The New Raith Rovers Thread

[RoversMad]

How about we ask people to play pin the tail on the donkey say £5 a go. You can be the donkey and instead of a pin we use a nailgun?

you would miss mate, your failed attempts at nailing a piece of ass are legendary!

[P.C]

you would miss mate, your failed attempts at nailing a piece of ass are legendary!

in my defence my last attempt was foiled by a junior member telling the last she must be easy if she was with me, que her and her mate going mad at him and him digging himself the biggest hole ive seen. I blame that lack of a shag affecting my "performance" in the Woking charity game the next day

[Mij]

Haven't seen the FFP but as others have said the 7 minutes thing was said by TH.

Not really sure what people are expecting here. The open meeting was the Board telling it like it is. So anyone telling them to come clean and give it to us straight obviously wasn't at the meeting or hasn't bothered to read the notes of the meeting which are on the Trust website.

yep,a fairly transparent meeting outwith anything to do with the commercial side as there was no representative from the commercial side at the meeting .It was however, as has been said ripped to shreds by the previous commercial manager . Again as has already been said but Mr Sommerville was also another non attendee so no idea what progress he has made in his quest to bring in extra revenue . Theres a a lot of mud being thrown at the board and by god i`ve done it regarding investement or lack of,fund raising,marketing but in its defences its down to lack of bodies .

First Division football simply isn't financially sustainable give the current economic conditions. Crowds are dwindling and the money clubs get from the football authorities has been cut by 30%. Add in the loss of two Pars games and it's no wonder the club is staring at losses. People can moan all they like about the supporters groups but at least they are getting off their arses and raising money for the club. Something they do year in year out.

It's ok saying they should be boosting crowds and marketing the club better and to a certain extent I agree but that's a hit like pushing water up hill. I know people who have given up on the Rovers and only show for big games. There's a recession on and money is tight, something's got to give and for many it's the Rovers. By no means unique to us. Look around and crowds are dwindling all over, even at our supposed Giants in Glasgow. It's chicken and egg. They could fit the price but would more people come and then start coming regularly? John Boyle tried it at Motherwell and in the long term it was a failure. If we reduced it to £12 or £10 then by Christmas we'd still be back to the diehards just paying less money.

On the agreement thing yes it's just words but the stuff on ownership is worth being there. If it had been written down at the time then it might just have stopped the whole Anelka farce. And it's not cost anyone anything to write it down so it's worth a punt and to be fair to the trust they did invest money recently so it's not as if they were writing this and doing nothing else. It's easy to bitch and moan about

everything from the sidelines but harder to try doing something positive. And the trust, fifes finest, the 200 club etc etc are at least doing something

But the bottom line is we like many others in this division aren't sustainable in our current form. Wages is where the cuts will come which will mean falling down the divisions. Are folk prepared to accept that so we balance the books? I would be if it means we have a long term future.

not much to argue with there

theres calls to reduce the admission price .The club do not get the full £17 as it is .With the deduction of VAT they only get something like £14 odds .Reducing admission prices in general would not make one jot of a difference,maybe over one or two games the crowds would rise but not significantly but not long term .

Hats off to the supporters groups who raise money year in and year out but unforunately to sustain what the club have at the moment it requires much bigger investment .

regarding the concordat, most of thats a given so why the need to have it down in black and white I dont know however i suppose we live in a world of rules and regulations .

Heres one who hopes that regulation 7 is not adhered to if our club is teetering on the brink that and outside invester is willing to invest significant finances into our club

one other thing. The fact HMRC moved the goalposts and were willing to appoint a liquidator for the sake of £45,000 (even after a debt repayment plan was in place)to a club that has no assets should be a warning to other .

Edited October 7, 2011 by Mij

[Ebanda's Handyman Services]

Fundraising 'Supergroup'

Thoughts?...

[Broken Algorithms]

Fundraising 'Supergroup'

Thoughts?...

All for it if it leads to progress being made in that respect.

[P.C]

Fundraising 'Supergroup'

Thoughts?...

Had a quick game at it (try not go on FT too much) in principal it could be an idea its like Rovers equilivant of team GB

Think it would be good if trying to organise big events, dont think the individual groups would want to merge on a perm basis but we should be able to coroporate for one off events

[Poet of the Macabre]

Cheers,

can you arrange a sponsored "set fire to Sammy & his tank"??

