The bottom line is that there is no point opening grounds to fans only to make a loss.
We are in the hands of the SMC when it comes to implementing the measures that are needed (legally) to allow safe access.
I'd be surprised if Mr Allam offers us a good deal, we're already a financial burden according to their accounts.

Hopefully a streaming service will provide some much needed income until the end of the season.

Does anyone know the situation with pass holders money? Have people who pay monthly direct debit stopped paying them etc, will the club refund pass holders if no more games this season etc

the smc could then be in breach of contract...we pay rent and costs...anything else is their problem..if the go ahead is given, Pearson will want the gates open!

Hope you're right, but I suspect these "extras" will be negotiable.

Their get out clause will probably be that city are paying (exhorbitant charges), so we must as well.

At the end of the day i dont think this is going to be a difficult decision to make, simply because RL isnt going to be the front runner in trialling fans back in stadiums. If football prove they can get fans back in safely then we'll follow, otherwise i think pass holders who would have potentially opted out of a refund would be justified in asking for money back. If the football trials dont work then i think RL would just continue behind closed doors.

Agree, given that there has been an outbreak at a caravan park rlin Shropshirerl I think there may well be a rethink on stadiums reopening anyway. October is still 12 weeks away so things could change a number of times (travel to Spain, for example)

rlThis is what we need, but it is a way off.rl

rlIstobal (amongst others) have something that may help short to medium termrl

..... and bankrupt the club.

Only my opinion, of course.

You're slightly missing my point.

Im saying its an easy decision either way as we'll just follow football.

Many fans, including myself will be willing to write off this years season ticket for the good of the club, if there's no way of getting fans back into the stadium.

However, my point was that SOME fans may feel differently if the trials in football were successful and fans are allowed back, but the club/RL CHOOSE not to allow fans in because the 33% capacity doesnt allow the opportunity to make money.

I think AP would be happy to cover costs, let alone make money.

Whether its making money or breaking even, a fans position on a refund could be different if it was an internal decision not to allow fans versus a blanket government decision not to allow fans.

Ok, I read it as "If football prove it's ok...." , if football proves it's not ok" a refund would be justified".



A reduction in capacity might be the only way to achieve social distancing, but football starts again in September, I can't imagine the big clubs surviving if season passes are cut by 66%. Or maybe the tv deals make supporters less relevant.

I agree, but we have the unfortunate spectre of the SMC to consider...

TV income dwarfs anything else in Prem Football...

correct, some premiership football clubs could survive on tv money alone with no other income

The whole of the 2020-21 football season in England could be played in front of reduced capacities.