Queen's Park 2019/20

[spiders4ever]

51 minutes ago, The man with no name said:

I think it is simple but not in the terms you describe. Professionalism = chance of surviving. Amateurism = certain death.

What if any fact based reasons do you have or is it just opinion?

[The man with no name]

1 hour ago, spiders4ever said:

What if any fact based reasons do you have or is it just opinion?

Based on what we were told at the President's briefing.

[spiders4ever]

58 minutes ago, The man with no name said:

Based on what we were told at the President's briefing.

Personally I would need a lot more information to reach a decision.

[Bring Your Own Socks]

4 hours ago, Mick1867 said:

...attraction of playing at Hampden...

I can see how it's exciting for the first game or two but surely the actual match experience must be a bit flat. For a player on the far side he's got to be 80-100m away from the fans. On a windy day he'll hardly hear a thing. Compare that to the buzz you get at a place like Saturday with your own fans hollering your name and egging you on at every chance. The changing rooms are way better than normal but still well out of date. The tour guide still sells "hairdryers" as a feature and goes on about Rod Stewart and Tina Turner. We've a great wee gym, physio etc at Lesser. A chance to build some top spec changing rooms for the home team coach and players (away gets the painted concrete blocks) with downlighters and usb ports etc at each station. Won't cost that much more but it helps our guys feel special and that's what the coach needs come Feb/Mar. Lots of opportunity.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Bring Your Own Socks

[Bring Your Own Socks]

P.S on the Hampden-being-a-boost thing. I've often felt other teams get a boost from visiting the National Stadium. Last week's Stenny game being an example. Yes, we outplayed them but their defence fought like lions. In the year we got promoted under Gus, we won 7 of our home games, lost 6 and drew 5. Hardly a fortress.

[The Spider]

 

2 hours ago, The man with no name said:

Based on what we were told at the President's briefing.

Let's put this in context. The current President is the first ever ex-Professional to wear the hallowed chain of office and without seeing any business model to support the claim that we would be better off going professional, based on your posts to date you are prepared to take what's being said at face value and would be happy for him to simply wave this through without any members' vote?

1 hour ago, spiders4ever said:

Personally I would need a lot more information to reach a decision.

As someone who was attracted to the club by their amateur status in an entirely professional Scottish League, i would be very reluctant to see them turn professional and based on the limited information we have been given so far I remain opposed to the change. However, even though I personally would prefer the club to remain amateur, if are truly in a "do or die" situation as is being claimed then I would put the club's best interests before my personal ones and reluctantly vote in favour of the change.

However, as I understand has been requested by many who attended the President's meeting, until such time as I see business model A v business model B which clearly demonstrates the need for such a change, then i will remain firmly in favour of the status quo. It's insulting to suggest that the Members of the club aren't capable of making the right decision when all the facts are put before them, and I it would take a very brave (or very foolish) President who would attempt to bypass the very people to whom he is directly accountable.

 

[The man with no name]

33 minutes ago, The Spider said:

 

Let's put this in context. The current President is the first ever ex-Professional to wear the hallowed chain of office and without seeing any business model to support the claim that we would be better off going professional, based on your posts to date you are prepared to take what's being said at face value and would be happy for him to simply wave this through without any members' vote?

As someone who was attracted to the club by their amateur status in an entirely professional Scottish League, i would be very reluctant to see them turn professional and based on the limited information we have been given so far I remain opposed to the change. However, even though I personally would prefer the club to remain amateur, if are truly in a "do or die" situation as is being claimed then I would put the club's best interests before my personal ones and reluctantly vote in favour of the change.

However, as I understand has been requested by many who attended the President's meeting, until such time as I see business model A v business model B which clearly demonstrates the need for such a change, then i will remain firmly in favour of the status quo. It's insulting to suggest that the Members of the club aren't capable of making the right decision when all the facts are put before them, and I it would take a very brave (or very foolish) President who would attempt to bypass the very people to whom he is directly accountable.