If your serious though the next item on the fundraising agenda is Decembeard, if you fancy growing some

whiskers for the wee team?

I would certainly try. My "beards" tend to look poofy as f**k but hey ho

Get your team relegated so we can get some decent attendances.

I think the team's already trying their best mate Maybe we should rig the 4th Round draw for the Scottish Cup?

Funny you say that mate we are looking into a fundraising event involving supporters of all the Fife teams. Still trying to sort out dates and stuff but will keep you posted.

Good idea this. Help out the wee team whilst also promoting Fife football throughout the Kingdom.

[grumswall]

The important thing is, did you take a photo of a scoreboard or even the stands to confirm what was going on? They normally have a 15-year half-life for success-starved clubs like Raith.

What a load of shite. The point was though that the moral high ground from dickheads spouting that pish about Livi doesn't look so moralistic now.

you two really are boring now. Piss off and enjoy the success as we did the last few seasons and look forward to the mess that will eventually come from it.

[roverthemoon]

there was no representative from the commercial side at the meeting .It was however, as has been said ripped to shreds by the previous commercial manager

I agree the commercial side of the club has always been poor even under the previous commercial manager. That said I'm not sure any argument was ripped to shreds in the meeting. JD is obviously still smarting at being let go by the club and that came across pretty clearly in his contribution. There seems to be a question mark over whether employing JD brought value for money. I have no idea if it did or not I don't think someone who has been effectively sacked and lost his income is exactly the best judge of things. That's not a slight against JD at all.

[L. Brilliant]

I agree the commercial side of the club has always been poor even under the previous commercial manager. That said I'm not sure any argument was ripped to shreds in the meeting. JD is obviously still smarting at being let go by the club and that came across pretty clearly in his contribution. There seems to be a question mark over whether employing JD brought value for money. I have no idea if it did or not I don't think someone who has been effectively sacked and lost his income is exactly the best judge of things. That's not a slight against JD at all.

If what I'm told is true then JD effectively did several jobs at once for the club, and would be within his rights to feel a bit aggrieved. Not to imply you're having a go at him, at all.

[BIGQ FAE KDY]

It sounds like it was a great performance in the final on thursday but i was wondering who decides on the date of the final.I would have thought with scotland playing on saturday night at 6.30 then a saturday afternoon k.o at 3pm would have been a better time to play it.We could have had the game then afterwards for those who want to stay they could have put the scots game on in the club.So not only would there be a bigger crowd at the final than at a thursday night game but also we could have made money through the bar.There could have been some food put on aswell at very little cost so as to make it a good night.I just think we miss so many opportunities and in doing so it frustrates me.

Edited October 7, 2011 by BIGQ FAE KDY

[CALDERON]

100% agree.

[Ebanda's Handyman Services]

It sounds like it was a great performance in the final on thursday but i was wondering who decides on the date of the final.I would have thought with scotland playing on saturday night at 6.30 then a saturday afternoon k.o at 3pm would have been a better time to play it.We could have had the game then afterwards for those who want to stay they could have put the scots game on in the club.So not only would there be a bigger crowd at the final than at a thursday night game but also we could have made money through the bar.There could have been some food put on aswell at very little cost so as to make it a good night.I just think we miss so many opportunities and in doing so it frustrates me.

Totally agree too although there may be other reasons that we aren't aware of for the game being played on Tuesday.

I trust that the gate money will be split with Cowden so you think Cowden would have preferred that too. The Rovers could have made a wee bit on the bar with the Scotland game being on the three tvs.

[Mij]

I agree the commercial side of the club has always been poor even under the previous commercial manager.

the past was bringing in more than it has so far this season

That said I'm not sure any argument was ripped to shreds in the meeting. JD is obviously still smarting at being let go by the club and that came across pretty clearly in his contribution. There seems to be a question mark over whether employing JD brought value for money. I have no idea if it did or not I don't think someone who has been effectively sacked and lost his income is exactly the best judge of things. That's not a slight against JD at all.

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

the existing commercial side for what its worth was ripped to shreds by JD .He quoted the figures whilst he was in charge with no denial from those on the board and virtually no come back of figures from the commercial dept section in place at the moment, maybe the reason O `Neil i think his name is from the commercial side chose not to attend . I do not think for one minute JD a rovers man through and through was smarting because he was let go by the club,what did come across was someone who was angry seeing the hard work he had put in and what he had built up going down the swanny and not been carried forward .

whos questioning whether JD provided value for money? he would appear to have brought value for money in comparison to whats in existence at present where lottery sales are down,no lottery sponsor,no sponsored cars,poor hospitality sales and so on and so .

