Homer Sandoval
-
Posts
47 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Homer Sandoval
-
-
4 minutes ago, G_H said:
The problem we have in Scotland is Celgers being treated as more important than the entirety of the rest of the league. It's moments like this when they need to be put back into their box and told that they are not more important than 40 other clubs, but the governing bodies invariably fail at doing so.
Sadly the Glasgow axis is seen by all the important people as being pivotal to the league structure in Scotland. The evidence of 2012 firmly nails this to the wall. TV income which trickles down to the the other 40 clubs is wholly dependent on at least 4 x league matches between Celtic/Rangers. There's no box to put them back in.
2 -
40 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
I have no idea what clauses are written into contracts, I just assumed that cancelling the lot would mean paying them off anyway but I concede I have no idea of the legal ramifications.
Very few people will voluntarily walk away from being paid wages, including footballers. It's a desperate situation and clubs will struggle to wriggle out of paying wages. Unless of course SSP comes into play.
0 -
1 hour ago, The Moonster said:
I'll be shocked if we don't start selling season tickets in the next two weeks. The only issue I see with that is, if we're using next seasons ticket money to survive a period of no football, what money do we use to fund next seasons team (whenever that season goes ahead)?
Perhaps we could ask fans to pay the price of two home games each month instead? Set up a direct debit of £32 to come out on pay day. Obviously the majority of our fans have probably already paid for their season ticket and thus won't want to pay twice for games they can't even attend, but I think we need to be inventive here so that we can preserve the budget for a fresh season.
Laudable, but flawed. Many supporters too will be hit in the pocket with the current situation. Would a football club monthly donation be a priority?
0 -
This will be worrying times for club officials and subsequently their supporters. The SPFL should be helping clubs. No question in my opinion.
Asking fans to step up is OK on a certain level but they too will be suffering as the world goes into economic shutdown. For my own part, my work will undoubtedly be closed by Friday given the demographic of our staff. Getting £94 a week, if it actually hits bank accounts, is not going to cut it for me.
Very few Scottish clubs will have funds to cover for income being hit. As well as matches being off many have extra activities as a venue and that will now be a route that's cut off.
There's no quick fix. Or any fix!
0 -
40 minutes ago, Jilted John said:
Probably thin air.
At Starks Park, with our average gate, you could easily position people to sit with three or four seats empty to either side of you and never come into contact with anyone. Why we would need to ‘cancel’ is ludicrous.The figure of 500 was one quoted by Sturgeon this morning in the Scottish Parliament.
Sensible precaution unless the COVID-19 British strain is different which seems to be the suggestion from the loony fringe. It's not a heavy cold
1 -
17 minutes ago, Reggie Perrin said:
Talking to a mad Rangers fan (is there any other kind) at work yesterday about the away leg of their Europa tie being behind closed doors.
He is intending travelling with his “Neeburs” to Germany anyway as it should be “ a bit of a laugh and a gid piss up”.
This brain donor is a member of the Senior Management Team.
I need a new job.You and I must work for the same company. My boss has just said almost the same thing.
0 -
It would appear that closed door matches may be inevitable. Surely the right call in the circumstances but devastating to clubs for loss of income. What then for the wee outfits who live hand to mouth?
0 -
2 hours ago, FFCinthearea said:
My first Falkirk match was in 1986 v Motherwell. I still have the ticket and it was £2.50 for the terracing which is about £5 in todays money. Admission to the South Stand in the Scottish 3rd tier is £18 which is just under £9 in 1986 world.
These type of comparisons are worthless and can't really be amortised to suit.
Are admission prices too expensive is the real question. The quick answer without any thought will always be yes. People hate paying for stuff and when they do pay want to pay less without thinking why.
Supporters want title challenging teams every season but never have the worry about that can be financed.
Club officials will always look at revenue streams and admission prices will be quite a high priority.
0 -
1 hour ago, WATTOO said:
My gripe is more to do with the disparity of pricing within the same league, so as an Ayr fan we charge £18 for both the main stand and terracing as do a few others, however the likes of Morton charge £20 for arguably the poorest facilities in the league (restricted view terracing) and then we have the Dundee clubs who are charging a whopping £24 (which actually increases to £26 when playing one another).
Personally I think it's scandalous that there's a 33% difference in pricing within the same league.
The financing model for football is wrong. That said, what can be done about it? The disparity between the clubs is staggering to the point that I'm perplexed how clubs are still in business.
The people coming through the gates at league one/two level are vital sources of income and in that respect it is unlikely there will be reductions any time soon.
