| Sinclair to Biffos? 15:00 - Jan 3 with 11838 views | scooby |
According the fans FB group, rumours that Ty is speaking to the Biffos. Silly season is truly upon us!
Comments like:
"Yes, they're in talks currently. The club have accepted a fee but it's down to personal terms now. Highly likely the deal will go through by the end of the week/start of next week"
"apparently the board have said something and it’s got out everywhere"
I can only feel that if this happens, the board will lose even more support from a large part of supporters... Interesting times ahead [Post edited 4 Jan 9:12]
|  | | |  |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 15:09 - Jan 3 with 8608 views | EllDale |
I mentioned in another thread a few weeks that Sinclair was a potential departure in this transfer window.
He's out of contract this summer and unlikely to accept a new deal which involves a pay cut so I can see the attraction in cashing in especially as Nevett is now unlikely to be sold due to injury. | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 15:22 - Jan 3 with 8542 views | D_Alien |
A conspiracy theorist might speculate he was "pushed" onto the pitch to collect that second yellow on Boxing Day
Let's see if he's in the squad against Kiddy |  |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:12 - Jan 3 with 8369 views | NorthernDale |
We are struggling to put out a team on Saturday as it is, yes we need the money, but we are on the edge of the playoffs. I recognise the hard work the board as put in to running the club, even using their own money, but have they no ambition, get into the playoffs and you have a chance of promotion, which increases income coming into the club and makes the club more attractive to any potential investor.
The Biffos have just signed Ethan Walker a winger on loan from Blackburn and are also looking to sign, if the rumours are correct, Danny Lloyd (from Livingston) and Gordon a right back from AFC Flyde. It would seem they are looking for a playoff spot. [Post edited 3 Jan 16:13]
| | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:26 - Jan 3 with 8293 views | TVOS1907 |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:12 - Jan 3 by NorthernDale |
We are struggling to put out a team on Saturday as it is, yes we need the money, but we are on the edge of the playoffs. I recognise the hard work the board as put in to running the club, even using their own money, but have they no ambition, get into the playoffs and you have a chance of promotion, which increases income coming into the club and makes the club more attractive to any potential investor.
The Biffos have just signed Ethan Walker a winger on loan from Blackburn and are also looking to sign, if the rumours are correct, Danny Lloyd (from Livingston) and Gordon a right back from AFC Flyde. It would seem they are looking for a playoff spot. [Post edited 3 Jan 16:13]
|
Have you missed the financial problems we're having?
And Oldham get crowds more than double the size of ours and have a wealthy owner, so it's not really a sensible comparison. [Post edited 3 Jan 16:29]
|  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:31 - Jan 3 with 8263 views | ramsdale |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:12 - Jan 3 by NorthernDale |
We are struggling to put out a team on Saturday as it is, yes we need the money, but we are on the edge of the playoffs. I recognise the hard work the board as put in to running the club, even using their own money, but have they no ambition, get into the playoffs and you have a chance of promotion, which increases income coming into the club and makes the club more attractive to any potential investor.
The Biffos have just signed Ethan Walker a winger on loan from Blackburn and are also looking to sign, if the rumours are correct, Danny Lloyd (from Livingston) and Gordon a right back from AFC Flyde. It would seem they are looking for a playoff spot. [Post edited 3 Jan 16:13]
|
But Oldham have the cash to sign players and are in their second season in this league with a striker that's played in League One for the past 4 years. They should be aiming for far beyond a playoff spot.
It's been highly publicised that we've barely got the money to pay the players we've got, never mind signing more players.
We've been ravaged by injuries like we've never seen before and we are hugely over-performing, arguably performing miracles. Any thought that we should be aiming for a playoff spot by burning more money on players in the hope of a trip to Wembley is absurd. You don't put that down to lack of ambition, you put that down to having zero resources left.
We take the money to keep the lights on, play the kids should we need to and not spend above our means like others have done and spectacularly failed. [Post edited 3 Jan 16:31]
| | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:44 - Jan 3 with 8192 views | NorthernDale |
Yes, I fully recognise our financial position, but at the same time, to keep our fan base and attract new fans you have to give them hope, otherwise we back to the 1,000 plus gates we had in the early 1980's. | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 17:15 - Jan 3 with 8069 views | Duckegg |
There will be no club for those 1000 supporters to stand on the terraces or to sit in the stands...
