Sons' sorrow

[Jan Vojáček]

I just stumbled across this on Twitter:

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/15795111.Dumbarton_fans_back_bid_to_move_historic_grounds/

It's just the press release, but I reckon the Brabco PR machine has been at work.

- "A supporters’ group has thrown its weight behind controversial plans to move one of Scotland’s most historic football clubs out of its home town." 

- "However, previously sceptical fans have come around to the move." 

Edited December 28, 2017 by Sonsteam of 08

[BallochSonsFan]

Seems a wee bit of selective quoting and trying to spin things.

 

The trust has not adopted any position either for or against the move. Fans would welcome anything that is demonstrably for the benefit of the club. Right now it's about working together in order to properly scrutinise the cases for both moving and staying and ensuring that any decision is made on the basis of sound business planning/modelling and proper input from the support.

 

It's some way from giving unequivocal backing to the move. Nobody would be against the move in principle - what matters is ensuring that the decision we end up with in practice is properly robust and has been given proper diligence

 

 

[Jan Vojáček]

Just now, BallochSonsFan said:

Seems a wee bit of selective quoting and trying to spin things.

The trust has not adopted any position either for or against the move. Fans would welcome anything that is demonstrably for the benefit of the club. Right now it's about working together in order to properly scrutinise the cases for both moving and stating and ensuring that any decision is made on the basis of sound business planning/modelling and proper input from the support.

It's some way from giving unequivocal backing to the move. Nobody would be against the move in principle - what matters is ensuring that the decision we end up with in practice is properly robust and has been given proper diligence

That needs to find its way into the article. I don't think a single fan would disagree, and it creates a far more realistic narrative to the story.

[lionel wickson]

58 minutes ago, DumbartonTheSons said:

As much as John Sutton sounds like he could be the sort of player that could really gee us along, as BBPF says, if his attitude is turning down a loan when he's clearly not in Jack Ross' plans, then he's definitely not what we need.

We need someone with desire and drive to succeed and improve us. That doesn't sound like John Sutton to me.

What's Ryan Hardie doing at the moment I wonder...

I think I saw somwhere that the Sutton loan would only have been a 28 day emergency loan.

[DumbartonTheSons]

I think I saw somwhere that the Sutton loan would only have been a 28 day emergency loan.

That seems odd. As far as I know we only have Sam Wardrop from Celtic on loan at the moment.

We had several at the same time last year if I remember correctly?

I wonder what the reason is for any prospective loan deal for Sutton being for 28 days.

[cameron2000]

That seems odd. As far as I know we only have Sam Wardrop from Celtic on loan at the moment.

We had several at the same time last year if I remember correctly?

I wonder what the reason is for any prospective loan deal for Sutton being for 28 days.

We also have Ally Roy and Greg Morrison on loan. A 28 loan would have allowed him to try and impress St Mirren or to see how he fitted into the team before extending it for the rest of the season.

[cameron2000]

That seems odd. As far as I know we only have Sam Wardrop from Celtic on loan at the moment.

We had several at the same time last year if I remember correctly?

I wonder what the reason is for any prospective loan deal for Sutton being for 28 days.

We also have Ally Roy and Greg Morrison on loan. A 28 day loan would have allowed him to try and impress St Mirren or to see how he fitted into our team before extending it for the rest of the season.

[Silverton End]

Word is Ally Roy may be returned to his parent Club in January.

Absolutely bizarre to me tbh, his opener v Livi showed he is more than capable. Certainly a better attacking option than Calum Gallacher.

Hopefully it's wrong, the 'word' that is.

[TheFarPost]

2 hours ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

That needs to find its way into the article. I don't think a single fan would disagree, and it creates a far more realistic narrative to the story.

I'm just penning a letter to the Evening Times and the Herald clarifying our position. Plus there's a statement up on the trust site: https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/ 

[NorthBank]

4 hours ago, sonsanorak said:

Holding out for the pay off lets him walk with a cheque and pick up a signing on fee.

A loan is just the salary as it is.

