Walking Down the Beechwood Road mk 2

[Kennie]

6 hours ago, jimbaxters said:

Agree with the sentiment of this but as the SJC is a voluntary competition it needs a USP to attract participants. For this competition it is the lure of prize money. With this in mind, 40% is better than nothing but, for me, 60% is not a good look.

Just for a bit of context, the last time Talbot were in the Semi Final of the SJC was in 2022. They played Rob Roy.

The gate profit from that game was £4416. There was a 3 way split with each getting £1472.

The SJFA then paid each club £3,528 to bring it up to the agreed £5000.

That was a single leg tie back then.

If we had 2 legs with a similar gate profit of £4416 in both games. (it would be more as there would be less expenditure to go to the host club) so let's add a further £1000 making a profit of £5416. Ach, lets round it up to £6,000 gate profit in each leg.

Talbot would have got £2,400, The SJFA £3,600. in game 1

Rob Roy would have got £2400, The SJFA £3,600 in game 2.

Whoever got beat would then pick up another £5000 from the SJFA making their exit fee £7,400.

Whoever won would then be on a minimum of £2,400 + £10,000 (£12,400) or a maximum of £2,400 + £20,000 (£22,400)

Being a 2 leg semi, all other income steams go to the Home club in each leg such as programmes, raffles, food and drink sales etc.

I think my sums are right. Maths wasn't my strongest subject at school.

[allyg1977]

3 hours ago, Kennie said:

Just for a bit of context, the last time Talbot were in the Semi Final of the SJC was in 2022. They played Rob Roy.

The gate profit from that game was £4416. There was a 3 way split with each getting £1472.

The SJFA then paid each club £3,528 to bring it up to the agreed £5000.

That was a single leg tie back then.

If we had 2 legs with a similar gate profit of £4416 in both games. (it would be more as there would be less expenditure to go to the host club) so let's add a further £1000 making a profit of £5416. Ach, lets round it up to £6,000 gate profit in each leg.

Talbot would have got £2,400, The SJFA £3,600. in game 1

Rob Roy would have got £2400, The SJFA £3,600 in game 2.

Whoever got beat would then pick up another £5000 from the SJFA making their exit fee £7,400.

Whoever won would then be on a minimum of £2,400 + £10,000 (£12,400) or a maximum of £2,400 + £20,000 (£22,400)

Being a 2 leg semi, all other income steams go to the Home club in each leg such as programmes, raffles, food and drink sales etc.

I think my sums are right. Maths wasn't my strongest subject at school.

That's fair enough kennie but why has darvel been allowed to do all ticket for their game at home  when no other club has in the history of the cup surely it's wrong and immoral to Talbot and other teams cause surely they need to be all ticket for every match 

[jimbaxters]

3 hours ago, Kennie said:

Just for a bit of context, the last time Talbot were in the Semi Final of the SJC was in 2022. They played Rob Roy.

The gate profit from that game was £4416. There was a 3 way split with each getting £1472.

The SJFA then paid each club £3,528 to bring it up to the agreed £5000.

That was a single leg tie back then.

If we had 2 legs with a similar gate profit of £4416 in both games. (it would be more as there would be less expenditure to go to the host club) so let's add a further £1000 making a profit of £5416. Ach, lets round it up to £6,000 gate profit in each leg.

Talbot would have got £2,400, The SJFA £3,600. in game 1

Rob Roy would have got £2400, The SJFA £3,600 in game 2.

Whoever got beat would then pick up another £5000 from the SJFA making their exit fee £7,400.

Whoever won would then be on a minimum of £2,400 + £10,000 (£12,400) or a maximum of £2,400 + £20,000 (£22,400)

Being a 2 leg semi, all other income steams go to the Home club in each leg such as programmes, raffles, food and drink sales etc.

I think my sums are right. Maths wasn't my strongest subject at school.

So the exit money you mention wasn't provided in 2022, only the gate spilt?

[Kennie]

15 hours ago, allyg1977 said:

That's fair enough kennie but why has darvel been allowed to do all ticket for their game at home  when no other club has in the history of the cup surely it's wrong and immoral to Talbot and other teams cause surely they need to be all ticket for every match 

Darvel made that decision, it's their ground and they can decide how fans can access the game. 

[Kennie]

15 hours ago, jimbaxters said:

So the exit money you mention wasn't provided in 2022, only the gate spilt?

No the exit money is new.

What was provided before was a gate guarantee. The SJFA would top up the gate income to £5,000 if the share of the gate was less than £5,000. If the gate split was £4,950 the SJFA added £50. If the split was £2,500 the SJFA added £2,500.

[jimbaxters]

1 hour ago, Kennie said:

No the exit money is new.

What was provided before was a gate guarantee. The SJFA would top up the gate income to £5,000 if the share of the gate was less than £5,000. If the gate split was £4,950 the SJFA added £50. If the split was £2,500 the SJFA added £2,500.

Ok, so the prize money is better but again I mention the war chest which was famous in the Junior era and which has not been spent, unless you guys have had a massive party. Taking 60% of the gate isn't a good look when you're sitting on all that bunce.

