Wes Tender

From the Vital Pompey website regarding the possible return of Wes Thomas to Bournemouth:- No doubt eyebrows were raised on many Skate Neanderthal foreshortened foreheads. When did they last sign up players, even on loan, from the same division since they were in the Premierhip? Following their fall from grace, only players from higher divisions have been considered good enough to play for the mighty Pompey. Regarding their beloved manager, the imbecile goes on to say:- Par for the course for the usual Skate fan. "Reasonable" of course being coded Skatetalk for sufficient dosh to buy players of a standard higher than most other rival teams could afford in whichever division they find themselves, and regardless of whether their income is sufficient to cover their wages.

There are many different types of tourist or other customers who might be interested in either visiting it or staying on it. As you say, it might have less attractiveness at first sight to British tourists, especially in the major British liner port. But what percentage of the population have actually been on a liner, let alone an iconic one such as the QE2? There is an element for them of seeing how the other half live. Then there are the tourists from other countries, who although they might see lots of liners in the port, don't actually have the opportunity of actually going on board one. Add in the market for an original and iconic Hotel & Conference destination and the investment prospects begin to improve. As I said, whereas the Queen Mary is not a stand alone attraction, I would anticipate that other things might need to be added adjacent to it, such as a decent Maritime Museum, or Titanic Museum. I'd argue that the British weather is actually a plus point, as in LA there was the inclination to do other outdoor things. I was there for the Olympics and went to see the Queen Mary mainly because of her connections with Southampton. Frankly I was horrified with what the bloody Yanks had done to her. There has been discussion in the past I understand about bringing her back here, but I seem to recall that she is no longer in a condition for this to be possible. Shame that the Princess flying boats are no longer here in Southampton, or else we could have had a parallel universe exhibition featuring them, some Yank liner like the SS United States and an Elstree Studio's kitsch version of a mini New York for the Yanks to visit.

You only have to look across the pond to Los Angeles where nearby at Long Beach, they have the former Cunard Queen Mary, close by to the Howard Hughes "Spruce Goose" flying boat and the tacky Olde London Town "attraction" The Queen Mary is used as an hotel, although the tourist parts are the atrocious "sound and light" show in the engine room and the upper deck promenades are filled with American junk food outlets. The London feature on the quay is the usual Hollywood idea of what they think London is like and as usual, they are far wide of the mark and have no idea. However, the Spruce Goose is excellent. They must attract many thousands of tourists to these attractions, so no reason that the QE 2 could not be utilised as an Hotel/conference centre and other attractions added to give it extra value, although the only fly in the ointment I could think of is the shortage of waterfront space in the docks because of all the cruise trade we have at the moment.

*Yawn* ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Well, it's quite obvious from some of the comments on here that the most knowledgeable posters are not confident that he will know when to enlarge and to what extent. And here is a valuable resource to guide him. All somebody has to do, is point him in this direction for expert consultancy advice without a fee.

So 20 pages in, have we reached any conclusions, based on what Manchester United have achieved historically? Having covered them, I really do believe that the debate ought to be continued with several pages of facts and figures relating to Arsenal's and Liverpool's transfer dealings in the 90's too. Cortese will find all this information invaluable in assisting him to reach a decision as to how big the expansion should be and the precise optimum moment when it should be enacted. Well done, lads.

Dreams? Or aims and ambitions? So he should keep these ambitions to himself and not tell his manager, the players or the fans? Right. Adkins has to know what is expected of him, or else how does he plan for it? As for the fans, most will appreciate that the people who run our club have such high expectations of where they want us to be in the future. Where exactly is the discontent of which you speak? Was that always your little bit of philosophy as your location, or did you change it just to make it ironic for that post?

*Yawn*

Blah, Blah, Blah. Next. Blah, Blah Blah, Next Blah, Blah, Blah. Next I'm already far too bored with this speculation about a hypothetical situation. As usual, you show yourselves totally incapable of getting the right end of the stick, probably deliberately. For example, I wasn't talking about you not having a shred of evidence to support your little hypothesis about the mighty Derby and Forest. I was talking about you not having a shred of evidence about Cortese's plans for stadium expansion and when he might bring it about and what the trigger for it will be and what the policy will be regarding the sale of tickets. I repeat. You know nothing. So really quite pointless in debating this further with you if you're going to twist everything I say to suit yourself. You probably think it makes you look clever. It doesn't. It makes you look a bit thick.

