john bell Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 56 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: This. Here's my analysis of it from Berwick's perspective: ... working on their £10 per ticket average, and our Board's 50% comment, our matchday ticket income is about £5,000. ... currently we get 18 games v proper clubs = £90,000. ... under the proposal we get 13 games v proper clubs = £65,000.This takes no account of possible reduction in crowds through disillusionment, nor lower Season Ticket sales (given 6 of 19 home games are v 'B' teams) ... cheque in lieu of away tickets = £15,000. ... our remaining 6 games are against 'B' teams. Away fans have already got their tickets. Lets say the home support (450) is down by 2/5 (270) = £16,000.Evidence from the Challenge Cup suggests home crowds may actually fall considerably more than 2/5. ... final total = £96,000.This takes no account of reduced sales of car parking, 50/50 draw tickets, programmes, food and drink at lower-attended games. So what we're actually looking at is just £6,000 and then only if none of the bold happen. If it does - it's break-even or more likely a loss. (There is a small bus saving from 3 fewer away games). As soon as the cheque is withdrawn it becomes a definite loss - considerable if the bold happen. Obviously the principle of the idea is the primary objection... but even if not, the practicality in supposed financial benefits seems like total fantasy anyway. To concur with another poster - the sums are way off the mark. Budgeted gate revenue for Berwick Rangers is £1500 per league game, or £27,000 across 18 fixtures. That takes into account that a typical league gate of around 400 people includes season ticket holders, junior fans getting free entry, adult admissions and concessions (and given Berwick's age demographic of fans, the concessions are a very significant number). Therefore the comment that £15K represents more than 50% of our budgeted income. Our total revenue from gate admissions and season tickets for the financial year ending May 2017 (PLC Profit and Loss Account 2017) was £58,549, and that includes all cup competitions and friendlies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Parr Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 The Colt argument re the drop off in performance of the Scottish national team is risible. If the football authorities in Scotland were really serious about improving national performance then they might want to start at the top end of the Premiership by attacking the status quo - and the same two teams winning year after year after year after year. As is stands this proposal is all about strengthening the Old Firm's stranglehold on Scottish fitba, via a brazen bribe. Stick to the democratic principle of one club, one vote and get this nonsense in the fucking sea. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 10 minutes ago, john bell said: To concur with another poster - the sums are way off the mark. Budgeted gate revenue for Berwick Rangers is £1500 per league game, or £27,000 across 18 fixtures. That takes into account that a typical league gate of around 400 people includes season ticket holders, junior fans getting free entry, adult admissions and concessions (and given Berwick's age demographic of fans, the concessions are a very significant number). Therefore the comment that £15K represents more than 50% of our budgeted income. Our total revenue from gate admissions and season tickets for the financial year ending May 2017 (PLC Profit and Loss Account 2017) was £58,549, and that includes all cup competitions and friendlies. Thank you. Once I'd read-it-over I realised my figures - on both sides - were too high, and I came on to revise it just now, but I've now removed the figures and the calculation of £6,000 extra. Nevertheless with 13 home games v actual clubs not 18, likelihood of lower crowds at least v 'B' teams, and matchday revenue in those, it's important not to look at it as £15,000 extra either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Everyone should unite under a banner of "tell the Colts to bolt"..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 If we are looking at alternatives I would perhaps go down the French route, though I'm not sure if this is still in place. Maximum of 23 senior first team players and everyone else used has to be under 21. If players get injured or suspended, you need to throw in a youngster. I'd be in favour of that before going with the B teams proposal. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Someone has started a thread on this on the premiership page. Many on here are more informed about this, so might be good if some from here contributed, so that more folk can help fight the good fight. I did put up a link to this thread but I'm not sure many will come over to this page now the other thread has got going. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just now, Ross. said: If we are looking at alternatives I would perhaps go down the French route, though I'm not sure if this is still in place. Maximum of 23 senior first team players and everyone else used has to be under 21. If players get injured or suspended, you need to throw in a youngster. I'd be in favour of that before going with the B teams proposal. I like it. It also prevents rich clubs from stockpiling the best players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 1 minute ago, PauloPerth said: I like it. It also prevents rich clubs from stockpiling the best players. PSG have me doubting whether or not it is still in place. I recall reading a lot about this being one of the major reasons they won the World Cup and Euro's in '98 and 2000. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Thank you. Once I'd read-it-over I realised my figures - on both sides - were too high, and I came on to revise it just now, but I've now removed the figures and the calculation of £6,000 extra. Nevertheless with 13 home games v actual clubs not 18, likelihood of lower crowds at least v 'B' teams, and matchday revenue in those, it's important not to look at it as £15,000 extra either. But doesn't your model postulate higher crowds v b teams as I suggested above 520 v 500? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer doon south Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 It's surprising that the spfl and indeed old firm colts are prepared to push this agenda through given the evidence offered up by challenge cup outings. Poor attendance and poor results in general. Poor fan reaction towards the inclusion of colt teams. Tv didn't even pick up colt sides in the second year inclusion if I recall. Challenge cup has shown there is much more positive opinion towards highland, lowland, welsh and Irish sides. Although there is still negativity towards some of the above they do at least add to the competition in some way. Whether that be novelty of opposition, competitive games (TNS), tv coverage. Colts have not added anything. And as has been said they will suck the soul out of clubs slowly but surely. Scottish football in my opinion is finally turning a corner. A better pyramid structure, seasons in each of the league's are close and exciting for many more teams than years gone by, challenge cup is better I feel with the inclusion of welsh and Irish highland and lowland teams (not the colts). I think that league cup is not a bad format despite my own teams disappointing league cup campaign although the European teams getting a bye doesn't make sense to me as it would be good for them to find match sharpness for Europe campaign. Junior teams in my opinion are seeing the light and beginnng to trickle over. Ķelty hearts I think will be a positive addition if and when they reach lowland league. If the colts are pushed through I feel it will undo any and all good work done in Scottish football as I see no benefit to anyone. Not the proper clubs, not the colts, not to the players and not to the fans. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 26 minutes ago, Ross. said: If we are looking at alternatives I would perhaps go down the French route, though I'm not sure if this is still in place. Maximum of 23 senior first team players and everyone else used has to be under 21. If players get injured or suspended, you need to throw in a youngster. I'd be in favour of that before going with the B teams proposal. Most clubs in Scotland have a good smattering of young Scottish players in their first team squads anyway. I can't think of a time when Scottish clubs have played more of them on such a regular basis. I'm sure fans of each team could name some guys (we've got Williamson, Smith, Martin and Morrison, all of whom have played for Scotland at youth level, although Morrison is currently out on loan; previously we had PJ Crossan, who, just as he was breaking in to the first team and starting to play fairly regularly, signed for Celtic; he's now on loan at Alloa). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Most clubs in Scotland have a good smattering of young Scottish players in their first team squads anyway. I can't think of a time when Scottish clubs have played more of them on such a regular basis. I'm sure fans of each team could name some guys (we've got Williamson, Smith, Martin and Morrison, all of whom have played for Scotland at youth level, although Morrison is currently out on loan; previously we had PJ Crossan, who, just as he was breaking in to the first team and starting to play fairly regularly, signed for Celtic; he's now on loan at Alloa). Yeah, I appreciate that most clubs outside the top league especially will be more than covered in this respect, but at the top end of the league I expect a few sides would need to trim the fat and adjust accordingly. It would of course be part of a broader ranger of policies that promote the use of younger, home grown players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Cowden Cowboy said: How are the 6 games v old firm producing reduced 'other matchday sales' due to reduced crowds when your model suggests these games will produce higher crowds than average - 520 v 500? You're surely not expecting all or even many of the 250 away tickets to be used, though? Not many OF fans followed their 'B' teams in the Challenge Cup, despite it being a novelty and played when the first-teams didn't have games... My point is that a lower home turnout for 'B' team games - which was also seen in the Challenge Cup - also translates into lower sales of car parking, 50/50 tickets, programmes, food 'n drink. My point is really that simply talking of £15,000 more income seems misguided... There are 5 fewer games against 'proper' clubs, and 6 games against 'B' teams where lower home crowds and corresponding matchday sales seem very likely. There's also the worry that a portion of people get disillusioned by it and stop / attend less often, or people think their ST no longer represents value as 1 in 3 home games are against 'B' teams. Such factors would all deduct from £15k. Edited January 24, 2018 by HibeeJibee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibsFan Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 While I know that the pilot scheme is for the Old Firm's colt teams only, I'm very disappointed that Hibs have (for some time now) seemed to take a keen interest in this project. I would not be remotely surprised that, if this train wreck of an idea does go ahead, we would be chomping at the bit to get ourselves in the picture. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/local-sport/airdrieonians-albion-rovers-show-united-11895042 Confirmed good guys Stirling Albion Airdrieonians Albion Rovers Very likely good guys Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Come on everyone else, get your club contacted and lets get this number to eight ASAP. If this falls through I can't see how Regan and Doncaster can keep their jobs with the SFA and SPFL both supporting it against blatent fan opinion. Said they'd listen to the fan survey then come out in support of something 74% of fans said no to! Get them to f*ck 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
senorsoupe Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Ross. said: Yeah, I appreciate that most clubs outside the top league especially will be more than covered in this respect, but at the top end of the league I expect a few sides would need to trim the fat and adjust accordingly. It would of course be part of a broader ranger of policies that promote the use of younger, home grown players. Even with a quick skim through the squad lists of each top flight team I can only see two or three of the teams who have a lot of non-Scottish players on their books so maybe Rangers would have to ditch the likes of Eduardo Hererrera and maybe Dundee might have to cut ties with Kostadin Gadzhalov but for the most part the 12 top flight teams have been promoting youngsters fairly well in the last couple of years. Having senior squad limits would be a better option than colt teams and the SPFL could take that 15 grand per club per year and give it to the existing teams to invest in the quality of their coaching. Edited January 24, 2018 by senorsoupe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just got my email about this pish sent off to the club. Considering this is depressingly likely to come down to finance, I did some fag packet calculations about how much I spend at home games, and it works out to about £500 per season. Assuming fans in League Two spend a similar amount, that would mean that clubs would only need to shed about 30 regulars before the bribe is completely eaten away, without considering the additional costs and suchlike. Any League Two club chairman that votes for this should have some difficult questions to answer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 One advantage of bringing back the Reserve League over this Colts nonsense is that a player who has been out through injury can be eased back into action by a couple of games in the reserves before returning to the first team. The rules as set out wouldn't allow him to play in the Colts unless it was during the transfer window (assuming I've understood that part correctly). If the OF want to get their young players competing against adults then stick a couple of them in the reserves. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
She who dares gins Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/local-sport/airdrieonians-albion-rovers-show-united-11895042 Confirmed good guys Stirling Albion Airdrieonians Albion Rovers Very likely good guys Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Come on everyone else, get your club contacted and lets get this number to eight ASAP. If this falls through I can't see how Regan and Doncaster can keep their jobs with the SFA and SPFL both supporting it against blatent fan opinion. Said they'd listen to the fan survey then come out in support of something 74% of fans said no to! Get them to f*ck First time we’ve ever been confirmed good guys. I feel strange..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnsythebinman Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 If the whole idea here is to get young players playing against more experienced men, in a more competitive environment, then lets fix that bit. we dont need to ruin the rest of the lower leagues to do that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.