Pilgrims' Patter

The Forum => The B-Ark => Topic started by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 04:45:06 PM

Title: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 04:45:06 PM
So who's going to offer up the excuses for that?

Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Pride of Lincolnshire on July 16, 2011, 04:56:27 PM
In all seriousness, pre season games aren't a true measure of a squad. You've got to give the team a couple of months in the league before you can truely gauge how they're performing. Although I'm not impressed by some of the signings, it's only fair we do give every player a fair shot. Let's not be too hasty in shooting the players down please.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 05:02:11 PM
2 months in and your season's defined.

I'm seriously worried the good work of the last 2 years is going to be ruined in one summer.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Mickey Nuttells Hair on July 16, 2011, 05:09:28 PM
It will only be ruined if we are relegated.  I don't think that will happen, mainly based on some of the shit we saw last season.

I'm only concerned by the JJ signing but as someone else mentioned the exact same was being said about Laurie last season.

Today's result is embarrassing, nothing more.  Hopefully will kick the players and managers into gear so the games that matter don't go the same way.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: father Ted on July 16, 2011, 05:11:42 PM
   Must be the 1st time Town have beaten Utd  for a while .
        Plenty of time ( a month ) to get the right players in   .
  Still , would have expected an away goal or two  at  Tattershall  Rd  .
    
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Adam, with the greatest of respect relegation should not even be an issue.

Say what you like about H&S but they left terrific foundations here, the play off defeat was a disappointment be we should look to build on that and push on next season.A play off berth should be seen as the absolute minimum requirement every season while we are below the Conference National, the status of the club demands it.

Sadly all I see is backward steps resigning old players and players who were not quite good enough 1st time around. I'm worried the progress off the field (which has been superb in every department) will be hampered by a lack of progress on it.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Mickey Nuttells Hair on July 16, 2011, 05:21:12 PM
The only reason I mention the R word is that's my definition of failure really.

Also to quote Lee Carter directly 'build a club off the field to sustain Conference football and leave the football side to catch up'. A man to be listened to and hopefully one whose club we can mirror, so no worries if this season is not ours for promotion.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 16, 2011, 05:23:07 PM
Adam, with the greatest of respect relegation should not even be an issue.

Say what you like about H&S but they left terrific foundations here, the play off defeat was a disappointment be we should look to build on that and push on next season.A play off berth should be seen as the absolute minimum requirement every season while we are below the Conference National, the status of the club demands it.

Sadly all I see is backward steps resigning old players and players who were not quite good enough 1st time around. I'm worried the progress off the field (which has been superb in every department) will be hampered by a lack of progress on it.

Since Your demands are so high maybe its time you put your hand in your pocket and put in the exrta  2 to 300 hundred Thousend so we can meet your requirments.

You talk of H&S from last year and the year before and now going back. Last year and the year before the team cost to much. We Made a loss
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 05:26:24 PM
Can anyone who went tell us how the game actully was.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 05:31:54 PM
Adam, with the greatest of respect relegation should not even be an issue.

Say what you like about H&S but they left terrific foundations here, the play off defeat was a disappointment be we should look to build on that and push on next season.A play off berth should be seen as the absolute minimum requirement every season while we are below the Conference National, the status of the club demands it.

Sadly all I see is backward steps resigning old players and players who were not quite good enough 1st time around. I'm worried the progress off the field (which has been superb in every department) will be hampered by a lack of progress on it.

Since Your demands are so high maybe its time you put your hand in your pocket and put in the exrta  2 to 300 hundred Thousend so we can meet your requirments.

You talk of H&S from last year and the year before and now going back. Last year and the year before the team cost to much. We Made a loss

perhaps you should do a straw poll of supporters and see what they expect after the last two seasons,  in most walks of life and certainly business you expect to see year on year progress.

And please don't get personal, none of us have access to the kind of money needed to balance the books, thats a pretty stupid comment to make.
 
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: O CHO MEALLT on July 16, 2011, 05:32:55 PM
Can anyone who went tell us how the game actully was.
From a Boston United perspective-truly dreadful.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: kingofnaves on July 16, 2011, 05:37:26 PM
What did you expect!
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: The Big M on July 16, 2011, 05:58:52 PM
Tbf it was a little poor.  It had an air of we'll just turn up cos we have to about it. Saying that chris hall was playing center mid which he isn't jordan fairclough did ok holsgrove looked good when he got on the ball. I strugle to see what new signings was poor excluding stones who was at the club anyway
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: BUFC Loyal on July 16, 2011, 06:11:54 PM
My main worry is not who we've signed so far bar Stones, its the lack of new faces that are on trial here, as much as i like Milson he maybe will look back on that leg-break at Nantwich the other year with a bit of anger because before that he looked a promising prospect but while S/H was here he never got a look in, and now whilst on trial for us he's being played at Right Back.

Also i think Ogden and Ward looked half-decent today, but they're IMO not ready to be 1st team regulars.

