual bets?
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Rog & Reet
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 18 May 2011 09:36
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
> For us to go down, two of the teams below us have to win, Blackburn either
> draw or win.
>
> Odds for,
>
> Blackburn win $3.90, draw $3.00 (Can’t remember a draw being so low)
>
> Brum win $6.50
>
> Blackpool win $5.50
>
> Wigan win $2.38
>
>
>
> 6 bets covers all combinations.
>
> Minimum single win, $39+
>
> Maximum single win $139+
>
> Minimum three wins $192+
>
> Maximum 3 wins $250+
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Monday, 16 May 2011 7:35 PM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> Down to $7.50 here now.  Still worth a go I reckon
>
> On 16 May 2011 17:43, Jeremy Tonks  wrote:
>
> If I was a Blackburn fan I might look at it like this:
>
>- We've only won three away all season.
>- We haven't won away since 2010.
>- We've let in more goals on the road than any other team in the league
>
>
>- We've had an awful season, sacking a proven manager and replacing him
>with a muppet
>- Samba is injured
>- Or as one Blackburn fan says:  "Actually, this is a must win game.
>Can we win it?  Very very unlikely.   The die was cast in December as i've
>said before.   The club is disastrously managed at all levels now and the
>outcome is inevitable."
>
>
>- BUT we are playing Wolves!
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Monday, 16 May 2011 10:58 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> If I was a Blackburn fan I might look at it like this:
>
>- We've only won three away all season.
>- We haven't won away since 2010.
>- We've let in more goals on the road than any other team in the league
>
>- We're playing a resurgent team who've won two in a row, scoring three
>goals in each.
>- We've had an awful season, sacking a proven manager and replacing him
>with a muppet
>- Samba is injured
>- Or as one Blackburn fan says:  "Actually, this is a must win game.
>Can we win it?  Very very unlikely.   The die was cast in December as i've
>said before.   The club is disastrously managed at all levels now and the
>outcome is inevitable."
>
> See, the sh1te coloured glasses work for everyone.  It's more a reflection
> of being a football fan than it is about Wolves ability.
>
> On 16 May 2011 10:15, Morris, Lee SGT  wrote:
>
> Look at it this way, if you were a Blackburn fan,  we would be one of the
> teams you would want to play.
>
>
>
> There's going to be a surprsie somewhere, its happened all year. If all the
> results go according to the table we will be fine whatever happens against
> Blackburn, because all those around us SHOULD loose as well.
>
>
>
> It doesn't work like that thoughjust as well we've won our last two
> though isn't it?
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *LEESE Matthew
> *Sent:* Monday, 16 May 2011 10:09
>
>
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
>
>
> Out of Light, Cometh Darkness.
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Marcus Chantry
> *Sent:* Monday, 16 May 2011 9:58 AM
> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [NSWolves] Bet [sec=unclassified]
>
> But unless my memory is failing me we have a long and distinguished record
> in helping teams break their long losing streaks or improving their
> disastrous away records.  Just because they are struggling doesn’t mean we
> don’t have it in us to capitulate.  We have