If Nevett was to be sold and Sinclair is to be sold during January to ensure that the club can survive then so be it...
I came terms a few months ago that Sinclair and Nevett will no longer be Dale players come January the only stumbling block for me was how much....
For me we need a big push for more trust members and try and and do what we can to generate more money..... |  | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 17:30 - Jan 3 with 7997 views | TVOS1907 |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 16:44 - Jan 3 by NorthernDale |
Yes, I fully recognise our financial position, but at the same time, to keep our fan base and attract new fans you have to give them hope, otherwise we back to the 1,000 plus gates we had in the early 1980's. |
But your posts show you don't recognise our financial position. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 18:35 - Jan 3 with 7767 views | 49thseason |
Nevett will go eventually for decent money if the club remains viable. I am less bothered about Sinclair, he is very hit and miss in terms of his performances, the difference between him and Hayes was stark. Clearly some people see more in him than I do but he isnt so difficult to replace. If losing Sinclair made room financially for 2 or 3 loans it would be a good swap at this stage. Perhaps MRKT will help us to pull a rabbit out of the hat.
We have to also assume that some of the injured crew will be close to making a return, Ferguson has been out for months, Mitchell must be getting closer you would hope although I am starting to wonder if Rodney will ever be fit enough for 90 minutes as there is no evidence that he is improving. How did Taylor play on Saturday I think he needs gametime so being in for Nevett for a few week could be what he needs.
Lets hope that New Years Day was our darkest hour and that things begin to look better from here on. |  | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 19:03 - Jan 3 with 7682 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 18:35 - Jan 3 by 49thseason |
Nevett will go eventually for decent money if the club remains viable. I am less bothered about Sinclair, he is very hit and miss in terms of his performances, the difference between him and Hayes was stark. Clearly some people see more in him than I do but he isnt so difficult to replace. If losing Sinclair made room financially for 2 or 3 loans it would be a good swap at this stage. Perhaps MRKT will help us to pull a rabbit out of the hat.
We have to also assume that some of the injured crew will be close to making a return, Ferguson has been out for months, Mitchell must be getting closer you would hope although I am starting to wonder if Rodney will ever be fit enough for 90 minutes as there is no evidence that he is improving. How did Taylor play on Saturday I think he needs gametime so being in for Nevett for a few week could be what he needs.
Lets hope that New Years Day was our darkest hour and that things begin to look better from here on. |
A better question would be, what is the going rate for a player who is 23 at the end of the season and who is out of contract on 30th June 2024?
If a six figure sum is offered that's good business on someone who only has a maximum of 19 games contracted. |  |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 19:30 - Jan 3 with 7583 views | 49thseason |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 19:03 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
A better question would be, what is the going rate for a player who is 23 at the end of the season and who is out of contract on 30th June 2024?
If a six figure sum is offered that's good business on someone who only has a maximum of 19 games contracted. |
That logic is undeniable. I can't see a club in our position getting six figures for him but half of that and another wage off the books is not a bad proposition considering the weakness of our negotiating position. Always assuming of course that we can get a couple of loanees into the building in exchange for his wage.
I would be interested to get your take on the financial position for next season if we can manage to crawl to the end of this one.... | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 20:26 - Jan 3 with 7411 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 19:30 - Jan 3 by 49thseason |
That logic is undeniable. I can't see a club in our position getting six figures for him but half of that and another wage off the books is not a bad proposition considering the weakness of our negotiating position. Always assuming of course that we can get a couple of loanees into the building in exchange for his wage.
I would be interested to get your take on the financial position for next season if we can manage to crawl to the end of this one.... |
In two words - more losses
In more depth:
I don't know of any National League team that turns a profit.
Revenue from the EFL Parachute payments goes down next year. The ecomomy is very hard and we will be starting new season (IMO) just after a general election.
General business confidence is ok but not to the levels where there are extensive corporate budgets kicking around and certainly not in the National League.
Season tickets will have to go up. I think it was you who made the point about price elasticity for fans who might have seen one year of the National League as novel but paying x% more for more of the same. Notwithstanding the home form for 4+ seasons has been dire.
