Popular Post Davis Love III Posted January 9, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted January 9, 2023 I really shouldn't have bothered replying to him, but I couldn't resist... ------------------------- Hi Ian, I really hate to do this, but so much of what you have said needs to be addressed. Somehow, you have managed further to antagonise, insult and patronise supporters with this attempt at an explanation. Now, there is no question that there are complexities and financial realities to situations like this, I think most people who have contacted you will fully understand that. However, this is where we need to look at what you've said, both the content and (perhaps even more so) its tone. 1. "The Club has considered the attendances of Season Ticket holders and supporters at Old Firm matches in recent Seasons, and despite various incentives which have been offered, Home Support attendances have been modest, to say the least." - In other words, it's the fault of you loyal, season ticket paying fans (and regular match paying fans) who have forced us to make this decision. Contemptuous, to say the least. Surely a better, more forward-thinking response to these attendance numbers would be consulting with supporters to find out why exactly these fixtures aren't attractive and what could be done to make them more appealing, instead of further alienating them and making the problem irreparably worse. 2. "You may not be aware, but as this is a Cup game, the pricing of the tickets requires to be agreed with the opposition. Further to that, the ticket receipts are split 50/50, with the home Club incurring the Operational costs." - No, none us have heard of the Scottish Cup or know how anything works, clearly, but then again, adopting that same patronising tone, maybe you don't know either, seeing as the SFA Handbook 22/23 (page 196, 33.3.3) notes that: "The Home Club shall be entitled to make a deduction of 20% from the gross receipts" helping to cover those operational costs, with receipts then split 50/50. 3. "You will appreciate that we endeavour to ensure that the Club is run sustainably. If we were to restrict pricing to say £20 per adult ticket, this would have resulted in a net loss." - Several things here. 1. Presumably, much of these additional costs are due to policing/stewarding to accommodate the away support, so where then is the logic to increase their numbers even more across the stadium, surely making the exercise even more costly? 2. I wonder what running sustainably will mean if/when, let's say 500 season ticket holders don't bother renewing in the summer due to this fallout, or another 500 fans on top of that who frequently pay-per-game decide to keep their money for other activities. What's sustainable about that? Ultimately, Ian, you/the club have got this very wrong. The decision itself was misguided and visionless, how it was presented was tone-deaf, and the response to it since has been offensive, patronising, and trying to deflect from the reality. Layering stupidity with arrogance is a dangerous cocktail and I'm afraid that this whole sorry episode has reeked of it. People make mistakes, organisations get things wrong, but the failure to acknowledge that and show zero contrition will only cause lasting-damage. 52 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
double deluxe Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 3 minutes ago, Davis Love III said: I really shouldn't have bothered replying to him, but I couldn't resist... ------------------------- Hi Ian, I really hate to do this, but so much of what you have said needs to be addressed. Somehow, you have managed further to antagonise, insult and patronise supporters with this attempt at an explanation. Now, there is no question that there are complexities and financial realities to situations like this, I think most people who have contacted you will fully understand that. However, this is where we need to look at what you've said, both the content and (perhaps even more so) its tone. 1. "The Club has considered the attendances of Season Ticket holders and supporters at Old Firm matches in recent Seasons, and despite various incentives which have been offered, Home Support attendances have been modest, to say the least." - In other words, it's the fault of you loyal, season ticket paying fans (and regular match paying fans) who have forced us to make this decision. Contemptuous, to say the least. Surely a better, more forward-thinking response to these attendance numbers would be consulting with supporters to find out why exactly these fixtures aren't attractive and what could be done to make them more appealing, instead of further alienating them and making the problem irreparably worse. 2. "You may not be aware, but as this is a Cup game, the pricing of the tickets requires to be agreed with the opposition. Further to that, the ticket receipts are split 50/50, with the home Club incurring the Operational costs." - No, none us have heard of the Scottish Cup or know how anything works, clearly, but then again, adopting that same patronising tone, maybe you don't know either, seeing as the SFA Handbook 22/23 (page 196, 33.3.3) notes that: "The Home Club shall be entitled to make a deduction of 20% from the gross receipts" helping to cover those operational costs, with receipts then split 50/50. 