Maybe however surely it is better to play regularly and get some match fitness and some credibility instead of sitting on a bench where you know you are not wanted? Even for the same money? JS has started in 2 games this season. With Mullan coming in he slides even further down the pecking order. The Club have tried to unload him before now as the manager will only play him in an emergency. We may pay him off eventually but as one of the highest paid players the current situation does not suit anyone.  And JS will have been a bench warmer for 18 months making him a less attractive prospect to another Club.

[NorthBank]

1 hour ago, cameron2000 said:

We also have Ally Roy and Greg Morrison on loan. A 28 loan would have allowed him to try and impress St Mirren or to see how he fitted into the team before extending it for the rest of the season.

Sutton has had loads of chances to impress and has not taken them. He needs regular playing time which he will not get in Paisley.

[Jan Vojáček]

22 minutes ago, TheFarPost said:

I'm just penning a letter to the Evening Times and the Herald clarifying our position. Plus there's a statement up on the trust site: https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/ 

Good stuff. The coverage up until now has been pretty good (imo), but that article seemed to totally misunderstand Brian's quotes in the press release, and could've created a difficult situation for the Trust.

[TheFarPost]

Following recent press coverage, and reaction on social media to the launch of the ‘Thumbs Up for Young’s Farm’ campaign, people have been asking if the Sonstrust could say more about the issues involved. I'm happy to do so. Here's what can be said at present:  https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/

There have been a number of comments on PnB about the stadium proposal PR over the past week or so. I'll respond to those as soon as I can.

Also, if you're coming to the stadium on Saturday for the Morton game, the present plan is for there to be a trust Q&A session in the Community Suite before the match - probably around 1.50pm for about 20 minutes, and open to all (of course). That will be confirmed shortly.

We are currently putting together an FAQ on the stadium relocation question as it stands right now, and we'll be polling trust members early in the New Year.

Fire away if there are other questions, folks. You can always drop me a PM here if you want, too.

Cheers,  

Simon

Edited December 28, 2017 by TheFarPost

[TheFarPost]

4 hours ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

Good stuff. The coverage up until now has been pretty good (imo), but that article seemed to totally misunderstand Brian's quotes in the press release, and could've created a difficult situation for the Trust.

The weight of the 'could' in our comment was evidently lost on them. Plus they just relied on the press release, and didn't look at the context for the quote on our trust website, which says:

"The Sonstrust will go on engaging positively with the club and its owners on any and all plans for the future — and seeking the necessary assurances about our own role as key stakeholders.

"The trust’s priority will continue to be to reflect the concerns of fans, and to ensure that any development, on a new site or on the current one, is appropriate and fully benefical for the club we love.

"We want Dumbarton FC to have a thriving future, with fans and the community at its heart. A sustainable community stadium development could create major opportunities for us and for the local area, which we want to be fully part of."   https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/22/stadium-project-info/ 

Of course we'd be crazy not to recognise the potential in what is now being proposed, the decent community consultation that's started to happen (albeit far too late in the day), plus the need to be on board a train that could really heading somewhere -- rather than the buffers. That's was what Brian's quote was intended rightly to reflect.  

That doesn't and can't mean for one minute that we've given up on the tough questions that need to be addressed up to and beyond the planning decision on 31st January. We'll see where we get with  our next discussions with Brabco in January... but any 'official position' from the trust would have to depend on a vote of our members, based on what we are able to put to them. We have that in hand. 

Edited December 28, 2017 by TheFarPost

[TheFarPost]

On 26 December 2017 at 09:07, Howlin' Wilf said:

 

The figures aren't to improve the current site, so much as to bring it up to standard. It may be true that they are exaggerated but I haven’t heard that being said by anyone with any inside knowledge. I understand that they are based on estimates for the work.
The main thrust of my posting was that there are still posts appearing here which are along the lines of “Go away nasty Brabco!” If the Dalmoak plan doesn’t go ahead for any reason then people should reflect on what happens to companies who fail in an investment and who have considerable contingent debt, which they have no chance of trading their way out of. This contingent debt will become real after any failure of the Dalmoak plan because the authorities have been mollified by assurances that we are moving. Thus maintenance issues on the pitch, the stand, the floodlights and the boundary wall have not been enforced but they would be by the various agencies on any failure of the Dalmoak plan.
Add into the mix that Brabco will then have as their only asset and recourse to recovering their investment, a heritable site adjacent to a large and popular housing development worth maybe £2m.
Just saying.
 

