Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: scawsby steve on March 07, 2023, 09:41:10 pm
-
Good at rock concerts. Good at car boots. Good at gym membership.
Crap at football. Crap chairman. Crap management team. Crap players.
Have I missed anything out?
-
Crap Head of Football Operations? Perhaps harsh but what’s improved in his time so far?
-
The food?
-
Club zero options up front.. club 1 shot on target per game...club scraping the barrel for cheap options up front..
-
We're a sustainable club. That's commendable, genuinely.
We are also an atrociously run club.
-
Club no idea.
-
Will club Doncaster be sustainable when we are down to the hardcore of 1500 in the national league?
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
Yeah ok then.
-
Great technical players though, lovely three to five yard passes, don't know about heading and tackling though, and having a bit of energy effort and will to win.
-
Great technical players though, lovely three to five yard passes, don't know about heading and tackling though, and having a bit of energy effort and will to win.
Must have missed them. Unless you mean the ones to Harrogate players or into touch
-
In the first quarter of the second half the attacking stats changed noticeably more in towns favour. They either wanted it more, are more fitter , or determined, or a mix of these attributes, or rovers just gave up or got lazy or just don’t care.
Either way, that is not a game rovers should have lost on paper. And not by two late goals.
I’m utterly destitute. Not just about tonight. But for the future, and most worryingly , next season.
-
Sick of hearing about club chuffing doncaster.
It's b*llocks, and nothing good has ever come from it for ROVERS .
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
Who appointed RW, GM, and DS, that signed these players and coaches?
F*cking clueless, the lot of them.
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
Who appointed RW, GM, and DS, that signed these players and coaches?
F*cking clueless, the lot of them.
Same people who’ve employed all our managers for the last 15 years
To blame the board for a performance like that is ridiculous
-
So they shouldn’t take any responsibility for 3 abysmal seasons?
Ok.
-
The budget isn’t the main issue. It’s how much of it we waste that’s the problem.
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
Who appointed RW, GM, and DS, that signed these players and coaches?
F*cking clueless, the lot of them.
Same people who’ve employed all our managers for the last 15 years
To blame the board for a performance like that is ridiculous
I think you'll find that there was a very different looking board and chairman 15 years ago.
-
7 hours without a league goal
-
The budget isn’t the main issue. It’s how much of it we waste that’s the problem.
Look at our forwards or lack of.. we have no options.. you just have to look at what we have or don't have, lavery very similar to Miller.. Agard can't run.. we don't have the quality up top cos they cost too much.. we don't have the quality to play two up top.. and we badly need to. We therefore also have little option off the bench in terms of creativity either.
-
So they shouldn’t take any responsibility for 3 abysmal seasons?
Ok.
Yes they should
But not tonight’s performance
As gaz said the budget isn’t the issue it’s how we’ve been spending it
-
As I posted on another thread:
When are the Club Doncaster nay-sayers going to grasp what Club Doncaster actually does? It's not bloody rocket science.
-
The budget isn’t the main issue. It’s how much of it we waste that’s the problem.
This. In spades.
-
Sick of hearing about club chuffing doncaster.
It's b*llocks, and nothing good has ever come from it for ROVERS .
Really?
-
Sick of hearing about club chuffing doncaster.
It's b*llocks, and nothing good has ever come from it for ROVERS .
Without it we'd be in much worse shape I can guarantee that. We're not a well run club, but that's a separate issue from Club Doncaster. without it we'd be a skint poorly run club looking at the trapdoor to non league.
-
Sick of hearing about club chuffing doncaster.
It's b*llocks, and nothing good has ever come from it for ROVERS .
Without it we'd be in much worse shape I can guarantee that. We're not a well run club, but that's a separate issue from Club Doncaster. without it we'd be a skint poorly run club looking at the trapdoor to non league.
How's that?
Rovers can run a car boot, some 5 a side pitches and a gym without the dons and Belles to fund aswell, who were always independent anyway.
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Crikey are you serious? It covers the difference between the income the Football part of the club generates and the expenditure the football club spends on wages and overheads.
It is not rocket science for heaven sake.
If you can’t get a grasp of that then there is no hope. :facepalm:
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Crikey are you serious? It covers the difference between the income the Football part of the club generates and the expenditure the football club spends on wages and overheads.
It is not rocket science for heaven sake.
If you can’t get a grasp of that then there is no hope. :facepalm:
Look, what I'm asking is HOW it achieves what you are saying, not WHAT it does. It's not a difficult question.
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Imagine you own two shops. Both part of the same business. One makes good profit. The other runs at a loss. One balances out the other. But the badly performing shop is getting worse. It’s that simple.
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Imagine you own two shops. Both part of the same business. One makes good profit. The other runs at a loss. One balances out the other. But the badly performing shop is getting worse. It’s that simple.
It isn't that simple.
If you had a profitable shop, and took on a loss making shop, you would be out of pocket.