I don't see how the club can take on the financial risks of two year contracts without certainty over its funding for those two years.
I don't see how we keep Cameron John, Ethan Ebanks-Landell, Adam Clayton, Jimmy Keohane and Ian Henderson stay on EFL level wages. Likely they will depart to other clubs on free transfers or in Henderson's case retire.
We will have to review the Academy model vs first team priorities. Young players are not up to the physical capabilities of playing 46 National League games and the lack of faith to put young players on the bench undermines the model if you are not going to play them.
We'll probably have mid table National League finances depending on who goes up or down.
There will be a choice of seeing if we choose to move into player trading or take loans - the latter is obviously easier but I think there is a market for a club that says to a player play here well and we will move you on quickly. Look at Nevett as an example.
It's no different across any other National League club though and there is a bit of adjustment of mindsets going on that we are a now a non-league club so need to spend like one. | |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 20:44 - Jan 3 with 7335 views | 49thseason |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 20:26 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
In two words - more losses
In more depth:
I don't know of any National League team that turns a profit.
Revenue from the EFL Parachute payments goes down next year. The ecomomy is very hard and we will be starting new season (IMO) just after a general election.
General business confidence is ok but not to the levels where there are extensive corporate budgets kicking around and certainly not in the National League.
Season tickets will have to go up. I think it was you who made the point about price elasticity for fans who might have seen one year of the National League as novel but paying x% more for more of the same. Notwithstanding the home form for 4+ seasons has been dire.
I don't see how the club can take on the financial risks of two year contracts without certainty over its funding for those two years.
I don't see how we keep Cameron John, Ethan Ebanks-Landell, Adam Clayton, Jimmy Keohane and Ian Henderson stay on EFL level wages. Likely they will depart to other clubs on free transfers or in Henderson's case retire.
We will have to review the Academy model vs first team priorities. Young players are not up to the physical capabilities of playing 46 National League games and the lack of faith to put young players on the bench undermines the model if you are not going to play them.
We'll probably have mid table National League finances depending on who goes up or down.
There will be a choice of seeing if we choose to move into player trading or take loans - the latter is obviously easier but I think there is a market for a club that says to a player play here well and we will move you on quickly. Look at Nevett as an example.
It's no different across any other National League club though and there is a bit of adjustment of mindsets going on that we are a now a non-league club so need to spend like one. |
My thought is that we should have slashed the overheads months ago. The only things that really matter are a team, a ground to play in and safety of the supporters.
Academies, community outreach, a shop can go, and all the other activities that are not core to the business Whole areas of the ground could be shut down for 3 or 4 days a week. a skeleton crew of people working from home could do the essential stuff and come into the COA for a day or two per week.
A squad of 8 or 10 professionals with some youngsters and part-timers would have to suffice .
on the other side of the coin, it would seem that some off-pitch sources of income are an absolute requirement. and the call has to be "all hands on deck". My worry is that its all too little too late as we stand right now. | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:09 - Jan 3 with 7119 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 20:44 - Jan 3 by 49thseason |
My thought is that we should have slashed the overheads months ago. The only things that really matter are a team, a ground to play in and safety of the supporters.
Academies, community outreach, a shop can go, and all the other activities that are not core to the business Whole areas of the ground could be shut down for 3 or 4 days a week. a skeleton crew of people working from home could do the essential stuff and come into the COA for a day or two per week.
A squad of 8 or 10 professionals with some youngsters and part-timers would have to suffice .
on the other side of the coin, it would seem that some off-pitch sources of income are an absolute requirement. and the call has to be "all hands on deck". My worry is that its all too little too late as we stand right now. |
We are (for now and admirably) running a league structure in the non-league.
You make the point about shutting down the whole ground for 3 or 4 days a a week but on the ground, you could really close it for much longer if needed. There are roughly 25 games of football and 10 games of rugby league. The ground side can be closed for 335 of the 365 days of the year. There is a period in June and July where there is no sport at all played at Spotland.
You also rightly point out that we need off field revenue but a previous CEO shut the Goldbond and a rival club poached a member of commercial staff to run their enterprise. Another commercial member of staff has just left for another club.
