British Speedway statement

[Skidder1 7,631]

12 minutes ago, Technik said:

I don't think we hear to many complaints from Mr Ford about not making money & it has to be said he & his Poole team have been front runners in collecting silveware. He builds a team within a budget & sticks to it. Riders come from all nations to race for him so I guess he must be doing something right in Dorset.

Paying the riders on time and in full always helps!!

[Skidder1 7,631]

41 minutes ago, Wee Eck said:

The one exception to this has to be Glasgow. Yes, they have poured eye watering amounts into everything that goes on at Ashfield, but the amount of publicity for the owners’ core businesses has to provide a substantial payback. 

I can’t think of any one more professional in running speedway in UK than the Glasgow owners. 

Is this the same Glasgow that stated in their promotional video a couple of seasons ago that they were losing £100k a year?!

[mikebv 10,224]

1 hour ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

I think it's reasonable that sports organisation can be a labour of love and you shouldn't necessarily (or even at all) be in it for money. So if you're running an activity that loses money in itself, but your wider facility attracts enough other revenue to subsidise it, then that can be a reasonable business decision.

What is daft, is continuing to throw money at a loss making enterprise. It's a zero sum game, not only for you but for many of the other promoters who have to try to match the prevailing cost levels.  

Exactly...

Surely at least some of them can see how winning any Speedway title with so few competitors (and the ridiculous way it can be won with every rider in the league possibly playing his part regardless of team), is pretty much as shallow a victory as any could be..

(Apart from maybe the boat race)..

In a sport that brings great financial reward I get "throwing money at it" as there will be competition which, whilst not as rich, can still provide decent opposition, and you can speculate to accumulate..

The Football Premier League and Polish Speedway are two examples where spending big can give rewards but those who spend less can still compete..

And the Poles launching the U24 League shows how they want this conveyor belt of talent (not just Polish), to continue so as to ensure their Leagues stay full of fans, sponsors and coverage..

In Speedway there is far too disparate a distance between the haves and the have nots, with, you could argue, several clubs plying their trade in the "wrong" league for their size and backing..

How few teams need to be left before someone starts to properly equalise team strengths through salary spend?

A salary spend that never goes over a certain amount that all sign up to, and will keep clubs in the black..

Eg. Could you run six man teams for £4k per team per night in the top league? And say £3k a night in the 2nd Division? Run twice a week in both leagues and that's £8k being shared between six lads in the top tier and £6k being shared in the 2nd.. 

We know that DU'ing is necessary as it is clear Promoters are quite happy for riders to be full time pro's, so heat leaders doing both leagues would pick up a decent return every week, taking a decent share each of the £14k their two teams will be paying out..

Or maybe run with the same £'s per night but five man teams thus increasing the return for the rider?

Averages certainly dont equalise teams as is obvious every year, as they are delivered by too many variables, with fans every pre season pointing out the clear wooden spoon contenders, and not often being wrong..

Not many take any win of either match or even league too seriously, so surely success should be measured in the growth of the leagues, and ultimately through that, the sport itself?

[cowboy cookie returns? 746]

26 minutes ago, mikebv said:

Exactly...

Surely at least some of them can see how winning any Speedway title with so few competitors (and the ridiculous way it can be won with every rider in the league possibly playing his part regardless of team), is pretty much as shallow a victory as any could be..

(Apart from maybe the boat race)..

In a sport that brings great financial reward I get "throwing money at it" as there will be competition which, whilst not as rich, can still provide decent opposition, and you can speculate to accumulate..

The Football Premier League and Polish Speedway are two examples where spending big can give rewards but those who spend less can still compete..

And the Poles launching the U24 League shows how they want this conveyor belt of talent (not just Polish), to continue so as to ensure their Leagues stay full of fans, sponsors and coverage..

In Speedway there is far too disparate a distance between the haves and the have nots, with, you could argue, several clubs plying their trade in the "wrong" league for their size and backing..

How few teams need to be left before someone starts to properly equalise team strengths through salary spend?

A salary spend that never goes over a certain amount that all sign up to, and will keep clubs in the black..

Eg. Could you run six man teams for £4k per team per night in the top league? And say £3k a night in the 2nd Division? Run twice a week in both leagues and that's £8k being shared between six lads in the top tier and £6k being shared in the 2nd.. 

We know that DU'ing is necessary as it is clear Promoters are quite happy for riders to be full time pro's, so heat leaders doing both leagues would pick up a decent return every week, taking a decent share each of the £14k their two teams will be paying out..

