Update Required?

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

H1987
Posts: 1661
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by H1987 » Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:50 pm

divas wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:40 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:32 pm
if we could do it in a safe way to let a few home fans in, hopefully we can make it happen :thumbup: Letting a few hundred watch Shields or the Northern League, in much smaller venues, but forbidding it at our level is a nonsense. We can't survive on that alone (as DJ also noted) but I think it'd be something. I'm sure there would be 300 of our local, low-risk group fans who would certainly like it.
It’s absolutely pointless having 300 fans in at this sort of level and above. It would cost the club more to put a game on with those numbers than we’d make which is why it isn’t a solution that has been implemented any higher than league where that sort of number is the norm.
How? Our stewards and turnstile operators are volunteers. You can’t run hospitality anyway.

300 is better than 0. For the 300 who can go, for the players, and for the fans watching a stream.

H1987
Posts: 1661
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by H1987 » Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:52 pm

loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
He concedes that this money should maybe be coming from the FA and / or Premier League.

Tbh there’s an argument for supporting this level. He likens it to supporting the arts industry. Lots of people are employed at this level of football but no one is getting rich off of it. Some of our lads will no doubt rely on their footballing salaries to help cover the rent.

H1987
Posts: 1661
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by H1987 » Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:54 pm

EDJOHNS wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 4:36 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
As per the interview

- No move to the Arena if fans aren't allowed in - DJ notes 'why would we pay twice' in such a scenario
- If we go to 'covid capacity' then it will be at the Arena
- Has met with Darlington Rugby club and says they want to know what we need for the future (i.e. what would keep us there?)
- Sounds like the academy will be working more from Blackwell
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
- As with prior statements, he believes we should not and cannot commit to playing this season without guaranteed financial support

What smacked me in the face was "Has met with Darlington Rugby club and says they want to know what we need for the future (i.e. what would keep us there?)

To me that smacks of they think we may have other options opening up and are worried.
I do hope I am right.
That’s how I took it as well. Perhaps some concerns over an income stream being cut off, with this temporary move to the Arena they must fear us going on a permanent basis.

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13125
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by divas » Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:09 pm

H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:50 pm
divas wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:40 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:32 pm
if we could do it in a safe way to let a few home fans in, hopefully we can make it happen :thumbup: Letting a few hundred watch Shields or the Northern League, in much smaller venues, but forbidding it at our level is a nonsense. We can't survive on that alone (as DJ also noted) but I think it'd be something. I'm sure there would be 300 of our local, low-risk group fans who would certainly like it.
It’s absolutely pointless having 300 fans in at this sort of level and above. It would cost the club more to put a game on with those numbers than we’d make which is why it isn’t a solution that has been implemented any higher than league where that sort of number is the norm.
How? Our stewards and turnstile operators are volunteers. You can’t run hospitality anyway.

300 is better than 0. For the 300 who can go, for the players, and for the fans watching a stream.
Very few stewards these days are volunteers. Probably even less so during Covid when you factor in those that are, are mainly elderly and won’t want to put themselves at risk when they don’t have to. I certainly wouldn’t be doing the role that I did and I’m much younger than many. Additional paid resource would need to be brought in.

Match day costs are considerable, trust me.

The 300 would be season ticket holders who have already paid therefore there will be negligible revenue and plenty of cost.

H1987
Posts: 1661
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by H1987 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 6:47 am

divas wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:09 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:50 pm
divas wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:40 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:32 pm
if we could do it in a safe way to let a few home fans in, hopefully we can make it happen :thumbup: Letting a few hundred watch Shields or the Northern League, in much smaller venues, but forbidding it at our level is a nonsense. We can't survive on that alone (as DJ also noted) but I think it'd be something. I'm sure there would be 300 of our local, low-risk group fans who would certainly like it.
It’s absolutely pointless having 300 fans in at this sort of level and above. It would cost the club more to put a game on with those numbers than we’d make which is why it isn’t a solution that has been implemented any higher than league where that sort of number is the norm.
How? Our stewards and turnstile operators are volunteers. You can’t run hospitality anyway.

300 is better than 0. For the 300 who can go, for the players, and for the fans watching a stream.
Very few stewards these days are volunteers. Probably even less so during Covid when you factor in those that are, are mainly elderly and won’t want to put themselves at risk when they don’t have to. I certainly wouldn’t be doing the role that I did and I’m much younger than many. Additional paid resource would need to be brought in.

