The SPFL recommendation?

[Newbornbairn]

1 hour ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Beginning to look like bank balances will be more important than league placing when it comes to next season.

And the size of supports.

 

Wahey!

[EdinburghBlue]

Nearly fell out of bed laughing at Murdoch MacLennan's reported comments on Radio Scotland this morning. Apparently he’s horrified at Championship plans to play 'half a season.’ Utter hypocrisy from someone who pushed for titles, promotions and relegations from an unfinished season. If the agreed plan is to play each other once home and away then that’s by definition the season. Awarding the title is then perfectly fair.

[RandomGuy.]

1 hour ago, EdinburghBlue said:

Nearly fell out of bed laughing at Murdoch MacLennan's reported comments on Radio Scotland this morning. Apparently he’s horrified at Championship plans to play 'half a season.’ Utter hypocrisy from someone who pushed for titles, promotions and relegations from an unfinished season. If the agreed plan is to play each other once home and away then that’s by definition the season. Awarding the title is then perfectly fair.

It was Roy MacGregor.

[Passionate]

3 hours ago, EdinburghBlue said:

Nearly fell out of bed laughing at Murdoch MacLennan's reported comments on Radio Scotland this morning. Apparently he’s horrified at Championship plans to play 'half a season.’ Utter hypocrisy from someone who pushed for titles, promotions and relegations from an unfinished season. If the agreed plan is to play each other once home and away then that’s by definition the season. Awarding the title is then perfectly fair.

Think about it now can an 18 game season work,  income coming from 9 games instead of 18,  so basically agreeing to half your income before you start, that must be one of the worst suggestions yet...

[DA Baracus]

1 hour ago, Passionate said:

Think about it now can an 18 game season work,  income coming from 9 games instead of 18,  so basically agreeing to half your income before you start, that must be one of the worst suggestions yet...

The advantage here though is that clubs will be able to budget for this. It will presumably start in January so clubs won't have to pay a full squad until then (i.e. they won't need to sign players until then).

In effect most clubs will just be paying for half a season and using the income they'd normally make in half a season to do so. There's no real drop in income as they won't be asked to pay for a full season on half a season's income. 

Sound feasible if clubs can get to January in a good condition. Clubs will need to fundraise to pay costs (such as players under contract) until January, but it's certainly not insurmountable and definitely a far better way forward than the ludicrous streaming model.

[Shadwell Dog]

3 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

It was Roy MacGregor.

Chick young saying that roy had turned water into wine at Ross County. No he's turned a lot of his money into a premier league football side. Hardly a miracle.

[Hank von Hell]

59 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Chick young saying that roy had turned water into wine at Ross County. No he's turned a lot of his money into a premier league football side. Hardly a miracle.

He will be feeling the pinch a bit himself with the massive hit the Oil & Gas industry has suffered and may not be so keen for winemaking in the future.      

[craigkillie]

In addition to it not being Murdoch MacLennan who said it, the use of the word "horrified" was nothing to do with MacGregor being opposed to the idea. The "horrified" part was about the notion that clubs would go that long without income and that we might have to go to such extreme lengths. He was shocked that it might have to happen, which is not the same as being against it.

Edited May 25, 2020 by craigkillie

[Shadwell Dog]

4 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

In addition to it not being Murdoch MacLennan who said it, the use of the word "horrified" was nothing to do with MacGregor being opposed to the idea. The "horrified" part was about the notion that clubs would go that long without income and that we might have to go to such extreme lengths. He was shocked that it might have to happen, which is not the same as being against it.

 

 

Yeah as usual the headline writers make it sound like one thing when it really meant another.  His interview wasnt the worst I've heard apart from chick young being halfway up.his arse throughout.

[Thom & Gerry]

Always worth listening to. He is a man who has done very little wrong in his business and football enterprises.

[RandomGuy.]

3 hours ago, Thom & Gerry said:

Always worth listening to. He is a man who has done very little wrong in his business and football enterprises.

Ross County accrued over £10m worth of losses over the past 5 years, according to their official accounts.

Clearly a well run club.

Edited May 25, 2020 by RandomGuy.

[TxRover]

6 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

The advantage here though is that clubs will be able to budget for this. It will presumably start in January so clubs won't have to pay a full squad until then (i.e. they won't need to sign players until then).

In effect most clubs will just be paying for half a season and using the income they'd normally make in half a season to do so. There's no real drop in income as they won't be asked to pay for a full season on half a season's income. 

