|
Post by kezypanther on Aug 25, 2019 17:08:19 GMT
What is happening with the old one? Don’t know if it has been mentioned before so sorry if it has.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Oct 20, 2019 16:27:42 GMT
Am I the only one that finds the picture quality really quite poor considering? Clearly an upgrade and very good overall but the image isn't actually all that clear, especially evident on the highlights when you can barely see whats happening.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,405
|
Post by Yotes on Oct 20, 2019 16:29:27 GMT
Am I the only one that finds the picture quality really quite poor considering? Clearly an upgrade and very good overall but the image isn't actually all that clear, especially evident on the highlights when you can barely see whats happening. Do you not think that's the quality of the footage/cameras, rather than the screen? They look crap on the telly or online too.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Oct 20, 2019 16:32:12 GMT
Am I the only one that finds the picture quality really quite poor considering? Clearly an upgrade and very good overall but the image isn't actually all that clear, especially evident on the highlights when you can barely see whats happening. Do you not think that's the quality of the footage/cameras, rather than the screen? They look crap on the telly or online too. It could be, and im not expert on giant screens but looks like the pixel count is way too low. To me you can see the dots that make up the images. It may be the best you can get, but I certainly dont find it very clear.
|
|
|
Post by kievthegreat on Oct 20, 2019 16:35:36 GMT
Do you not think that's the quality of the footage/cameras, rather than the screen? They look crap on the telly or online too. It could be, and im not expert on giant screens but looks like the pixel count is way too low. To me you can see the dots that make up the images. It may be the best you can get, but I certainly dont find it very clear. I know what you mean about the quality, but looking at the images they put up, there are very crisp. It's the videos which look poor.
|
|
|
Post by brodeurfan1993 on Oct 25, 2019 12:18:47 GMT
For any business, in any sector to be successful it needs to do a number of things, including amongst other things, make a profit, keep their customers happy, provide value for money, invest in the future and hopefully have a unique selling point. According to some on this forum the NIC do not make a profit? So immediately the business is not performing well. Do they keep their customers happy, here's the rub, their immediate customer in this case, is the Panthers organisation, so to keep them happy they look like they have bypassed Panthers with any price increase and instead gone directly to the Panthers customer (i.e. you and me) and hit us with price increases under the pretext of looking to improve the match night experience in the future. It is only because they have a monopoly on hockey that they can do this. A supermarket would not get away with imposing a "shopping fee" on their customers, because quite rightly their customers would say "sod that" and go and shop elsewhere. So if the NIC has decided that it needs to invest in "Their" business to maintain it's longer term viability, then instead of going directly to their customer's customer (i.e you and me) to rise the cash they require; they should do like any other business and look at their cost structure / operating efficiencies, look at where they can increase prices (What option would Panthers really have if their rent at the NIC was to increase? they would hopefully look to absorb the increase through their own operating efficiencies and/or pass on a proportion of the increase to you and me). And, if the NIC felt that any cost saving and price increases were still not enough to operate into the future successfully, then they should look to obtain investment from shareholders / bank loans. NIC bankers - that's you and me then. Spot on. Whatever happened to investing some of your profits back into your own business,that’s what virtually every other business does. When i ran my own company if we needed a new computer or a new van etc we used money from within the company coffers to buy one,we didn’t add a levy onto every customer to pay for it. If the NIC aren’t making a profit then they have a problem and need to rethink their business model. To Igninla and grrm: The NIC runs at a loss and always has. It is backed by the Nottingham City Council, and while a profit is nice, that is likely not the intention of the operation. What it DOES do, is bring people into the city for events, who inevitably spend in other outlets (food, drinks, shops, tram) prior to their event. This supports the city as a commerce centre, keeps businesses operating, keeps business rates going to the council and creates many other multiplier effects. Keeping the centre of towns relevant is a hard task. You are misguided if you think that they are banking your money. And even if you disagree with me (btw Council representatives sit on the board) and feel the arena should be responsible for investing in these improvements and not pass it on to the customer (You via Panthers) then you will ultimately pay for it elsewhere through the revenue raising of the City Council (Business rates, Council taxes, etc) who ultimately back the arena financially. The money it makes is largely reinvested back into the facility anyway. There aren't shareholders taking dividends out of the business. You should not look at it as a business and more as a community asset. It is not surprising that the facility faces financial challenges given it runs 2 ice pads, and is rivaled by bigger venues for the big ticket concert acts. If you argue that it is unfair for the council to charge you more to attend arena events as someone who just goes Home-Arena-Home, that would be a reasonable argument to be made. However you need to look at the wider picture and see how the supports the city across the board. By keeping the whole city active on a commercial basis, it spreads revenue raising across many more businesses and operations. If you drastically reduced the number of shops, the arena would become a lot more expensive as the city starts to work the remaining assets harder. I think you are both being too cynical.
|
|
|
Post by kievthegreat on Oct 25, 2019 12:31:38 GMT
Isn't the issue with the levying of fees to pay for it, rather than adjusting prices?
I.e, Arena increases rent to pay for improvement, promoters (such as the Panthers) adjust prices for their events to cover the extra outgoings. The issue I think people take umbridge is with directly charging the customer levys, booking fees, etc... as we have the club telling us prices aren't increasing while they clearly are because the Arena are adding on new fees.
I get why they do it, Grrm pointed it out that it means prices increases aren't passed on to their customers (see promoters) so they can offer 'competitive' rent/hire fees, but it grates on us at the bottom of the line.
Key for me going forward is that the implementation of the fees, we were told, was to fund improvements. Can we therefore expect the same level of investment (I.e scoreboard) next year and every subsequent year?
|
|