Just as all of your opinions are based on ifs and buts too. Admit it, you have not one single shred of evidence to back up your comments. You don't know what Cortese/the Liebherrs are planning, what their strategy will be under varying circumstances. I don't disagree with your final line and never have done. We are just arguing the hypothetical details. Hypothetical. And typically of the small group of mass debators that you belong to, you twist everything you disagree with to suit your own opinion. Where did I say that Pompey fans would become Saints fans? I was careful to emphasise that most would not, although a small proportion might; fans are fickle. Not really relevant comparing the two Nottingham clubs and Derby with us, as we are now above all of them and have wealthy ownership and any historical comparisons are spurious as they are from another era when most circumstances were entirely different. And where did I ever mention Wigan? Are they particularly noted for bringing masses of fans to matches at the other end of the country? No, I didn't think so. But it is useful quoting extreme examples to illustrate a point, isn't it? Although you would gain far more respect were you to use much more pertinent examples instead of ridiculous ones.

If you read my responses carefully, you would see that I was talking about a proportionate increase in the allocation of away fans' seats. 10%. Therefore, we would always have at least 90% of the seats. I also said that if we could fill the number of seats above the 3000 that we are obliged to allocate to away fans, so much the better. But I see that you would rather that those extra seats were left empty, because you are generous with the Liebherr's money and would tell them that they would be mental to want to earn extra revenue from them. It isn't your money. It isn't your decision. You have no say, only an opinion, as do I.

We have a parallel situation down here if the Skates were liquidated. A phoenix club would be formed, but it would take years and years for them to get back to where they are even now. In the meantime, many of their potential fans under normal circumstances, would gravitate here. I am not talking about their hardcore fans; I'm talking about the ones where dad takes his sons to a match for the first time, those from areas between Portsmouth and here and Skate fans who live further away from Portsmouth, closer to us, and who therefore are not regular Skate fans. There is no doubt that we would therefore increase our fanbase, were Portsmouth to be liquidated. The same naturally applies to any other two clubs in close proximity, that the demise of one will result in the increased attendances of the other. Your views on how Nottingham can sustain two clubs with Derby ten miles away, because of the massive catchment area they have in the Peak District are already well known.

England were absolutely dire. After a while I just got bored rigid at all the backwards and sidewards passing and the number of times we gave the ball away needlessly. Had we been playing a much better team than San Marino, we would have been on the receiving end of a defeat, playing so poorly.

It depends on what we want to see as the result of all this fallout. Perhaps many of us are happy to have them continue, either run by the Trust or with Chainrai. Unless some lunatic multi-millionaire arrives on the scene to save them, they are going to be incredible comedy value with either of the two scenarios under which they now find themselves. And we still have the results of the Baker Tilley forensic examination to look forward to.

When I posted my opinion, I forgot that you had the ear of Cortese and the Liebherrs and knew their innermost thoughts on the possibility of stadium expansion. Had I known this too, I would have known that having developed the stadium to take account of the increased ticket sales for the glory teams, they were quite prepared to forego revenue that might otherwise have been generated by the sale of those seats to some away fans. After all, they are made of money and are quite happy to pour it into the club without expecting to maximise the return on their investment. What I find disappointing in attempts to debate this question sensibly, is having childish, petulant responses from people like you, who can only bandy about insults to anybody whose views and opinions differ from their own. As mentioned, you have not one shred of evidence to hand regarding the thoughts of the Liebherrs or Cortese and yet you are prepared to label anybody with oposing views to yours as mental. Were you the playground bully at school? Somebody without the intellect to get the better of other brighter children, so you had to resort to petty name-calling? Regarding your puerile response to my question about the Nottingham clubs, I would say yes. But naturally it would depend on the quality of the grout and the price and the reliability of the supply source. Now, I've answered your ludicrous question. How about answering my more sensible one? I'll even allow you some leeway to justify your yes or no. Try and exercise your few brain cells and come up with something that doesn't involve insults, please, if you are capable of it.

What is actually mental, is the idea that the stadium would be expanded solely for the exclusive use of Saints fans, and refusing to fill at least some of the empty seats that there will inevitably be for at least half the matches with away fans is mental. In case it had escaped your notice, the club is run as a business, to make a profit. If you believe for one minute that they would rather have empty seats just because they would otherwise be filled with some away supporters, you really are a sandwich short of a picnic. Get it? Regarding Nottingham's two football clubs, I see that you have avoided answering my question. I'll repeat it. If one or other of those two clubs were to cease to exist, would the other club benefit by an increase in attendances as a result? A simple yes or no, please

Well, stop misquoting me and we'll leave it there.