There is a bigger question here of course. Is league football sustainable for some clubs?
1 -
Picked the wrong day last Saturday to watch the Sons in action on many fronts. Went along with my diehard DFC supporting colleague and being honest I have had better Saturdays. My pal was distraught at his team's performance and whilst I was not quite at the level he was at, Dumbarton were poor against a decent Montrose team. There appeared to be a lack of a plan from the Sons and they were reacting rather than creating.
1 -
For Sons fans in the know, what's the current update on the mystery men of Brabco. Is the bloke who was banned from being a director for defrauding folk with his gambling exploits still involved?
0 -
1 hour ago, The Moonster said:
He's also talked about trying to do deals for 2 weeks now, again if he had no money I think he'd be quick to say.
It is unlikely that he would openly criticise his employers with claims of no money. There is no doubt that Dumbarton has a squad that looks like short on talent but Duffy has managed them well and given the current league position the Sons are probably doing as well as can be expected. Clearly frustration is high amongst fans and that too is understandable.
0 -
17 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:
I would feel a bit happier in all of this if I thought that at some point in the recent past the DFC Board, or elements of it, had sat down with JiIm Duffy to discuss and plan for the second half of the season - I'm not altogether sure this has happened and I think it should have. Whilst the points on the board until now is reasonable, it should have been plain that our small squad contained players who were not of Division One standard and we had become quite reliant on certain individuals - eg Hutton, Tumilty, the two centre-backs and Layne.
You cannot sustain that over a season and if our squad-building has become reliant on, for example, the whim of the Iranian FA then that is not a comfortable place to be. People say not to panic, and I'm generally fine with that, but if we do not see new faces in the coming days then we are at serious risk, not only of rapidly sliding down the table, but of risking at some point not being able to put eleven players on the park.
Has anyone considered that Duffy has his hands tied by lack of money? Perhaps his targets are difficult to get signed up as funds are limited.
3 -
On 07/01/2020 at 19:19, BallochSonsFan said:
It hasn't.
I have doubts as to whether or not Brabco could deliver what they said they would at the cost they thought they could. Land prices were best case scenarios. Budgets for infrastructure looked very optimistic considering the scale of the changes needed to the A82 and the poor state of the alternative Renton Road. I was never completely convinced that we'd ever get the final 4000 capacity version of their blueprint and always suspected that we'd get a minimum viable product and that later phases simply wouldn't happen, money having since been spent on the club's running costs.
A new stadium would have given the club the opportunity to explore alternative revenue streams. Those were primarily from the renting of artificial pitches for community use and from the renting of space for office use. There was also the opportunity to increase events at a new stadium with upgraded events space.
None of that offered any guarantees. Artificial pitches only bring in money if you build them at the right cost and can hire them out almost constantly at the right price. It's questionable whether or not the finances stacked up. I'd argue that they didn't and that Brabco's figures were "ambitious" at best. It's not that they didnt do any work on their plans but some of the assumptions about usage were way off for an area with relatively high unemployment and a low paid workforce.
You then look at other facility users. We've got an office park in Clydebank that has some major office space available at competitive rates. Attracting a decent-sized venue user (for example a call centre) wouldn't be straight forward. It would have taken some financial incentives from the local authority as a means of creating jobs and it would have required the club to expand significantly and bring in new skills.
Venue hire? The efforts of those fans who volunteer to organise events with a view to fundraising for the club are phenomenal. We're incredibly lucky to have a group of fans with the passion and dedication to try to make these things a success. But to fully maximise the facilities at a new stadium we'd have been looking to hire for exhibitions, conferences, weddings and other significant social occasions. The wedding market for a football club is incredibly small. You've got a 2 month window in May and June where you have very few home games and that frees up Saturdays for wedding receptions. Over the course of a season that runs July to early May? You're not going to attract weddings when you can't guarantee venue use 6 months or more in advance of a wedding date. The conference market in West Dunbartonshire? Not exactly huge demand.
Then there's the issue of growing the crowd. The location of the new ground wouldn't have been ideal. It would certainly have been newer and would have addressed some of the maintenance concerns that previous boards mismanaged. The current club board havent had their problems to seek in terms of the bricks and mortar of the current ground. But would the new ground have attracted new fans? I'm not convinced. It certainly wouldn't have been enough on it's own. The local public in Dumbarton and the Vale of Leven and in Helensburgh generally care very little for the club. A new ground wouldn't in itself attract new fans and we've got sufficient space in the current stand to run any promotions we want to with the intention of attracting new fans. We already offer free tickets to local football and other youth groups. We run ticket offers to encourage parents to take children to games. A new ground doesnt ignite interest in the club amongst people who at best regard us with complete apathy.