No one has answered HOW club doncaster makes up the shortfall
-
Tonight’s performance has absolutely nothing to do with club doncaster
The players we have are miles better than the players playing for harrogate and earning a lot more money.
Tonight’s shit show is all down to the players and the coaching team
Who appointed RW, GM, and DS, that signed these players and coaches?
F*cking clueless, the lot of them.
RW - Top of the division and nailed on for promotion.
Before that DM - Finally realising the potential of a sleeping giant where others have failed and nailed on for promotion.
Why are they achieving more at their current clubs than they did here? It can't be a coincidence.
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Imagine you own two shops. Both part of the same business. One makes good profit. The other runs at a loss. One balances out the other. But the badly performing shop is getting worse. It’s that simple.
It isn't that simple.
If you had a profitable shop, and took on a loss making shop, you would be out of pocket.
No one has answered HOW club doncaster makes up the shortfall
Club Doncaster is bringing in financial streams from outside the actual footballing side of the business to make up the loss on the footballing side that TB was financing out of his own pocket
-
Merchandising, gym memberships, event hires, including high-profile gigs which we'll get some decent money for, sponsorships, I assume some tax benefits as well although that's very much not my area. Imagine the egg chasing team and Belles are run much more cheaply and generate some profit as well.
Sure SM can provide more details but it's not exactly beyond belief that it makes money.
-
Was being the operative word. It's fantastic that we don't rely on the owners' personal cash for survival but it would seem that TB has been reticent to financially support the club for some time.
At the meet the owners event he said that he had been reminded that he had put £12.5m into the club as had Dick Watson making £25m overall. I'm as grateful as anyone for that.
Dick Watson died SIX years ago. The fact that TB has spent an equal amount would suggest that either DW was investing a much larger amount than TB or TB has not put a penny into the club for at least six years. Not that he needed to when we had transfer fees from Marquis and Whiteman to cover our trading losses rather than being reinvested into strengthening the squad.
-
And here was silly old me thinking not relying on handouts from the owner was what self sufficiency meant
-
Merchandising, gym memberships, event hires, including high-profile gigs which we'll get some decent money for, sponsorships, I assume some tax benefits as well although that's very much not my area. Imagine the egg chasing team and Belles are run much more cheaply and generate some profit as well.
Sure SM can provide more details but it's not exactly beyond belief that it makes money.
OK, thanks we're getting somewhere.
So from those revenue generating schemes, how many can ROVERS do on their own ?
I dare say all of them, and without the loss generators of the Belles and Dons.
Rovers would be better off if we didn't have the Belles and Dons to fund aswell.
-
Surely the belles and dons share the running costs of the stadium? Therefore saving money?
-
Merchandising, gym memberships, event hires, including high-profile gigs which we'll get some decent money for, sponsorships, I assume some tax benefits as well although that's very much not my area. Imagine the egg chasing team and Belles are run much more cheaply and generate some profit as well.
Sure SM can provide more details but it's not exactly beyond belief that it makes money.
OK, thanks we're getting somewhere.
So from those revenue generating schemes, how many can ROVERS do on their own ?
I dare say all of them, and without the loss generators of the Belles and Dons.
Rovers would be better off if we didn't have the Belles and Dons to fund aswell.
Are Belles and Dons loss generators? - Are they being funded rather then being similarly self sufficient?
-
Surely the belles and dons share the running costs of the stadium? Therefore saving money?
Belles don’t use the stadium, they play at Thorne
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
-
Merchandising, gym memberships, event hires, including high-profile gigs which we'll get some decent money for, sponsorships, I assume some tax benefits as well although that's very much not my area. Imagine the egg chasing team and Belles are run much more cheaply and generate some profit as well.
Sure SM can provide more details but it's not exactly beyond belief that it makes money.
OK, thanks we're getting somewhere.
So from those revenue generating schemes, how many can ROVERS do on their own ?
I dare say all of them, and without the loss generators of the Belles and Dons.
Rovers would be better off if we didn't have the Belles and Dons to fund aswell.
I support Doncaster Rovers. Them alone. Not interested in the Rugby team or the womens team.
If I cared about those two sports, I'd go and watch.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Some clubs benefit more than others. Rovers must be what 85% of that?
-
Ok oggy, I get it. No matter what is explained to you about CD you just want something to blame for the shit show that the Rovers' are at the moment. See ya.
-
Ok oggy, I get it. No matter what is explained to you about CD you just want something to blame for the shit show that the Rovers' are at the moment. See ya.
Dry your eyes princess. I like many others want to know what the benefit is of this fabulous system is? As yet, nobody has come up with anything that benefits Doncaster Rovers, not any other tam but Doncaster Rovers. We aren't Man City here building a global brand and franchise with the ladies team. We are the worst professional Yorkshire team, a second division ladies team and an average rugby team. There is no benefit. just because some of the lap dogs come out with their tales wagging after meeting the club and listening to their lies and pass it off as knowledge. Doesnt make it right.
