Sons' sorrow

[O'Kelly Isley III]

I've been giving this ground move proposal a lot of thought over the last 87 hours, and there are definitely several differing ways to look at the situation.

If we consider the literally here and now, and accept that Brabco will likely do no more than underwrite the most basic investment in the current location then the following might still apply:-

1. We have crap floodlights unfit for purpose.

2. We have no local training facility and are shelling out money on Toryglen.

3. We play in a location in which games are often ruined by howling winds (as opposed to Howlin' Wilf...).

4. We have a bloody great dip along one goal-line.

5. Even if money to uprate were available there will be a poor chance of planning permission, whether the Trust or whoever took on ownership of DFC.

6. Motor access is now heavily restricted thanks to the travelling community.

7. With each passing year the fabric of the poorly spec'd BBS frays further.

8. There are swathes of scabby waste ground and crumbling brickwork surrounding the ground.

9. For many non-football people the BBS may be standing in the way of enhancing a key area of the town and its rivers.

9. Last and by no means least, as and when Ian Murray moves on, it may well be very difficult to attract a manager of comparable rank, especially given the limited facilities.

OK, I'm doing my Devil's Advocate here, and the Brabco proposal still has to stack up, but for example if Phase One were to be concluded without DFC having to vacate the present ground then that starts to become interesting.

All I'm trying to highlight here is that wild as it may sound to some, maybe once we get more detail, hopefully starting next week at The Abbotsford, then we begin to consider everything in the round. I don't want a pig-in-a-poke but neither do I want us all to be wishing five years down the line that we had taken the chance when it was there.

Not everything in the current garden is rosy, and perhaps the proposed garden could be rosier than many of us are prepared to concede. Let's all keep an open mind for now.

Edited November 21, 2014 by O'Kelly Isley III

[Howlin' Wilf]

When was the last AGM, Wilf?

I'd have to check but from memory at least three years ago.

[sons'r'us]

I've been giving this ground move proposal a lot of thought over the last 87 hours, and there are definitely several differing ways to look at the situation.

If we consider the literally here and now, and accept that Brabco will likely do no more than underwrite the most basic investment in the current location then the following might still apply:-

1. We have crap floodlights unfit for purpose.

2. We have no local training facility and are shelling out money on Toryglen.

3. We play in a location in which games are often ruined by howling winds (as opposed to Howlin' Wilf...).

4. We have a bloody great dip along one goal-line.

5. Even if money to uprate were available there will be a poor chance of planning permission, whether the Trust or whoever took on ownership of DFC.

6. Motor access is now heavily restricted thanks to the travelling community.

7. With each passing year the fabric of the poorly spec'd BBS frays further.

8. There are swathes of scabby waste ground and crumbling brickwork surrounding the ground.

9. For many non-football people the BBS may be standing in the way of enhancing a key area of the town and its rivers.

9. Last and by no means least, as and when Ian Murray moves on, it may well be very difficult to attract a manager of comparable rank, especially given the limited facilities.

OK, I'm doing my Devil's Advocate here, and the Brabco proposal still has to stack up, but for example if Phase One were to be concluded without DFC having to vacate the present ground then that starts to become interesting.

All I'm trying to highlight here is that wild as it may sound to some, maybe once we get more detail, hopefully starting next week at The Abbotsford, then we begin to consider everything in the round. I don't want a pig-in-a-poke but neither do I want us all to be wishing five years down the line that we had taken the chance when it was there.

Not everything in the current garden is rosy, and perhaps the proposed garden could be rosier than many of us are prepared to concede. Let's all keep an open mind for now.

Thats a bit of a turnaround from you but a fair and sensible post. What it shows is that there's pro's and con's to both arguments and we shouldn't dismiss either out of hand until we know all the detail.

As well as many of you, i have yet to be convinced that moving is required. Yet i can see that a 4000 capacity ground with training facilities, if delivered witbout the need to move until completion, and debt free is a fairly attractive proposition. However there are many ifs that need to be answered prior to me accepting this proposal as the right way ahead.