Or maybe run with the same £'s per night but five man teams thus increasing the return for the rider?

Averages certainly dont equalise teams as is obvious every year, as they are delivered by too many variables, with fans every pre season pointing out the clear wooden spoon contenders, and not often being wrong..

Not many take any win of either match or even league too seriously, so surely success should be measured in the growth of the leagues, and ultimately through that, the sport itself?

Spot on. Seems so simple doesn't it!

[Speedtiger 327]

1 hour ago, Technik said:

I don't think we hear to many complaints from Mr Ford about not making money & it has to be said he & his Poole team have been front runners in collecting silveware. He builds a team within a budget & sticks to it. Riders come from all nations to race for him so I guess he must be doing something right in Dorset.

So if he’s making money why did he put the club up for sale and had no takers? 

[Neila 1,142]

10 minutes ago, Speedtiger said:

So if he’s making money why did he put the club up for sale and had no takers? 

Wanted too much for it ?

[Neila 1,142]

1 hour ago, Skidder1 said:

Is this the same Glasgow that stated in their promotional video a couple of seasons ago that they were losing £100k a year?!

Similar loss this year allegedly !!

[Wee Eck 702]

2 hours ago, Skidder1 said:

Is this the same Glasgow that stated in their promotional video a couple of seasons ago that they were losing £100k a year?!

I think you need to read what I wrote. Glasgow speedway no doubt loses money. But I understand that the loss is more than covered by the commercial benefit to their other businesses. 
The discussion was about a workable business plan, and you only have to look at the success of the associated businesses to see that the amount of marketing benefit derived from Glasgow speedway is paying off.

When Poole had RIAS as it’s sponsor, their sponsorship was a cost to the business but a marketing boost. It’s the same impact derived in a different manner. 

[Byker Biker 468]

7 minutes ago, Wee Eck said:

I think you need to read what I wrote. Glasgow speedway no doubt loses money. But I understand that the loss is more than covered by the commercial benefit to their other businesses. 
The discussion was about a workable business plan, and you only have to look at the success of the associated businesses to see that the amount of marketing benefit derived from Glasgow speedway is paying off.

When Poole had RIAS as it’s sponsor, their sponsorship was a cost to the business but a marketing boost. It’s the same impact derived in a different manner. 

Nicely, this company has always been hugely successful with their innovation, investment, marketing initiatives and willingness to take reasonable risk. They are arguably the market leader in mobility solutions respected by the motor industry, operate nationwide and have heaped commercial recognition and success on Scotland and Glasgow in particular. They treat their employees well in a firm but fair way and are keen to share their success with their immediate community. Glasgow Speedway is a pimple on the arse of their empire but brings them great personal satisfaction, please don't think that Glasgow Speedway has enhanced the extent of their operation unless you are HMRC and don't forget the equity is in the freehold land that is the footprint of the stadium, there's always a way out if it's absolutely necessary. They are to be applauded and thoroughly deserve more recognition than the sport affords them.

[stevehone 3,420]

4 hours ago, speedwaysliders said:

Someone ,somewhere has to get speedway on normal TV.

it'll never be on the BBC, not enough box tickers

[Speedtiger 327]

8 minutes ago, Byker Biker said:

Nicely, this company has always been hugely successful with their innovation, investment, marketing initiatives and willingness to take reasonable risk. They are arguably the market leader in mobility solutions respected by the motor industry, operate nationwide and have heaped commercial recognition and success on Scotland and Glasgow in particular. They treat their employees well in a firm but fair way and are keen to share their success with their immediate community. Glasgow Speedway is a pimple on the arse of their empire but brings them great personal satisfaction, please don't think that Glasgow Speedway has enhanced the extent of their operation unless you are HMRC and don't forget the equity is in the freehold land that is the footprint of the stadium, there's always a way out if it's absolutely necessary. They are to be applauded and thoroughly deserve more recognition than the sport affords them.

All agreed what Glasgow has achieved is nothing short of fantastic and just what the sport needs but will they get any applause and recognition from there peers? NO they will be seen by the green eyed monsters as upstarts and a threat. Will they last or get fed up with the backstabbing and walk away, time will tell. 