As a businessman myself I fail to see any benefit commercially or revenue wise for Doncaster Rovers, the team we all support.
-
Was being the operative word. It's fantastic that we don't rely on the owners' personal cash for survival but it would seem that TB has been reticent to financially support the club for some time.
At the meet the owners event he said that he had been reminded that he had put £12.5m into the club as had Dick Watson making £25m overall. I'm as grateful as anyone for that.
Dick Watson died SIX years ago. The fact that TB has spent an equal amount would suggest that either DW was investing a much larger amount than TB or TB has not put a penny into the club for at least six years. Not that he needed to when we had transfer fees from Marquis and Whiteman to cover our trading losses rather than being reinvested into strengthening the squad.
That's it in a nutshell. Silent Majority doesn't like it when I bring up the "Five Year Plan" for Championship Football that was trumpeted by the board 5 years ago to much fanfare. That's presumably because it has been binned/buried and any mention of it is somewhat embarassing for the board given the current state of things. But either way, if you look at what Baldwin said at that time, he specifically said that the club was at that point self-sustaining. He went on to say that the Directors voluntarily CHOSE to inject a couple of million a season into the club on top of that because they WANT a Championship football club. For that reason we at that point had a budget that equated to top 6 in League 1. That is all fact based on direct quotes from Gavin Baldwin.
Fast forward pretty much exactly 5 years to now. The plan has failed (obviously) and we are told that the club is self-sustaining and that the Directors no longer have to put their hands in their pocket to fund the club. So basically, the only difference between now and then is that the Directors no longer choose to put any money in. We were a self-sustaining club 5 years ago! The only reason we were competing at the level we were is because the Directors chose to shoot for Championship football. Clearly they no longer have that level of ambition. I make no criticism of that in itself but it may help to manage expectations if instead of trumpeting how great it is that we're self-sustaining, the board instead admitted that there has been a subtsantial decline in investment from the owners over the last few years.
And i'll pre-empt those who will say "it isn't about the budget, it's about how you use it" with this little quote from Baldwin himself.....
“More often than not, budgets will equate to league position, roughly. There are anomalies such as Shrewsbury. That makes it exciting. Over five years your squad budget will tell you where you come in the league."
-
The five-year plan...good times.
Wonder what it is now? Avoid Conference football? Maintain attendances above 4000?
-
Ok oggy, I get it. No matter what is explained to you about CD you just want something to blame for the shit show that the Rovers' are at the moment. See ya.
Dry your eyes princess. I like many others want to know what the benefit is of this fabulous system is? As yet, nobody has come up with anything that benefits Doncaster Rovers, not any other tam but Doncaster Rovers. We aren't Man City here building a global brand and franchise with the ladies team. We are the worst professional Yorkshire team, a second division ladies team and an average rugby team. There is no benefit. just because some of the lap dogs come out with their tales wagging after meeting the club and listening to their lies and pass it off as knowledge. Doesnt make it right.
As a businessman myself I fail to see any benefit commercially or revenue wise for Doncaster Rovers, the team we all support.
Sorry you can't or won't accept the explanations of what CD brings to DRFC
As far as I am aware Harrogate is or was in Yorkshire maybe not in your world as it doesn't fit your narrative.
Wonder what constitutes being a businessman in your world is
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
-
Ok oggy, I get it. No matter what is explained to you about CD you just want something to blame for the shit show that the Rovers' are at the moment. See ya.
Dry your eyes princess. I like many others want to know what the benefit is of this fabulous system is? As yet, nobody has come up with anything that benefits Doncaster Rovers, not any other tam but Doncaster Rovers. We aren't Man City here building a global brand and franchise with the ladies team. We are the worst professional Yorkshire team, a second division ladies team and an average rugby team. There is no benefit. just because some of the lap dogs come out with their tales wagging after meeting the club and listening to their lies and pass it off as knowledge. Doesnt make it right.
As a businessman myself I fail to see any benefit commercially or revenue wise for Doncaster Rovers, the team we all support.
Sorry you can't or won't accept the explanations of what CD brings to DRFC
As far as I am aware Harrogate is or was in Yorkshire maybe not in your world as it doesn't fit your narrative.
Wonder what constitutes being a businessman in your world is
Slightly togue in cheeks after Harrogate battered us yesterday but you know my point, you're being deliberatly obtuse.
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
The club doesn't own stadium.
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
The club doesn't own stadium.
Yeah it does
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
The club doesn't own stadium.
Yeah it does
It's on a 99-year lease from DMBC.
-
Was being the operative word. It's fantastic that we don't rely on the owners' personal cash for survival but it would seem that TB has been reticent to financially support the club for some time.
At the meet the owners event he said that he had been reminded that he had put £12.5m into the club as had Dick Watson making £25m overall. I'm as grateful as anyone for that.