I honeslty don't think its the signings we've signed that has worried people its the lack of new faces and 'new ideas' from the Gaffers.

That being said though i'll give C/L a fair chance and those players who sign for us but i do feel we are in need of bring fresh faces in.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Adam on July 16, 2011, 06:18:42 PM
Adam, with the greatest of respect relegation should not even be an issue.

Say what you like about H&S but they left terrific foundations here, the play off defeat was a disappointment be we should look to build on that and push on next season.A play off berth should be seen as the absolute minimum requirement every season while we are below the Conference National, the status of the club demands it.

Sadly all I see is backward steps resigning old players and players who were not quite good enough 1st time around. I'm worried the progress off the field (which has been superb in every department) will be hampered by a lack of progress on it.

Since Your demands are so high maybe its time you put your hand in your pocket and put in the exrta  2 to 300 hundred Thousend so we can meet your requirments.

You talk of H&S from last year and the year before and now going back. Last year and the year before the team cost to much. We Made a loss

perhaps you should do a straw poll of supporters and see what they expect after the last two seasons,  in most walks of life and certainly business you expect to see year on year progress.

And please don't get personal, none of us have access to the kind of money needed to balance the books, thats a pretty stupid comment to make.
 

Doesn't mean they're being either reasonable or well informed though.

As far as I can see the only alternative is for the Chestnuts to forego the opportunity to actually balance the books (meaning the club is viable for the first time in decades), stick a few more hundred £k of their own money in so we can have a better shot at making the play offs. Think we've been there before with investing money the club doesn't really have.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Keynsham Pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 06:24:50 PM
The worries with the signings have been up front. I don't think that Suarez is or will be anything more than a back up player. Stones isn't up to the level and Jj is well past his best. With Newsham being fragile and not a proven goal scorer at this level and not sure he will be(a la Clare moving from scoring in conf to not in league 2), I can't see where the goals come from.

We also need a combative tackling midfielder and another centre half.

Therefore at least 4 signingsand we will be fine but without that then mid table at best, relegation battle is a possibility if we don't have anyone to put the chances away
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: shinnster on July 16, 2011, 06:44:54 PM
Tbh you say Ogden isnt ready for the first team but what he showed today was impressive to say the least,he can run at players and hes only little hes not scared to,he holds the ball up,hes fast and hes got pace to leave players standing,If it was me Id give him a fair crack.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: threenil on July 16, 2011, 06:49:43 PM
I'm comparatively new to being a football fan, and it appears that for me to be a true fan, I must put the times that we are beaten to bad luck, or improving the team.

At what stage is a "true fan" allowed to say "actually, I don't think this squad is going to be up to it" without being flamed as a heretic?

Thanks in advance for all the constructive comments I'm about to get.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 16, 2011, 06:50:16 PM
Adam, with the greatest of respect relegation should not even be an issue.

Say what you like about H&S but they left terrific foundations here, the play off defeat was a disappointment be we should look to build on that and push on next season.A play off berth should be seen as the absolute minimum requirement every season while we are below the Conference National, the status of the club demands it.

Sadly all I see is backward steps resigning old players and players who were not quite good enough 1st time around. I'm worried the progress off the field (which has been superb in every department) will be hampered by a lack of progress on it.

Since Your demands are so high maybe its time you put your hand in your pocket and put in the exrta  2 to 300 hundred Thousend so we can meet your requirments.

You talk of H&S from last year and the year before and now going back. Last year and the year before the team cost to much. We Made a loss

perhaps you should do a straw poll of supporters and see what they expect after the last two seasons,  in most walks of life and certainly business you expect to see year on year progress.

And please don't get personal, none of us have access to the kind of money needed to balance the books, thats a pretty stupid comment to make.
 

I didn't see any personal comment in that or nore do i wish to make a personal comment.

My point at the mo is without the funds the team people want will not be there, The past 2 years have been fantastic and will leave most wanting mre of the same. But the the last 2 years see a decent amount of losses both years(Last season was a lot less but not even this can be substained) People need to remember that we aint alking of a couple of grand.

To carry on we have no choice to cut the spend and this also means available players are fewer apart.