 

Estimates do very, but there are not insignificant oncoming costs involved in staying where we are, together with the need to strengthen our commercial base in order to survive, and the question of how the owners recover their investment. That's for sure. So there are risks attached to staying, as well as raises attached to moving. That is something that it is important for all of us to understand. Several months ago, as was reported at the October public meeting, we started to get more far more engagement on business and sustainability plans. We have seen and have been able to comment on an initial report on costs of both moving and staying, and income streams for a new stadium development. Around six weeks ago another consultant (mentioned in our latest statement) was brought in -- someone with a good track-record and a real commitment to community sports development. Things are not as far ahead on this as we would want (or as they should be) on the business modelling, but we've definitely seen progress. Whichever way things go regarding relocation, the priority for the trust has to be the sustainability of the club. In the meantime, those of us given responsibility for negotiating on all of this (myself, Alan Findlay, Stevie Lynch and Alistair Thorn) will call the shots as we see them, make sure the important questions are faced, take our steer from our members, act as responsible partners and stakeholders in DFC, and use every ounce of influence we have to try and get the right decisions taken. https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/

[The Moonster]

A few observations from me in regards to these recent press releases:

1. I note that Chris Stainton was "speaking on behalf of the Dumbarton board" in his quotes. As far as I'm aware Chris Stainton, nor Brabco, currently have anyone on the board. Are the board happy for him to speak on their behalf? Why didn't the club Chairman give a statement if the board are behind it?

2. Whilst Ian Wilson doesn't appear to have his name on anything DFC at the moment, he still seems to be involved behind the scenes. It's a worry for me that if planning permission is granted he will waltz back on the scene. I know some Brabco guys don't want to be known, but of the guys we do know we should be informed of what their actual role is and what their role will be going forward.

3. They've gone heavy on the "fans back this plan now" without any fans actually saying they do (the odd few have in meetings granted, but no official word has been given). The Trust have said all along that we would back the plans if we could be given guarantees of a few things, mainly that the club are under no liability and we retain (or expand) our representation on the board. I'm not aware of any guarantees being given as of yet (they have said these things but nothing in writing).

4. The figures quoted for staying at the Rock seem to go wildly from being difficult but manageable to impossible to service. It can't be difficult for us to get some quotes done here and find out what the real damage is.  If the quoted figures are correct and it's impossible for us to service, then I question why the owners have let this get to this stage. Where is the business plan here? We have nothing concrete business wise for the new stadium (all conjecture based on what price we get for land - even read the wording in the statement - "sustainable and first class facilities", it's buzz words with no actual detail) and we don't have a business plan for staying where we are. How can we be asked to support something when the plan for it isn't concrete and the back-up plan isn't even being drawn up?

5. Offshore ownership. What's the script here? We were told not worry, they'd bring it onshore but since then we've heard f**k all.

IMO Brabco still don't grasp the doubts of the majority of fans. All of the above would be easy to answer if you were a competent business man with a good idea of what your plan was. They haven't answered (and I doubt they will), either because they can't or because they don't want to, either way it's bad news.

[TheFarPost]

On 24 December 2017 at 18:21, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:

One thing that's clear in all of this is that Brabco don't care about what fans of Dumbarton FC actually think. Hence why they are paying people to gain support from organisations who have absolutely f**k all to do with the club. The ones who's opinions should matter are the loyal supporters who plough money into the club. No offence to Dumbarton Riverside but their support for a new stadium shouldn't matter a jot.

 

Actually, though they obviously have a primary interest in a return on investment, the evidence of our discussions over recent months is that Brabco do care what DFC fans think. That's because they know that the backing of supporters and the trust is crucial to making any new development work. 