Dick Watson died SIX years ago. The fact that TB has spent an equal amount would suggest that either DW was investing a much larger amount than TB or TB has not put a penny into the club for at least six years. Not that he needed to when we had transfer fees from Marquis and Whiteman to cover our trading losses rather than being reinvested into strengthening the squad.
That's it in a nutshell. Silent Majority doesn't like it when I bring up the "Five Year Plan" for Championship Football that was trumpeted by the board 5 years ago to much fanfare. That's presumably because it has been binned/buried and any mention of it is somewhat embarassing for the board given the current state of things. But either way, if you look at what Baldwin said at that time, he specifically said that the club was at that point self-sustaining. He went on to say that the Directors voluntarily CHOSE to inject a couple of million a season into the club on top of that because they WANT a Championship football club. For that reason we at that point had a budget that equated to top 6 in League 1. That is all fact based on direct quotes from Gavin Baldwin.
Fast forward pretty much exactly 5 years to now. The plan has failed (obviously) and we are told that the club is self-sustaining and that the Directors no longer have to put their hands in their pocket to fund the club. So basically, the only difference between now and then is that the Directors no longer choose to put any money in. We were a self-sustaining club 5 years ago! The only reason we were competing at the level we were is because the Directors chose to shoot for Championship football. Clearly they no longer have that level of ambition. I make no criticism of that in itself but it may help to manage expectations if instead of trumpeting how great it is that we're self-sustaining, the board instead admitted that there has been a subtsantial decline in investment from the owners over the last few years.
And i'll pre-empt those who will say "it isn't about the budget, it's about how you use it" with this little quote from Baldwin himself.....
“More often than not, budgets will equate to league position, roughly. There are anomalies such as Shrewsbury. That makes it exciting. Over five years your squad budget will tell you where you come in the league."
I don't like it when you bring up the 5 year plan?
Can you show me some evidence of that?
-
Isn’t it on a 99 yr lease from DMBC?
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
What is your point though? You seem to be all over the place with the points you want to score.
And FYI, the lease is held by the Football Foundation and not DRFC.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
What is your point though? You seem to be all over the place with the points you want to score.
And FYI, the lease is held by the Football Foundation and not DRFC.
My point is that it is an asset, as per my original post.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
DMBC wouldnt care who owns the lease, it would just transfer to the new owners. thats how a lease works.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
DMBC wouldnt care who owns the lease, it would just transfer to the new owners. thats how a lease works.
The ground is leased. It is not an asset belonging to the club. They do not own it. It is presumably sat on DMBC's books, not the club's.
-
Was being the operative word. It's fantastic that we don't rely on the owners' personal cash for survival but it would seem that TB has been reticent to financially support the club for some time.
At the meet the owners event he said that he had been reminded that he had put £12.5m into the club as had Dick Watson making £25m overall. I'm as grateful as anyone for that.
Dick Watson died SIX years ago. The fact that TB has spent an equal amount would suggest that either DW was investing a much larger amount than TB or TB has not put a penny into the club for at least six years. Not that he needed to when we had transfer fees from Marquis and Whiteman to cover our trading losses rather than being reinvested into strengthening the squad.
That's it in a nutshell. Silent Majority doesn't like it when I bring up the "Five Year Plan" for Championship Football that was trumpeted by the board 5 years ago to much fanfare. That's presumably because it has been binned/buried and any mention of it is somewhat embarassing for the board given the current state of things. But either way, if you look at what Baldwin said at that time, he specifically said that the club was at that point self-sustaining. He went on to say that the Directors voluntarily CHOSE to inject a couple of million a season into the club on top of that because they WANT a Championship football club. For that reason we at that point had a budget that equated to top 6 in League 1. That is all fact based on direct quotes from Gavin Baldwin.
Fast forward pretty much exactly 5 years to now. The plan has failed (obviously) and we are told that the club is self-sustaining and that the Directors no longer have to put their hands in their pocket to fund the club. So basically, the only difference between now and then is that the Directors no longer choose to put any money in. We were a self-sustaining club 5 years ago! The only reason we were competing at the level we were is because the Directors chose to shoot for Championship football. Clearly they no longer have that level of ambition. I make no criticism of that in itself but it may help to manage expectations if instead of trumpeting how great it is that we're self-sustaining, the board instead admitted that there has been a subtsantial decline in investment from the owners over the last few years.
And i'll pre-empt those who will say "it isn't about the budget, it's about how you use it" with this little quote from Baldwin himself.....
“More often than not, budgets will equate to league position, roughly. There are anomalies such as Shrewsbury. That makes it exciting. Over five years your squad budget will tell you where you come in the league."
I don't like it when you bring up the 5 year plan?
Can you show me some evidence of that?
"Sack the Board" thread from mid February. Page 10 onwards.
I've also asked you at least three times to confirm where our budget now ranks by comparison to that Top 6 League 1 budget we then had. You have so far refused to answer the question.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
DMBC wouldnt care who owns the lease, it would just transfer to the new owners. thats how a lease works.
