The credit crunch......

bros · #1

I don't do any team fishing through the Summer, it starts with the Angling Times late in September.

With regards to the start of the ATWL this year, I don't think that I will be able afford to fish!

Is anyone else in the same boat?

#2

I think there will be a few Bros, i know a couple of our lads are struggling , lets hope it picks up soon. And if not why not drop the pools to help people out who have been the backbone of our leagues for years, or even let anglers not enter the pools so they can still go match fishing and have the crack with their mates.

Guest · #3

I can't afford it now

I'm gna be crappity smack next year

then again live off government loans at university i doubt i'll be able to fit in all that much fishing !

#4

Recession or no recession, unless there is a sudden change of mind, I can't see our team fishing it. We have already talked between ourselves about it.

Irkthepurists · #5

The pools are key, the Wigan flyers are the most successful canal matches in terms of numbers here in the NW..... Pools £7.....

average of 40 anglers on a Wednesday/Sat with more on Sunday....

Since the recession hit we've seen more anglers attending.... only a few but it's significant.

Wouldn't be the same if it was £17 plus bait for Hampton!!

bros · #6

Good point Lloydy about the pools. The reason why I have mentioned the ATWL is that this is the time when the bait bill goes up also.

Lets say £10.00 on joker, £5.00 on worm, £2.00 on casters and lets assume that we have no expense for leam, hooks, floats, etc. Thats £17.00 per week, plus pools at say £15.00 plus say £8.00 fuel which is quite realistic.

That adds up to £40.00 per week and with a breakfast and pint after, we are at weekly cost of £50.00 minimum.

How about having an option of section money (plus peg fee) or the whole pools? Some of you may think I am being petty, but believe me, it is going to get to that for me!

#7

Team fishings knackered, like most things in life money has spoilt it. Can't believe how much back stabbing goes on in fishing either, has it got worse over the last couple of years or have i just woken up to it. I remember when it was fun

#8

I think staggered pools seriously need thinking about.

Why not give anglers the option?

Peg fee compulsary.

optional £5 section pool (£50 every 10 anglers or £25 every 5)

optional £5 main pool

optional £3 superpool

The only problem is the extra work for the organiser.

joffmiester · #9

what organisers lee
why would you take on more work organising this for the same anglers that stab you in the back and moan about how its run,pegs that are in when they shouldn't be[this is only a small number of anglers]
Christ on the teams of eight anglers were coming up to us and asking if we had done the results they just didn't know how hard it is running these big matches and again if anglers had put there correct team names down on the sheets would of stopped a lot of extra work. god knows what would of happened if we would of had extra pools to sort out
but my point of view is i would still rather fish one big match a week then 2 small ones
my other point is would commercials ever think of reducing there pegging fee's answer NO

#10

The crunch is also impacting at club level angling, where the financial impact isnt as anywhere as extreme as it is with you guys on the circuits - it's certainly hit a couple of our now 'ex' club 'members' :(

#11

would commercials ever think of reducing there pegging fee's answer NO

Look at the attendances on commies Joff, they are falling fast, Boldings pools in bridgenorth has a low peg fee for a commie and over a full season i reacon they get more anglers, rarely over fifty but rarely under 35, i don't know the answers but we need to keep as many anglers/teams fishing as possible and if this means dropping pools so be it, there are lots of teams that if 3 of their members can't afford to fish then they aint got a team, i think Bills team were struggling at the end of last W/L, then you lose a whole team not just the 1 or 2 and once you lose them they rarely come back.

simon_m · #12

i think if there was opitional pools then people might feel under presure to go in all of them anyway and may as a result stay away anyway coz they dont wana feel that presure so why not just reduce the pools and see if that works?.Take our warks league for example i can only think of a handfull of anglers myself included thats under 30,so that cant be good for the future,so prehaps havin reduced pools might get a few more anglers willing to come and have a go??

#13

Whilst pools have predominantly come under focus in this thread, does anyone envisage the possibility of a reduction in numbers on the w&j circuits next year due to bait cost and the credit crunch?

If so, could there be a possible reciprocal growth in turnouts on non w&j matches?

#14

Whilst pools have predominantly come under focus in this thread, does anyone envisage the possibility of a reduction in numbers on the w&j circuits next year due to bait cost and the credit crunch?

If so, could there be a possible reciprocal growth in turnouts on non w&j matches?

It would be interesting to see how all the canals fished without BJ, i prefer squatt fishing but i cant see 50 and 60 peg winter squatt and pinkie matches returning, but i would fish them if they did.

endpeg · #15

Im all for reduced pools if it means more people will fish and ive always supported the idea of stepped pool structures. One problem with reduced pools, though, is that the returns are naturally also reduced. As match anglers we are all gamblers and some more so than others. The prospect of winning a lot of money drives a LOT of anglers. Not me, by the way.

eg. I didnt think the Loughborough payouts needed to be so high but lots disagreed. Some of the same people thought the payouts werent high enough on Lee's matches. It makes me realise that the potential of a big pot of money is what drives many match anglers. Talk to a lot of anglers as to why they go to certain venues and the same reasons crop up. Money (cost of entry and/or size of prize at the end) are a major influence and sometimes seem more important than the quality/type of fishing itself. Sad but true.

#16

At the end of a season how many anglers even break even, i would say not alot, i know i certainly don't and i think i win my fair share of sections/frame money. i think if you go for the money you should ask your boss if you can work sats and sundays.

bros · #17

I went pleasure fishing on a carp venue this week. It was hard work to motivate myself to get there as I hate fishing on my own. There was one other angler on the lake and I sat 3 pegs away from him (about 12 yards!).

I found myself transfixed on trying to beat his catch rate and thus realised why I go match fishing - it's not the cash, it's the competition. The cash is a nice bonus, but there are n't many anglers (if any) that win more than the expense of doing it.

Another idea would be to have one or 2 worm barred matches at the start of the league. Norbury and D & Locks would hold up to B&J barred matches. Other venues such as Little Onn are also suitable.

Why not?

#18

Another idea would be to have one or 2 worm barred matches at the start of the league. Norbury and D & Locks would hold up to B&J barred matches. Other venues such as Little Onn are also suitable.

Why n

Absolutely spot on, i think it was mentioned in the past(before we were in league) and got thrown out but i would vote for it, the jokers not brilliant anyway that time of year and i dont think little onn or norbury need worm and joker.

endpeg · #19

I think most of our team wouldnt object either. Id happily B&J fish from Nov onwards when the proper frosts normally arrive.

joffmiester · #20

Im all for reduced pools if it means more people will fish and ive always supported the idea of stepped pool structures. One problem with reduced pools, though, is that the returns are naturally also reduced. As match anglers we are all gamblers and some more so than others. The prospect of winning a lot of money drives a LOT of anglers. Not me, by the way.

eg. I didnt think the Loughborough payouts needed to be so high but lots disagreed. Some of the same people thought the payouts werent high enough on Lee's matches. It makes me realise that the potential of a big pot of money is what drives many match anglers. Talk to a lot of anglers as to why they go to certain venues and the same reasons crop up. Money (cost of entry and/or size of prize at the end) are a major influence and sometimes seem more important than the quality/type of fishing itself. Sad but true.

i think you right there jon