[johnny graham]

The main question is on Wednesday will all questions be answered and if answered will they be answered completely truthfully.

As one who was a union member for forty years I always found that when asking awkward questions to those in charge that answers never really came or obfuscation was brought into play.

I don't really care where dumbarton play but it is imperative that they do continue to play. I care about the sons as do many others. I just hope that the owners care as much as I do.

[Jordo1872]

I've been giving this ground move proposal a lot of thought over the last 87 hours, and there are definitely several differing ways to look at the situation.

If we consider the literally here and now, and accept that Brabco will likely do no more than underwrite the most basic investment in the current location then the following might still apply:-

1. We have crap floodlights unfit for purpose.

2. We have no local training facility and are shelling out money on Toryglen.

3. We play in a location in which games are often ruined by howling winds (as opposed to Howlin' Wilf...).

4. We have a bloody great dip along one goal-line.

5. Even if money to uprate were available there will be a poor chance of planning permission, whether the Trust or whoever took on ownership of DFC.

6. Motor access is now heavily restricted thanks to the travelling community.

7. With each passing year the fabric of the poorly spec'd BBS frays further.

8. There are swathes of scabby waste ground and crumbling brickwork surrounding the ground.

9. For many non-football people the BBS may be standing in the way of enhancing a key area of the town and its rivers.

9. Last and by no means least, as and when Ian Murray moves on, it may well be very difficult to attract a manager of comparable rank, especially given the limited facilities.

OK, I'm doing my Devil's Advocate here, and the Brabco proposal still has to stack up, but for example if Phase One were to be concluded without DFC having to vacate the present ground then that starts to become interesting.

All I'm trying to highlight here is that wild as it may sound to some, maybe once we get more detail, hopefully starting next week at The Abbotsford, then we begin to consider everything in the round. I don't want a pig-in-a-poke but neither do I want us all to be wishing five years down the line that we had taken the chance when it was there.

Not everything in the current garden is rosy, and perhaps the proposed garden could be rosier than many of us are prepared to concede. Let's all keep an open mind for now.

Very good post OK and one that outlines some of the challenges we face at our current home. You also highlight the crux of the matter for me, that being the timescale between construction commencing at Young's and our move from the BBS. Those two must overlap because the risk of being left homeless is too great for me to consider it a viable option if not.

I'd like to understand our financial plan that will cover the transition period as I'd be more favourable of the proposal if I was privy to that information, but I doubt any clarity will be forthcoming anytime soon, unless I'm surprised at this Wednesdays meeting.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

Thats a bit of a turnaround from you but a fair and sensible post. What it shows is that there's pro's and con's to both arguments and we shouldn't dismiss either out of hand until we know all the detail.

As well as many of you, i have yet to be convinced that moving is required. Yet i can see that a 4000 capacity ground with training facilities, if delivered witbout the need to move until completion, and debt free is a fairly attractive proposition. However there are many ifs that need to be answered prior to me accepting this proposal as the right way ahead.

Yes it is indeed but I have been giving this serious thought. Like yourself I still need answers and some guarantees but there is a bigger picture in all of this. Important as the proposal is, it's not all about the new site, we need to consider the limitations and likely future if we remain where we are.

The fact remains that we do sit on a highly saleable parcel of land and if there is to be an opportunity to realise it with something better to move to this may be it. That's not a ringing endorsement of Brabco, more a recognition of the possible need for us all to compromise our views.