Yes i have my own concearns and disapointments but id rather be medioca than have the rug pulled
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Little Chip on July 16, 2011, 07:03:21 PM
It was good to see a good crowd down at Town today. As for the football it was a little dull a bit like the the weather, we lacked some drive today but if Holsgrave, Miquel and sleath had put their chances away it would have been a different story, to be fair to Town they worked their socks off and looked a decent team. I thought that Stones did the best today out of the front men, for all the stick the lad has got and Semple looked dangerous like normal when he got the ball, Ogden also looked livley when he came on, JJ was not quite their for me today but we need to give them all time. I'm sure that L & C know what they need to add to the team and are working on it.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 07:35:07 PM
It was good to see a good crowd down at Town today. As for the football it was a little dull a bit like the the weather, we lacked some drive today but if Holsgrave, Miquel and sleath had put their chances away it would have been a different story, to be fair to Town they worked their socks off and looked a decent team. I thought that Stones did the best today out of the front men, for all the stick the lad has got and Semple looked dangerous like normal when he got the ball, Ogden also looked livley when he came on, JJ was not quite their for me today but we need to give them all time. I'm sure that L & C know what they need to add to the team and are working on it.
thanks lc, finally got a report
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: green hats mate on July 16, 2011, 07:55:51 PM
I went to the match as usual looking for positives ,  but their was none .
The unknown factor is what other players are being brought in ,  if we don,t bring in four qaulity signings we are in for along  hard season.  Would money spent on a fitness coach be better put towards the playing budget ? Fitness as not been a problem for the last two years without one.
 Today Town were the worthy winners.
 Our players on show today would struggle to get 40 goals a season .
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Sussex Pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 08:03:31 PM
I guess the only posiive the BSP team will be releasing trialists this weekend.....let hope JL and LC can pick up 3-4 above average signings.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Poros on July 16, 2011, 08:04:15 PM
Think we need to get Neil Kempster out of retirement. Was a pretty meen no. 9 for the mighty Queenof Spades and the Brit!
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Tipps End Pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 08:46:41 PM
You lot are going on as if we have already been relegated. Friendlies are just what they say on the tin. No-one really takes them seriously at semi-pro level. It's all about getting your fitness, bonding etc etc. These guys aren't full time pros'.

A few years ago when I was playing I was in exactly the same position and the pre-season games had zero bearing on how well we did in the league.

Lighten up lads. This is a marathon - not a sprint.

DL
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: kingofnaves on July 16, 2011, 09:12:32 PM
Fitness! I think the Fitness Coach stated they looked good last week! If they don't take them serious why should people pay to watch them?If they can't take a local derby serious there's no hope for the rest of the season!Looks like we are going back to TT happy clappers season!
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Tipps End Pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 09:22:14 PM
KON - I don't think people should really pay to watch them. Friendlies have been blown way out of proportion during the last few years. Personally, I can't be bothered with them. If the weather's nice I might go down to have a look but I won't go out of my way and certainly won't get all worked up if we don't play brilliantly and don't win five nil.

DL
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 09:31:20 PM
Tbf it was a little poor.  It had an air of we'll just turn up cos we have to about it. Saying that chris hall was playing center mid which he isn't jordan fairclough did ok holsgrove looked good when he got on the ball. I strugle to see what new signings was poor excluding stones who was at the club anyway
Are you serious, Joachim was abysmal, looked totally uninterested and only made one significant contribution, which was beating a man and getting a good cross in on 40 mins. As for the rest thought Semps was well below par, Holsgrove wasn't as good as Tuesday, Hall looked like a fish out of water so didn't really have a good game.

A big plus was Jordan Fairclough thought he played well today and showing some promise for a young lad. Once we made the mass changes we where much better, young Ogden is a good player and I'd like C&L take a chance on him. Would have liked to see Milly in centre mid as we needed someone to break the play up. Stones was poor until the changes but then played the best I've seen him play. Young Harry Deane also did well.

Overall was disgusted at the lack of giving a shit by the 11 that started, the young lads that finished looked a much better team. The big worries are still a lack of someone with bite in the middle (C&L must have someone in mind for this) and more worryingly a lack of firepower, just can't see where the goals are coming from.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 16, 2011, 09:45:39 PM
Take Shaun's goals out of the equation after xmas last season and it doesn't take a genius to work out we've got a problem up front.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 09:52:10 PM
My point at the mo is without the funds the team people want will not be there
This isn't true for me, it's not about funding it's about the change from getting young, unproven players who can improve personally and as a team, to getting older players with no promise. If we'd have signed young beck and a.n.other like him (let's say Dotty Cotton from Stamford) I'd have no complaints now, and I'd hazzard a guess that these 2 would be cheaper than Joachim/Stones...
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: The Big M on July 16, 2011, 10:22:50 PM
How you can say hall was a fish out of water it not really fair as he was out of position and o agree about jj I'd forgot he was there lol
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 16, 2011, 11:14:08 PM
How you can say hall was a fish out of water it not really fair as he was out of position and o agree about jj I'd forgot he was there lol
Sorry didn't make myself clear, I was agreeing with you. A fish out of water because he was playing out of position.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: lonegunman on July 17, 2011, 06:33:56 AM
I was going to go, now after reading all this i'm pleased it rained all day!
I'll wait until the season starts before i pass comment about anything. You never know, the managers might have some other players up their sleeves, they kept the KH signing close to their chests.


check the grassy knoll and the chips and curry  :bunny
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Pilgrim86 on July 17, 2011, 09:52:12 AM
We're gonna miss Sleath...
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: green hats mate on July 17, 2011, 10:19:53 AM
Would think Stones is only a a small wage ,  Lets hope JJ is only on a very short contract .

Fear for the early season if Sleath is missing a month .