Match day costs are considerable, trust me.

The 300 would be season ticket holders who have already paid therefore there will be negligible revenue and plenty of cost.
Which match day costs do you think we are avoiding when playing behind closed doors exactly? I am aware that there are considerable costs, but apart from any stewarding and the bill to clean the toilets, we're going to be paying them anyway. Hospitality all has to be shut. Security and running costs will need to be paid even behind closed doors.

I'm not saying it's a money spinner, I'm saying it's the right thing to do for fans, for players and for the club, and I disagree it's going to lose more money than operating behind closed doors would anyway.

jjljks
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by jjljks » Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:08 am

Premier League clubs meeting with EFL today to discuss possible financial help, but no mention of help for NL clubs in trouble.

lo36789
Posts: 8832
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Update Required?

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:14 am

H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:54 pm
EDJOHNS wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 4:36 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
As per the interview

- No move to the Arena if fans aren't allowed in - DJ notes 'why would we pay twice' in such a scenario
- If we go to 'covid capacity' then it will be at the Arena
- Has met with Darlington Rugby club and says they want to know what we need for the future (i.e. what would keep us there?)
- Sounds like the academy will be working more from Blackwell
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
- As with prior statements, he believes we should not and cannot commit to playing this season without guaranteed financial support

What smacked me in the face was "Has met with Darlington Rugby club and says they want to know what we need for the future (i.e. what would keep us there?)

To me that smacks of they think we may have other options opening up and are worried.
I do hope I am right.
That’s how I took it as well. Perhaps some concerns over an income stream being cut off, with this temporary move to the Arena they must fear us going on a permanent basis.
I read it simply as the one person who used to use the line "the rugby club members said..." without actually ever asking the members has left. Ultimately replaced by other people nominated and voted for by that membership.

What actually transpires is that committee have been completely in the dark over anything and so they are genuinely trying to understand what are the problems that they keep hearing / reading about on certain facebook groups.

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am

Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

eek
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by eek » Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:32 am

Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would say the government is quite wrong in passing 100% of the buck to the Premier League but the Premier League can afford to pay some of the costs and should.

As for whether the Government should be paying towards keeping football going when no-one can actually see it, it seems completely pointless.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:42 am

Thinking off the top of my head - I wonder if the government will pressure the Premier League to help league clubs, then step in with a last ditch offer themselves for non league?
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

lo36789
Posts: 8832
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Update Required?

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:44 am

Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not one to stand up for tories usually but "quietly forgotten about"?

When exactly has been the right time to push for this since the election?

I don't care what the election pledge had said. Directing £150m at this sort of a review is a terrible prioritisation of spending right now.

poppyfield
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by poppyfield » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:14 am

Bit late in the day i know, but, there can't be an MP from any political party who doesn't have a local team which is been affected by this mess , so start lobbying your MP to get involved .
Help get the club back to Darlo by helping to spread the word about the "Back to Darlo!" fund. The image on the right will be constantly updated with the latest total so please feel free to use the image link below the thermometer on your own signatures, blogs, websites, etc.Image
Image link: http://www.mydarlo.co.uk/img/BTD-therm-350x100.jpg

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:31 am

lo36789 wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not one to stand up for tories usually but "quietly forgotten about"?

When exactly has been the right time to push for this since the election?

I don't care what the election pledge had said. Directing £150m at this sort of a review is a terrible prioritisation of spending right now.
I don’t think it is as they found £1.5 billion package to bail out the arts industry. Also they were in power for 3-4 months before COVID hit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

eek
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by eek » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:37 am

Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:31 am
lo36789 wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not one to stand up for tories usually but "quietly forgotten about"?

When exactly has been the right time to push for this since the election?

I don't care what the election pledge had said. Directing £150m at this sort of a review is a terrible prioritisation of spending right now.
I don’t think it is as they found £1.5 billion package to bail out the arts industry. Also they were in power for 3-4 months before COVID hit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Professional Arts have always been subsidised by the Government - professional sport has never been.

al_quaker
Posts: 5683
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by al_quaker » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am

loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
I was under the impression it would be based on 'lost revenue' i.e. we are missing out on crowds of ~1500 @ £14 for an adult ticket, so need that income replaced. Other clubs at this level are only missing out on crowds of 700 @£12, so need less money replacing. If true, seems a reasonable way to proceed.Those clubs which are reliant on owners putting cash in to make up the difference between gate receipts and expenditure will still be reliant on them.