[Wee Eck 702]

39 minutes ago, Byker Biker said:

Nicely, this company has always been hugely successful with their innovation, investment, marketing initiatives and willingness to take reasonable risk. They are arguably the market leader in mobility solutions respected by the motor industry, operate nationwide and have heaped commercial recognition and success on Scotland and Glasgow in particular. They treat their employees well in a firm but fair way and are keen to share their success with their immediate community. Glasgow Speedway is a pimple on the arse of their empire but brings them great personal satisfaction, please don't think that Glasgow Speedway has enhanced the extent of their operation unless you are HMRC and don't forget the equity is in the freehold land that is the footprint of the stadium, there's always a way out if it's absolutely necessary. They are to be applauded and thoroughly deserve more recognition than the sport affords them.

I agree with the first part but not the conclusion. How many column inches have the Allied group obtained from using the Tigers as a “hook”? Have a look at https://www.scotsman.com/business/big-interview-gerry-facenna-co-founder-and-chair-allied-vehicles-2018412?amp for starters. 
The Tigers are not a pimple, more a beauty spot which have been used repeatedly to promote the Allied business.
Secondly, the open market value of the land wouldn’t touch the sides of Allied’s investment in Glasgow speedway and the stadium. The trustees of Ashfield Juniors discovered this when they tried to sell it to a supermarket chain. They had been offered several million - something like £4m - IF planning consent could be obtained but it was discovered that covenants on the land made that virtually impossible. The Scottish Land Registry shows it was ultimately sold for £250,000 in 2014

I accept that the owners obtain significant amounts of personal satisfaction from their ownership of Glasgow speedway but, as you say, they are hugely successful, and part of that success comes from spotting an opportunity, and a relatively low cost one compared to the size of the business, for a novel route for marketing. 

[Technik 476]

8 hours ago, Speedtiger said:

So if he’s making money why did he put the club up for sale and had no takers? 

I can only speculate as to his reasons to want to sell Poole speedway. However it's no secret that the Ford family have purchased a French mansion house & are in the midst of renovating it as we can all see on a much publishised TV programme. I would hazzard a guess that they would like to use the monies from a sale of the speedway to pay for their next project in France.

Now why the club failed to sell I have no idea but I understand there were interested parties but none put pen to paper. 

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

12 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

 

It is somewhat surprising what has been invested in a couple of speedway tracks in the current climate, but the calamitous loss of teams would suggest speedway is not an attractive proposition for many. 

 

12 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

I think it's reasonable that sports organisation can be a labour of love and you shouldn't necessarily (or even at all) be in it for money. So if you're running an activity that loses money in itself, but your wider facility attracts enough other revenue to subsidise it, then that can be a reasonable business decision.

What is daft, is continuing to throw money at a loss making enterprise. It's a zero sum game, not only for you but for many of the other promoters who have to try to match the prevailing cost levels.  

In 2012 there were 28 stand alone tracks. Accepting that in 2022 both Birmingham and Workington will be running and, pushing it a bit, that Eastbourne would be. Taking into account Isle of Wight (who operate outside of the BSPL) - that's 21. 

Of those no longer operating 5 (Lakeside, Stoke, Dudley, Swindon and Coventry) were due to the loss of the stadiums (this may also apply to Kent). Rye House, Somerset & Buxton closed for financial reasons, although in Somerset's case that was more to do with the loss of revenue from their club house.

While I wouldn't suggest that speedway's finances are anything but parlous, this suggests that the reason for the loss of teams is at least as much about an inability to have somewhere to race than people not being prepared to invest (with Workington and Oxford coming back, clearly they are).

According to this article, the Premier League lost  £2.74bn in 10 years: 

Explained: The ‘terrible’ state of Premier League clubs’ finances – The Athletic

According to this article, the owners of Everton, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Brighton and Fulham put well over £1bn into their clubs in a 5 year period prior to 2020:

Premier League owners and how much they invested or 'earned' from their clubs | Sportslens.com

Even allowing for the difference between profile, revenue, turnover, sponsorship and attendances, these are extraordinary figures that make speedway's £100k losses look like peanuts but what they clearly show is - as I suggested earlier - that sports clubs may be run like businesses but they are often little less than a personal hobby (even a cursory viewing of the internet suggest that both rugby codes are no different).

To really prove my point, my suspicion is that if a Birmingham supporter came up on the national lottery this weekend the future of the club would be assured, regardless of the fact that his chances of making money would be nigh on zero.  An even better example would be when Mildenhall and Isle of Wight were shareholder owned; year on year, people put money in in the almost certain knowledge that they would lose it (as a Mildenhall shareholder myself, I did so).