My opinion after seeing them yesterday
 Defence about good enough
 Midfield ,  Sleath and thats about it.
 Forwards , Two first class strikers needed

 Holsgrove ????
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: oxo on July 17, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
Yes it was pretty dire yesterday and yes we do need two or three better quality signings.
We were discussing the situation in general yesterday and agreed that unless we perform well the two or three hundred supporters we have attracted over the last couple of years could quickly fall by the wayside and that would be a disaster.
I think that the fans need to know how the club is progressing off the field, by that I mean what is the position regarding a new ground?. Obviously we will only attract the grants required for a new ground if the club is seen to be operating in the black and this coming season we are told will be the first we have done so since the dark days hence the reason for the cut in the budget. What I am getting at is that if we were told that a site had been secured and plans were moving forward to have firm dates set for the various phases the fans would accept these budget cuts and would also accept a season where the future of the club would be the most important issue. We would all be patient knowing that in a couple of years we will be in a position to drive for promotion.
In the meantime lets all get behind the lads and the club.I am now off to the Pilgrim Lounge for the best value Sunday lunch in Lincolnshire.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 17, 2011, 10:47:30 AM
Im just going to sit on the fence on this one.

After newton and co had to pile more money in last season again im Just concearned more about how many more times are they going to do it,

After throwing several hundreed thousend in over the past few years it would be verry easy for them to walk away.

Yes i would love to see a team competing with far better players than we have( Thats not a dig at the players we have).

JJ and Stones love em or hate em are here on peanuts, Are they key players no but im sure they do a job as the 20.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on July 17, 2011, 11:13:11 AM
There does seem to be lack of direction on and off the field at the mo (from what we are seeing and being informed about). But we do have new managers and half the team has gone due to funding and last seasons play off failiure. We also have on going court cases with grimsby that has to be funded if we lose them. The compo that comes from pearson may not be enough to cover what the cost may be for pursuing s&h case. But despite all is, surely there are good quality players out there who are good enough to play in our team that can compete at this level on a budget. still 4 weeks to go till the new season which means plenty of time for new signings and improvement. Or new signings and no improvement. Come on lee pull the rabbits out the hat.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: The Big M on July 17, 2011, 11:33:10 AM
Oh I see what ya mean now woad pilgrim sorry
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Lord Cutler Knobhead on July 17, 2011, 02:20:47 PM
I think we need to remember that we're dealing with a management team that haven't as yet had to do this kind of stuff.  Getting it 100% spot on in the first summer without any room for trying something and it not working is a big ask.  They've tried to look at the players they know and whittle out the chaf.  Give 'em chance.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: howmanynames2pick on July 17, 2011, 06:24:35 PM
as someone who bothered to go, I'm a bit suprised by some of the comments.
It was far from  a "classic"  but what were people expecting? Brazil 70?
It was the groups 2nd match together! Man City fans may tell you that their "star" team still isnt gelling 2 years down the road!
It was a "trial", a "practice match" Not the Cup Final!
As has been said some players did better than others, Danny Sleath particularly did well. Parks did well.
When people go on about the squad and it should be this, that or the other maybe it could be if the club were not having to fork out £1384.61 per week in rent (not just the season, but every week!)
I would guess this puts us at a major disadvantage to a lot of clubs even with there much smaller attendances.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: womble on July 17, 2011, 07:10:22 PM
Lets remember what pre-season matches are for:-
To gauge players fitness and build "match fitness"
To try out formations and see what positions suit which players looking for versatility as a bonus
To identify which positions still need to be filled and hopefully find the right player to fill them at the right price.

As has already been posted Kevin Holsgrove appeared from off the radar so who knows who we are talking to!
And finally Chris Hall tweeted that it was a bad day at the office to which Semps replied " relax it's early days" maybe we should do the same!

Here endeth the lesson according to Womble  ;D
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Burton Pilgrim on July 17, 2011, 07:51:03 PM
Most people would look at our squad and say we need 2 central midfielders and 1 or 2 decent strikers.  Listen to Canners' interview on the O/S - interesting that he mentions loan players.  That's the best way for a club like us to afford better quality players, but it won't happen until towards the end of pre-season, when clubs decide which players are going out on loan.
If we get a quality MF and striker on loan, it can make the difference between an average season and a good one.  We've got the basis of a decent squad, but need a bit more quality in key areas.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 17, 2011, 10:41:46 PM
When people go on about the squad and it should be this, that or the other maybe it could be if the club were not having to fork out £1384.61 per week in rent (not just the season, but every week!)
I would guess this puts us at a major disadvantage to a lot of clubs even with there much smaller attendances.
How do you work that out? Just done a quick spreadsheet and here's the figures for last season:

Number   Team        Attendance    Price   Income per game   income per season
1        Telford United   1845   11           £20,295.00           £405,900.00
2        Boston United   1401   11           £15,411.00           £308,220.00
3        Nuneaton Town    932           10           £9,320.00           £186,400.00
4        Alfreton Town    760           10           £7,600.00           £152,000.00
5        Worcester City    665           11           £7,315.00           £146,300.00
6        Stalybridge Celtic 483           10           £4,830.00           £96,600.00
7        Eastwood Town    460             9           £4,140.00           £82,800.00
8        Stafford Rangers  456           11           £5,016.00           £100,320.00
9        Hinckley United    455           10           £4,550.00           £91,000.00
10        Blyth Spartans    449           10           £4,490.00           £89,800.00
11        Guiseley            409             9           £3,681.00           £73,620.00
12        Workington            400           12           £4,800.00           £96,000.00
13        Corby Town       398           10           £3,980.00           £79,600.00
14        Gainsborough     378           10           £3,780.00           £75,600.00
15        Gloucester City    359           12           £4,308.00           £86,160.00
16        Hyde United    353           10           £3,530.00           £70,600.00
17        Solihull Moors    317           10           £3,170.00           £63,400.00
18        Droylsden            315           10           £3,150.00           £63,000.00
19        Harrogate Town    295           12           £3,540.00           £70,800.00
20        Redditch United    265             9           £2,385.00           £47,700.00
21        Vauxhall Motors    210             8           £1,680.00           £33,600.00

I've gone for attendance X adult standing price for price per game then X 20 for season. If you - £72,000 off our final income it's £236,220.00 still more than everyone bar Telford. I'd guess our bar takings and sponrship etc. is as good if not better than most other teams. Obviously a fair few have sugar daddies to artificially inflate budget but that was only 4 or 5 teams. So explain how we are worse off?

Oh and it is common knowledge that Church and Pearson where offered significantly better deals to stay, if this money isn't available why not and if it is why are people making budget an excuse for signing JJ?

I'm not a fool, owning a football club is a money pit and I dont want us to run at a deficit and I'm pleased DN is cutting our cloth accordingly. But I'd say going on figures above our budget should still be more than competitive against most clubs in this league.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Pilgrim86 on July 17, 2011, 10:46:41 PM
£72,000pa rent / 52 weeks = £1384.61 per week
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 17, 2011, 10:49:48 PM
£72,000pa rent / 52 weeks = £1384.61 per week
I wasn't asking how he worked out the weekly rent, but how it makes us worse off compared to the other clubs...
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: BostonGoals on July 17, 2011, 11:28:03 PM
Also taking into account everything else, policing costs, utility bills and any other debts that are probably being paid off from the Robwell era it doesnt give us a lot to work with.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: goodyntu on July 17, 2011, 11:40:12 PM
Plus not everyone pays a standard rate of £11. Take into account season ticket sales which lower the average price of going to a game. Also concessions are £7/8 I think and U16's are £4. The income over a season from ticket sales will probably be around £200,000-£250,0000 at a guess. There are so many other costs that football clubs have to fork out, it's a surprise that we're even planning to break even or to make a profit, obviously this should be the aim though. Travelling expenses alone could easily cost us £20k or so.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: kingofnaves on July 18, 2011, 05:32:54 AM
Traveling expenses! How much to travel from Mersyside each week?
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 18, 2011, 09:41:56 AM
Also taking into account everything else, policing costs, utility bills and any other debts that are probably being paid off from the Robwell era it doesnt give us a lot to work with.
Yep but everyone else has policing, utility bills etc. so doesn't put us at a disadvantage against other clubs.

Plus not everyone pays a standard rate of £11. Take into account season ticket sales which lower the average price of going to a game. Also concessions are £7/8 I think and U16's are £4. The income over a season from ticket sales will probably be around £200,000-£250,0000 at a guess. There are so many other costs that football clubs have to fork out, it's a surprise that we're even planning to break even or to make a profit, obviously this should be the aim though. Travelling expenses alone could easily cost us £20k or so.
Agreed but I've calculated all clubs income as the standard adult price. So again doesn't put us at a disadvantage against other clubs

So people are missing the point. Is there anyone that can give a valid reason why we supposedly pay less/are at a disadvantage when compared against other clubs in this division ???

 
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: LPRA on July 18, 2011, 10:01:39 AM
Even if we are unable to offer the wages others are, the thing that disappoints me is the apparent lack of leverage going on. Our managers should be cherry picking the best players at this level, knocking on their doors and saying, "fancy coming and playing in front of FL sized crowds in an FL standard ground every other week? Fancy playing for a club that sometimes has more away than home fans? Then come play for us...."

From the lack of quality signings it would appear that this hasn't happened. But, as someone else said, I'm sure the Two Lees not deliberately filling up the squad with shit players. And there is a few weeks left until the season kicks off....
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: faraway pilgrim on July 18, 2011, 10:42:05 AM
Slightly worried that losing Sleathy for a month will have a damaging affect on the start of the season. Whilst i have faith in the managers, replacing Pearson and Church was always going to be tough but i do think the club should spend the compensation monies for those two players on buying extra quality. If we got say £5000 for both players that gives approx £120 a week on top of the normal wage structure  for two quality players. Do we sign someone on loan for a month to cover Sleath or shift a signed player into the middle as cover?.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Pride of Lincolnshire on July 18, 2011, 12:03:27 PM
Woad Pilgrim - You're just my type of man, you're hired !