3. "You will appreciate that we endeavour to ensure that the Club is run sustainably. If we were to restrict pricing to say £20 per adult ticket, this would have resulted in a net loss." - Several things here. 1. Presumably, much of these additional costs are due to policing/stewarding to accommodate the away support, so where then is the logic to increase their numbers even more across the stadium, surely making the exercise even more costly? 2. I wonder what running sustainably will mean if/when, let's say 500 season ticket holders don't bother renewing in the summer due to this fallout, or another 500 fans on top of that who frequently pay-per-game decide to keep their money for other activities. What's sustainable about that? Ultimately, Ian, you/the club have got this very wrong. The decision itself was misguided and visionless, how it was presented was tone-deaf, and the response to it since has been offensive, patronising, and trying to deflect from the reality. Layering stupidity with arrogance is a dangerous cocktail and I'm afraid that this whole sorry episode has reeked of it. People make mistakes, organisations get things wrong, but the failure to acknowledge that and show zero contrition will only cause lasting-damage. Terrific response, I applaud you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Van Dyke Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 20 minutes ago, Davis Love III said: I really shouldn't have bothered replying to him, but I couldn't resist... ------------------------- Hi Ian, I really hate to do this, but so much of what you have said needs to be addressed. Somehow, you have managed further to antagonise, insult and patronise supporters with this attempt at an explanation. Now, there is no question that there are complexities and financial realities to situations like this, I think most people who have contacted you will fully understand that. However, this is where we need to look at what you've said, both the content and (perhaps even more so) its tone. 1. "The Club has considered the attendances of Season Ticket holders and supporters at Old Firm matches in recent Seasons, and despite various incentives which have been offered, Home Support attendances have been modest, to say the least." - In other words, it's the fault of you loyal, season ticket paying fans (and regular match paying fans) who have forced us to make this decision. Contemptuous, to say the least. Surely a better, more forward-thinking response to these attendance numbers would be consulting with supporters to find out why exactly these fixtures aren't attractive and what could be done to make them more appealing, instead of further alienating them and making the problem irreparably worse. 2. "You may not be aware, but as this is a Cup game, the pricing of the tickets requires to be agreed with the opposition. Further to that, the ticket receipts are split 50/50, with the home Club incurring the Operational costs." - No, none us have heard of the Scottish Cup or know how anything works, clearly, but then again, adopting that same patronising tone, maybe you don't know either, seeing as the SFA Handbook 22/23 (page 196, 33.3.3) notes that: "The Home Club shall be entitled to make a deduction of 20% from the gross receipts" helping to cover those operational costs, with receipts then split 50/50. 3. "You will appreciate that we endeavour to ensure that the Club is run sustainably. If we were to restrict pricing to say £20 per adult ticket, this would have resulted in a net loss." - Several things here. 1. Presumably, much of these additional costs are due to policing/stewarding to accommodate the away support, so where then is the logic to increase their numbers even more across the stadium, surely making the exercise even more costly? 2. I wonder what running sustainably will mean if/when, let's say 500 season ticket holders don't bother renewing in the summer due to this fallout, or another 500 fans on top of that who frequently pay-per-game decide to keep their money for other activities. What's sustainable about that? Ultimately, Ian, you/the club have got this very wrong. The decision itself was misguided and visionless, how it was presented was tone-deaf, and the response to it since has been offensive, patronising, and trying to deflect from the reality. Layering stupidity with arrogance is a dangerous cocktail and I'm afraid that this whole sorry episode has reeked of it. People make mistakes, organisations get things wrong, but the failure to acknowledge that and show zero contrition will only cause lasting-damage. Class. Thank you for sending that. Sums up what most of us are feeling 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted January 9, 2023 Author Share Posted January 9, 2023 Bra. Fucking. Vo. I wrote one too but I’m not following on from that absolute topper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJFCtheTeamForMe Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 (edited) @Davis Love IIIfair play. It crossed my mind for a second and then I just gave up. Apathetic already 🫤 I felt I was relatively constructive with my initial email. More about why they've completely missed the mark and why fans were so upset about. Don't think he even read it which makes me think they're not interested in the criticism. Do we all think there will be a reply? Edited January 9, 2023 by SJFCtheTeamForMe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 I’m not responding, I’ll let my lack of attendance next Saturday talk for me. i notice the Woman are playing the next day and all season ticket holders get in free. Wonder if anyone fancies starting up a suggestion that fans go to that match instead. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RawB93 Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 44 minutes ago, mizfit said: i notice the Woman are playing the next day and all season ticket holders get in free. Wonder if anyone fancies starting up a suggestion that fans go to that match instead. She could probably use the help 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