 

You never attended the President's meeting and therefore missed a great opportunity to get the answers you seek. Those that did attend and took the opportunity to ask questions to Committee Members at the end of the meeting have a better idea of where the Club currently is. I am in no doubt that the Club has no future as an amateur one. Professionalism doesn't give the Club guaranteed survival but it does allow it to access other revenue streams currently denied to it. This gives the Club a better chance of survival. 

[williebraveheart]

1 hour ago, The man with no name said:

You never attended the President's meeting and therefore missed a great opportunity to get the answers you seek. Those that did attend and took the opportunity to ask questions to Committee Members at the end of the meeting have a better idea of where the Club currently is. I am in no doubt that the Club has no future as an amateur one. Professionalism doesn't give the Club guaranteed survival but it does allow it to access other revenue streams currently denied to it. This gives the Club a better chance of survival. 

I have sympathy with both the above viewpoints and it would be foolish to come to any definitive position without more concrete models being submitted. I cannot believe that we are this close without any business projections having been presented. Speaking to members of the committee at the end of the meeting is not quite how I would like to see things done. Give us facts, two or three scenarios for and against, and establish once and for all whether a members' vote is officially required. I have no concern whether we are professional or not but I do want to be satisfied that we eventually are going down the best road for survival. Without facts we can only have opinions. The clock is ticking...........

[The Spider]

1 hour ago, The man with no name said:

Professionalism doesn't give the Club guaranteed survival but it does allow it to access other revenue streams currently denied to it. This gives the Club a better chance of survival. 

Your first sentence is entirely accurate, but your second sentence is very selective.

Professionalism also creates appreciably increased expenditure and based on minumum wage, training hours and travelling to away games I'd suggest that you would be looking at wages in the region of £100k. There would be an appreciable saving on travelling expenses though, but I've no idea whether that's £20k or £50k. Nonetheless there will be a net increase in expenditure v an expenses based model, and whether the club are able to generate more than that in incoming transfer fees / compensation would determine whether or not the model actually works.

Also, would the coach be given additional funds to dabble in the transfer market? If so where does that money come from?

These are questions that have not been answered yet as (until recently at any rate) the fine details have yet to be discussed at Committee level. It would be madness for the club to make any decision without asking their accountants to produce a detailed cost analysis of both possibilities, and once created it would be foolish not to share them with members.

You and everyone else who are convinced that professionalism is the only real choice may well be proven correct, but until I see the two business models I'm not prepared to gamble our future purely on an individual's say-so.

[Hampden Diehard]

All the business plans in the world won't save us if we appoint a poor manager.

[an86]

I don't see how anyone can suggest they are in favour of the status quo. The status quo doesn't exist. The club is going to have to change the way it operates, whether we do or don't remain amateur. There is no "business as usual" option here. 

[The Spider]

16 minutes ago, an86 said:

I don't see how anyone can suggest they are in favour of the status quo. The status quo doesn't exist. The club is going to have to change the way it operates, whether we do or don't remain amateur. There is no "business as usual" option here. 

It's rather obvious we are going to experience significant change; a new ground for one and a significant drop in income for another, but at the moment we appear to be having a primary discussion about whether we stay amateur or turn professional when embracing that change. In the context of model A v model B the status quo was simply the model for remaining amateur, and that's all I meant by meant by that phrase.

Edited August 19, 2019 by The Spider

[Hampden Diehard]

Strollers 2 Shire 3 tonight. An experienced Shire v a young QP side, with Shire scoring their 3 in the first half from their 3 chances. QP had plenty more but the Shire keeper and defence were terrific.

 

Reece McGuire (apologies for any spelling mistakes) came on and had a great game, scoring two. Sadly for the Strollers Ultra Faction, the equaliser wouldn't come.

 

Cammy Foy went off early (hopefully only precautionary) but Adam Martin had to be helped off after a ridiculous two-footed tackle. Gibby was booked for mouthing at the linesman and continued it after the final whistle to double it up to a red. Daft.

 

The referee was dreadful; truly dreadful. Some of his decisions for both sides defied logic. He spoke to a Shire player three times in the first half hour without booking him. The same guy then kicked out at Cammy Clark off the ball and the linesman ignored it.

 

Entertaining stuff though.

