|
Post by PessimistGas on Nov 22, 2017 19:33:28 GMT
I don't think it is misconception, more a difference of opinion. Like putting the roof on before you have built the foundations. We have twice the gates of the likes of Shrewsbury and Scunny but can't compete, why would it be any different if we got to the Championship by some miracle? It's called prioritising your available resources plus we would get an extra 4.5 million in payouts from efl So, pump the money into the team instead, it's not guaranteed to pay off, then you are back to square 1 with £2m of extra debt we are being charged interest on. Better to own a crap training ground than no training ground IMO.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:01:03 GMT
It's called prioritising your available resources plus we would get an extra 4.5 million in payouts from efl So, pump the money into the team instead, it's not guaranteed to pay off, then you are back to square 1 with £2m of extra debt we are being charged interest on. Better to own a crap training ground than no training ground IMO. You can have the best training facilities and ground in the world but at the end of the day it's success on the field that counts and puts bums on seats and that in itself generates more cash and the better the results the higher up the pyramid you get and more revenue you get from television money
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 20:09:23 GMT
So, pump the money into the team instead, it's not guaranteed to pay off, then you are back to square 1 with £2m of extra debt we are being charged interest on. Better to own a crap training ground than no training ground IMO. You can have the best training facilities and ground in the world but at the end of the day it's success on the field that counts and puts bums on seats and that in itself generates more cash and the better the results the higher up the pyramid you get and more revenue you get from television money The idea behind improving the training facilities is presumably to enhance the chances of success on the field.
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Nov 22, 2017 20:17:04 GMT
So, pump the money into the team instead, it's not guaranteed to pay off, then you are back to square 1 with £2m of extra debt we are being charged interest on. Better to own a crap training ground than no training ground IMO. You can have the best training facilities and ground in the world but at the end of the day it's success on the field that counts and puts bums on seats and that in itself generates more cash and the better the results the higher up the pyramid you get and more revenue you get from television money The best ground and facilities doesn't guarantee success in the short term but it generates more revenue makes it likely and sustainable over the long term. It's chicken and egg. Frankly, £2m is bugger all in scheme of things, but maybe it is worth throwing it at the first team and seeing if we can fluke the Championship as the we aren't going to get the infrastructure investment we so desperately need. I think I'd still rather see something tangible. Most of all I am down hearted to the point of being upset that we are having this conversation after the optimism of 18 months ago. I'm not sure what the AQ's are hoping to get out of this and what the end game is here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 21:33:53 GMT
You can have the best training facilities and ground in the world but at the end of the day it's success on the field that counts and puts bums on seats and that in itself generates more cash and the better the results the higher up the pyramid you get and more revenue you get from television money The best ground and facilities doesn't guarantee success in the short term but it generates more revenue makes it likely and sustainable over the long term. It's chicken and egg. Frankly, £2m is bugger all in scheme of things, but maybe it is worth throwing it at the first team and seeing if we can fluke the Championship as the we aren't going to get the infrastructure investment we so desperately need. I think I'd still rather see something tangible. Most of all I am down hearted to the point of being upset that we are having this conversation after the optimism of 18 months ago. I'm not sure what the AQ's are hoping to get out of this and what the end game is here. Agreed and I don't think they know either unless all this upgrading of the infrastructure and the plans for the mem and colony is designed to make the club attractive to either new owners or investors you pay your money and take your chance on which is right but something is in the air
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 22, 2017 22:43:43 GMT
The reason I brought the Colony training ground up again is because Wael is reported to have told supporters on Saturday that "it will get built" and then a rumour appeared about the development being downgraded to virtually the same as the amateur rugby club had gained permission for in the past. This all smacks of him not wishing to lose face on the training ground and not really having any defined plan of where we are going or how we are going to get there. As Padstow says above, when you have limited resources you must prioritize how you use them and to me the priority would be getting the club into profit or at least closer to break even as soon as possible. The alternative is to carry on losing money and having to loan even more from Dwane Sports in a vicious circle which can only drag us downward.