Most clubs at this level simply don't run the lavish extras and headcount. They run lean and make do, mainly with volunteers doing for free what paid roles are in the EFL.
We open up 5 bars where we could limit that to a smaller number.
We open up 4 stands for most games where we could limit that to a smaller number for every game.
We could fit most attendances in the National League safely into the Wilbutts and have lower stewarding costs, kiosk costs. Close the Pearl Street and Sandy Lane for most games. Under the Wilbutts it is possible to have kiosks and bars to serve a stand bigger than our average home attendance.
We have a car park barrier that uses electricity ever day of the week.
We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?
There are lots of costs and people that can be cut back and that would reduce the weekly operating loss that needs to be funded but then we would be a very different organisation.
Our last accounts had 138 on the payroll. AFC Fylde at Mill Farm report 70. | |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:39 - Jan 3 with 7012 views | TalkingSutty |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:09 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
We are (for now and admirably) running a league structure in the non-league.
You make the point about shutting down the whole ground for 3 or 4 days a a week but on the ground, you could really close it for much longer if needed. There are roughly 25 games of football and 10 games of rugby league. The ground side can be closed for 335 of the 365 days of the year. There is a period in June and July where there is no sport at all played at Spotland.
You also rightly point out that we need off field revenue but a previous CEO shut the Goldbond and a rival club poached a member of commercial staff to run their enterprise. Another commercial member of staff has just left for another club.
Most clubs at this level simply don't run the lavish extras and headcount. They run lean and make do, mainly with volunteers doing for free what paid roles are in the EFL.
We open up 5 bars where we could limit that to a smaller number.
We open up 4 stands for most games where we could limit that to a smaller number for every game.
We could fit most attendances in the National League safely into the Wilbutts and have lower stewarding costs, kiosk costs. Close the Pearl Street and Sandy Lane for most games. Under the Wilbutts it is possible to have kiosks and bars to serve a stand bigger than our average home attendance.
We have a car park barrier that uses electricity ever day of the week.
We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?
There are lots of costs and people that can be cut back and that would reduce the weekly operating loss that needs to be funded but then we would be a very different organisation.
Our last accounts had 138 on the payroll. AFC Fylde at Mill Farm report 70. |
If we're talking about financial waste then i'm sure you will remember the amount of money the current Chairman and Directors frittered away in support of Stockdale, a rookie manager? Absolutely ridiculous two year contracts given to journeymen footballers who couldn't believe their luck and lets not forget the transfer fees they paid for the likes of Ball, Charman and Campbell. You didn't have to be a financial wizz kid to realise the follyness in all of that. For all the money the Chairman and Directors paid for the MH shares and any they are now putting into the club in order to try to retrieve their previous outlay ( that's the real reason) it's got to be acknowledged that their decisions have cost the club a absolute fortune. It's cost the club far more money than they have put into it and also our league status. We've had numerous Chairman and dozens of Directors during the history of this club and and apart from the shysters, they have put their money into the club with no expectation of getting it back. It goes with the territory when you step into the boardroom of your local lower league football club. When it comes to running this club the Chairman and Directors have been a disaster, look at their track record since they appointed Stockdale. They've put money into the club but their decision making as cost us far money financially in the long run and resulted in a relegation to non league football [Post edited 3 Jan 22:52]
|  | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:40 - Jan 3 with 6995 views | 442Dale |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:09 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
We are (for now and admirably) running a league structure in the non-league.
You make the point about shutting down the whole ground for 3 or 4 days a a week but on the ground, you could really close it for much longer if needed. There are roughly 25 games of football and 10 games of rugby league. The ground side can be closed for 335 of the 365 days of the year. There is a period in June and July where there is no sport at all played at Spotland.
You also rightly point out that we need off field revenue but a previous CEO shut the Goldbond and a rival club poached a member of commercial staff to run their enterprise. Another commercial member of staff has just left for another club.
Most clubs at this level simply don't run the lavish extras and headcount. They run lean and make do, mainly with volunteers doing for free what paid roles are in the EFL.
We open up 5 bars where we could limit that to a smaller number.
We open up 4 stands for most games where we could limit that to a smaller number for every game.
