Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Blue_and_Gold

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
1
General Discussion / Re: Fundraising idea
« on: September 27, 2020, 09:17:38 PM »
https://www.lynnnews.co.uk/sport/it-should-have-been-a-week-of-celebration-for-the-football-club-and-its-fans-not-this-kings-lynn-town-chairman-stephen-cleeve-9124440/

If there is a programme being produced and available to pre order then why is SC banging on about the game not going ahead unless he is given Gov money, which has to be larger than last seasons average gate and at a higher rate of admission than last season.

Talk of biting the hand that is hopefully going to feed you.

Very mixEd messages coming out of the club.

So if Natonal League say play irrespective of what the deal is, what's the Club going to do? It seems we want a hand out but also want to dictate how much we should get and what basis the grant is calculated on.  :dontknow:



2
General Discussion / Re: Fundraising idea
« on: September 27, 2020, 08:23:55 PM »
Seeking market research less than a week before the game suggests this content is not yet in place?

Seeking market research less than a week before the game certainly suggests something!

4
General Discussion / Re: Fundraising idea
« on: September 27, 2020, 07:19:39 PM »
In a word B&G no.  I guess they didn't think either idea was able to bring in enough money to warrant the effort involved.

Amazing. I thought the target figure was circa 10k !  :dontknow:

5
General Discussion / Re: Fundraising idea
« on: September 27, 2020, 07:06:27 PM »
I would have thought Mark Hearle has sold a lot of advertising for the programme so rather than having to return advertisers monies it makes sense to produce the programme.   £15 is a good fund raiser.  No doubt.  Depends though on ratio of adverts to copy to make it a worthwhile read.   

I suggested going forward? that the Club charges maybe £15 for streaming with an online programme thrown in.  Wonít matter how many pages of copy then with no printing costs.

Mallard, did you ever hear back from the Club management with regards to the fund raising event you put forward to them?

And, any further forward with the Club shirt you offered to buy and raffle (was it a raffle)?

7
General Discussion / Re: Fundraising idea
« on: September 27, 2020, 06:33:16 PM »
I would have thought Mark Hearle has sold a lot of advertising for the programme so rather than having to return advertisers monies it makes sense to produce the programme. 

If the Club has already committed itself to the expense of the program and received the advertisers money, its probably even more important for them to sell a reasonable number of programs.

Could well be possible that a fair number would be up for this, but personally would be concerned that £15 could be a bit too much for many.

Would they sell twice as many if it was only priced at £10?   :dontknow:

In future, linking it to the streaming service as Mallard suggests, sounds a good idea.  :scarf:

8
General Discussion / Re: Financial help from Govt looks unlikely
« on: September 26, 2020, 12:58:21 PM »
I certainly don't thing that its a case of preferential treatment and I certainly wouldnt be an advocate of that. Not having a one size fits all policy isn't the same as offering preferential treatment policy.

I'm sure many have struggled, and many more will before this is all over.

Of course, some of this is due to current circumstances, but some, just like some NL clubs were probably on a cliff edge, before the Pandemic. Theres never going to be a perfect solution that suits everyone.

I agree that Clubs should cut back to the bare essentials. That will need a massive change in attitude by the Clubs for that to happen.


 :scarf:


Reading elsewhere, it seems the Brighton Chairman is against Premier Clubs putting their hand in their pockets to help out Clubs in NL.


9
General Discussion / Re: Gary Setchell...
« on: September 26, 2020, 10:53:49 AM »
Decent Club that for Setch to get back  into the game with.   Good luck to him.

Yep.

Like most managers, he'll probably raid his former Clubs.

I wonder if we'll lose Pedro?   :bankrupt:

10
General Discussion / Re: Financial help from Govt looks unlikely
« on: September 26, 2020, 10:52:00 AM »
Hi Kes.

No problem with you not agreeing with me.  :clap:

A basic amount for survival is probably what a majority received. There was always going to be some that fell through the cracks, and that has been acknowledged. It's not an ideal world. Never has been, never will be.