It is difficult to argue with your point that it is 'daft...to throw money at a loss making enterprise'. Yet in the case of ownership of sports teams, that is precisely what people do. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Halifaxtiger

[mikebv 10,224]

4 hours ago, Halifaxtiger said:

 

In 2012 there were 28 stand alone tracks. Accepting that in 2022 both Birmingham and Workington will be running and, pushing it a bit, that Eastbourne would be. Taking into account Isle of Wight (who operate outside of the BSPL) - that's 21. 

Of those no longer operating 5 (Lakeside, Stoke, Dudley, Swindon and Coventry) were due to the loss of the stadiums (this may also apply to Kent). Rye House, Somerset & Buxton closed for financial reasons, although in Somerset's case that was more to do with the loss of revenue from their club house.

While I wouldn't suggest that speedway's finances are anything but parlous, this suggests that the reason for the loss of teams is at least as much about an inability to have somewhere to race than people not being prepared to invest (with Workington and Oxford coming back, clearly they are).

According to this article, the Premier League lost  £2.74bn in 10 years: 

Explained: The ‘terrible’ state of Premier League clubs’ finances – The Athletic

According to this article, the owners of Everton, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Brighton and Fulham put well over £1bn into their clubs in a 5 year period prior to 2020:

Premier League owners and how much they invested or 'earned' from their clubs | Sportslens.com

Even allowing for the difference between profile, revenue, turnover, sponsorship and attendances, these are extraordinary figures that make speedway's £100k losses look like peanuts but what they clearly show is - as I suggested earlier - that sports clubs may be run like businesses but they are often little less than a personal hobby (even a cursory viewing of the internet suggest that both rugby codes are no different).

To really prove my point, my suspicion is that if a Birmingham supporter came up on the national lottery this weekend the future of the club would be assured, regardless of the fact that his chances of making money would be nigh on zero.  An even better example would be when Mildenhall and Isle of Wight were shareholder owned; year on year, people put money in in the almost certain knowledge that they would lose it (as a Mildenhall shareholder myself, I did so).

It is difficult to argue with your point that it is 'daft...to throw money at a loss making enterprise'. Yet in the case of ownership of sports teams, that is precisely what people do. 

Correct...

However, the business models of Football and Speedway are a world apart..

Many owners of Football teams happily run at hundreds of millions of (serviceable) debt due to owning all fixtures and fittings, own the land the stadium is built on, and have in some cases, literally billions of pounds of assets. ...

Not to mention guaranteed enormous income from TV...

With the ultimate safety net being that if it all goes pear shaped then someone else will see the opportunity of the untold riches that can be delivered and give you a huge purchase fee...

Speedway in most cases are tenants with an asset base of circa a tractor, a fence and an air bag, with some riders who may, or may not, have any intrinsic value...

In football a team can spend 200 million during a transfer window, all adding to the debt, however they are not guaranteed success because other teams can spend tens and tens of millions too, all safe in the knowledge that their asset base is higher than their debts...

In Speedway, one club spending £100k more than their rivals just adds salary inflation into the market, when the last thing the sport needs is teams spending more..

Football needs a 'Manchester United' to keep it at the forefront of billions of people's thoughts globally. .

But it also needs a 'Watford' who can compete with them on a reasonably level playing field...

There should be a salary cap which all sign up to, with the number of riders per team being driven by the riders expectations of salary, against what the salary cap is...

Teams should never pay any more than that, however added on sponsorship can and should count.

With the caveat being it is "proper sponsorship" not like happens in football for example where the 'oil rich clubs' in particular skirt around FFP by gaining huge sponsors through not exactly transparent means...

Eg. Say there were 18 teams split into two, eight in the top tier and ten in the second, with five men per team, then that would be 28 matches for the top tier, and 36 for the second tier, if home and away twice..

14 home matches @ £18 would generate £252k if 1000 average per week (an absolute minimum crowd surely to what tier one teams do get I would suggest). Take off the VAT and that's around £200k to cover rider and meeting costs..

£5k per night for the riders (an average of a grand each, some higher some lower) would mean £140k paid out for 28 matches... Headroom of £60k to pay other costs...

In the 2nd tier @ £16 admission at 700 per meeting it would deliver just under £202k for 18 home matches (£161k ex VAT)..

£3k per night for the riders (an average of £600 each, some higher, some lower) would mean £126k paid out for 36 matches.. Headroom of £35k to pay other costs..

A decent heat leader doubling up could earn as an average therefore around £3.2k a week for four meetings..

Not huge money given what they do, however very decent in comparison to the average wage, and as we often say, they can still work November to March doing other things. ..

Edited November 18, 2021 by mikebv