That's if anything gets agreed. Not sure how we can play our FA cup match unless some financial bailout comes forward this week

lo36789
Posts: 8832
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Update Required?

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am

Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:31 am
lo36789 wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not one to stand up for tories usually but "quietly forgotten about"?

When exactly has been the right time to push for this since the election?

I don't care what the election pledge had said. Directing £150m at this sort of a review is a terrible prioritisation of spending right now.
I don’t think it is as they found £1.5 billion package to bail out the arts industry. Also they were in power for 3-4 months before COVID hit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rescue packages are fundamentally different to funding of a governance review.

They were but also Brexit was item number one on the manifesto. Again it's a case of prioritise. A manifesto is effectively a 5 year pledge not what they will do in 3 months.

I don't know I am not even sure right now I think a £150m spend on a governance review is even a priority for football never mind the country.

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:15 am

lo36789 wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:31 am
lo36789 wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not one to stand up for tories usually but "quietly forgotten about"?

When exactly has been the right time to push for this since the election?

I don't care what the election pledge had said. Directing £150m at this sort of a review is a terrible prioritisation of spending right now.
I don’t think it is as they found £1.5 billion package to bail out the arts industry. Also they were in power for 3-4 months before COVID hit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rescue packages are fundamentally different to funding of a governance review.

They were but also Brexit was item number one on the manifesto. Again it's a case of prioritise. A manifesto is effectively a 5 year pledge not what they will do in 3 months.

I don't know I am not even sure right now I think a £150m spend on a governance review is even a priority for football never mind the country.
The minister pretty much said it wasn’t on their agenda a couple of weeks ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:23 am

al_quaker wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am
loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
I was under the impression it would be based on 'lost revenue' i.e. we are missing out on crowds of ~1500 @ £14 for an adult ticket, so need that income replaced. Other clubs at this level are only missing out on crowds of 700 @£12, so need less money replacing. If true, seems a reasonable way to proceed.Those clubs which are reliant on owners putting cash in to make up the difference between gate receipts and expenditure will still be reliant on them.

That's if anything gets agreed. Not sure how we can play our FA cup match unless some financial bailout comes forward this week
Lost ticket revenue. That would seem the fairest way. also then all other taxes normally due from a club would be payable - hospitality and such I suppose is another matter.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:28 am

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
al_quaker wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am
loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
I was under the impression it would be based on 'lost revenue' i.e. we are missing out on crowds of ~1500 @ £14 for an adult ticket, so need that income replaced. Other clubs at this level are only missing out on crowds of 700 @£12, so need less money replacing. If true, seems a reasonable way to proceed.Those clubs which are reliant on owners putting cash in to make up the difference between gate receipts and expenditure will still be reliant on them.

That's if anything gets agreed. Not sure how we can play our FA cup match unless some financial bailout comes forward this week
Lost ticket revenue. That would seem the fairest way. also then all other taxes normally due from a club would be payable - hospitality and such I suppose is another matter.
Any ticket revenue subsidy from the govt or EPL would not be subject to tax and the associated revenue from food, hospitality etc would also be a hit to the govt in lost VAT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

onewayup
Posts: 1939
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by onewayup » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:30 am

Apparently the premiere league are meeting today to discuss whether they will help fund the pyramid system's. We await with baited breath.

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:43 am

Even if they agree in principle, there’s unlikely to be any firm commitment or details before we kick off our cup tie on Saturday. Tough decisions ahead for the board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2045
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Vodka_Vic » Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:38 am

DJ said each club had to fill in a questionnaire about how much revenue would be lost behind closed doors.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 6263
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by loan_star » Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:53 am

al_quaker wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am
loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
I was under the impression it would be based on 'lost revenue' i.e. we are missing out on crowds of ~1500 @ £14 for an adult ticket, so need that income replaced. Other clubs at this level are only missing out on crowds of 700 @£12, so need less money replacing. If true, seems a reasonable way to proceed.Those clubs which are reliant on owners putting cash in to make up the difference between gate receipts and expenditure will still be reliant on them.