The ground is leased. It is not an asset belonging to the club. They do not own it. It is presumably sat on DMBC's books, not the club's.
We are essentially arguing the same thing. Yes DMBC is the landlord but Doncaster Rovers own the lease.
DMBC would not care if Doncaster Rovers owned it, I owned it or you owned it. The lease is for 9x years and there is a stadium here, as long as they get paid they don't care. Any new owner of Doncaster Rovers would just assume the lease for the land and the functionality of what is on it.
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
And your profit stream comes from?
TB is on hand to fund any shortfalls
Andvwhat would you do with these assets of training ground, we do mot own the ground
Dear me you say you are a business man it's not like saying buying and selling on E Bay is much of a business
-
He has a paste table at the Sunday car boot, Raven.
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
DMBC wouldnt care who owns the lease, it would just transfer to the new owners. thats how a lease works.
The ground is leased. It is not an asset belonging to the club. They do not own it. It is presumably sat on DMBC's books, not the club's.
We are essentially arguing the same thing. Yes DMBC is the landlord but Doncaster Rovers own the lease.
DMBC would not care if Doncaster Rovers owned it, I owned it or you owned it. The lease is for 9x years and there is a stadium here, as long as they get paid they don't care. Any new owner of Doncaster Rovers would just assume the lease for the land and the functionality of what is on it.
Yes, but for a prospective buyer of the club they end up being liable for the lease and upkeep of the ground, but not own the ground itself. This is not in and of itself necessarily a huge selling point.
-
If you dont want to invest in your football club, sell up or at least put it up for sale and move on.
People will say...'But who will buy it?'. Put it up and lets find out as this isn't working, its going backwards and fans, players and managers alike have had enough of it.
I'd rather have someone who cares about the club running the show than these figureheads acting as puppet masters for the constant stream of lies and rhetoric that they spiel out at every meeting that for 5 years has turned out to be utter rubbish and actually...lies.
Where have you been, the Clib is permanently up for sale to the right buyer as a businrss man would you buy a business with very few assets and the risk of having to fork out to keep the business afloat if needed and no forseeable profit from said purchase?
Not sure where you've been hiding. But we are self sustainable now have you not heard, thats the latest saying out of the club. Own our own stadium and training facilities too, I would call those assets.
And your profit stream comes from?
TB is on hand to fund any shortfalls
Andvwhat would you do with these assets of training ground, we do mot own the ground
Dear me you say you are a business man it's not like saying buying and selling on E Bay is much of a business
The profit stream comes from success in footballing terms. Entertaining football...more people watch, more food gets eaten and more shirts are sold. Basically, the exact opposite of what is happening now so the very thing TB is bemoaning and the club is championing will be totally irrelevant when people don't get season tickets and people stop turning up to watch the negative 541 football Danny 'Yeah, No' Schofiled keeps playing.
So yeah sustainable at the minute, not next season or the year after because you cant just stand still, you have to invest. If you dont want to, thats fine. Put it up for sale and go.
You keep the assets in some cases, others would come in and get rid of them. facts are... they are assets as I've said previously. The stadium is an asset as the football club (in whatever guise) has the lease for the stadium for the next ninety-something years, ownership of it makes no difference. Do you think the landlord would just boot out whoever takes over? bearing in mind the reason the lease was awarded in the first place is that it was hemorrhaging millions a year. We are doing them a favour by having the lease.
I'll ignore the business comment but anyone with half a brain knows that if you stand still and don't re-invest you go backwards as we can quite clearly see is happening right before our glorious eyes, on and off the pitch.
-
He has a paste table at the Sunday car boot, Raven.
More profit for Club Doncaster!!!!!!!!!
-
So are some peoples houses that are leasehold, does that mean you dont own them.
Leaseholder - Person who holds the lease for propery/land...owner.
Go on companies house and tell me who owns the stadium, is it the council or Doncaster Rovers?
I’m unsure. That’s why I put a question mark after my comment.
The Malkinson Family owned York Street in Boston and leased it out to BUFC. When the lease was up, they kicked the football club out on the premise it was being sold. it’s still up for sale , but that’s another story. And a local pub team play footy on it (no joke)
As leaseholder you hold the owership of whatever it is you are leasing. As soon as that lease is over (90 something years for Donny at the stadium),the lease transfers back to the original party.
Some do like in your comment, others renegotiate or sell it to the people who were leaseholders.
A similar transaction sometimes occurs on council houses for example if people have lived there for a long time.
The club/Foundation does not own the ground. It is leased. In order to sell the ground, they would have to buy it off DMBC in the first place.
DMBC wouldnt care who owns the lease, it would just transfer to the new owners. thats how a lease works.
The ground is leased. It is not an asset belonging to the club. They do not own it. It is presumably sat on DMBC's books, not the club's.
We are essentially arguing the same thing. Yes DMBC is the landlord but Doncaster Rovers own the lease.
