|
|
Post by stones1 on May 2, 2024 16:26:18 GMT
What stumbling block ? The club already own the lands outside the fence on the riverside. In fact, quite a while back the Council came in for some stick for its slowness in selling the land to the club. The whole point of the exercise was to provide the space for tiered covered terracing/seating in the riverside. Now we are told the club can't afford to do anything. You can look for problems or excuses to do nothing, but lack of space on the riverside is not a get out. Perhaps stumbling block not necessarily but I think it’s definitely something to consider why it’s not a quick fix as many believe it. In terms of the land purchasing, I think it was more frustration that they weren’t going to release it to the club when in reality what else are they going to do with it. Not so they could build immediately. The council were (as they have always been) being deliberately difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by stones1 on May 2, 2024 16:31:16 GMT
Also in terms of FA Cup money, it doesn’t take a genius to worn out that whittles down to about £360,000 post tax.
- bonuses for players
- pitch replacement
- gantry
- new toilets.
Not sure how you’re going to move a fence and build anything half decent along the riverside with the leftovers, as much as I wish they would it just isn’t going to happen.
|
|
7oaks
First Eleven
Posts: 113
|
Post by 7oaks on May 2, 2024 17:03:23 GMT
Do we know what the tax bill will be? Would all of the receipts from the cup run be taxable? What portion of the expenditure would be offset against tax? I imagine that most of the costs listed above would count as capital expenditure and so reduce the tax payable.
As for the pitch replacement, this was foreseen and the cost of the old pitch had been depreciated to zero. The owners surely had a plan to finance the cost of the pitch without relying on an historic cup run.
We need someone here with better knowledge of the club's finances and accountancy / tax expertise.
Is the comment about exits required for the possible stand along the riverside of the ground correct? I seem to remember the plan was to erect a small tiered seating stand that would not increase the ground capacity. If there is not enough money for this at present perhaps the foundations and tiering could be contemplated in the short term?
Although I have never been able to get to the Gallagher sadly, it seems that the way in which the Genco stand is portioned inevitably limits the capacity and encourages poor behaviour which probably deters some from attending matches. Maybe less of an issue for NLS but why run the risk of loss of revenue and trouble with spectator behaviour? Doing what is possible to improve conditions for spectators and boost attendances should form part of the decision-making process. But I am sure that the owners must be aware of this. Perhaps they could share their current plans with the supporters?
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry on May 2, 2024 17:20:17 GMT
Can we now end this never changing scenario. Dave u and now Tim have told us, the majority, they are right and we should just accept this. The club are inconceivable and steadfast that nothing will change. The two and the club just show their inability and naiveness by ignoring the situation and taking little swipes at anyone who dares to disagree. If the club didn't foresee any issues they didnt want to. I can go back to the 70s and remember all the trouble from barrow to gravesend. It's never going away. It's like telling a dog to stop barking. Finally others will disagree with me but, I'm sure, will explain their reasons logically and with no confrontational attitude. Why is this person not running a club? Happy dayz Alas, I fear you are probably right scooby. As supporters, we can wish and we can want, we pays our money to support the team and some of us travel everywhere. But Dave and Tim have told us what's what. We are just whistling in the wind. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2024 22:23:15 GMT
Can we now end this never changing scenario. Dave u and now Tim have told us, the majority, they are right and we should just accept this. The club are inconceivable and steadfast that nothing will change. The two and the club just show their inability and naiveness by ignoring the situation and taking little swipes at anyone who dares to disagree. If the club didn't foresee any issues they didnt want to. I can go back to the 70s and remember all the trouble from barrow to gravesend. It's never going away. It's like telling a dog to stop barking. Finally others will disagree with me but, I'm sure, will explain their reasons logically and with no confrontational attitude. Why is this person not running a club? Happy dayz No one said anything about being right or wrong. But to believe the club hasn’t investigated it just doesn’t make sense. Realistically if nothing has been done then the likelihood is, as far as the club is concerned there are reasons why they can’t do it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 4:02:06 GMT
Whatever stadium facilities we have after the cup windfall is spent is what it will be for the foreseeable future. If we hadn’t had the cup run and were still begging fans for money for basic ongoing maintenance, I would accept it and grudgingly move on. We now have a choice about what kind of football club Maidstone is. Aveley was probably the lowest point after a long series of depressing lows. Us celebrating progressing in the play offs, them celebrating being a small club who had a great first season at this level. Both sets of fans should have been thanking their players, but we booed them and threw a bottle. Why? What on earth have we become? The best support in non league? Not even close. We’ve won the f**king lot? Only in your dreams. I’m glad we’re not going up, because with the current set up we would disgrace ourselves over and over again. We have become tinpot nobodies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 4:04:26 GMT
IMHO If the Club requires further investment to develop the riverside and town end (figures of 1m and 3.5m respectively previously advised by Oliver) and this is not immediately forthcoming then the option that Bernie presents does appear to be the best short to medium term solution for all (especially a Chatham derby match) to enhance the Matchday environment and experience.