I really can't see how we can have any grant money, on one hand being for a Clubs basic survival amount, and then have the same amount being given to each Club. Surely each Club will have (need) a different figure for the amount they need to survive.

That could be down to many reasons, with some Clubs being the victims of their own decisions.

I do agree that the grant money should be for survival purposes only, but there will be so many variables that need to be taken into account, that unless there has been considerable forward planning by Clubs and NL (unlikely in my opinion), there's probably not enough time to collate all the data. So, one size (or maybe two) will probably be the decision, if and when Grant money is made available.

It would be nice to see Clubs take this as an opportunity to get their finances in order. Personally I can't see that happening unless they are forced into tighter financial controls once this is all over.

 :scarf:

11
General Discussion / Re: Streaming
« on: September 26, 2020, 09:10:43 AM »
Agreed Griss.  Itís about time other events were brought into line.  With the R rate seemingly going up daily. We need to be all singing from the same Hymn sheet.

I think that's the point.

It's not so much that Football Clubs should be allowed to do what others are doing.

Surely it's a case of the others being brought into line with elite sports.

12
General Discussion / Re: Financial help from Govt looks unlikely
« on: September 26, 2020, 09:07:32 AM »
Trouble is if you treat all clubs differently then is the National League not in effect giving the bigger sides an advantage over the smaller Clubs ?

Maybe.  :dontknow:

No perfect solution.

13
General Discussion / Gary Setchell...
« on: September 25, 2020, 10:50:03 PM »
......appointed as manager at Bedford.

Good luck Gary.

14
General Discussion / Re: Financial help from Govt looks unlikely
« on: September 25, 2020, 09:39:02 PM »
Thanks Kes.

I don't disagree that the employed scheme was probably the more favourable of the two.

As far as comparing the two schemes, as there were only the two scheme to discuss, its rather difficult to mention one without the other. There are reasons why the grants were distributed as they were and employed were treated differently to self employed, just as theres reasons why NL Clubs requirements, when it comes to grants, are different. One size don't fit all.

Using turnover instead of profit wouldn't work. Different business's obviously  run on different margins, so you need to take the costs of running a business into account (thereby, in simple terms, giving a net profit). One company may have to spend £50 to generate £100 of turnover. Another Company may have to spend £75 to generate £100 of turnover.

It's never possible to please everyone all of the time. The Govt have acknowledge that. Im sur the NL will feel the same.

It must have been a hell of a job for the Chancellor to come up with something that was going to help the majority of people. I'm quite happy with what I know of the rationale behind the method used to distribute the grants...........and I'm self employed (for my main income).

So comparing  the method suggested with regards to how funds are distributed, paying all Clubs the same, a universal level amount, would seem very unfair to me. Any funds received will be granted to assist in a Clubs survival. As was said by the Boreham Wood Chairman, its not there to go and spend on a striker (as an example).

Therefore they need a method of distributing the funds on what they percieve as a fair basis. Clubs will have different financial exposure so surely it must make sense to distribute the funds, taking the financial exposure and running costs into account, rather than the same payment to each club (and irrespective of them  being NL, or North or South).

As an exampke, if a Club needs an extra 5k a month to survive but only gets 2k, it may be  pointless giving them the 2k. Good money after bad.

If another Club only needs 1k extra a month to survive, but get 2k, they have been given more than they require to the detriment of the other Club.

Of course, many other variables to take into account.

Just my opinion.   :scarf:

15
General Discussion / Re: Financial help from Govt looks unlikely
« on: September 25, 2020, 02:26:24 PM »
That's the Tory way Mall.......same rationale for self employed...instead of a basic level universal income,  pay out at 80%,then 70%,then 20%of previous year's profits...great if your profits are high and horrible if they are relatively low....just increases the gap and to many people, just not fair.

Not quite as simple as that Kes. It was capped at a maximum of an average of £50,000 over the preceding 3 years. If your average over the preceding 3 years was £50,001, you get nothing.

Self employed were also allowed to continue to work, whereas employed who were furloughed were not.

And dare I say it, there's very often a reason why a lot of self employed peoples net profit are low.   :laughcry:


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48