We could fit most attendances in the National League safely into the Wilbutts and have lower stewarding costs, kiosk costs. Close the Pearl Street and Sandy Lane for most games. Under the Wilbutts it is possible to have kiosks and bars to serve a stand bigger than our average home attendance.
We have a car park barrier that uses electricity ever day of the week.
We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?
There are lots of costs and people that can be cut back and that would reduce the weekly operating loss that needs to be funded but then we would be a very different organisation.
Our last accounts had 138 on the payroll. AFC Fylde at Mill Farm report 70. |
So with that all said, and it being mysteriously missed in the other thread...
Where do you feel the club has gone wrong over the last two and a half years in their engagement with the Trust and supporters to have done more to avoid the place we are at present? As part of this answer, what should they do immediately to capitalise on the skills and commitment within the fanbase right now which would help reduce those costs/increase revenue? |  |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:59 - Jan 3 with 6902 views | TVOS1907 |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:09 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
We are (for now and admirably) running a league structure in the non-league.
You make the point about shutting down the whole ground for 3 or 4 days a a week but on the ground, you could really close it for much longer if needed. There are roughly 25 games of football and 10 games of rugby league. The ground side can be closed for 335 of the 365 days of the year. There is a period in June and July where there is no sport at all played at Spotland.
You also rightly point out that we need off field revenue but a previous CEO shut the Goldbond and a rival club poached a member of commercial staff to run their enterprise. Another commercial member of staff has just left for another club.
Most clubs at this level simply don't run the lavish extras and headcount. They run lean and make do, mainly with volunteers doing for free what paid roles are in the EFL.
We open up 5 bars where we could limit that to a smaller number.
We open up 4 stands for most games where we could limit that to a smaller number for every game.
We could fit most attendances in the National League safely into the Wilbutts and have lower stewarding costs, kiosk costs. Close the Pearl Street and Sandy Lane for most games. Under the Wilbutts it is possible to have kiosks and bars to serve a stand bigger than our average home attendance.
We have a car park barrier that uses electricity ever day of the week.
We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?
There are lots of costs and people that can be cut back and that would reduce the weekly operating loss that needs to be funded but then we would be a very different organisation.
Our last accounts had 138 on the payroll. AFC Fylde at Mill Farm report 70. |
It's no surprise that you've decided to include this rather disrespectful paragraph when you know full well who is regularly commenting on here: You could have addressed me directly, instead of going about it in such a roundabout way.
"We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?"
Have you got someone in mind who will design it, provide content and resources, spend time checking it and somehow make it up to the standard that will sell? (As there will still be costs to be covered)
Because I can tell you who it won't be. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:59 - Jan 3 with 6899 views | TVOS1907 |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:09 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
We are (for now and admirably) running a league structure in the non-league.
You make the point about shutting down the whole ground for 3 or 4 days a a week but on the ground, you could really close it for much longer if needed. There are roughly 25 games of football and 10 games of rugby league. The ground side can be closed for 335 of the 365 days of the year. There is a period in June and July where there is no sport at all played at Spotland.
You also rightly point out that we need off field revenue but a previous CEO shut the Goldbond and a rival club poached a member of commercial staff to run their enterprise. Another commercial member of staff has just left for another club.
Most clubs at this level simply don't run the lavish extras and headcount. They run lean and make do, mainly with volunteers doing for free what paid roles are in the EFL.
We open up 5 bars where we could limit that to a smaller number.
We open up 4 stands for most games where we could limit that to a smaller number for every game.
We could fit most attendances in the National League safely into the Wilbutts and have lower stewarding costs, kiosk costs. Close the Pearl Street and Sandy Lane for most games. Under the Wilbutts it is possible to have kiosks and bars to serve a stand bigger than our average home attendance.
We have a car park barrier that uses electricity ever day of the week.
We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?
There are lots of costs and people that can be cut back and that would reduce the weekly operating loss that needs to be funded but then we would be a very different organisation.
Our last accounts had 138 on the payroll. AFC Fylde at Mill Farm report 70. |
Double post [Post edited 3 Jan 23:01]
| |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:17 - Jan 3 with 6843 views | TalkingSutty |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:59 - Jan 3 by TVOS1907 |
It's no surprise that you've decided to include this rather disrespectful paragraph when you know full well who is regularly commenting on here: You could have addressed me directly, instead of going about it in such a roundabout way.