templeofsaints Posted January 9, 2023 Share Posted January 9, 2023 2 hours ago, Davis Love III said: I really shouldn't have bothered replying to him, but I couldn't resist... ------------------------- Hi Ian, I really hate to do this, but so much of what you have said needs to be addressed. Somehow, you have managed further to antagonise, insult and patronise supporters with this attempt at an explanation. Now, there is no question that there are complexities and financial realities to situations like this, I think most people who have contacted you will fully understand that. However, this is where we need to look at what you've said, both the content and (perhaps even more so) its tone. 1. "The Club has considered the attendances of Season Ticket holders and supporters at Old Firm matches in recent Seasons, and despite various incentives which have been offered, Home Support attendances have been modest, to say the least." - In other words, it's the fault of you loyal, season ticket paying fans (and regular match paying fans) who have forced us to make this decision. Contemptuous, to say the least. Surely a better, more forward-thinking response to these attendance numbers would be consulting with supporters to find out why exactly these fixtures aren't attractive and what could be done to make them more appealing, instead of further alienating them and making the problem irreparably worse. 2. "You may not be aware, but as this is a Cup game, the pricing of the tickets requires to be agreed with the opposition. Further to that, the ticket receipts are split 50/50, with the home Club incurring the Operational costs." - No, none us have heard of the Scottish Cup or know how anything works, clearly, but then again, adopting that same patronising tone, maybe you don't know either, seeing as the SFA Handbook 22/23 (page 196, 33.3.3) notes that: "The Home Club shall be entitled to make a deduction of 20% from the gross receipts" helping to cover those operational costs, with receipts then split 50/50. 3. "You will appreciate that we endeavour to ensure that the Club is run sustainably. If we were to restrict pricing to say £20 per adult ticket, this would have resulted in a net loss." - Several things here. 1. Presumably, much of these additional costs are due to policing/stewarding to accommodate the away support, so where then is the logic to increase their numbers even more across the stadium, surely making the exercise even more costly? 2. I wonder what running sustainably will mean if/when, let's say 500 season ticket holders don't bother renewing in the summer due to this fallout, or another 500 fans on top of that who frequently pay-per-game decide to keep their money for other activities. What's sustainable about that? Ultimately, Ian, you/the club have got this very wrong. The decision itself was misguided and visionless, how it was presented was tone-deaf, and the response to it since has been offensive, patronising, and trying to deflect from the reality. Layering stupidity with arrogance is a dangerous cocktail and I'm afraid that this whole sorry episode has reeked of it. People make mistakes, organisations get things wrong, but the failure to acknowledge that and show zero contrition will only cause lasting-damage. Excellent response.......pretty sure it will have f-all effect though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSJ.84 Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 If Steve Bright is criticising you, then you know you’ve made a mistake 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 13 minutes ago, PSJ.84 said: If Steve Bright is criticising you, then you know you’ve made a mistake I cannot read one of his posts without sleeping 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSJ.84 Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 46 minutes ago, mizfit said: I cannot read one of his posts without sleeping I did get bored and stop reading half way through tbf, but I got the gist of it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Saints Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 Nobody makes me feel angrier than Steve Bright does. I occasionally consider going back into therapy due to the visceral reaction I get from reading any of Steve Bright’s posts. Alternatively, I could just block him or leave the St Johnstone Banter page, but that sounds like a lot of effort. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJFCtheTeamForMe Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 (edited) Slight change of subject but still a miserable rant nonetheless. When Gordon was injured at the start of the second half. They went to sub him off. I was about to have an aneurysm as James Brown got stripped to come on. McGowan had played okay but it's clear we were struggling to play anything through midfield. Surely moving McGowan into the back 3 & Mitchell into the middle was the right move with Phillips (could have gone Spoony if he wanted to be more adventurous) coming on to try and get involved? Like I said in the match thread they decided not to sub him at all though, which potentially cost us the first goal as on top of his poor performance he was clearly struggling and limping. Edited January 10, 2023 by SJFCtheTeamForMe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Widge Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 I could respond to the email that was sent out, but what's the point. Flaherty has ignored about 80% of it's actual meaning and issues to instead focus on the one thing he thinks he can justify, which is the cost. Bottom line is, the cost cannot be justified, not now for this game and not ever. Fair enough if the club are making a loss if we don't do anything else; however that needed to be highlighted weeks ago and brought to the attention of the fans, media and people in charge, that was the only way to resolve it and try and come out of the decision with any dignity. What's galling the most is the total lack of disregard for the fans views and opinions, both those who took the time to carefully and constructively email the club and get in touch, as well as those who didn't but are still as equally important. Instead of trying to make a mark on the club in a positive manner, by trying new things and taking initiative, Flaherty has looked at the books only and decided that's what matters most. For that reason alone serious questions need to be asked about him and the current board. The one thing that will always remain at a football club is the supporters, at the end of the day the fanbase is the thing that not only supports, but finances, encourages and believes in the team on the pitch and the club as a whole. So our current boards decision, let's totally ignore them, alienate them and make them feel like a cash cow who're only good for their money. Well Mr Flaherty, I've got news for you. The fans of this club will far outlast you and the current boards outdated views and management of our club! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJFCtheTeamForMe Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 (edited) Another change of subject. Fed up talking about the cup game in the huff about it. The very few positives from Saturday. Gallagher I thought did alright. No doubt be dropped again at the weekend though. Theo was on the park a short time but looked fired up in that cameo. Been critical and unsure if he's up to but don't see the harm in him getting a start on Saturday either. Although, could certainly very quickly become a target for stick if we start poorly. Edited January 10, 2023 by SJFCtheTeamForMe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Saintee Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 17 minutes ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said: Another change of subject. Fed up talking about the cup game in the huff about it. The very few positives from Saturday. Gallagher I thought did alright. No doubt be dropped again at the weekend though. Theo was on the park a short time but looked fired up in that cameo. Been critical and unsure if he's up to but don't see the harm in him getting a start on Saturday either. Although, could certainly very quickly become a target for stick if we start poorly. Bair needs matches to develop or to realise he's not a footballer. Ideally on loan at this point. It's totally unfair to just chuck him on for 15-20 mins when we're chasing a game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tree house tam Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 2 hours ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said: Slight change of subject but still a miserable rant nonetheless. When Gordon was injured at the start of the second half. They went to sub him off. I was about to have an aneurysm as James Brown got stripped to come on. McGowan had played okay but it's clear we were struggling to play anything through midfield. Surely moving McGowan into the back 3 & Mitchell into the middle was the right move with Phillips (could have gone Spoony if he wanted to be more adventurous) coming on to try and get involved? Like I said in the match thread they decided not to sub him at all though, which potentially cost us the first goal as on top of his poor performance he was clearly struggling and limping. That's the Davidson way though, defend rather than try to play any football, try to play it safe and sneak a result rather than take it by the baws and go for it. It's way past even caring about it now, for me anyway. We're resigned to having him in charge of the football and Flax in charge of operations until the clubs sold. That's the dream team right there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marly Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 On 08/01/2023 at 09:16, Radford said: What is our strongest team? SJWFC 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 Always weird to see the Campsies on a video, that's the view from my front room. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.