at winter league

#21

To try and make a profit out of angling in its current state is what will probably kill it. When a organisation sponsors an event doesn't that mean that they put money into it not take it out?

ropa · #22

The problem I have with it is they don`t really know, because of how many teams will take part or how many leagues there will be, how much money they will generate by this extra charge!! Have they a figure in mind that they need to cover costs or are they just speculating to how much they can rake in???? Who?? apart from Ken decides on these changes, or is it pressure from above imposed on Ken?? Who sits dwon with Ken and decides about rule changes for the league, is it anybody from any of the leagues, have we in place a w/league committee?? If not shouldn`t it be about time we have?? What happened to some of the concerns of last year, granted Ken has listened to travel problems etc, but how can a league of 12 have 2 qualifiying places and a league of of 6 have 2 qualifying places???? AND now pay double the cost for the privilage.

#23

Good points Mr Ropa.

Take this back to basics.

If I, as a match organiser, asked an individual or a team for £60, they have a right to know where this money is going. It's not rocket science.

Guest · #24

so let me get this straight then, the organisers of this event have lost money year on year for TEN YEARS . i find this hard to believe because anyone with an ounce of common sense would put a stop to this (loss) after one year, never mind ten! on the flip side if they have regarded this as a form of sponsorship then yes it will show as a loss on paper but surely that is outweighed by the media attention gained, prestige etc in respect of the competition being a blue ribband event. lets face it the money paid in by MANY teams is someting they have no real chance of getting back , in todays financial climate it would be wise to look at the bad pr this increase has and will continue to cause , the teams subsidising organisers poor financial acumen is not the way to go. like bill has suggested give everyone a spread sheet to see where the money goes and this may go some way to cushioning the blow and cynicsm towards the percentage increase. if there is nothing to hide just get it done other **top notch organisers** do it !

#25

Are we that gullible!

I think I'll stand in the middle of Brum and ask everyone for £60!

I know what I'd be told.

#26

So the general consensus seems to be that they dont mind paying the extra money if an account balance sheet is produced?

#27

Are we that gullible!

I think I'll stand in the middle of Brum and ask everyone for £60!

I know what I'd be told.

Iv'e heard the kids from the tyburn are moving to stafford as theres a santa lookalike who gives them free bait.

ropa · #28

Lee, we as a team don`t mind paying the extra money, however we can`t speak for the rest of the teams in the league and especially the teams that have no realistic chance of progressing further in the competition. As a league we have to speak for the lesser teams as they are what makes the competition special and if they decide they don`t want tp pay it, they cant be forced therefore our league will reduce in size. The w/league fees was afordable for teams to fish, will it be in future??? It would certainly help if a balance sheet was made available but is it just papering over the cracks????

#29

Yeah, I should have give em some worms!

Never had a bite on that line

#30

I agree totally Ropa, we should be speaking for all the teams not looking after ourselves.

Guest · #31

lee , in all honesty no i dont think people are happy to pay 35 pounds per team extra with or without a spreadsheet , however people may be more understanding if they can actually see that they are not being taken for a ride. i know for a fact that you and bill have done spreadsheets before as i think paul t has also **all this without being asked ** also the sums being accounted for in this instance are significantly higher** it stops the uncertainty amongst angle

Guest · #32

Hi All,
Working on a balance sheet now, hope to have it up on the Go-Fishing site asap.

Will also comment on a few other posts with regard to rules ect. remember though, just about every angler/ team has a different point of view on every rule, very hard to keep all happy!
Ken

Guest · #33

you will not get a tacklefest balance sheet, ever, sorry

Ken

#34

A balance sheet will answer a lot of peoples questions.

Will the final be on the Nene?

joffmiester · #35

ken i think with less than a month away its a bit late for anyone to have there say mate
i take it with the increase its now a self funded league bye the anglers fishing the leagues then and not sponsored bye ANGLING TIMES
we could do with theses questions answering quickly mate also which of the the boundaries do the leagues fall into for the semi finals [like we have always been in the northern semi region

REGIONS/ BOUNDARIES i take it there the same thing mate

#36

Ken's reply taken from the go fishing site

Taken from Go fishing Site

With reference to requests regarding the Team Championships, may I take this opportunity to detail some costs - financial loss that have been carried for many years due to a lack of significant investment into competition fishing.
Final payout £8,500
Semi final fixed costs £2,700
General event organisation, printing, freelance weekend staff for covering regional rounds, fixed final costs: £6,000+.

Monies in: 180 teams x £25 - £4,500.

Overall 2007 loss: £12,700 (our internal audit actually puts that figure at £13k).

We shall continue to seek investors into match fishing to attempt to push the final prize fund higher, but it is a slow, steady building process although there are hopes that the Champion of Champions event for league winners will help raise the profile of this sector of the sport.
We are committed to match angling but economics means we can't continue to lose money at the current rate. We already invest heavily into match with a large regional reporting teams giving club and match team sponsors the weekly column inches of advertising they fervently seek.
Please feel free to pass the detail on to any team members - this is their competition and all we hope is to make it a little more self supportive - I'm not aware of any other national matches that make major loss.
The proposed £60 per team still sees the Team Champs 'in the red', but makes the financial loss more manageable.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have but only to real anglers giving real names and team names and only on this site please.

Ken Wade

Angling Times Team Championship Organiser

#37

So is the extra £35 a team to pay for the Champion of Champions

Thanks for responding Ken

scotty85 · #38

ken whats happen to the east mids dont we get a semi or are we going to get stuck were there short.also the AT winter league as always been a team event it dosnt need any individual champ thing adding to it that goes against what it is. team champs

#39

Well said Scotty

Cant see the point in having an individual Champion of Champions, everything IMO should be resourced towards what it has always been ...... a TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP !!!!!

::)

#40

Might be worth trying it on Xmas Day