"We pay to produce content for Tik Tok and a full colour programme for our games - all positive for the publicity but when money is tight all nice to haves and non-essentials. With the challenge the club is facing, those making the shift to digital are recognising the need to adapt to a new tech-savvy audience which drives bigger advertising revenue for the club. Clubs need to think smart and recognise the opportunities digital holds, from wider reach to fewer costs. Why not produce a downloadable PDF accessible to all and save the printing costs?"
Have you got someone in mind who will design it, provide content and resources, spend time checking it and somehow make it up to the standard that will sell? (As there will still be costs to be covered)
Because I can tell you who it won't be. |
Don’t take it personally TVOS, this is the same poster who utilised this forum to disrespect the Chairman who oversaw the most successful period in the clubs history. At a time when he had reached out along with others to try to help the club. Instantly stamped on. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:18]
| | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:22 - Jan 3 with 6808 views | kel |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:17 - Jan 3 by TalkingSutty |
Don’t take it personally TVOS, this is the same poster who utilised this forum to disrespect the Chairman who oversaw the most successful period in the clubs history. At a time when he had reached out along with others to try to help the club. Instantly stamped on. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:18]
|
Indeed. Why weren’t all these cost cutting ideas suggested say 12-18 months ago?.. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:23]
|  | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:26 - Jan 3 with 6782 views | TalkingSutty |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:22 - Jan 3 by kel |
Indeed. Why weren’t all these cost cutting ideas suggested say 12-18 months ago?.. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:23]
|
It's a great question, it's not as though there was no financial expertise in and around the boardroom. | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:31 - Jan 3 with 6757 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 22:40 - Jan 3 by 442Dale |
So with that all said, and it being mysteriously missed in the other thread...
Where do you feel the club has gone wrong over the last two and a half years in their engagement with the Trust and supporters to have done more to avoid the place we are at present? As part of this answer, what should they do immediately to capitalise on the skills and commitment within the fanbase right now which would help reduce those costs/increase revenue? |
Where do you feel the club has gone wrong over the last two and a half years in their engagement with the Trust and supporters to have done more to avoid the place we are at present?
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2020/june/statement--andrew-kelly/
Like all things what people perceive as current issues go back more than two and a half years (June 2021).
If I take the pre-June 2021 piece in five bullet points:
1) Andrew Kelly clearly and extensively outlined the dysfunction in the Boardroom that existing in 2018 and 2019 in June 2020 that had clearly left the club in a difficult financial position where he had a call from the then chairman (Andrew Kilpatrick) to come back to the Board.
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2020/june/statement--andrew-kelly/
2) A global pandemic which damaged football up and down the country, particularly smaller clubs.
3) The role of the then Board trying to sell the club from 2019 onwards as referred to by the EFL written reasons. After a former Chairman and a former Director sold their shares to two Americans, other major shareholders looks to do the same.
4) The sale, after an EGM to Morton House and the associated EFL investigation and legal cases. An unneeded and unnecessary distraction of financial resources and time.
5) Between 2018 and 2023, I think I am right in saying 4 CEO/COO's, 4 Chairman and a wholesale change in staff on an off the field. All of that turnover, for a variety of reasons, breeds instability.
The club has clearly limped along financially since 2019 (see Andrew Kelly's statement). He (not me) said in June 2020:
"The Board decided in early 2019 that the cycle of cup runs and player sales, although historically had been a system that worked, was not a route we should continue to rely on, and so we started to look at potential investments."
Since June 2021, the Trust have been in the Boardroom, something that was not allowed to them by former regimes. They report (to the point they have been able to) on discussions with potential investors.
The Trust website records regular meetings with the Board both before and after June 2021. I'm of the view that a Board member being appointed by the Trust is a positive thing.
Where has it gone wrong IMO:
A) Rochdale cannot financially compete and does not have league club level resources on and off the field. Most clubs that make losses, which is the majority, have owners who write these losses off against other business interests and funding.
B) There is a disconnect that exists where is it assumed the Trust = the fans. It doesn't. The Trust has only 31% of the home support as its membership. 69% of the home support isn't the Trust. There is no unification. This messageboard does not mirror with the Facebook groups or X (formerly Twitter) views of all supporters.