The changes needed at Dumbarton run far deeper than the stadium. There needs to be fundamental change at the club. It doesnt need a new stadium on the edge of town to make that happen. The current board and the volunteer working group are already trying to make those changes happen and it's interesting to see that a lot of people who attend the various functions at the club are not Dumbarton fans. That's important because it starts to change opinion and to make people think of the current ground as a community facility that can be used, hopefully bringing in additional revenue that the club needs. Ideally that would be matched with an increase in fans contributing to healthier crowds and a local community that values it's football club more. In reality that's a long and difficult road for all lower league clubs to try to go down.The new stadium would have been an opportunity but it certainly wasnt a guarantee. The council's refusal to allow planning permission cannot be seen as an insurmountable barrier to the future of Dumbarton FC.
Some good reasoning there but all of what has been said does not mitigate the present situation the Sons find themselves in. New owners with cash and a vision. What club wouldn't like that?
0 -
17 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
The ground is fit for purpose if we have no ambition of growing the club. The point is this development reduces/removes the chance of any future development that owners with more interest in the club could have used for investing in the club.
On the point of growing the club in terms of infrastructure that ship sailed when the proposal for a new stadium was opposed and rejected.
0 -
1 hour ago, The Moonster said:
I heard all profits are being directly transferred to the Managers Fund...
In all seriousness, no, it won't benefit the club. As long as Brabco are our owners, no selling of our land or building of houses will benefit the club. I'd go as far as saying if they build this shit that we're essentially completely shafted going forward. For any new owner coming in, what have we got? No room to develop the current site, no desire from the fans our local authority to let us move anywhere and a golden share which likely (hopefully) prevents them from just selling the land altogether and closing the club down. That means the only person we would appeal to is a fan of the club, and I'm not aware of any rich ones willing to plough money into a black hole. Part of me thinks Brabco are just going to sit on the club, try and strangle us as much as possible until we die so they can remove our rotting carcass from the land and sell it for more houses. It's hard to see a happy ending with these c***s, I must admit.
Is this not the scenario that was always going to happen if Brabco did not get their plans for a new stadium passed? The current stadium is more than fit for purpose for the Sons though surely?
0 -
2 hours ago, cremola foam said:
Opinions are obviously divided on the Young Farm proposal. A 9-10 vote is close. Our current home cannot continue. We are boxed in, capacity is limited, investment is compromised and atmosphere could be better. It is just not good enough for a club with Championship ambitions.
I am touched by some people's faith in the Council. My paranoia, on the other hand, is wholly justified ;).
Interested to read your comments. Why do you think that the present home for the Sons ‘cannot continue’? Also you mention that ‘investment is compromised’. How so?
0 -
12 minutes ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:
We should be more concerned about the fact our owners don't give a damn about the club tbh.
It would be in our best interests to work with the council rather than against them. They didn't throw out our planning application because they don't like Dumbarton FC, they did so because it was fucking ridiculous.
The only thing we gain from refusing permission to install a few lighting columns is a backlash from the local community (there's been plenty so far, even after we released a statement) we are working hard to get onboard and a soured relationship with the local council.
The objection to the castle/rock lighting planning application was made nearly one year ago, why is this suddenly news? In the spirit of come and go, it makes sense for DFC to accommodate the council where they can as long as the club itself does not incur costs either now or in the future. The WDC website portal for planning shows who exactly constructed the objection on behalf of the club and to be fair, the objection as outlined seems reasonable and is open to discussion. The newspaper article is online click bait with the casual observer ignoring the substance and just taking in a catchy title for the story. The mock outrage from the self-styled paragons of the community is sad and funny at the same time.
The Young's Farm stadium proposal, in my opinion, was always doomed to failure for all sorts of reasons. I can see comparisons in the current Sons situation with that of Clydebank. The club though does have something that at the time of the Bankies demise did not. A home. A leaking home by all accounts but bricks and mortar (plus steel) all the same. Brabco clearly sees the land on which the current stadium is built as some sort of cash opportunity. They don't care about the football club - never have in my opinion. Is there not a bloke involved with them that has been struck off for dodgy business dealings?
2 -
4 minutes ago, Thommo90 said:
Aye, you are right actually. Still got me in for the following season though.
So based on that, if DFC had a £200 season ticket for 18-19 season, you would have bought one, but not at full price?