(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQvlq0pnGdX2n--FRmILGbgZjrQG1qdXaLCVmJwBCVwTiAqWnQ1Iw&t=1)
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Pilgrim86 on July 18, 2011, 12:59:26 PM
Also taking into account everything else, policing costs, utility bills and any other debts that are probably being paid off from the Robwell era it doesnt give us a lot to work with.
Yep but everyone else has policing, utility bills etc. so doesn't put us at a disadvantage against other clubs.


We have a larger ground than most, which means it costs more to keep maintained. We also have full time staff, which most clubs in our division won't have.
Do we pay for the presence of a PC every game? Or is it part of the Community PC's job to be at each game? You never see police at any other ground.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: The Big M on July 18, 2011, 03:49:00 PM
Boston united still owe my friends shop £80 which they cant be bothered to pay so i cant see any disadvantage with money.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 18, 2011, 05:22:43 PM
ave Gates  400 - 500. Boston ave 1300 -1400.

3 Times the water.
Lots more stewards.
As mentioned above repairs and upkeep higher.
Around 10 turnstyle ops (or though some are voluntry)
Safty officers,Doctors,First Aid bill higher than most)
72k rent
Team travel Something most forget.

600 pound 21/22 times a season so thats around 13k gone.
Kit Cost and replacments comming to several 100 pounds per a player.
Pitch care etc.
Phone bills
admin bills
Printing bills for tickets and programs.
Heating bills,
Petrol for the other cars,
Entertainment charges for match day music etc,
Electrice bills,
Mobile phones,

Most clubs have these bills but ours are a lot higher due to the size of york street and the amount of staff and fans using these.

£308k Is nothink when you start adding the rest up.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 18, 2011, 06:25:40 PM
3 Times the water.     I'd say watering the pitch is the biggest water cost and that's the same for all clubs. Would guess the difference in water bill is negligable.
Lots more stewards.  Yep agree with this. But I know a couple of stewards so know what they earn. I'd say the difference in this would be no more than 3-4K
As mentioned above repairs and upkeep higher.    Not seen a lot of repairs lately. I'd say the run down places we visit require more maintenance to keep the ground grading.
Around 10 turnstyle ops (or though some are voluntry)           as you say some voluntary, other clubs will have TO's as well so negligible difference.
Safty officers,Doctors,First Aid bill higher than most)                 It's surely a requirement for all clubs to have these, not sure how ours are going to cost more?
72k rent     already accounted for
Team travel Something most forget.

600 pound 21/22 times a season so thats around 13k gone.    Blyth and Workington have to travel further so will have higher travel costs
Kit Cost and replacments comming to several 100 pounds per a player.        
Pitch care etc.
Phone bills
admin bills
Printing bills for tickets and programs.
Heating bills,
Petrol for the other cars,
Entertainment charges for match day music etc,
Electrice bills,         highest cost floodlights, there is a minimum wattage needed for ground grading so costs will be similar.
Mobile phones

Most of the rest I can't see how having a bigger ground = higher costs e.g. phone bills? It doesn't cost more because the ground is bigger.

I've not seen anything that will take the 100K to 140K extra we have compared to a 400-500 average supporting team after ground rent.
 
If as P86 suggests it's going to full time backroom staff (4-5 full time backroom staff would easily take 100K+) maybe this is where we need to be looking to be making savings? Not sure who we employ though apart from John and Craig so can't see where we could make any cuts there as these 2 are vital for the club and Craig in particular brings in vital revenue through sponsorship etc.

So I still don't see how we can be worse off than most clubs in this league who's income is 100-140K less than ours...
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: The Big M on July 18, 2011, 06:42:20 PM
Im with WP on this one take vauxhall they only 150 fans some games. They still have some good players and a competitive squad they would have to the same rules and regs. And they couldnt overspend as they are a sports comittee, so can only spend what they make
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 18, 2011, 07:23:31 PM
3 Times the water.     I'd say watering the pitch is the biggest water cost and that's the same for all clubs. Would guess the difference in water bill is negligable.
Lots more stewards.  Yep agree with this. But I know a couple of stewards so know what they earn. I'd say the difference in this would be no more than 3-4K
As mentioned above repairs and upkeep higher.    Not seen a lot of repairs lately. I'd say the run down places we visit require more maintenance to keep the ground grading.
Around 10 turnstyle ops (or though some are voluntry)           as you say some voluntary, other clubs will have TO's as well so negligible difference.
Safty officers,Doctors,First Aid bill higher than most)                 It's surely a requirement for all clubs to have these, not sure how ours are going to cost more?
72k rent     already accounted for
Team travel Something most forget.