DMBC would not care if Doncaster Rovers owned it, I owned it or you owned it. The lease is for 9x years and there is a stadium here, as long as they get paid they don't care. Any new owner of Doncaster Rovers would just assume the lease for the land and the functionality of what is on it.
Yes, but for a prospective buyer of the club they end up being liable for the lease and upkeep of the ground, but not own the ground itself. This is not in and of itself necessarily a huge selling point.
Thats exactly where we are now. How many people own a football club for ninety-something years? The point is moot.
-
Oggy do yourself a favour put the spade down after you've filled the hole in you persist in digging
-
Oggy do yourself a favour put the spade down after you've filled the hole in you persist in digging
Yeah, its tough being right on every point. With every point coming back being factually incorrect or totally inaccurate.
-
Yep you are not wrong there pity it's not you being right
-
Club Doncaster makes up for Rovers financial losses and, if we can sort out our horrific recruitment policy, gives us the funds to make it work.
Without it the horrific recruitment policy would still be here, and we'd still be shit, but we'd also be losing £2m a season.
How does it make up for rovers financial losses ?
Don't you think you ought to know all the facts before gobbing off about it?
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
You've still to explain how you know they are being funded and are a drain on resources.
Who's told you this?
-
You’re all pissing in the wind. You can’t explain anything to someone who doesn’t want to understand.
-
There is none so blind a he who will not see.
-
3 pages, no ones yet explained how club doncaster is a benefit to Rovers?
Surely DRFC can run the car boot, gym and 5 a side pitches alone, and without the rugby and ladies team diverting funds.
The Belles and Dons were always separate entities.
-
3 pages, no ones yet explained how club doncaster is a benefit to Rovers?
Surely DRFC can run the car boot, gym and 5 a side pitches alone, and without the rugby and ladies team diverting funds.
The Belles and Dons were always separate entities.
...and you've still not explained how you know they're diverting funds.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
You've still to explain how you know they are being funded and are a drain on resources.
Who's told you this?
OK. Let's say the Belles and Dons make a profit, ( highly unlikely) their profits go back into each individual club respectively, fair ?
What about the funds from the gym, car boot and pitches ?
Is that distributed evenly between 3 clubs? Or do Rovers get a bigger share ? Is that fair ?
My point is, if all 3 clubs were separate entities ( as they always were ) and Rovers ran the stadium, and collected all proceeds from said revenue streams, plus charged rent to the rugby club for use of the stadium.
Rovers would be in a FAR better position, granted Belles and Dons wouldn't be, but then I don't support them.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
You've still to explain how you know they are being funded and are a drain on resources.
Who's told you this?
OK. Let's say the Belles and Dons make a profit, ( highly unlikely) their profits go back into each individual club respectively, fair ?
What about the funds from the gym, car boot and pitches ?
Is that distributed evenly between 3 clubs? Or do Rovers get a bigger share ? Is that fair ?
My point is, if all 3 clubs were separate entities ( as they always were ) and Rovers ran the stadium, and collected all proceeds from said revenue streams, plus charged rent to the rugby club for use of the stadium.
Rovers would be in a FAR better position, granted Belles and Dons wouldn't be, but then I don't support them.
Right, so you've no idea if they are funded not. You've just made stuff up and kept posting it.
This is why people just end up ignoring you and you end up changing your user name again.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
Absolute poppycock.
And why should we spoon feed you when we've gone to the trouble of looking into and understanding all aspects of Club Doncaster, which go far further than just the Don's and Belle's participation.
You choose to criticise and make massive assumptions about things you say you know little about.
Gain an understanding first, then ask questions and only then can you put yourself in a position to criticise.
And, wtf has Club Doncaster got to do with the sh*t show last night? It's like blaming Patienceform for Rovers defeats.
-
It’s not just last night though. It’s the last 2 years, day in, day out disappointment.
-
It’s not just last night though. It’s the last 2 years, day in, day out disappointment.
So, what has that to do with Club Doncaster? Nothing. By all means let's keep it related to the football on the many other threads.
-
DBR, had Rovers been massively successful on the pitch over the last two years, instead of massively unsuccessful, would the club have put the reason for the success down to Club Doncaster?
-
DBR, had Rovers been massively successful on the pitch over the last two years, instead of massively unsuccessful, would the club have put the reason for the success down to Club Doncaster?
I doubt it. Club Doncaster has been operating for a number of years, certainly well before Fergie and McCann.
Even with success I suspect TB, DB & GB would allow the manager/coaches & players to take all the plaudits.
I hope I've understood your question correctly?
-
Interestingly, whilst looking back over the years to find information about the birth of Cub Doncaster, I came across this post from 2010
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=72034.0
It wasn't too long after this when JR and the KM2, as they were known then, were looking at ways of increasing revenue. If memory serves, when GB was brought on board and further ways of making the stadium complex generate more money were muted and a concept that became known as Club Doncaster was born.