Edited November 21, 2014 by O'Kelly Isley III

[Getcooperon]

I've been giving this ground move proposal a lot of thought over the last 87 hours, and there are definitely several differing ways to look at the situation.If we consider the literally here and now, and accept that Brabco will likely do no more than underwrite the most basic investment in the current location then the following might still apply:-1. We have crap floodlights unfit for purpose.2. We have no local training facility and are shelling out money on Toryglen.3. We play in a location in which games are often ruined by howling winds (as opposed to Howlin' Wilf...).4. We have a bloody great dip along one goal-line.5. Even if money to uprate were available there will be a poor chance of planning permission, whether the Trust or whoever took on ownership of DFC.6. Motor access is now heavily restricted thanks to the travelling community.7. With each passing year the fabric of the poorly spec'd BBS frays further.8. There are swathes of scabby waste ground and crumbling brickwork surrounding the ground.9. For many non-football people the BBS may be standing in the way of enhancing a key area of the town and its rivers.9. Last

and by no means least, as and when Ian Murray move on, it may well be very difficult to attract a manager of comparable rank, especially given the limited facilities.OK, I'm doing my Devil's Advocate here, and the Brabco proposal still has to stack up, but for example if Phase One were to be concluded without DFC having to vacate the present ground then that starts to become interesting.All I'm trying to highlight here is that wild as it may sound to some, maybe once we get more detail, hopefully starting next week at The Abbotsford, then we begin to consider everything in the round. I don't want a pig-in-a-poke but neither do I want us all to be wishing five years down the line that we had taken the chance when it was there.Not everything in the current garden is rosy, and perhaps the proposed garden could be rosier than many of us are prepared to concede. Let's all keep an open mind for now.

Sorry but I don't see how this stacks up.

1) Yes the BBS is a bit tired looking but you don't move house every time your home needs redecorated

or a bit of maintenance.

2) All types of weather can affect football and you can't do much to legislate for this except perhaps summer football but thats another debate.

3) Can't accept BBS is such a liability that it could prevent us from recruiting a high calibre manager in the future.....many other factors will influence this.

4)Plenty of clubs use community facilities for training ......it's part and parcel of being a community club and needn't be a financial drain.

I appreciate you are playing devils advocate but I think it's possible that we lose sight of the key point if we make the focus the current limitations of BBS (some of which I'm sure could be addressed if there wasca willingness to do so). The proposed move is for other reasons......Brabco seeking their return......and we should keep this uppermost in our minds when scrutinising their proposals rather than convincing ourselves our current ground is such a big liability that the proposal put forward is the best option we have. As I've said before I am not totally against the proposals to move but they should be subject to careful scrutiny in the right areas of the argument.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Getcooperon

[The Moonster]

I look forward to Wednesday, I hope it's a good turnout.

[Sweet Pete]

Sorry but I don't see how this stacks up.

1) Yes the BBS is a bit tired looking but you don't move house every time your home needs redecorated

or a bit of maintenance.

2) All types of weather can affect football and you can't do much to legislate for this except perhaps summer football but thats another debate.

3) Can't accept BBS is such a liability that it could prevent us from recruiting a high calibre manager in the future.....many other factors will influence this.

4)Plenty of clubs use community facilities for training ......it's part and parcel of being a community club and needn't be a financial drain.

I appreciate you are playing devils advocate but I think it's possible that we lose sight of the key point if we make the focus the current limitations of BBS (some of which I'm sure could be addressed if there wasca willingness to do so). The proposed move is for other reasons......Brabco seeking their return......and we should keep this uppermost in our minds when scrutinising their proposals rather than convincing ourselves our current ground is such a big liability that the proposal put forward is the best option we have. As I've said before I am not totally against the proposals to move but they should be subject to careful scrutiny in the right areas of the argument.

Great post.

[Howlin' Wilf]

Sorry but I don't see how this stacks up.

1) Yes the BBS is a bit tired looking but you don't move house every time your home needs redecorated

or a bit of maintenance.

2) All types of weather can affect football and you can't do much to legislate for this except perhaps summer football but thats another debate.

3) Can't accept BBS is such a liability that it could prevent us from recruiting a high calibre manager in the future.....many other factors will influence this.

4)Plenty of clubs use community facilities for training ......it's part and parcel of being a community club and needn't be a financial drain.