Who said anything about four or more thousand additional away fans? Typical CB Fry exageration. And you ask why allow additional away fans. Simple really. Additional revenue. Get it? And who said anything about Nottingham Forest being crippled by the existence of Notts County? That adjective is entirely yours. Exaggeration again, hyperbole, pompous, supercilious claptrap. But if one of those two clubs did not exist, then the other would pick up a lot of their fans, would they not? So each club in close proximity to another affects the other's attendances. Or is that concept too alien for you to understand it?

So did I suggest increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? No, I did not. So to suggest that I did, is twisting my words. It would be lovely if we could add 10,000 seats and sell them all to our fans. But if we couldn't, why should we forego the chance to make money from rival fans filling at the most 10% of that extra capacity and generating around £665,000 extra revenue, plus additional takings in the concourse?

For some reason that must only be known to yourself, I try to explain my position in as simple terms as I can possibly muster, but as tajjuk observes, you twist it around. I am NOT suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium. I have already said that I am happy with 10% away fans. That is 3000 in a 30,000 seater stadium, 4000 in a 40,000 seater. Although there would be an extra 1000 away fans under such a scenario, the proportion of away fans would remain constant, wouldn't it? And just in case it is also not clear, if that extra 10,000 seats could be filled by our own supporters, that would be great, but if not, then I would be happy with 1000 (10%) of the seats being sold to away supporters.

To begin with, my original post was in response to Malmacian, taking issue with his comment about the catchment area. Whereas you continued with a long discussion with tajjuk about the catchment area, you somehow chose to go off on a tangent with me about the allocation of tickets to away fans visiting St Mary's, not something that I was particularly interested in, but seemingly you wished to discuss with me. Then I chided you for quoting me in a reply to somebody else's post, when I had not responded to your question to clear up a misapprehension you had about what I said. And now you claim that I have thrown insults at you. You have called me stroppy and uppity, whereas I have called you obtuse and might have been a bit terse in my responses. Insults? Where? Are you really that thin-skinned? Or is asking that question deemed to be an insult? Regarding the increased capacity, I have even stated quite clearly that if we could fill the capacity with our own fans beyond the 3000, that would obviously be the thing to do. But if we added an extra 5000 seats and had say 500 that we couldn't sell, would you prefer them to be empty?

Are you being deliberately obtuse today? I already answered that question. If we increased the away allocation to fill an enlarged stadium, it would only be a bad idea if the proportion of seats allocated to rival fans increased. Of course you wouldn't increase the capacity by say 5000 and have most of those seats filled with away fans, as the balance of support would be altered significantly to our detriment. But I see no problem in increasing the capacity by 5000 and allowing an extra 500 to go to away fans. Do you? If we could fill the extra capacity entirely with our fans beyond the 3000 we have to allocate, then obviously that would be the thing to do, unless we were able to charge significantly higher prices to the away fans than we could get from our home fans. Even then, I wouldn't want them to have over 10% of the capacity.

I think that again you have not understood my point. I stated that the away allocation should only be expanded as a proportion of the stadium's increased capacity. So that if the stadium capacity was 80,000, I'd have no qualms personally if the away support increased to 8,000. I've no problem with away support being 10% of capacity.

No, unless the stadium is expanded so that the proportionate allocation of away fans' seats rises accordingly, I don't think that we should allocate more seats to away fans in home areas. Is that clear enough?

Yes, you asked for me to clarify my point, but then before I responded, used it regardless to make another point further in the debate and then you wonder why I found it exasperating. Regarding what you asked above though, as things stand with the current capacity, there is only so much space available for away fans and I understand that there is an obligation to allow a certain percentage of the capacity to be set aside for away fans. Once that allocation is filled, then naturally any other fans of the away team have only the option of taking home seats, if they can get them. They then run the risk of ejection if they identify themselves as away fans in the home section. By and large, it is only the glory teams and the local rival derbies which will produce the demand for tickets that will sell out the stadium currently. But there are several clubs who are glory clubs, or those close enough, or who historically have good away support to fill the away end for many fixtures. Whether the home parts of the ground are filled depends on several factors, such as whether the opponents are a big enough pull, whether the match is televised, on a weekend, whether the Corporate areas are sold out, etc.