[FairWeatherFan]

41 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

Ok, so the prize money is better but again I mention the war chest which was famous in the Junior era and which has not been spent, unless you guys have had a massive party. Taking 60% of the gate isn't a good look when you're sitting on all that bunce.

Couple of years ago they paid out £400 to members that met their match obligations plus some footballs. Might have been a payment during during covid. Its been explained they were losing money with the Junior Cup last year hence the change. They've just went to actual prize money with no obvious change to their revenues other than taking more from members.

Seems like any war chest the SJFA had is being chipped away at.

[tyson1909]

Would seem Darvel are determined to squeeze as much out the Talbot fans as possible, only 100 concessions offered. Does that mean if your the hundred and first concession  then you need to pay double than the guy that bought a ticket 30seconds before you? Surely must be a way of providing 900 tickets more fairly. Got to be some sort of age discrimination in this fiasco. Also heard there will be a time limit too. What a surprise to hear the deadline is the day of the 1st leg at Beechwood. The whole situation reeks. Just seems like one blunder after another and its a sure fire way to re-ignite any past tensions there may have been.  I'm not saying hosting a big game is easy, i dont know the ins & outs of running a match but you never get all this drama from any other big games we've been involved in. Could certainly put a few punters off, which is a shame as it could/should be a big occassion and already tarred with drama. 

[Casper Wilson]

13 minutes ago, tyson1909 said:

Would seem Darvel are determined to squeeze as much out the Talbot fans as possible, only 100 concessions offered. Does that mean if your the hundred and first concession  then you need to pay double than the guy that bought a ticket 30seconds before you? Surely must be a way of providing 900 tickets more fairly. Got to be some sort of age discrimination in this fiasco. Also heard there will be a time limit too. What a surprise to hear the deadline is the day of the 1st leg at Beechwood. The whole situation reeks. Just seems like one blunder after another and its a sure fire way to re-ignite any past tensions there may have been.  I'm not saying hosting a big game is easy, i dont know the ins & outs of running a match but you never get all this drama from any other big games we've been involved in. Could certainly put a few punters off, which is a shame as it could/should be a big occassion and already tarred with drama. 

Simple answer is to hand the 900 back and then watch the big U turn.

[andy25]

27 minutes ago, Casper Wilson said:

Simple answer is to hand the 900 back and then watch the big U turn.

Agree  

[tyson1909]

41 minutes ago, Casper Wilson said:

Simple answer is to hand the 900 back and then watch the big U turn.

You'd like to think Darvel will agree to some sort of comprimise before it gets to that extreme measure. What usually happens in all ticket games, is there usually some sort of negotiation of some sort? Its just that i've never heard of such a thing like this before so i cant really say i'm in the know.

[Shanner]

There's still a couple of weeks for Darvel to stop their outbursts of wee man syndrome souring things any further. It's time for the organisers to adjudicate and tell them to stop coming the c**t. 

[jimbaxters]

Mon the Talbot!

[Shanner]

humming weather, so it won't be a classic, just get the pointos by any means and down the road 

[Connor7]

Tucker deserves some amount of credit. What a turnaround, I would make you favourites now going by form. Would love to see you in the lowland league, a club that everyone should be aspiring to at this level. 

[Shanner]

7 minutes ago, Connor7 said:

Tucker deserves some amount of credit. What a turnaround, I would make you favourites now going by form. Would love to see you in the lowland league, a club that everyone should be aspiring to at this level. 

Folk on here had him as a washed up yesterday's man earlier in the season. Mental!

[Connor7]

1 minute ago, Shanner said:

Folk on here had him as a washed up yesterday's man earlier in the season. Mental!

Imagine the board listened to them and sacked him 6 months ago. Credit to them for sticking by the man. The guy puts your Mick Kennedys to shame. A proper manager 

[Ben10]

Brilliant Bot! Bring on Darvel and Beith. 
 

Tucker some man hiy! 
 

Btw St Cadocs full staff away wi Scotland I Wis telt. Embarrassing from them, literally 4 non committee and maws and da’s. Lowland league for that Pish! 
 

 

[beaver watch]

Good result but could have been better, we were in their face in the first half and all over them. Second half we started like a different team although how the referee gave the first goal when there were two balls in play. Mastermind move by the gaffer changing the midfield gave us a bit of ooomph but the two goals we lost were genuine defensive errors. At the start of the season if the Saints had pulled level we would have crumpled. The mojo is back. we might not win the league but the foundations being laid on this new side is impressive.

[Shanner]

12 minutes ago, beaver watch said:

Good result but could have been better, we were in their face in the first half and all over them. Second half we started like a different team although how the referee gave the first goal when there were two balls in play. Mastermind move by the gaffer changing the midfield gave us a bit of ooomph but the two goals we lost were genuine defensive errors. At the start of the season if the Saints had pulled level we would have crumpled. The mojo is back. we might not win the league but the foundations being laid on this new side is impressive.

I thought we pulled ourselves together pretty well after the poor opening to the second half. St Cadocs were looking like the team with the momentum at that point. 

Four points from our next two games wouldn't be the end of the world but we're playing well enough overall to go into these matches confident.