The FA Cup money will not cover the full stadium development but rather than keep it on the books would it not be better to spend it on ourselves rather than give it to the taxman? I am not an accountant but the merits or otherwise any projects of this nature can be objectively measured from a management perspective on IRR, DCF and ROI.
I do not know whether we would have to provide seating for away supporters but again there are the cheap solutions that could be put on the Riverside that again Bernie has shared previously. As for exits and turnstiles that is just a simple challenge to overcome and will not cost much.
Finally, I would support creating a family friendly area in place of the old media area to the south of the main stand. Again this should be able to be completed with minimal cost.
Otherwise as has been pointed out already, ongoing costs such as pitch replacement, media gantry and toilets enhancement would have already been budgeted for prior to the FA cup run through depreciation and accruals.
Happy to manage this project (at my usual consulting rates) if anyone offers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 6:32:59 GMT
I do not know whether we would have to provide seating for away supporters but again there are the cheap solutions that could be put on the Riverside that again Bernie has shared previously. As for exits and turnstiles that is just a simple challenge to overcome and will not cost much. Thats an interesting point, maybe the guys who go to the away matches can update this ? Every time you go away, is there seating available for the away fans ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 7:09:10 GMT
Whatever stadium facilities we have after the cup windfall is spent is what it will be for the foreseeable future. If we hadn’t had the cup run and were still begging fans for money for basic ongoing maintenance, I would accept it and grudgingly move on. We now have a choice about what kind of football club Maidstone is. Aveley was probably the lowest point after a long series of depressing lows. Us celebrating progressing in the play offs, them celebrating being a small club who had a great first season at this level. Both sets of fans should have been thanking their players, but we booed them and threw a bottle. Why? What on earth have we become? The best support in non league? Not even close. We’ve won the f**king lot? Only in your dreams. I’m glad we’re not going up, because with the current set up we would disgrace ourselves over and over again. We have become tinpot nobodies. We? 95% of us clapped both teams and went home happy. A hundred teenagers, the same ones who are the reason for segregation in many other games, booed their team and threw a bottle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 7:37:18 GMT
C'mon bernie, no need to tar all Stones supporters, because of a few dozen silly kids.
The vast majority of support is welcoming to opposition supporters and equally well behaved at away matches.
As for our stadium set up, I'm not convinced that the club see the segregation issue in the same way as many fans.
Creating a barrier does the job for them and that's what matters.
The fact that hundreds of Stones supporters end up being packed in the Genco or displaced altogether is a shame but not the end of the World.
We can still be relied upon to return to the Gallagher regularly and support our team, so what's to be gained by spending £thousands reconfiguring the stadium to sort out segregation once and for all and ensure the Genco is exclusively the Stones 'kop'.
In the great scheme it is unlikely to be a priority for club however many supporters may wish for something different.
Daveu is right to a point with arguing that the club would have done it, if the infrastructure changes were relatively straight forward and low cost to achieve.
But its all about cost/ benefit analysis.
Little gain for plenty of cost would be the view of a financial analyst.