Regarding local teams - yes, they'll look out for themselves. But if DFC is to do more than survive in the future, really good partnerships with local sports clubs, schools, community groups and businesses is vital. Commercial development and community development need each other. The trust has been pressing within the club for more initiative, openness, creativity and engagement on this front for years. If local groups have "absolutely f**k all to do with the club" that's a huge loss both to them and to us in the long run, and it needs to change. The fact that this is now, belatedly, being recognised is one of the most positive signs in all this. To build support for our club we need to go out there and win people over, not tell them that we don't give a fig about them and don't expect them to give a fig about us! https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

Actually, though they obviously have a primary interest in a return on investment, the evidence of our discussions over recent months is that Brabco do care what DFC fans think. That's because they know that the backing of supporters and the trust is crucial to making any new development work. 
Regarding local teams - yes, they'll look out for themselves. But if DFC is to do more than survive in the future, really good partnerships with local sports clubs, schools, community groups and businesses is vital. Commercial development and community development need each other. The trust has been pressing within the club for more initiative, openness, creativity and engagement on this front for years. If local groups have "absolutely f**k all to do with the club" that's a huge loss both to them and to us in the long run, and it needs to change. The fact that this is now, belatedly, being recognised is one of the most positive signs in all this. To build support for our club we need to go out there and win people over, not tell them that we don't give a fig about them and don't expect them to give a fig about us! https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/

The point still stands though. At this moment in time they most certainly have hee haw to do with the club and therefore their support for a new stadium shouldn't matter.

I'm all for them being a part of DFC in the years to come but as for their support having some sort of leverage in our move? Absolutely not for me. They will support the move for one thing and one thing only - themselves. The pish being sprayed all over Facebook will only serve to do one thing - convince the masses to support something they know nothing about because its shiny and new, great for the community and will magically make our youngsters healthy and fit.

IMO Brabco are not reaching out to these people for the good of the club or the community. They are buying support from people who have nothing to do with us and they know fine well the community angle they are taking will win over the public which could sway the cooncil with decision making. IMO that's diluting our voices and I'm absolutely not convinced they give a shit about us other than for their own benefit.

[BallochSonsFan]

Brabco need public opinion in their favour in order to strengthen their planning application.

 

Club supporters have a part to play in that - the council won't want to be seen to make a decision without giving due consideration to the views of fans despite how little they actually seem to care about the club itself. I doubt that the council would want to be seen to make a poor decision in terms of the club that could damage the 4th oldest club in Scotland.

 

But ultimately community benefit will carry significant weight. There's potential economic benefit from additional council tax, set against increased demand for local services. They'll look at the potential for community facilities. Those things are as influential to the decision makers as the views of Dumbarton fans.

 

The council will take a range of views into account in making their decision. Fans have a voice but not the only voice in this.

 

 

[O'Kelly Isley III]

Actually, though they obviously have a primary interest in a return on investment, the evidence of our discussions over recent months is that Brabco do care what DFC fans think. That's because they know that the backing of supporters and the trust is crucial to making any new development work. 
Regarding local teams - yes, they'll look out for themselves. But if DFC is to do more than survive in the future, really good partnerships with local sports clubs, schools, community groups and businesses is vital. Commercial development and community development need each other. The trust has been pressing within the club for more initiative, openness, creativity and engagement on this front for years. If local groups have "absolutely f**k all to do with the club" that's a huge loss both to them and to us in the long run, and it needs to change. The fact that this is now, belatedly, being recognised is one of the most positive signs in all this. To build support for our club we need to go out there and win people over, not tell them that we don't give a fig about them and don't expect them to give a fig about us! https://sonstrust.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/the-sonstrust-and-dfc-stadium-proposals/

If nothing else, Brabco and their representatives have probably done more recently to reach out to the wider community than successive DFC BoD's. Now whether anyone cares for Brabco or their proposals, please consider this: perhaps the current plans and process may actually represent a golden opportunity to put in place a truly functional Board for the first time in decades.

I remain sceptical of the jigsaw falling neatly into place, but the closer the Trust is to the action the better chance we have of achieving that. One thing is for sure, the current North Korean management style will eventually kill the club, Championship status or not.