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

Edited October 8, 2011 by Mij

[Ebanda's Handyman Services]

the past was bringing in more than it has so far this season

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

the existing commercial side for what its worth was ripped to shreds by JD .He quoted the figures whilst he was in charge with no denial from those on the board and virtually no come back of figures from the commercial dept section in place at the moment, maybe the reason O `Neil i think his name is from the commercial side chose not to attend . I do not think for one minute JD a rovers man through and through was smarting because he was let go by the club,what did come across was someone who was angry seeing the hard work he had put in and what he had built up going down the swanny and not been carried forward .

whos questioning whether JD provided value for money? he would appear to have brought value for money in comparison to whats in existence at present where lottery sales are down,no lottery sponsor,no sponsored cars,poor hospitality sales and so on and so .

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

There is a lottery sponsor now and wasn't it said that Bill O'Neil was in Hong Kong or something?

I've known Bill O'Neil to be very pro-active regarding fundraising in the past. I doubt much will have changed in that respect.

[roverthemoon]

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

correct me if i`m wrong but did you not say you could not attend the meeting?

I'm sure this is just a typo but I heard you the first time

Yes, you are wrong. I was at the meeting and heard the whole exchange. JD did raise some good questions but to me it was pretty clear he was angry particularly near the end of his contribution. Whether that's about his good work going to waste or the circumstances around his removal only he knows. It seemed pretty personal between him and TH so I assumed it was at least in part some of the latter but I could be wrong.

I don't think any figures were 'ripped apart' but then it's all about opinion. No great surprise there was more money coming in JD's day. It's probably a pretty safe assumption to make that if generating crowds is getting harder them generating commercial income is as well.

No idea why the new commercial guy wasn't there but isnt he fairly new anyway so not sure he would have been much help. No great surprise that TH or other directors aren't across the ins and outs of the commercial side in terms of figures so i think that's why JD's points went unanswered rather than some great conspiracy.

As I said I have nothing against JD and as you say he is Rovers through and through but I find it hard to believe that someone whose services have been let go and not by mutual consent it would seem wouldn't harbour some degree of resentment to the people who made that decision. Maybe I'm wrong and he's a better person than most other people would be in that situation. If he is then fair play to him.

I'm just going on my own interpretation of the discussion and my experience of dealing with the commercial side over a few years. I think Chris Lumsden noticeably improved things in the area I dealt with. So I don't start from the point that everything was a smoothly oiled money making machine under JD. As I said I think the commercial and marketing has always been a bit poor.

Again I'd stress none of this is having a go at JD. Just a different perception of the exchange at the meeting.

[Scary Bear]

Haven't seen the FFP but as others have said the 7 minutes thing was said by TH.

Not really sure what people are expecting here. The open meeting was the Board telling it like it is. So anyone telling them to come clean and give it to us straight obviously wasn't at the meeting or hasn't bothered to read the notes of the meeting which are on the Trust website.

First Division football simply isn't financially sustainable give the current economic conditions. Crowds are dwindling and the money clubs get from the football authorities has been cut by 30%. Add in the loss of two Pars games and it's no wonder the club is staring at losses. People can moan all they like about the supporters groups but at least they are getting off their arses and raising money for the club. Something they do year in year out.

It's ok saying they should be boosting crowds and marketing the club better and to a certain extent I agree but that's a hit like pushing water up hill. I know people who have given up on the Rovers and only show for big games. There's a recession on and money is tight, something's got to give and for many it's the Rovers. By no means unique to us. Look around and crowds are dwindling all over, even at our supposed Giants in Glasgow. It's chicken and egg. They could fit the price but would more people come and then start coming regularly? John Boyle tried it at Motherwell and in the long term it was a failure. If we reduced it to £12 or £10 then by Christmas we'd still be back to the diehards just paying less money.

On the agreement thing yes it's just words but the stuff on ownership is worth being there. If it had been written down at the time then it might just have stopped the whole Anelka farce. And it's not cost anyone anything to write it down so it's worth a punt and to be fair to the trust they did invest money recently so it's not as if they were writing this and doing nothing else. It's easy to bitch and moan about

everything from the sidelines but harder to try doing something positive. And the trust, fifes finest, the 200 club etc etc are at least doing something

But the bottom line is we like many others in this division aren't sustainable in our current form. Wages is where the cuts will come which will mean falling down the divisions. Are folk prepared to accept that so we balance the books? I would be if it means we have a long term future.

