Weston Super Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html Seems fair to me..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html So does this mean the Daily Echo are allowed in the ground? http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4789376.Daily_Echo_banned_by_Saints/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html Hmmm, that's more notable for what it doesn't say, rather than what it does. Making your own photos available is fine, but most clubs do that already. Photographers applied for access the normal way last week and were told they were not permitted, so the club aren't being entirely open here I don't think. They specifically mention 'reporting on a game' but not photography. That doesn't clarify anything IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfc4prem Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html Seems very reasonable and fair to me. Of course, it is spin, but it makes all the tabloid stories seem very OTT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidshokk Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 I find that article very cryptic and has left me none the wiser over whether media organisations can actually take and use photos in the ground?! Are they saying they can come in, take pictures, use them but there will also be official photos taken by the club? surely thats always been the case if so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 So does this mean the Daily Echo are allowed in the ground? http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4789376.Daily_Echo_banned_by_Saints/ Yes, they have been for ages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Hmmm, that's more notable for what it doesn't say, rather than what it does. Making your own photos available is fine, but most clubs do that already. Photographers applied for access the normal way last week and were told they were not permitted, so the club aren't being entirely open here I don't think. They specifically mention 'reporting on a game' but not photography. That doesn't clarify anything IMO. It's fairly clear isn't it? Reporters are allowed, photographers aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Yes, they have been for ages. Cheers, so all that statement does is clarify the ridiculous policy of only allowing an official photographer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint peach Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html The club needs to wake up and stop backing itself into a corner. Next they'll produce just one match report and make that available through the club? Or to media organisations for a fee, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfc4prem Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 It's fairly clear isn't it? Reporters are allowed, photographers aren't. Yep, that's how i read it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever a red and white Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-10914863 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSFC Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Yeah, but from the minute he introduced the £3 booking fee i've been annoyed. You've been "annoyed" over a booking fee that you don't actually need to pay. You are pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 What it also confirms is that money is more important than being part of a football community that operates for the benefit of fans first and foremost... which stinks IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Cheers, so all that statement does is clarify the ridiculous policy of only allowing an official photographer. Who is [presumably] employed by SFC to do a specific job and create images for the club. The club then owns the copyright for those images, and wants control over how they are reproduced - for a fee, you can buy them and do what you like with them.... Maybe this is so the 'income' from images - ala image rights - can be absolutely discerned, and appropriate taxes paid, thus avoiding the shenanigans that have gone on down the road??? Surely it also means we are 'getting our money's worth' from the employees [photographers] of the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 You've been "annoyed" over a booking fee that you don't actually need to pay. You are pathetic. Correct. I'd have no issue with the booking tax if it was to cover the cost of P+P, but £3 is an outrageous amount to charge to post out a letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever a red and white Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidshokk Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2116531,00.html Hmmm... now where have i seen that before... way up somewhere.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 I have two thought on this: 1) Cortese is being a bit of a muppet. The photographers, the STs and the booking fees are all small niggling annoyances, which are completely unnescessary. 2) I don't give a flying f**k if The Sun likes us or not. They're not the most popular paper in football circles anyway (Hillsborough anyone?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Who is [presumably] employed by SFC to do a specific job and create images for the club. The club then owns the copyright for those images, and wants control over how they are reproduced - for a fee, you can buy them and do what you like with them.... Maybe this is so the 'income' from images - ala image rights - can be absolutely discerned, and appropriate taxes paid, thus avoiding the shenanigans that have gone on down the road??? Surely it also means we are 'getting our money's worth' from the employees [photographers] of the club? Which is what already happens at every club out there. The issue is the banning of other accredited photographers, who have been deemed fit and proper by the company appointed by every league club, including ourselves, to do their job for their newspaper or agency, and take photos of our games, as we have previously agreed to. The clubs' own images are already protected and always have been. They just want to control who has access to St Mary's and try to make more money from other organisations in a way which completely goes against the nature of the game in this country IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Out of interest where do SFC get their pictures from at away games? Do we pay for them or does our photographer take them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Correct. I'd have no issue with the booking tax if it was to cover the cost of P+P, but £3 is an outrageous amount to charge to post out a letter.It is beginning to be the norm. I went on the Warwickshire CCC site to book a ticket for Warwick v Hants T20 QF a few weeks back. Cost of ticket in advance £15 - £20 on the day. Booked a ticket and found £1 booking charge. Only two alternatives for delivery - ETicket or post to home. Fee to sent me an email with Eticket for me to print £2 or £2.50 to post it. Thought cheaper than on the day only to find they changed their policy on the day and were selling for £15. It is not just Saints. It is the leisure industry in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 So does this mean the Daily Echo are allowed in the ground? http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4789376.Daily_Echo_banned_by_Saints/ yes, they were back sometime during last season, ages ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 yes, they were back sometime during last season, ages ago Can't wait 'til the threads about the editor of the Echo appear, telling us what an outrage it is that the paper has not kept it's loyal customers up to date with vital information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 It is beginning to be the norm. I went on the Warwickshire CCC site to book a ticket for Warwick v Hants T20 QF a few weeks back. Cost of ticket in advance £15 - £20 on the day. Booked a ticket and found £1 booking charge. Only two alternatives for delivery - ETicket or post to home. Fee to sent me an email with Eticket for me to print £2 or £2.50 to post it. Thought cheaper than on the day only to find they changed their policy on the day and were selling for £15. It is not just Saints. It is the leisure industry in general. I know it's becoming a common place trick to squeeze more money out of people. I was always proud that Saints were more upstanding than those with ticket fee's, but now we're in the gutter with the rest of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 why not charge any accredited photographer an entrance fee and then let them take their own pics? Got to say, I don't like this policy. The Sun is correct, we need all the publicity we can get and the amount of revenue which could potentially be generated is a drop in the ocean compared to players' wages etc. Cortese is setting himself up for a national row with the media. Not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornishsailor Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Out of interest where do SFC get their pictures from at away games? Do we pay for them or does our photographer take them? This is exactly the point. The Echo's photo's from away matches come from their photographer (or by arrangement with the club's photographer). Fortunately I don't expect any other clubs to reciprocate this ban so you'll be fine, but think on if promotion was gained at Rochdale, or whoever, and there was nobody taking photos from the away teams perspective. I guess there would be a lot of disappointed fans back in Southampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Really don't see how there are about 4 different threads on this topic. At the end of the day, is it really such a big deal? The club tries to make a few extra quid from photos, but it's deemed evil because not many other clubs do it. Some people just need to take a step back, read what they've written on threads like these and think "Is it really worth getting worked up over?". The answer, for those who haven't guessed, is no. Let's leave this trivial issue behind and concentrate on the game we have coming up tomorrow, and then the next game on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Lion Tamer Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Do you honestly think that companies - big expensive companies, with lots of money to write off against tax - sponsor football teams because they get a few pictures published in the local rag / and or the Sun? I suspect their sponsorship deals are based more upon the exposure a team will get on Sky and other [possibly international] TV channels. They want their logo in as many places as possible to get value for money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 They want their logo in as many places as possible to get value for money 100% correct. Banning photographers would certainly have an impact on sponsors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 bad decision but hardly the issue that the Sun make it. Journos thinking a problem for them is a problem for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 it won't be long before the stewards try to stop us taking photos on our mobiles.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 I know it's becoming a common place trick to squeeze more money out of people. I was always proud that Saints were more upstanding than those with ticket fee's, but now we're in the gutter with the rest of them. there has always been a booking charge....stop being a foolb with your "moral high ground" stuff yes, there was a booking charge on credit card sales..but hey, you did not care as that did not effect you did it..self self self Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 there has always been a booking charge....stop being a foolb with your "moral high ground" stuff yes, there was a booking charge on credit card sales..but hey, you did not care as that did not effect you did it..self self self You've already made yourself look silly on this topic because you don't know what you're talking about. You didn't even know there was no booking fee when a debit card was used and when I informed you you came out with some hilarious comment about using your credit card (and thus paying a fee) so you could earn reward points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 What it also confirms is that money is more important than being part of a football community that operates for the benefit of fans first and foremost... which stinks IMO. Come off it. Since when did football operate primarily for the benefit of the fans? 30 years ago? 40? 100? Feel free to hate this photography policy but to bemoan the commercialisation of Saints, as if it's some new fiendish phenomenon is absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 By the way chaps, we don't have a sponsor this year so what better time to try this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 By the way chaps, we don't have a sponsor this year so what better time to try this? How can there be a good time to introduce a scheme that is doomed to failure which will result in an embarrassing climb down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 How can there be a good time to introduce a scheme that is doomed to failure which will result in an embarrassing climb down? Or ends up with everyone else 'following suit'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Or ends up with everyone else 'following suit'. Why would other clubs copy a scheme that earns no money (the press won't buy the pics) and results in negative publicity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Why would other clubs copy a scheme that earns no money (the press won't buy the pics) and results in negative publicity? If every club does it, the press won't have a choice.