The next phases of development will be intended to increase not only the capacity but the overall experience too. However, the bottom line will come down to financing and planning permission. An uncovered terrace is significantly easier to design, get approved and build than one with a roof. Especially considering the size it would need to be.Darlo_Pete wrote:Yes to build terracing I agree, but this is the first time I've heard it suggested that the new terracing may be covered.lo36789 wrote:Was this not something that was called out as the 'next step'?Darlo_Pete wrote:I've not heard of the terracing at the away end being terraced. But if it was built then you could always get the home fans to change ends and use the larger terrace as the home end.
The Blackwell Deal
-
- Posts: 1476
- Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:12 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: The Blackwell Deal
Re: The Blackwell Deal
A little bit but at least the people at Bishop seemed friendly, welcoming and happy to have us there.lo36789 wrote:It's clearly commercially sensitive. It would provide details over cost based and split of revenues which no sensible company would ever do.
When you spent money on a burger at Heritage Park the club didn't get a penny of it - did you complain then?
When you spent money on a beer at Heritage Park the club didn't get a penny out of it - did you complain or ask then?
it is a small but important thing. There seems to be little known about the terms of the deal by which we are grudgingly allowed to use BM which leads to speculation and suspicion. It also contaminates the relationship between the two clubs and within the fan base. That isnt good for the long term.lo36789 wrote:Why are people so fixated on revenues from a burger? The rugby club will have bought the supplies for the sales. They will have a mark up on it which takes into account their staff costs to prepare it etc. to arrive at the price they are prepared to sell it for for the effort of purchasing it and providing the service.
If we want to make 50p on a burger then we have to add 50p to the price of the burger - when that happened there was uproar that the football fans are being charged different to rugby fans.
Assume we get nothing from beer and food and anything we do get is a bonus. It ain't worth anything anyway. We pay the rugby club a fee for their service providing hospitality and we charge a mark up on top (that is worth money), we get percentage of advertising that we source (again worth it) and we keep 100% of gate receipts and raffle ticket etc. (That is our main source of revenue and always will be unless we get FL again).
Stop fretting over stuff that is immaterial. I know people think that burger sales at football grounds is some sort of gold mine but it really truly isn't.
Looking at it from the outside the rugby club seem jealous and petty. Things like the signage debacle and a less than welcoming attitude don't help.
My view is as I don't know what the arrangements are any money I donate will be via a mechanism that gives 100% of that money to the football club
Indeed - but I don't, often, have to make permanent additions ( at my cost) to the concert hall to put the concert on.divas wrote:Look at things the same as if we were hiring a room to put an event on- you pay a fee to hire the venue and then retain all of your ticket money. The venue then profits from food and drink sales and sometimes you can negotiate a small portion of the profit.
I am sure it must be commercially advantageous for them to let us use the site. Perhaps they need our money us as much as we need their ground.Spyman wrote:The irony in this sentence is astounding.RonJeremy wrote: I have a strong dislike towards the rugby club, long story short they have a real chip on their shoulder
If 'they' had a chip on their shoulder about 'us' being there then why did they agree to rent their ground out to us?
I am realistic - it isnt a perfect deal or even an ideal deal. It is, however, the best deal we have so it needs to work. That might mean more transparency about things that don't look important but are clearly concerning some people. Fan owned club and all that!
BTW - I am certainly not a chimp.
Re: The Blackwell Deal
Exactly, they needed us and we needed them.MKDarlo wrote:A little bit but at least the people at Bishop seemed friendly, welcoming and happy to have us there.lo36789 wrote:It's clearly commercially sensitive. It would provide details over cost based and split of revenues which no sensible company would ever do.
When you spent money on a burger at Heritage Park the club didn't get a penny of it - did you complain then?
When you spent money on a beer at Heritage Park the club didn't get a penny out of it - did you complain or ask then?
it is a small but important thing. There seems to be little known about the terms of the deal by which we are grudgingly allowed to use BM which leads to speculation and suspicion. It also contaminates the relationship between the two clubs and within the fan base. That isnt good for the long term.lo36789 wrote:Why are people so fixated on revenues from a burger? The rugby club will have bought the supplies for the sales. They will have a mark up on it which takes into account their staff costs to prepare it etc. to arrive at the price they are prepared to sell it for for the effort of purchasing it and providing the service.
If we want to make 50p on a burger then we have to add 50p to the price of the burger - when that happened there was uproar that the football fans are being charged different to rugby fans.
Assume we get nothing from beer and food and anything we do get is a bonus. It ain't worth anything anyway. We pay the rugby club a fee for their service providing hospitality and we charge a mark up on top (that is worth money), we get percentage of advertising that we source (again worth it) and we keep 100% of gate receipts and raffle ticket etc. (That is our main source of revenue and always will be unless we get FL again).
Stop fretting over stuff that is immaterial. I know people think that burger sales at football grounds is some sort of gold mine but it really truly isn't.
Looking at it from the outside the rugby club seem jealous and petty. Things like the signage debacle and a less than welcoming attitude don't help.
My view is as I don't know what the arrangements are any money I donate will be via a mechanism that gives 100% of that money to the football club
Indeed - but I don't, often, have to make permanent additions ( at my cost) to the concert hall to put the concert on.divas wrote:Look at things the same as if we were hiring a room to put an event on- you pay a fee to hire the venue and then retain all of your ticket money. The venue then profits from food and drink sales and sometimes you can negotiate a small portion of the profit.
I am sure it must be commercially advantageous for them to let us use the site. Perhaps they need our money us as much as we need their ground.Spyman wrote:The irony in this sentence is astounding.RonJeremy wrote: I have a strong dislike towards the rugby club, long story short they have a real chip on their shoulder
If 'they' had a chip on their shoulder about 'us' being there then why did they agree to rent their ground out to us?
I am realistic - it isnt a perfect deal or even an ideal deal. It is, however, the best deal we have so it needs to work. That might mean more transparency about things that don't look important but are clearly concerning some people. Fan owned club and all that!
BTW - I am certainly not a chimp.
Re: The Blackwell Deal
Blackwell Meadows is a suitable candidate for a Christmas special edition of one of those reality tv shows so perhaps we could get it sorted by filming DIY SOS Big Build (as we have done a lot of DIY funding and still in need of help). Otherwise what about Ugly ClubHouse, Lovely Ground