0 -
49 minutes ago, Thommo90 said:
Exact same boat as myself. Couldn't justify it.
Last year it cost me £200 for a ST but would have cost me £364 to pay in to every game. Because of how good that offer was, this year was always going to end up with poor sales.
£200 - great price indeed. Looking at the DFC website, the price you paid was for the discounted scheme they released in March 2017, I think? Not really comparing eggs with eggs there.
0 -
5 minutes ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:
The club has to make it worthwhile. If you bought a Dumbarton season this season it would have cost you £250, if you paid into every match individually it would cost you £288. If you buy a season ticket that's a saving of just over 2 matches (2.375 to be precise). If you're asking someone to part with a lump sum you need to make it worth their while, spreading the cost over the course of the season will suit far more people than paying a lump sum will.
At a guess, I'll probably miss 4 or 5 home games so there's no chance I'd be buying one. I'd love to be able to, but I can't justify it when I have other things to save/pay for.
If it was me I'd be lowering the season ticket price but I have no idea about club finances, budget etc so I can't possibly comment on how clubs deal with it. All I can say is that unless the lump sum represents a significant saving then the uptake will always be poor.
This isn't a dig at the club FWIW, simply an observation.Fair viewpoint to have. Can't fault your logic. In general, though, I'm not sure fans think on the basis of saving lots of money when they buy a season ticket. Certainly, there has to be a benefit and it's a fine line for clubs who try to balance books. Do you think that, in Dumbarton's case, that if the season ticket price was cheaper for this season and the walk-up price dearer, more tickets would have been sold?
0 -
1 hour ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:
In terms of the hardcore support - season tickets sales are down because our season tickets don't represent value for money vs walk up prices unfortunately. When I worked it out at the start of the season it really wasn't worth my while buying one because I knew I'd miss more than 2 or 3 games over the season. A season ticket would have been doing me out of money. I'd love to be able to blast over 200 quid on a season ticket, even if it wasn't great value for me personally, but I'm simply not in a position to do that due to other committments. I know of a fair whack of folk who are in the same boat. It's all well and good saying it helps the club etc but not everyone can afford a lump sum like that unless it represents a proper saving for them over the course of a season.
3Your point here interests me, for a variety of reasons. What doe any club do here then, in your opinion? Lower the season ticket price and raise the walk-in tariff? Do you think Dumbarton would get 100 or so extra people buying a ticket if it was cheaper? That figure is random to illustrate a point about volume. I would imagine that for Dumbarton as it is for others, season ticket income is vital to setting budgets and income targets.
0 -
14 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
What I find frustrating/annoying/strange is that it only takes say 6 weeks of bad form for people to decide to stay at home instead of coming to a game, yet 6 years of success in Scotland's second tier as the best part time team in the country and we still weren't able to build our support - if anything our support dwindled towards the end. We were a bawhair away from entering the play-offs to the Premiership, we went that far in the Scottish Cup that we had to submit an application in case we ended up in Europe, yet we could still barely muster 600 bodies through the home end. If a poor team causes folk to stay away until things get better, why doesn't a good team bring in more fans which allows us to build on that success?
You've just asked the question that every lower league chairman asks himself. Years of relative success are forgotten in an instant. 99 things right out of 100 attempts and heaven help if you get one thing wrong, even if that perceived failure is outwith logical control. It's the modern world.
0 -
11 hours ago, lionel wickson said:
I particularly enjoy the comments from fans who bemoan our lack of finance for signings and the club's general direction of travel, by deciding that the best option is not to attend any matches until the financial situation and signing policy improves.
This state of affairs is not exclusive to the Sons, but you make an excellent point. It's a vicious and never-ending circle that lower league part-time clubs have to contend with. Dumbarton's success in being in the Championship for so long was clearly masking a deeper set of problems which are manifesting itself now. That said, the horrendous personnel problems with the current squad would render any club dysfunctional. I really feel for all concerned and I have friends who are close the action, so to speak. It's difficult too for fans who want instant and continued success. A poor team reflects in attendances and more often than not the serial complainers don't go along anyway, save for the odd game which vindicates their bile. There is too an ironic expectation too from supporters to expect club officials to dig into their pockets (why?) and at the same time don't do likewise by going along to a game. Someone else can always do better, it appears.
7
What happens if they ban large gatherings due to COVID-19?
in Scottish League 1 General Chatter
Posted
Whilst your sentiment is correct, the reality is that it's not going to happen. Scottish football is tied into the Rangers/Celtic axis and it's never going to change.