I appreciate you are playing devils advocate but I think it's possible that we lose sight of the key point if we make the focus the current limitations of BBS (some of which I'm sure could be addressed if there was a willingness to do so). The proposed move is for other reasons......Brabco seeking their return......and we should keep this uppermost in our minds when scrutinising their proposals rather than convincing ourselves our current ground is such a big liability that the proposal put forward is the best option we have. As I've said before I am not totally against the proposals to move but they should be subject to careful scrutiny in the right areas of the argument.

Drawn back into the discussion here reluctantly and once again I must stress that I don't yet know enough about the proposed move to form a definitive opinion. But.......

I really must question that the Brabco thing has all along been an end to a means. In 2002 when I was chair of the Community Stadium Company, in my very first meeting with Gilbert Lawrie (then a newly reappointed board member), he declared that he thought we had moved to the wrong location and that long term our future lay elsewhere. His reasoning was that the location would become increasingly unsuitable as housing began to encircle the stadium. He had not been on the board during the time of the building of the stadium and said that had he been asked he would have strongly recommended another location.

Around 2006 when Neil Rankine, having taken us to the depths of the third division was getting increasingly desperate to sell, I was asked by a prominent businessman whom I know and who has been closely involved in Scottish Football for years to set up a meeting with Rankine, which I did. It was clear that Rankine was not going to value his shareholding on the basis of a part time football club but instead on the value of the land. My acquaintance was not prepared to meet Rankine's price and that was that.Indeed he expressed the opinion to me that no sane person would meet Rankine's price.

The club remained for sale in the columns of the Times for a long time. There was no interest. In the meantime Rankine was being inundated with offers for the land. It was clear that if the club were to survive, someone would have to meet Rankine's price for the club as a going concern or he would one day simply take an offer. The only possible way Rankine's valuation could be met was with the eventual sale of the land being part of the plan. However, as I already said, Gilbert had declared years earlier that he thought we were in the wrong location.

Rankine was content for the club to scrape around the bottom leagues as he knew the investment required to improve was not going to increase his wedge. The worse we were, the less likely it was that a buyer interested in a football club would come along and as land values increased, the more likely it was that he would sell to a developer.

Brabco apparently met Rankine's price and ownership of the majority of the club's shares went to them.

Now ask yourself if Brabco have behaved like asset strippers? Since they took over the turnaround in the club's fortunes on the field has been dramatic.

So yes ultimately Brabco want a return on their investment but it isn't just as simple as that as I have tried to outline here.

The alternative looked increasingly like Rankine selling to a developer and you can be sure there would have been no alternative at Dalmoak in the offing. A groundshare with the Vale would have probably been our only hope.

So I would ask that people judge the plans on their merits as they unfold and not as some big bad developer trying to screw us.

I really don't think that's the case.

However the plans do need to stand up to scrutiny and they may become clearer on Wednesday.

I doubt any finer financial details will emerge before the planning application is considered in March though.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Howlin' Wilf

[The Moonster]

That'll be Brabco that haven't even paid Rankine's full price yet. Brabco that have never addressed the fans of the club in any way, shape or form and are known only as "Brabco". Brabco that now want to move the club purely for their own profit. But aye, we're doing well on the pitch so everythings fine. I don't think we'll ever agree here Wilf and the "trust them" approach is baffling for me.

[BallochSonsFan]

It'll be interesting to see if we get any more information about the practicalities of the proposal on Wednesday. The journey from paper proposal to actually building the thing is massive and whilst Gilbert can assure us that any deal will be in the best interests of Dumbarton FC, the reality is that a 75% controlling interest gives Brabco free reign to do as they see fit.

I don't grudge them a profit but given the numerous examples in British football over the past decade of owners screwing clubs for their own gain, it's understandable for fans to be massively cautious. If this is to go ahead, Brabco will need to become far more visible and transparent in order to build eve basic trust between themselves and the support.

[Howlin' Wilf]

That'll be Brabco that haven't even paid Rankine's full price yet. Brabco that have never addressed the fans of the club in any way, shape or form and are known only as "Brabco". Brabco that now want to move the club purely for their own profit. But aye, we're doing well on the pitch so everythings fine. I don't think we'll ever agree here Wilf and the "trust them" approach is baffling for me.