What I am saying is that ownership of a training ground is not essential and that we should be able to find an acceptable facility to lease if we start looking now. An upgrade of the Mem is also not essential in the short term because if we have to borrow to make the upgrade (if that is even possible) the cost of servicing that debt will outweigh any extra revenue for many years to come.
What is essential IMO is to reduce the trading losses as quickly as possible so that they do not overwhelm the club. Because of the way the EFL prize money is structured there is a huge incentive to get to the Championship and for a club like Rovers, which is financed by interest bearing debt, that seems to be the only way to avoid unsustainable losses. Once we are there, and turning in a profit, we are in a far better position to move forward with longer term infrastructure investments and source the funding for them.
The general opinion of fans is that if you have a piece of land and spend £2 million on it then the developed land will suddenly be worth £3 million. My experience tells me that this is not the case and the sale value of the land may hardly increase at all. The reason is that the market for a sports training ground developed to amateur rugby club standard is limited and there may not be anyone around willing to pay £3 million for it. So the only financial benefit is a marginal saving on the cost of leasing a training ground from someone else. To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely.
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Nov 22, 2017 22:57:23 GMT
To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely. Would it really? It's peanuts, how much has Lansdown p*ssed away over the years trying to get out of league 1?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 22, 2017 23:06:27 GMT
To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely. Would it really? It's peanuts, how much has Lansdown p*ssed away over the years trying to get out of league 1? That's why I said wisely. There are precedents like Burton Albion and if Rovers could get there we would be in a better position than them because of the crowd potential we have even with our current facilities at the Mem.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 23:07:35 GMT
I cant do links but i read an article explaining that at least 15 of the clubs in the championship are paying more than 100% of their total turnover on staff wages with brentford at 160% and city 122%. Very few are anywhere near a profit. Its just a good indication in my view of what were up against if we really expect to get anywhere near that division.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 23:19:48 GMT
When we first heard about the Colony training ground it was going to be a state of the art facility similar to Fleetwood Town’s which cost £7 million. The latest rumours are that Dwane Sports will only invest £2 million which, given the lack of basic services on site, will mean the Rovers training ground will have to be be modeled on the original plans which were drawn up for an amateur rugby club. In other words it will be "not fit for purpose" for an ambitious professional football club. My advice is to immediately set about finding a suitable training ground to lease or share when the current facility needs to be vacated next year. Forget about the Colony training ground, mothball it and save the money for the more important priority of turning around the football club. When you have a loss making business the first aim must be to stem the losses and set the business on the road to profitability. Long term capital investments like a training ground, which eat up much needed cash and for which there is no short term return, can only be contemplated when the business is on a financially stable footing. Reading the forums there is a great misconception among fans which comes from constantly being told that it’s no use getting to the Championship with the facilities we currently have. I don’t think that is true and I don’t think fans realize that getting to the Championship is probably the only way to return to profitability in the short term. The EFL payments in League 1 total £1.30 million but in the Championship they are £6.4 million and that extra £5 million per year makes all the difference, Burton for example made £1.35 million profit last season and Rovers are in a much better position than them because we could, and probably would, get double their crowds. Once in the Championship the challenge is to deploy good management to make the best use of the extra revenue so that you can maintain that status and build your longer term infrastructure from a strong base. If there really is £2 million available then in my view the majority of it should be invested in the team. I don't think it is misconception, more a difference of opinion. Like putting the roof on before you have built the foundations. We have twice the gates of the likes of Shrewsbury and Scunny but can't compete, why would it be any different if we got to the Championship by some miracle? I wouldn’t look at Scunthorpe, that’ll go horribly wrong in the next 2-3 years.