Shame though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 8:16:01 GMT
I do not know whether we would have to provide seating for away supporters but again there are the cheap solutions that could be put on the Riverside that again Bernie has shared previously. As for exits and turnstiles that is just a simple challenge to overcome and will not cost much. Thats an interesting point, maybe the guys who go to the away matches can update this ? Every time you go away, is there seating available for the away fans ? Usually, but not always - it depends on the club, the level they play at, their approach to segregation, how grumpy the stewards are, etc. It doesn't seem to be a NS requirement. From what I've seen, if you really need a seat - for medical/physical reasons, all clubs can find you one, and most are very helpful - although not all, you sometimes have to make a fuss. For someone like me, an old git who has trouble standing for 2 hours, but can do it 'happily' (ask my daughter!) if required, I don't usually bother trying to get a seat. As long as I've got something to lean on and someone to moan to, I'm happy... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 8:53:38 GMT
C'mon bernie, no need to tar all Stones supporters, because of a few dozen silly kids. The vast majority of support is welcoming to opposition supporters and equally well behaved at away matches. As for our stadium set up, I'm not convinced that the club see the segregation issue in the same way as many fans. Creating a barrier does the job for them and that's what matters. The fact that hundreds of Stones supporters end up being packed in the Genco or displaced altogether is a shame but not the end of the World. We can still be relied upon to return to the Gallagher regularly and support our team, so what's to be gained by spending £thousands reconfiguring the stadium to sort out segregation once and for all and ensure the Genco is exclusively the Stones 'kop'. In the great scheme it is unlikely to be a priority for club however many supporters may wish for something different. Daveu is right to a point with arguing that the club would have done it, if the infrastructure changes were relatively straight forward and low cost to achieve. But its all about cost/ benefit analysis. Little gain for plenty of cost would be the view of a financial analyst. Shame though. I am not entirely convinced by the club's arguments (in as far as we know them). Their opinions will be affected by factors unknown to us and perhaps not just straight financial or business considerations. The directors have views of their own about what's possible and what isn't, or what should and shouldn't be done - not always strictly driven by straightforward reasons (as we, the fans, might see it). In my old job, I had to come up with solutions to problems (mostly IT, but not always) and then 'sell' them to the user management, and this last part was often the most difficult. One of the main parts of my job (although never actually in my job description!) was to get to know the key decision makers, their character, what drove them, what opinions they held, etc, so that when we pitched our ideas they would be more likely to accept our recommendations. The final pitch was rarely made on just the logic of the business case, it was invariably angled (sometimes heavily) towards the views/opinions/characters of the key users. Quite simply, because, no matter how good our recommendations were, we stood no chance of implementing them without their agreement and ownership. It wasn't entirely unknown for a project to ultimately fail, not because of the technology/design/implementation/etc, but because we never managed to get the senior staff on board. And I suspect that we are in this situation at the club. Both directors are strong characters, with established views and opinions, developed through long and successful business careers. They are fans, of course, but not just fans - MUFC is a huge investment for them, in time and energy, as well as money, they are not going to see the world in the same 'simplistic' way that we do. No matter how 'obvious' and 'straightforward' an idea might seem to us, it is not going to seem exactly that way to them. They simply may have different views/perspectives to us. And, bottom line, it's their club, they paid for it, they spend long days and sleepless nights running it, so they have the right to make their own decisions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 8:56:39 GMT
Daveu is right to a point with arguing that the club would have done it, if the infrastructure changes were relatively straight forward and low cost to achieve. Right to a point! The U'ster is correct in every respect, and you need to recognise his gravitas on this board. Failure to do so will see him put you to the sword, like he did with similar doubting Thomas's last year. All hail the mighty U! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2024 13:15:48 GMT
Sitting in a comfortable seat, high up in the Main Stand, doesn't give anybody special insight into the segregation problems of the Genco Stand.
|
|
|
|
Post by scooby on May 3, 2024 14:59:07 GMT
Daveu is right to a point with arguing that the club would have done it, if the infrastructure changes were relatively straight forward and low cost to achieve. Right to a point! The U'ster is correct in every respect, and you need to recognise his gravitas on this board. Failure to do so will see him put you to the sword, like he did with similar doubting Thomas's last year. All hail the mighty U! ' put to the sword' nice choice of words. Anytime and I mean anything dave u can come with his sword and I am more than ready. Bring it on!please please 🙏 |
|