C) The mission statement of the Trust needs updating to reflect 2023. The current one ( https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2015/07/trust-mission-statement-2015-16/) is from 2015/16 when the world was different. The Trust played an incredible role in the fundraising for legal fees for the hostile takeover but declining membership (whilst home attendances remain broadly static) indicates either apathy.
D) The Trust is the largest shareholder at 13.1% but doesn't behave like it, mainly because it can't constitutionally compared to other shareholders who can vote how they feel. The Trust also has no funds to contribute again unlike other current shareholders.
To avoid A) to D) I would like to have seen the Trust push on in November 2022 to buy the new shares so that non remained unsold. And in doing so increase its representation in the Boardroom as the number of board seats is usually reflective of how many shares you control.
I'm not sure the club and Trust could have physically met more often given the other priorities which were primarily focused between June 2021 and August 2022 on Morton House. In both organisations the Board participants all are unpaid volunteers with other real jobs and families.
What should they do immediately to capitalise on the skills and commitment within the fanbase right now which would help reduce those costs/increase revenue?
IMHO (and I'm assuming your "they" means the Trust and club Board jointly) - start with co-ordination.
Who is co-ordinating these skills? Who is deciding on the immediate priorities? What might be a perceived priority for the Trust might not be for the Club and vice-versa.
Why does 69% of the home support not bother with the Trust despite frequenting the stadium and bars? If the skills are coming from the widest part of the fanbase then who is collating that? For me the two go hand in hand. How do you offer your skills if you are not a Trust member without it becoming disjointed?
The increase revenue / reduce costs was covered extensively in a series of Trust meetings - that too just needs some co-ordination but neither really matter as what the club needs is cash.
So any supporters who donate to the Trust to buy shares, buy shares themselves or spend money with the club are aiding cashflow.
There's very little as the Fylde home game showed that can make a difference in the next 100 days which gets to the 13th April 2024 and our last home game of the season. There are only 10 games and 3 are midweek ones.
After the season is over we shall see but I'd caution about using next year's season ticket money from say a March 2024 launch to fund the dry summer period at the club as season ticket money is for August 2024 to May 2025. Prices need to go up to cover costs which have gone up and that needs explaining to the fan base clearly to prevent further apathy. | |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:37 - Jan 3 with 6739 views | kel |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:26 - Jan 3 by TalkingSutty |
It's a great question, it's not as though there was no financial expertise in and around the boardroom. |
Allegedly | | | |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:45 - Jan 3 with 6711 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:22 - Jan 3 by kel |
Indeed. Why weren’t all these cost cutting ideas suggested say 12-18 months ago?.. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:23]
|
The accounts, approved by shareholders, at the AGM suggest that in the 13 months to 2022 the losses were reduced from £1,218,559 in the 12 months period to May 2021 to losses of £467,356.
So improving by £0.75m mean the club went from losing £23k a week to £8k a week by June 2022.
It looks like somethings might not just have been suggested but actually implemented but then again losing £8k a week still needs to be funded. | |
| |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:49 - Jan 3 with 6697 views | 442Dale |
| Sinclair to Biffos? on 23:31 - Jan 3 by RAFCBLUE |
Where do you feel the club has gone wrong over the last two and a half years in their engagement with the Trust and supporters to have done more to avoid the place we are at present?
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2020/june/statement--andrew-kelly/
Like all things what people perceive as current issues go back more than two and a half years (June 2021).
If I take the pre-June 2021 piece in five bullet points:
1) Andrew Kelly clearly and extensively outlined the dysfunction in the Boardroom that existing in 2018 and 2019 in June 2020 that had clearly left the club in a difficult financial position where he had a call from the then chairman (Andrew Kilpatrick) to come back to the Board.
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2020/june/statement--andrew-kelly/
2) A global pandemic which damaged football up and down the country, particularly smaller clubs.
3) The role of the then Board trying to sell the club from 2019 onwards as referred to by the EFL written reasons. After a former Chairman and a former Director sold their shares to two Americans, other major shareholders looks to do the same.
4) The sale, after an EGM to Morton House and the associated EFL investigation and legal cases. An unneeded and unnecessary distraction of financial resources and time.