That's if anything gets agreed. Not sure how we can play our FA cup match unless some financial bailout comes forward this week
I get that but it doesnt answer the question why should tax payers bail out something that is a loss maker just so the chairman has a hobby for the weekend?

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Quaker85 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:10 pm

loan_star wrote:
al_quaker wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:53 am
loan_star wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm
H1987 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
- Estimates the national leagues would need 30 million to keep all clubs afloat for the season
I wonder how this would work with clubs that are subsidised by a benefactor, i.e. not viable proposition without major backing?
Should the government be chucking taxpayers money at a rich mans play thing?
I was under the impression it would be based on 'lost revenue' i.e. we are missing out on crowds of ~1500 @ £14 for an adult ticket, so need that income replaced. Other clubs at this level are only missing out on crowds of 700 @£12, so need less money replacing. If true, seems a reasonable way to proceed.Those clubs which are reliant on owners putting cash in to make up the difference between gate receipts and expenditure will still be reliant on them.

That's if anything gets agreed. Not sure how we can play our FA cup match unless some financial bailout comes forward this week
I get that but it doesnt answer the question why should tax payers bail out something that is a loss maker just so the chairman has a hobby for the weekend?
We were a loss making club a couple of seasons ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Darlogramps
Posts: 5177
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Darlogramps » Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:46 pm

eek wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would say the government is quite wrong in passing 100% of the buck to the Premier League but the Premier League can afford to pay some of the costs and should.

As for whether the Government should be paying towards keeping football going when no-one can actually see it, it seems completely pointless.
Trouble is, if the Premier League see themselves as being used as a cash cow to prop up everyone else, they’ll refuse.

The Premier League don’t need the pyramid as much as they used to. So we need to be careful about viewing them purely in financial terms. Just saying: “You’ve got money, fund everyone else” will be counterproductive.

I fully understand why the Premier League clubs would question why it’s their responsibility to keep everyone else in business.
If ever you're bored or miserable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlZohZoadGY

LoidLucan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:29 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by LoidLucan » Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:34 pm

Would be a strange situation to see the Prem handing over an extra wad of cash to say Salford's collection of billionaires and millionaires. Odd times indeed.

lo36789
Posts: 8832
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Update Required?

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:38 pm

Manchester United would be effectively asked to give money to Birmingham City who rejected their offer for Jude Bellingham in the summer in favour of £30m from Dortmund.

eek
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by eek » Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:00 pm

Darlogramps wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:46 pm
eek wrote:
Quaker85 wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:07 am
Perhaps fans who live in Darlington would do well to write to Peter Gibson MP and remind him of his party’s election manifesto pledge to set up a £150M community assets fund to help set up community assets and fan led review of football governance which they have quietly forgotten about.

The government is quite wrong to be passing the buck to the Premier League imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would say the government is quite wrong in passing 100% of the buck to the Premier League but the Premier League can afford to pay some of the costs and should.

As for whether the Government should be paying towards keeping football going when no-one can actually see it, it seems completely pointless.
Trouble is, if the Premier League see themselves as being used as a cash cow to prop up everyone else, they’ll refuse.

The Premier League don’t need the pyramid as much as they used to. So we need to be careful about viewing them purely in financial terms. Just saying: “You’ve got money, fund everyone else” will be counterproductive.

I fully understand why the Premier League clubs would question why it’s their responsibility to keep everyone else in business.
I believe the options are either the Premier League clubs find the money or there isn't any...

Old Git
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:09 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Update Required?

Post by Old Git » Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:02 pm

I have thought for a while that we could fall between two stools here. Both the Government and Premier League feeling it is the others responsibility to help out. Bottom line is that each club needs to be soundly run and manage their finances according to their means.
Trouble is that unless you have a benefactor with deep pockets how can you budget for such uncertain times? I agree with DJ it is foolish to begin a season that you may not be able to finish because of lack of revenue. Cancelling the NLN season would be a big disappointment for all concerned but not as disastrous as starting and finding a number of clubs fold due to cash flow problems.

lo36789
Posts: 8832
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Update Required?

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:22 pm

Old Git wrote:
Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:02 pm
I agree with DJ it is foolish to begin a season that you may not be able to finish because of lack of revenue.
It isn't just foolish I thought it was illegal for a company director to knowing continue trading at the expense of creditors.

Post Reply