I'm not privy to Brabco's deal with Rankine but wouldn't be surprised if the remaining amount of what they allegedly owe him is contingent on the plan going ahead. I'm not asking you to 'trust them' I'm just asking you to take some facts into consideration. Ignore or refute them as you wish, even if it's just because they conflict with your conclusions but I can assure you that what I've written above is 100% true; and written by someone who has no official connection with the club these days other than as a fan who travels onra bus.

[Howlin' Wilf]

It'll be interesting to see if we get any more information about the practicalities of the proposal on Wednesday. The journey from paper proposal to actually building the thing is massive and whilst Gilbert can assure us that any deal will be in the best interests of Dumbarton FC, the reality is that a 75% controlling interest gives Brabco free reign to do as they see fit.

I don't grudge them a profit but given the numerous examples in British football over the past decade of owners screwing clubs for their own gain, it's understandable for fans to be massively cautious. If this is to go ahead, Brabco will need to become far more visible and transparent in order to build eve basic trust between themselves and the support.

Yes indeed. PR is not DFC's forte.

[sonsanorak]

There are a few assumptions being made i think without much basis; 1 being that brabco will pocket any profit, the other earlier one being that brabco may take a profit and hand the club over to the fans. Neither of these seem to be particularly secure assumptions.

Under brabco, we ve seen the club climb the league, introduce a supporters director on the club board, appoint and support an ambitious young manager. In short, we re in the peak period since i started supporting the sons.

Perhaps, brabco/dfc board are looking to strengthen our financial incomes and boost the clubs position and security, not to turn over a profit. Alternatively, if we re in a new stadium with better facilities and more income generated, why wouldnt we trust brabco to continue to run the club? havent they done alright so far?

[The Moonster]

I'm not privy to Brabco's deal with Rankine but wouldn't be surprised if the remaining amount of what they allegedly owe him is contingent on the plan going ahead. I'm not asking you to 'trust them' I'm just asking you to take some facts into consideration. Ignore or refute them as you wish, even if it's just because they conflict with your conclusions but I can assure you that what I've written above is 100% true; and written by someone who has no official connection with the club these days other than as a fan who travels onra bus.

Right, Brabco came in and saved the club out of the good of their hearts. Come on. They saw massive potential for making money, nothing else.

[Howlin' Wilf]

I think it was a combination of the two for the reasons I outlined. However you obviously know better.

[Howlin' Wilf]

There are a few assumptions being made i think without much basis; 1 being that brabco will pocket any profit, the other earlier one being that brabco may take a profit and hand the club over to the fans. Neither of these seem to be particularly secure assumptions.

Under brabco, we ve seen the club climb the league, introduce a supporters director on the club board, appoint and support an ambitious young manager. In short, we re in the peak period since i started supporting the sons.

Perhaps, brabco/dfc board are looking to strengthen our financial incomes and boost the clubs position and security, not to turn over a profit. Alternatively, if we re in a new stadium with better facilities and more income generated, why wouldnt we trust brabco to continue to run the club? havent they done alright so far?

To be fair, getting the Sonstrust director on board, pre-dated Brabco.

[Howlin' Wilf]

Right, Brabco came in and saved the club out of the good of their hearts. Come on. They saw massive potential for making money, nothing else.

Gilbert Lawrie was instrumental in negotiating the deal for Brabco to buy Rankine's shares. Brabco's majority shareholder is of a family with connections to DFC going back to the 1940s. I would be astonished if profit was their sole motive and 'nothing else'.

[The Moonster]

If Brabco are Sons men and have the clubs best interests at heart then why have we never heard a fucking word from them in 5 years? First time they interact with fans is putting out a stadium move proposal. I'm not claiming to know better, quite the opposite, we know very little of them and for that reason alone I'm very wary of their plans, when you add the previous points raused to that then you'll have to forgive me for being cynical here.