5) Between 2018 and 2023, I think I am right in saying 4 CEO/COO's, 4 Chairman and a wholesale change in staff on an off the field. All of that turnover, for a variety of reasons, breeds instability.
The club has clearly limped along financially since 2019 (see Andrew Kelly's statement). He (not me) said in June 2020:
"The Board decided in early 2019 that the cycle of cup runs and player sales, although historically had been a system that worked, was not a route we should continue to rely on, and so we started to look at potential investments."
Since June 2021, the Trust have been in the Boardroom, something that was not allowed to them by former regimes. They report (to the point they have been able to) on discussions with potential investors.
The Trust website records regular meetings with the Board both before and after June 2021. I'm of the view that a Board member being appointed by the Trust is a positive thing.
Where has it gone wrong IMO:
A) Rochdale cannot financially compete and does not have league club level resources on and off the field. Most clubs that make losses, which is the majority, have owners who write these losses off against other business interests and funding.
B) There is a disconnect that exists where is it assumed the Trust = the fans. It doesn't. The Trust has only 31% of the home support as its membership. 69% of the home support isn't the Trust. There is no unification. This messageboard does not mirror with the Facebook groups or X (formerly Twitter) views of all supporters.
C) The mission statement of the Trust needs updating to reflect 2023. The current one ( https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2015/07/trust-mission-statement-2015-16/) is from 2015/16 when the world was different. The Trust played an incredible role in the fundraising for legal fees for the hostile takeover but declining membership (whilst home attendances remain broadly static) indicates either apathy.
D) The Trust is the largest shareholder at 13.1% but doesn't behave like it, mainly because it can't constitutionally compared to other shareholders who can vote how they feel. The Trust also has no funds to contribute again unlike other current shareholders.
To avoid A) to D) I would like to have seen the Trust push on in November 2022 to buy the new shares so that non remained unsold. And in doing so increase its representation in the Boardroom as the number of board seats is usually reflective of how many shares you control.
I'm not sure the club and Trust could have physically met more often given the other priorities which were primarily focused between June 2021 and August 2022 on Morton House. In both organisations the Board participants all are unpaid volunteers with other real jobs and families.
What should they do immediately to capitalise on the skills and commitment within the fanbase right now which would help reduce those costs/increase revenue?
IMHO (and I'm assuming your "they" means the Trust and club Board jointly) - start with co-ordination.
Who is co-ordinating these skills? Who is deciding on the immediate priorities? What might be a perceived priority for the Trust might not be for the Club and vice-versa.
Why does 69% of the home support not bother with the Trust despite frequenting the stadium and bars? If the skills are coming from the widest part of the fanbase then who is collating that? For me the two go hand in hand. How do you offer your skills if you are not a Trust member without it becoming disjointed?
The increase revenue / reduce costs was covered extensively in a series of Trust meetings - that too just needs some co-ordination but neither really matter as what the club needs is cash.
So any supporters who donate to the Trust to buy shares, buy shares themselves or spend money with the club are aiding cashflow.
There's very little as the Fylde home game showed that can make a difference in the next 100 days which gets to the 13th April 2024 and our last home game of the season. There are only 10 games and 3 are midweek ones.
After the season is over we shall see but I'd caution about using next year's season ticket money from say a March 2024 launch to fund the dry summer period at the club as season ticket money is for August 2024 to May 2025. Prices need to go up to cover costs which have gone up and that needs explaining to the fan base clearly to prevent further apathy. |
“The increase revenue / reduce costs was covered extensively in a series of Trust meetings - that too just needs some co-ordination but neither really matter as what the club needs is cash.”
“neither really matter”. Wish we’d known.
The rest filled up a bingo card at least. It also missed out that, as of April 2022:
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2022/april/chairmanmessageseasoncards_22-23/
<<“At April 2022, the club has a stable financial platform and cash reserves to be well positioned for next season. We have returned during 2021/22 to being a properly and prudently run football club…”>>
But the points about co-ordination are very important. Something that hasn’t been focused on well enough over the last two and a half years and has partly led to us being in this position. Collective failings as previously mentioned. [Post edited 3 Jan 23:57]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