There was such a furore about the rise in ST prices (they went up again after this) and even then, some familiar posters were saying the clubs marketing was p*ss poor and we don't hear enough from the board about future plans!
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=71171.0
Also interesting comments in the first thread above about the club being up for sale. No interested parties then or since
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
You've still to explain how you know they are being funded and are a drain on resources.
Who's told you this?
OK. Let's say the Belles and Dons make a profit, ( highly unlikely) their profits go back into each individual club respectively, fair ?
What about the funds from the gym, car boot and pitches ?
Is that distributed evenly between 3 clubs? Or do Rovers get a bigger share ? Is that fair ?
My point is, if all 3 clubs were separate entities ( as they always were ) and Rovers ran the stadium, and collected all proceeds from said revenue streams, plus charged rent to the rugby club for use of the stadium.
Rovers would be in a FAR better position, granted Belles and Dons wouldn't be, but then I don't support them.
Right, so you've no idea if they are funded not. You've just made stuff up and kept posting it.
This is why people just end up ignoring you and you end up changing your user name again.
So you can't answer the questions ? Thought not
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
Absolute poppycock.
And why should we spoon feed you when we've gone to the trouble of looking into and understanding all aspects of Club Doncaster, which go far further than just the Don's and Belle's participation.
You choose to criticise and make massive assumptions about things you say you know little about.
Gain an understanding first, then ask questions and only then can you put yourself in a position to criticise.
And, wtf has Club Doncaster got to do with the sh*t show last night? It's like blaming Patienceform for Rovers defeats.
So, again how is club doncaster a benefit to ROVERS ?
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
Absolute poppycock.
And why should we spoon feed you when we've gone to the trouble of looking into and understanding all aspects of Club Doncaster, which go far further than just the Don's and Belle's participation.
You choose to criticise and make massive assumptions about things you say you know little about.
Gain an understanding first, then ask questions and only then can you put yourself in a position to criticise.
And, wtf has Club Doncaster got to do with the sh*t show last night? It's like blaming Patienceform for Rovers defeats.
So, again how is club doncaster a benefit to ROVERS ?
It keeps them running.
-
Interestingly, whilst looking back over the years to find information about the birth of Cub Doncaster, I came across this post from 2010
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=72034.0
It wasn't too long after this when JR and the KM2, as they were known then, were looking at ways of increasing revenue. If memory serves, when GB was brought on board and further ways of making the stadium complex generate more money were muted and a concept that became known as Club Doncaster was born.
There was such a furore about the rise in ST prices (they went up again after this) and even then, some familiar posters were saying the clubs marketing was p*ss poor and we don't hear enough from the board about future plans!
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=71171.0
Also interesting comments in the first thread above about the club being up for sale. No interested parties then or since
I always find it interesting to read stuff that was written a few years ago.
I noticed how many of those posters aren’t writing on the forum these days.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
Absolute poppycock.
And why should we spoon feed you when we've gone to the trouble of looking into and understanding all aspects of Club Doncaster, which go far further than just the Don's and Belle's participation.
You choose to criticise and make massive assumptions about things you say you know little about.
Gain an understanding first, then ask questions and only then can you put yourself in a position to criticise.
And, wtf has Club Doncaster got to do with the sh*t show last night? It's like blaming Patienceform for Rovers defeats.
So, again how is club doncaster a benefit to ROVERS ?
Nice try. Well within your remit to do some research then ask questions. Try researching Club Doncaster Foundation and Club Doncaster Sports College.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
You've still to explain how you know they are being funded and are a drain on resources.
Who's told you this?
OK. Let's say the Belles and Dons make a profit, ( highly unlikely) their profits go back into each individual club respectively, fair ?
What about the funds from the gym, car boot and pitches ?
Is that distributed evenly between 3 clubs? Or do Rovers get a bigger share ? Is that fair ?
My point is, if all 3 clubs were separate entities ( as they always were ) and Rovers ran the stadium, and collected all proceeds from said revenue streams, plus charged rent to the rugby club for use of the stadium.
Rovers would be in a FAR better position, granted Belles and Dons wouldn't be, but then I don't support them.
Right, so you've no idea if they are funded not. You've just made stuff up and kept posting it.
This is why people just end up ignoring you and you end up changing your user name again.
So you can't answer the questions ? Thought not
Still waiting for you to explain how much worthless shares are worth.
-
I will hold my hand up and say I was very dubious about Club Doncaster (probably because I didn't really understand everything involved) but now I don't see what all the fuss is about.
If CD is a profitable, expanding organisation whose profits go to funding DRFC then I cannot see a problem.
What I am less happy about is now with the money from CD putting us on a sustainable footing TB feels the need to withdraw his financial contribution.
I remember years ago at a MTO meeting TB saying, eventually we will find a level at which we are comfortable. It certainly looks like he is happy where we are and we have reached that level.