 

 

[an86]

3 minutes ago, Hampden Diehard said:

Strollers 2 Shire 3 tonight. An experienced Shire v a young QP side, with Shire scoring their 3 in the first half from their 3 chances. QP had plenty more but the Shire keeper and defence were terrific.

Reece McGuire (apologies for any spelling mistakes) came on and had a great game, scoring two. Sadly for the Strollers Ultra Faction, the equaliser wouldn't come.

Cammy Foy went off early (hopefully only precautionary) but Adam Martin had to be helped off after a ridiculous two-footed tackle. Gibby was booked for mouthing at the linesman and continued it after the final whistle to double it up to a red. Daft.

The referee was dreadful; truly dreadful. He spoke to a Shire player three times in the first half hour without booking him. The same guy then kicked out at Cammy Clark off the ball and the linesman ignored it.

Entertaining stuff.

I don't think that's the first time Martin has been on the end of a shocker in the reserves. Think there's a player in there, but it's going to be tough for him to get in. He's been very unlucky since signing. 

[an86]

9 minutes ago, The Spider said:

It's rather obvious we are going to experience significant change; a new ground for one and a significant drop in income for another, but at the moment we appear to be having a primary discussion about whether we stay amateur or turn professional when embracing that change. In the context of model A v model B the status quo was simply the model for remaining amateur, and that's all I meant by meant by that phrase.

Given that you concede that major change is inevitable, you'd surely want a detailed plan of what remaining amateur would entail for the football club before making a decision? 

[Bring Your Own Socks]

Time for a match thread. Who’s turn is it?

[Hampden Diehard]

Time for a match thread. Who’s turn is it?

Sorted. Unleash Hell!

[The man with no name]

9 hours ago, The Spider said:

It's rather obvious we are going to experience significant change; a new ground for one and a significant drop in income for another, but at the moment we appear to be having a primary discussion about whether we stay amateur or turn professional when embracing that change. In the context of model A v model B the status quo was simply the model for remaining amateur, and that's all I meant by meant by that phrase.

Model A, staying amateur isn't viable. With the loss of the Hampden revenue we make significant losses even with increasing income streams and cutting costs. Even axing the Youth programme (something that means more to me than amateurism) we still are a long way from breaking even. Amateurism is no longer viable! We stay amateur and die (something that will be more rapid if we drop to the Lowland League). 

I hope that those who are against any new model are prepared to step up to the plate and take over if it is rejected. Sniping from the sidelines is not acceptable. I would expect Committee to step down en masses if their plans rejected and those that rejected it to take over.

[The Spider]

11 hours ago, an86 said:

Given that you concede that major change is inevitable, you'd surely want a detailed plan of what remaining amateur would entail for the football club before making a decision? 

Jeez Annie. Sometimes you make the simplest things unbelievably complex so I'll keep it ultra-simple for you. If it comes to a members' vote there will be two choices........turn professional or remain amateur. Until i see the detailed plan of how turning professional provides a brighter future for the club than remaining amateur, I'm in favour of the status quo.

[The Spider]

1 hour ago, The man with no name said:

Model A, staying amateur isn't viable. With the loss of the Hampden revenue we make significant losses even with increasing income streams and cutting costs. Even axing the Youth programme (something that means more to me than amateurism) we still are a long way from breaking even. Amateurism is no longer viable! We stay amateur and die (something that will be more rapid if we drop to the Lowland League). 

I hope that those who are against any new model are prepared to step up to the plate and take over if it is rejected. Sniping from the sidelines is not acceptable. I would expect Committee to step down en masses if their plans rejected and those that rejected it to take over.

At the moment there appear to be three camps. Those who wish us to remain amateur in any circumstance, those who wish us to turn professional, and those like me who wish to remain amateur until it is sufficiently demonstrated by comparative business models that turning professional is the only way to survive. If as you believe it is so blatantly obvious that turning professional is the only option, why would you believe that once presented with the appropriate business models the propsed change wouldn't receive the necessary majority of members' votes? Why are you so scared of following due process if you are so confident that it's a one-sided argument?

And why aren't you familiar with the phrase en masse?