600 pound 21/22 times a season so thats around 13k gone.    Blyth and Workington have to travel further so will have higher travel costs
Kit Cost and replacments comming to several 100 pounds per a player.        
Pitch care etc.
Phone bills
admin bills
Printing bills for tickets and programs.
Heating bills,
Petrol for the other cars,
Entertainment charges for match day music etc,
Electrice bills,         highest cost floodlights, there is a minimum wattage needed for ground grading so costs will be similar.
Mobile phones

Most of the rest I can't see how having a bigger ground = higher costs e.g. phone bills? It doesn't cost more because the ground is bigger.

I've not seen anything that will take the 100K to 140K extra we have compared to a 400-500 average supporting team after ground rent.
 
If as P86 suggests it's going to full time backroom staff (4-5 full time backroom staff would easily take 100K+) maybe this is where we need to be looking to be making savings? Not sure who we employ though apart from John and Craig so can't see where we could make any cuts there as these 2 are vital for the club and Craig in particular brings in vital revenue through sponsorship etc.

So I still don't see how we can be worse off than most clubs in this league who's income is 100-140K less than ours...

I wasn't splitting a difference from us to other clubs when mentioning the normal bills as such, just highlighting the bills to pay.

Pitch is the most expencive in water but 1300 people using toilet gives a massive increase in flushes of urinals etc, Since your charge to receive the water and then charge for the water to be taken aswell this bill would stack up over a season way above average 4-500 clubs.

Stewards 3-4 key is still 3-4k

Walk ways and banasters are painted at least every 2 seasons by heavy duty paint and as someone who has used this paint it would cost several thousends to do York Street. Board replacments, Seats etc costs.
We also require a lot more 1st aiders to most clubs becouse of been over the 1000 mark.

Electricity bills: Offices are in use most days compared to most in this league in use 2-3 days, Add to that the 6 or 7 pc in use everyday in the vp lounge, extra lighting inside the stands due to having 4 stands iinstead of the normal 1 and half which seems to be the norm,

Higher Buisness rates due to size and rooms in the ground( If anyone knows much about this they will know its a killer)

Even if John and Craig are the only full time that is still 40 K gone.


Just one other Thing to mention is that if you look at most other clubs at this level with the exeption of a couple of clubs they have huge catchment area of players on there doorstep, Most have to travel to Boston and some of this is covered by the club but it does highlight why its not always possible to get players in that we want.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: howmanynames2pick on July 18, 2011, 08:05:37 PM
nice to see a lot of  the managers who didnt apply for the job have become accountants :)
if the club is haemorrhaging almost 2k a week (ie a 100k loss last year) then it cant go on forever.
DN is not Abromavich, he like the rest of us is feeling the pinch
Some cost cutting has to be done.
If this to be a "consildation" season then so be it.
 All i was pointing out is that a £1384 bill each doesnt help. (unless you happen to be an ex chairman of course)
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: PilgrimSam on July 18, 2011, 08:17:50 PM
There is no point in moaning about money loss etc.
Why don't us fans group up and buy a small share in the club?  ;D
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: bostonwoody on July 18, 2011, 08:19:34 PM
With the greatest respect to all the posters here, I for one am becoming increasingly relieved that it's DN in charge not some of the number crunchers who have decided to display their talents.

Each to their own, he's an extremely successful business man whose expertise has brought nothing but hope to the club. How about we let him get on with it and we'll do what we do best SUPPORT the team instead of being beaten before a ball has been kicked
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: howmanynames2pick on July 18, 2011, 08:19:46 PM
Er that'll be the Trust. I do hope my tenner was put to good use.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: PilgrimSam on July 18, 2011, 08:23:10 PM
remember who we are, DAVID NEWTONS BARMY ARMY
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: noughtyforties on July 18, 2011, 08:40:23 PM
With the greatest respect to all the posters here, I for one am becoming increasingly relieved that it's DN in charge not some of the number crunchers who have decided to display their talents.

Each to their own, he's an extremely successful business man whose expertise has brought nothing but hope to the club. How about we let him get on with it and we'll do what we do best SUPPORT the team instead of being beaten before a ball has been kicked

Its a fool who questions Dave's head for figures......

Whatever happens on the pitch is not his making, he doesn't sign the players, coach them or scout them.

For my money he's a 1st class chairman doing a brilliant job.......I'm just not sure he's made the right managerial appointments.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 18, 2011, 08:46:57 PM
nice to see a lot of  the managers who didnt apply for the job have become accountants :)
if the club is haemorrhaging almost 2k a week (ie a 100k loss last year) then it cant go on forever.
DN is not Abromavich, he like the rest of us is feeling the pinch
Some cost cutting has to be done.
If this to be a "consildation" season then so be it.
 All i was pointing out is that a £1384 bill each doesnt help. (unless you happen to be an ex chairman of course)
There's not need to be sarcastic mate. Again you've completely missed the point, I'm NOT disputing that we're losing money or need to cut costs, you said we are at a disadvantage against clubs with lower support, all I want is evidence from you how? If you're still struggling to get that then I'm wasting my time.

Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Maxross on July 18, 2011, 08:50:50 PM
...And lets not forget the tax bill this time!

Think there has been an awful lot of over simplification of the figures involved.  I've been involved with running a few businesses and you always find that there are loads of hidden costs that you hadn't considered, especially when the public are on your premises.  What about public liability insurance for example?  A well supported club like Boston is bound to pay a lot more than a smaller club for example.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: woad_pilgrim on July 18, 2011, 08:52:37 PM
With the greatest respect to all the posters here, I for one am becoming increasingly relieved that it's DN in charge not some of the number crunchers who have decided to display their talents.

Each to their own, he's an extremely successful business man whose expertise has brought nothing but hope to the club. How about we let him get on with it and we'll do what we do best SUPPORT the team instead of being beaten before a ball has been kicked
Again missed the point. All I want is for someone to give me the logic behind this myth that we have one of the poorest budgets in this league. It's like the myth we aren't allowed in the Conf Nat due to the number of years left on the lease, that must have been asked 5 or 6 times and still people keep saying it, or like BUFC and/or Evans where banned from the Conference for 10 years, if enough people say it then it has to be true, right  ::)

DN is doing a brilliant job and has done ever since he came to the club, I want to be quite clear about that.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Maxross on July 18, 2011, 09:01:30 PM
I'd say we still have a strong budget for this league but just a case that that with the larger costs involved in running a bigger stadium the margin isn't neccessarily as big as it might first appear.  I think our geographical location is probably a hinderance with increased travel for away games and players travel expenses.

The key thing that I think nobody has brought up though is that football has gone mad at this level.,  Many conference clubs are running full time squads they blatantly can't afford and thats even crept into our BSN over the past few seasons.  I can also think of at least two sugar daddys bankrolling their teams in this division.  Is their any rule about percentage of turnover at this level? 

I'm pretty sure over the next few seasons we are going to see the whole pack of cards collapse and I feel a lot happier knowing we have a well run, if not awe inspiring side this season than a sugar daddy who might leave in 12 months time when he/she gets bored and the club go bust.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 18, 2011, 10:10:35 PM
With the greatest respect to all the posters here, I for one am becoming increasingly relieved that it's DN in charge not some of the number crunchers who have decided to display their talents.

Each to their own, he's an extremely successful business man whose expertise has brought nothing but hope to the club. How about we let him get on with it and we'll do what we do best SUPPORT the team instead of being beaten before a ball has been kicked
Again missed the point. All I want is for someone to give me the logic behind this myth that we have one of the poorest budgets in this league. It's like the myth we aren't allowed in the Conf Nat due to the number of years left on the lease, that must have been asked 5 or 6 times and still people keep saying it, or like BUFC and/or Evans where banned from the Conference for 10 years, if enough people say it then it has to be true, right  ::)

Im by far claiming we have the poorest but not has healthy as most think.


DN is doing a brilliant job and has done ever since he came to the club, I want to be quite clear about that.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Bostonshire on July 18, 2011, 10:11:47 PM
Me to pleased that DM is the man behind the figures. Doing my own accounts and book keeping is plenty for me
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Myleftfoot on July 18, 2011, 11:12:39 PM
Woad, calm down. You'll have a turn  :D
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: green hats mate on July 19, 2011, 06:36:55 PM
As Maxross explains when it actually come to running a business all sorts of costly items appear .   Newton runs the business properly ,  does other clubs "overlook" items to costcut ?
I would guess we have a competative budget for this league .
The only thing i,ve learned from this thread is that if we all refrain from p*ssing at the matches it will reduce the water bill.
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Seenbetter on July 19, 2011, 10:49:51 PM
A. Glad that DN is at the helm.
B. Go along with Norty40s about not being sure that the managers were the right choice but wish em well and hope they prove me wrong.
C. Bit of advice for Mr Fenty that was offered to me once, but not always taken - it is sometimes better to keep ones mouth shut and let everyone think you're a tit rather than open it and remove all doubt. Me thinks he protesteth too much.
D. The best thing to do is turn up at the games when the season starts and support the team and hope all goes well.
E. Haven't looked to see how much it is to watch the Wigan friendly but if it is £12 to stand, as someone has suggested, then will most likely do something else simply because it is only a friendly. If Boston fc are at home with a friendly could go there 'cos I understand they are on a winning streak. ;)
Title: Re: Match v Town
Post by: Artemis on July 23, 2011, 01:29:40 PM
I hope Mr Newton is buying gold on behalf of Boston Utd instead of paying over inflated players' wages for instant success because inflation is rising and will be lot higher in the months ahead as will the price of gold.  Clubs in BSN with average gates of less than 500 can't sustain over inflated pay for players especially when inflation continues to rise- they will fail like a pack of cards. 

That would be the time to cash in on the gold and mount an attack on the BSN title and Conference.