Sound feasible if clubs can get to January in a good condition. Clubs will need to fundraise to pay costs (such as players under contract) until January, but it's certainly not insurmountable and definitely a far better way forward than the ludicrous streaming model.

There is also the knock on impact on attendance. If you only have one home games versus a team, rather than two, I would expect a bump in attendance for the game over the average of the two games. If the average game sees 2,000 fans when you play twice in a season, it’s entirely possible you’ll see 2,500+ for the single appearance. While fixed costs would remain the same at half that of a play twice season, their might be a small increase in costs to support the extra fans.

It’s not a massive increase in income, but it means that you don’t lose 50% of your ticket income, but perhaps only 37.5%, while facilities and staff costs are nearly 50% lower.

[SouthLanarkshireWhite]

3 hours ago, TxRover said:

There is also the knock on impact on attendance. If you only have one home games versus a team, rather than two, I would expect a bump in attendance for the game over the average of the two games. If the average game sees 2,000 fans when you play twice in a season, it’s entirely possible you’ll see 2,500+ for the single appearance. While fixed costs would remain the same at half that of a play twice season, their might be a small increase in costs to support the extra fans.

It’s not a massive increase in income, but it means that you don’t lose 50% of your ticket income, but perhaps only 37.5%, while facilities and staff costs are nearly 50% lower.

Not sure what we will lose next season in terms of attendance,  as unemployment rises noticeably.

[TxRover]

3 hours ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:

Not sure what we will lose next season in terms of attendance,  as unemployment rises noticeably.

True enough, but as an offset, with people cooped up and not spending money on trips and such, possibly football as a distraction from sitting at home will play to the clubs advantage?

[Sergeant Wilson]

9 hours ago, TxRover said:

True enough, but as an offset, with people cooped up and not spending money on trips and such, possibly football as a distraction from sitting at home will play to the clubs advantage?

There might be a bounce back, but it'll bounce back down to previous levels or below.

Are you suggesting that people who become unemployed will prioritise football or that new supporters who have been stuck in will start going to games?

Edited May 26, 2020 by Sergeant Wilson

[TxRover]

6 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

There might be a bounce back, but it'll bounce back down to previous levels or below.

Are you suggesting that people who become unemployed will prioritise football or that new supporters who have been stuck in will start going to games?

I’m actually suggesting a bit of both. Lower level football might see a small benefit from being an inexpensive distraction, because even the unemployed generally have a small discretionary income (from assistance, etc) and all teams will see, for a time, people relieved to be able to get out and socialize (in some manner). This will likely include a number of first-time attendees, as travel outside one’s region seems to be likely to take a while to rebound.

Now, depending on the time frame, “do you think that’s wise, sir?”, is highly appropriate. Look at the results of “reopening” so far in America, where people have this insane if it happens it happens mentality because “freedom!”. The crowded parties and gatherings were seeing here seem rather a poor choice.

[FREDDYFRY]

So her plan of 14-14-14 (16) back on the  table!!

So back to Clyde, Peterhead and Forfar being disadvantaged, aye cheers for that Ann!

Get that well and truly in the sea!!
How vocal can we be now and can she asked directly what her thoughts are on the specific issue around no club being disadvantaged? This is a nightmare scenario for us!

Edited May 26, 2020 by FREDDYFRY

[Forest_Fifer]

So her plan of 14-14-14 (16) back on the  table!!
So back to Clyde, Peterhead and Forfar being disadvantaged, aye cheers for that Ann!
Get that well and truly in the sea!!
How vocal can we be now and can she asked directly what her thoughts are on the specific issue around no club being disadvantaged? This is a nightmare scenario for us!

Aye, but if it was 14-16-14 you'd be all over it like a tramp on chips, and screw Forfar.

[FREDDYFRY]

1 minute ago, Forest_Fifer said:

17 minutes ago, FREDDYFRY said:

So her plan of 14-14-14 (16) back on the  table!!
So back to Clyde, Peterhead and Forfar being disadvantaged, aye cheers for that Ann!
Get that well and truly in the sea!!
How vocal can we be now and can she asked directly what her thoughts are on the specific issue around no club being disadvantaged? This is a nightmare scenario for us!

Aye, but if it was 14-16-14 you'd be all over it like a tramp on chips, and screw Forfar.

Point is that there is no need for any reconstruction, other than to save Hearts of course!

[Michael W]

Laughable stuff here from Budge. The sort of stuff you end up with when you appoint something with a blatant agenda to oversee the reconstruction proposals, really.