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Why would other clubs copy a scheme that earns no money (the press won't buy the pics) and results in negative publicity? I bet..so many other clubs are watching with interest..if we make a tiny profit in league 1....just wait till it kicks in at a higher level... then of course, you know FOR SURE that it will make no money...dunes school of business in full swing 3 posts..and im out...thank god Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faz Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Are the school holidays over yet? Freedom of the press - pah. They arre able to report p[erfectly adequately. Most of our match reports don't have photos anyway. The media rights belong to the club, they can manage them how they think fit. If they've got it wroing, they'll change soon enough. But I suspect it woin't be long before others follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wild-saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 What it also confirms is that money is more important than being part of a football community that operates for the benefit of fans first and foremost... which stinks IMO. The day we went into administration (and almost extinction) proved beyond doubt that money is more important thant being part of the footbal community. I would also hazzard a guess that most people have joined in the obsession / need for NC to loosen the purse strings and spend some money on a decent new CM, RM and a CF. I am pretty sure that being an upstanding pillar of the community isnt going to pay for the players most are baying for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brmbrm Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 FWIW I can see the selfish argument that it is "good for me" to ban the press, but when eveyr club adopts the "good for me" policy then EVERYONE is worse off. So I say Boo!, change the policy (But do they have to buy a ticket to get in?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxfordshire_saint Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 lol @ those who think sponsors will be scared off by this. Televised games (and the highlights shows) and the fact that they will then have thousands of walking advertisements wearing their logo on the front of a shirt probably means a helluva lot more than the ever-so-rare pics we get in the national papers. Still, doesn't mean that I back Cortese on this one, it all just seems a bit petty IMO and seriously, how much money will it make us? How much is he expecting to sell the photos for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 lol @ those who think sponsors will be scared off by this. Televised games (and the highlights shows) and the fact that they will then have thousands of walking advertisements wearing their logo on the front of a shirt probably means a helluva lot more than the ever-so-rare pics we get in the national papers. Still, doesn't mean that I back Cortese on this one, it all just seems a bit petty IMO and seriously, how much money will it make us? How much is he expecting to sell the photos for? most of the decisions he's made have been petty, ridiculous decisions. Banning the echo because they released the images of staplewood slightly too early? come on ffs. But i'd love to know the reason as to why he's banned photographers. That's the main issue here - we're not being told why things like this are happening, and i think we have a right to know as we're going to see our club dragged through the gutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLove Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Sorry but what is wrong with the club wanting to use their own photographer and selling the image rights. The Premier League Does it. Also if you get a wedding photographer they will charge you more for the copy right of them all. FFS why are so many of you trying to bash the club? Especially two people who basically saved the club from going out of business a year ago. So what if they add the £3 booking fee so what if they charge a bit more for the ticket on the day, So what if there was no payment plan because a load of people decided to default on the payments and stuffed it for the rest of us. They have invested heavily in the club and are running this as a business. So to bring more money into the club they are looking at ways to ensure they can maximise revenue. And secondly with regards to the payment option being removed then who cares we have (Apparently (TBC)) more season tickets sold than in the last 3 years. And it saves me a tone of money in the long term. Personally this is a fair policy from the club to ensure they know who is coming to the club in the form of the press and also a fair and probably to be copied policy on photographers. Even the BBC charge for photo's they have taken. So stop this club bashing and just get behind the team and don't boo them just because you have had 1 to many shandy's. We are called Supporters for a reason you know. GRRRRRR Rant over. I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLOTH EARS Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 I can't believe any Saints fans are happy at the way our chairman is turning us into the most hated club in the country.... worse than dirty Leeds, worse than cheating Pompey I agree Patred, its almost as if Mr Cortese is like a crazed dictator, he is going to damage our club. Yes, i have been hearing all of the stories too and as much as i want them to be bull**** I am starting to believe them. What does Markus think about all of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityRanger Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Picture this(no pun). You're the sports ed of the Sun. From a personal point of view: Many of your oldest and best friends are photographers. This applies to many of the journos working under you. You prob started on a "provincial" paper, again as did many of your colleagues and therefore sympathise with them when they are supposedly "bullied". From a professional point of view: When you're getting the pullout ready on Sunday morn for Mondays pullout you want a wide selection of pics to choose from, from both a financial and artistic point of view. Taking just these factors into account you can see how Mr Sports ed is gonna make sure he nips this in the bud. I really wonder if Mr Cortese can pull this off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Who gives a sh1t about anyone, we are the Saints and we can do what the hell we like!!!! I'm only on page 2 but you win the prize.* * The most stupid post of the day (so far) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren Posted 9 August, 2010 Share Posted 9 August, 2010 Sorry but what is wrong with the club wanting to use their own photographer and selling the image rights. The Premier League Does it. Also if you get a wedding photographer they will charge you more for the copy right of them all. FFS why are so many of you trying to bash the club? Especially two people who basically saved the club from going out of business a year ago. So what if they add the £3 booking fee so what if they charge a bit more for the ticket on the day, So what if there was no payment plan because a load of people decided to default on the payments and stuffed it for the rest of us. They have invested heavily in the club and are running this as a business. So to bring more money into the club they are looking at ways to ensure they can maximise revenue. And secondly with regards to the payment option being removed then who cares we have (Apparently (TBC)) more season tickets sold than in the last 3 years. And it saves me a tone of money in the long term. Personally this is a fair policy from the club to ensure they know who is coming to the club in the form of the press and also a fair and probably to be copied policy on photographers. Even the BBC charge for photo's they have taken. So stop this club bashing and just get behind the team and don't boo them just because you have had 1 to many shandy's. We are called Supporters for a reason you know. GRRRRRR Rant over. I think. 100% agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now