Do you think that £17 is a fair price for the normal standard of football on show at Stark's Park?

Don't come out with any stuff about, "well that's the necessary admission price to meet costs", just answer the question. The info in the FFP shows that we could cut costs if required, either by going PT and/or getting rid of the youth system, which has only produced one - one! - player for the club.How many years has the youth system being going? 5-6?

As for the Motherwell example, where you say admission prices being reduced was a failure. They got in 11,000 fans for a run of the mill league game with Dundee United. That sounds like a fairly successful experiment. When they put the prices back up, not surprisingly, crowds dropped. Unfortunately, they decided to pay top dollar to players at the same time, getting in the likes of John Spencer and Andy Goram. The end result was administration, but that wasn't down to dropping prices for a couple of games. It was due to paying players more money than the club could afford.

Unlike Motherwell, we wouldn't be getting in better players, so reducing prices would do nothing for us in terms of increasing crowds. However, paying £17 for shitty football is getting to the stage where even the regulars are getting pissed off with the Rovers. If this causes regulars to attend less games and get out of the habit of attending games, then the club are truly fucked. We are never going to get additional 'adult' fans in, who pay the magic £17, if the team are playing absolutely woeful football at Stark's Park; We are more likely to keep seeing regulars deciding not to attend.

That pushing water up a hill metaphor is wearing thin already.

[Scary Bear]

Fundraising 'Supergroup'

Thoughts?...

It's admirable that people want to fund raise for the club, but I thought the Raith Forum was there for this stuff?

http://raithforum.wordpress.com/

Has that died the death? If so, the fundraising thing doesn't seem particularly sustainable. Relying on fundraising and handouts from directors to pay the bills is not a sustainable business model for the club.

Sticking 'super' in front of anything to try and make it seem good, smacks of the shite patter of Tony Blair's New Labour. Will the head of the Supergroup be a 'Fundraising Tzar'?

Sorry for the negativity, but I'm sick of the club stumbling from one financial disaster to another. I just want to watch football. The club is essentially a business and the directors should run it like one. They are all businessmen so it's a bit concerning that they find it so difficult to make Rovers break even.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Scary Bear

[Ebanda's Handyman Services]

It's admirable that people want to fund raise for the club, but I thought the Raith Forum was there for this stuff?

http://raithforum.wordpress.com/

Has that died the death? If so, the fundraising thing doesn't seem particularly sustainable. Relying on fundraising and handouts from directors to pay the bills is not a sustainable business model for the club.

Sticking 'super' in front of anything to try and make it seem good, smacks of the shite patter of Tony Blair's New Labour. Will the head of the Supergroup be a 'Fundraising Tzar'?

Sorry for the negativity, but I'm sick of the club stumbling from one financial disaster to another. I just want to watch football. The club is essentially a business and the directors should run it like one. They are all businessmen so it's a bit concerning that they find it so difficult to make Rovers break even.

The name of a group of fundraisers is incredibly irrelevant though. We could call ourselves, 'The Fundraising Rovers c***s' or 'The League of Extraordinary Fundraising Gentlemen' but the group would ultimately have the same focus of raising money for the football club. That latter would also alienate women.

Every Rovers fan, "Just wants to watch football". Some realise that we might not have a Raith Rovers football team to watch without raising additional funds for the club.

[Scary Bear]

The name of a group of fundraisers is incredibly irrelevant though. We could call ourselves, 'The Fundraising Rovers c***s' or 'The League of Extraordinary Fundraising Gentlemen' but the group would ultimately have the same focus of raising money for the football club. That latter would also alienate women.

Both sound like decent enough names. Think the former would alienate women more, given the use of c***s.

Every Rovers fan, "Just wants to watch football". Some realise that we might not have a Raith Rovers football team to watch without raising additional funds for the club.

Good luck with the fundraising. The fact that fundraising is required again, after so recently being 'saved' (or is it reclaimed) and despite the last two seasons being very successful (title challenge and SC semi-final) makes me think that this cycle of boom/bust will probably continue and that the club is still not being run very well.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Scary Bear