-
The trouble with that is, if TB is happy where we are now, having reached our level, the fan base will decrease resulting in us being above our level, financially. The result of that would be to move down to a lower level....... And so on.
-
The trouble with that is, if TB is happy where we are now, having reached our level, the fan base will decrease resulting in us being above our level, financially. The result of that would be to move down to a lower level....... And so on.
Which is precisely why I contest the claim that the club has become sustainable, they certainly cannot know that the club will maintain it's revenues from ticket sales. The best they can claim on the financial front is that the club has broken even. Next season and every other season to come will be a new start financially and breaking even will depend on all income streams including ticket sales irrespective of the level we are playing at. And given our very recent history it would seem the club masters don't consider the level we play at to be a priority.
-
Club Doncaster is one of the few things going well, it isn’t a problem.
Our problems lie on the pitch and having an inexperienced manager, that is playing a very negative formation,that isn’t working .
It’s ok to have a way of playing but if you see it’s not working , you have to adapt to what you have.
I see no fire in the players bellies. Refusing to get beat. We are rolling over. The manager needs to get his head out of dreamland, and get into the real world. The board have made the same mistake they did with McSheffrey and for some reason thought giving a baby in managers terms the job, madness. They aren’t saving money appointing cheap they are losing money.
-
I will hold my hand up and say I was very dubious about Club Doncaster (probably because I didn't really understand everything involved) but now I don't see what all the fuss is about.
If CD is a profitable, expanding organisation whose profits go to funding DRFC then I cannot see a problem.
What I am less happy about is now with the money from CD putting us on a sustainable footing TB feels the need to withdraw his financial contribution.
I remember years ago at a MTO meeting TB saying, eventually we will find a level at which we are comfortable. It certainly looks like he is happy where we are and we have reached that level.
Well that's the conundrum. TB provides the insurance should the budgeting not add up. I can understand the feeling that he, and the other owners, should want to be more proactive than reactive however, even if he was to say 'I'll put in £1m a year, the outcome could be the same come the end of year accounts when there's a shortfall (or worse as it did back then when we eventually had to cut our cloth accordingly)
Going back to that post from 2010, it stands up to my understanding that the three owners agreed to divi up up to £1m each per season, hence the reference to £6m in two seasons.
However, unfortunately and sadly it became unsustainable for JR and we lost DW (RIP) along the way, so TB was left holding the baby. Club Dobcaster has made up some of that shortfall. However, until recently it's widely believed income comes from the following main sources.
Fans (ticket sales & commercial/retail)
Owners contribution
Club Doncaster
EFL loyalty payments, prize money etc
TV money Inc cut from iFollow
Now, I always felt the contributions from us the fans and the owners was a reasonably balanced partnership in that annual ticket sales etc were in the region of £3.5m and the owners around £1m each. Now of course, ticket sales etc are much less both with reduced prices (again, TB fully committed to making the footy affordable for all) and reduced attendances.
TB's comments at the meet the owners about bringing other fans have been scrutinised but I guess he was really saying, over a long period of time I've done my bit but I could do with some help if we could bring in more through the turnstiles. (Basically the same message JR was delivering in 2010 onwards but in different ways)
Of course, given our current plight, then that isn't very likely, very soon.
I have an idea I've been brewing for sometime which might help close the gap in the perception of things and go some way to rekindling the partnership by incentivising both fans and owners alike to contribute, which I'm considering discussing with the club.
In the meantime, non of the above is likely to help or wash much with some of our fan base but nobody, other than the owners and us, are going to change things for us.
-
Without Club Doncaster the Rovers, Dons and Belles would each need to have their own operating staff, Ticket office, Commercial, Publicity, Admin', Groundstaff etc. With CD there is just one set of staff doing the work for all three clubs. There is a very significant (and very obvious) financial advantage to that which each club benefits from.
Why is that an advantage to Rovers, when the football club could just do it on their own without the Belles and Dons draining resources ?
Because then all three entities are funding one set of people between them instead of three sets of people in total.
Please tell me that you can understand that the cost of one set of people is lower than three sets of people.
No, Belles and Dons aren't funding anything, only a drain on resources.
The extra staff that comes with those clubs are also a drain.
Belles and Dons are set their own financial targets which they have to cover themselves, mostly through arranging their own separate sponsorship deals.
They also have to cover their own costs - the facilities do not come free.
They also use volunteers for many roles, thereby saving money (and also work) for themselves and Club Don.
Belles players don’t get paid.
Hardly a drain.
if there is a drain on Rovers’ income, then it is a function of their own performances. You’d be better off targeting your angst in that direction rather than shooting off into the dark.
-
Increasing the prices to what we did in the championship was a stupid mistake aswell. It knocked the crowds we'd built up simply because it was too expensive to watch a game in this area. We could have kicked on with 10k+ crowds had we not priced so many out.
As for now, club Doncaster is not the cause of our failures on the pitch. Poor strategy, poor management and failure to add funding on top of the success of club Doncaster are much bigger issues.