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Nov 22, 2017 23:23:59 GMT
Would it really? It's peanuts, how much has Lansdown p*ssed away over the years trying to get out of league 1? That's why I said wisely. There are precedents like Burton Albion and if Rovers could get there we would be in a better position than them because of the crowd potential we have even with our current facilities at the Mem. Basically hoping for a miracle then, though slightly less of miracle than otherwise would be the case. We already have top 6 league 1 crowds but can't compete with clubs half our size - £2m isn't going to go that far. How much interest did you say Burton were paying again?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 23:37:45 GMT
What we need is a new ground or an amazing redevelopment of the mem,thats where any major funds should go imo. Without a new ground with proper commercial outlets at that ground were league 1 at best but more likely a league 2 club.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Nov 23, 2017 6:51:30 GMT
Oops - Fleetwood are in Division 1... Apart from that everything else makes sense. Apart from the fact the owner rents offices at the stadium and training ground at exorbitant rents to beat the ftp and reduce losses Any chance Hani will rent the Santa grotto for £1m this xmas ?
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,219
|
Post by eppinggas on Nov 23, 2017 8:59:08 GMT
Hang on. Can someone let me know if I'm missing something? If we are now looking at a scaled down £2mil spend on the Colony based on a previous Planning permission (which is still in place) - what is stopping us actually starting the building work?
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Nov 23, 2017 9:28:45 GMT
The reason I brought the Colony training ground up again is because Wael is reported to have told supporters on Saturday that "it will get built" and then a rumour appeared about the development being downgraded to virtually the same as the amateur rugby club had gained permission for in the past. This all smacks of him not wishing to lose face on the training ground and not really having any defined plan of where we are going or how we are going to get there. As Padstow says above, when you have limited resources you must prioritize how you use them and to me the priority would be getting the club into profit or at least closer to break even as soon as possible. The alternative is to carry on losing money and having to loan even more from Dwane Sports in a vicious circle which can only drag us downward. What I am saying is that ownership of a training ground is not essential and that we should be able to find an acceptable facility to lease if we start looking now. An upgrade of the Mem is also not essential in the short term because if we have to borrow to make the upgrade (if that is even possible) the cost of servicing that debt will outweigh any extra revenue for many years to come. What is essential IMO is to reduce the trading losses as quickly as possible so that they do not overwhelm the club. Because of the way the EFL prize money is structured there is a huge incentive to get to the Championship and for a club like Rovers, which is financed by interest bearing debt, that seems to be the only way to avoid unsustainable losses. Once we are there, and turning in a profit, we are in a far better position to move forward with longer term infrastructure investments and source the funding for them. The general opinion of fans is that if you have a piece of land and spend £2 million on it then the developed land will suddenly be worth £3 million. My experience tells me that this is not the case and the sale value of the land may hardly increase at all. The reason is that the market for a sports training ground developed to amateur rugby club standard is limited and there may not be anyone around willing to pay £3 million for it. So the only financial benefit is a marginal saving on the cost of leasing a training ground from someone else. To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely. Your last paragraph sums up why personally I was happy for the land at UWE to be leased rather than owned. Under that circumstance once the stadium is in place we're the only possible users of it and any future owners would have to keep a stadium on site or ask the leaseholder to agree to a change of use. A pity that option now appears to be dead.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2017 9:42:20 GMT
Apart from the fact the owner rents offices at the stadium and training ground at exorbitant rents to beat the ftp and reduce losses Any chance Hani will rent the Santa grotto for £1m this xmas ? Trust you to bring a sensible discussion down to the level of the other forum
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Nov 23, 2017 10:30:55 GMT
Any chance Hani will rent the Santa grotto for £1m this xmas ? Trust you to bring a sensible discussion down to the level of the other forum What do you mean, Sensible is my middle name ! If you want sensible best go check the planning portal sometime next week......
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Nov 23, 2017 10:36:14 GMT
The reason I brought the Colony training ground up again is because Wael is reported to have told supporters on Saturday that "it will get built" and then a rumour appeared about the development being downgraded to virtually the same as the amateur rugby club had gained permission for in the past. This all smacks of him not wishing to lose face on the training ground and not really having any defined plan of where we are going or how we are going to get there. As Padstow says above, when you have limited resources you must prioritize how you use them and to me the priority would be getting the club into profit or at least closer to break even as soon as possible. The alternative is to carry on losing money and having to loan even more from Dwane Sports in a vicious circle which can only drag us downward. What I am saying is that ownership of a training ground is not essential and that we should be able to find an acceptable facility to lease if we start looking now. An upgrade of the Mem is also not essential in the short term because if we have to borrow to make the upgrade (if that is even possible) the cost of servicing that debt will outweigh any extra revenue for many years to come. What is essential IMO is to reduce the trading losses as quickly as possible so that they do not overwhelm the club. Because of the way the EFL prize money is structured there is a huge incentive to get to the Championship and for a club like Rovers, which is financed by interest bearing debt, that seems to be the only way to avoid unsustainable losses. Once we are there, and turning in a profit, we are in a far better position to move forward with longer term infrastructure investments and source the funding for them. The general opinion of fans is that if you have a piece of land and spend £2 million on it then the developed land will suddenly be worth £3 million. My experience tells me that this is not the case and the sale value of the land may hardly increase at all. The reason is that the market for a sports training ground developed to amateur rugby club standard is limited and there may not be anyone around willing to pay £3 million for it. So the only financial benefit is a marginal saving on the cost of leasing a training ground from someone else. To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely. Your last paragraph sums up why personally I was happy for the land at UWE to be leased rather than owned. Under that circumstance once the stadium is in place we're the only possible users of it and any future owners would have to keep a stadium on site or ask the leaseholder to agree to a change of use. A pity that option now appears to be dead. was/is the problem leasing the land, or the income BRFC would get to keep?
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Nov 23, 2017 12:43:40 GMT
Your last paragraph sums up why personally I was happy for the land at UWE to be leased rather than owned. Under that circumstance once the stadium is in place we're the only possible users of it and any future owners would have to keep a stadium on site or ask the leaseholder to agree to a change of use. A pity that option now appears to be dead. was/is the problem leasing the land, or the income BRFC would get to keep?
Either one, both or neither. No one knows.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Nov 23, 2017 13:53:56 GMT
The reason I brought the Colony training ground up again is because Wael is reported to have told supporters on Saturday that "it will get built" and then a rumour appeared about the development being downgraded to virtually the same as the amateur rugby club had gained permission for in the past. This all smacks of him not wishing to lose face on the training ground and not really having any defined plan of where we are going or how we are going to get there. As Padstow says above, when you have limited resources you must prioritize how you use them and to me the priority would be getting the club into profit or at least closer to break even as soon as possible. The alternative is to carry on losing money and having to loan even more from Dwane Sports in a vicious circle which can only drag us downward. What I am saying is that ownership of a training ground is not essential and that we should be able to find an acceptable facility to lease if we start looking now. An upgrade of the Mem is also not essential in the short term because if we have to borrow to make the upgrade (if that is even possible) the cost of servicing that debt will outweigh any extra revenue for many years to come. What is essential IMO is to reduce the trading losses as quickly as possible so that they do not overwhelm the club. Because of the way the EFL prize money is structured there is a huge incentive to get to the Championship and for a club like Rovers, which is financed by interest bearing debt, that seems to be the only way to avoid unsustainable losses. Once we are there, and turning in a profit, we are in a far better position to move forward with longer term infrastructure investments and source the funding for them. The general opinion of fans is that if you have a piece of land and spend £2 million on it then the developed land will suddenly be worth £3 million. My experience tells me that this is not the case and the sale value of the land may hardly increase at all. The reason is that the market for a sports training ground developed to amateur rugby club standard is limited and there may not be anyone around willing to pay £3 million for it. So the only financial benefit is a marginal saving on the cost of leasing a training ground from someone else. To me, spending £2 million on this would be a mistake when that money, if used wisely, could turn the club around completely. Interesting stuff. I'd love to see proper numbers behind either option.
|
|