[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

You’d have to be insane to throw money at that equation!

Yet, the four directors are reported to be throwing £65,000 a month in each and every month. That’s a tad over £16k a month each if they are divvying it up equally.

Over a year, that’s a smidgin short of £200k !

How long can the present incumbents subsidise / loan that sort of money?

We’ve seen through the Swann & Hilton eras that the club is ‘worthless’ and that there is no interest in buying a small unattractive club in a town of low populace / catchment.

So, where do we go from here?

Personally, I think there’s even scope for a properly planned and run membership scheme. I don’t know what form it would take or how it would play out, but in addition to all the other contributions I regularly make (tickets, merchandise, lottery etc), I wouldn’t object to paying an ongoing monthly subscription to a membership scheme of some kind. Let’s say £10 a month. Multiply that up and there’s potentially a substantial amount to go into the pot. As I said, I don’t know how a scheme of this kind would look, but there would obviously have to be some form of benefit to the subscribers.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

Minimise the office & peripheral staff, pay freezes, re-evaluation of job content, value & efficacy, increase the use of volunteers (most clubs at our level wouldn’t exist without volunteers), minimal playing staff on ‘realistic’ wages, minimal coaches, minimal non playing staff, do we need ‘specialists’

Part of Scunthorpe United’s problem is that it’s a relatively big operation (stadium, size of fanbase etc) for where we find ourselves in terms of league status. There’s a lot to it, a lot of moving parts that must be addressed each week. To be honest, it looks to me like there are less employed staff now than there have ever been so that will have had a positive impact on the wage bill. You mention ‘re-evaluation of job content, value & efficacy’, and I think they are probably addressing this. I immediately think of James Moody who has had periods in the not too distant past of seeming to wear about 500 different hats. That’s not sustainable. Perhaps, as it stands, in a couple of key areas they haven’t made the right additional appointments yet (hospitality etc)…

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

Restaurant, Hospitality & Events manager

What are the P&L figures of the restaurant over the last 20 years?

Hospitality & Events – The event is the game at 3pm every other Saturday.
When you’re up shit creek without a paddle, you need to focus on the core business… the football.

I’d imagine the figures aren’t great. But I disagree – I think the club really does need to offer at least a matchday dining experience. It’s a way to accommodate people who want a bit more than just standing up or sitting down outside for two hours, and it also covers hospitality, special occasions for supporters and so on. However, they need to seriously up the game – in my recent experiences of the restaurant the food has been quite poor.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

Which leads me on to the planned 3 day music extravaganza. So they are hoping to attract 10,000 per day to watch unknown local amateur bands and tribute bands.
So they are hoping 30,000 of the 81,000 of Scunthorpe will pay good money for this. Jesus… ain’t going to happen.

Various parts of your post make a lot of sense, and I agree with much of what you said. Particularly in regard to the 3-day music festival.

Staging a load of tribute bands and local acts will never ever attract 10,000 people for each day. In fact, it’d be lucky to get 500 – 1,000. It represents a massive financial risk.

An outside organisation could hire the stadium and grounds for a fee and put something on with an outstanding bill, and you could probably then expect people to travel from out of town / across the region to attend. I imagine that to be the way this actually goes, rather than the club doing anything more than providing a venue.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Awaywego

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

No i dont Deerey, don’t see any need to give any money to the club it’s a business not a charity,

You’re absolutely right that it’s not a charity, but you’re very wrong about it being a business. It’s run as one, because it has to be, but it’s so much more than that. It’s our football club, an emotional investment, a time investment, a hub of friendship and family; it’s continuity with personal past and connection to the future. If the last 18 months have taught supporters anything it should be that they’re more than mere customers, and the club is more than occasional entertainment that can be switched off like a TV. That’s lazy thinking.

I agree, kids parties and blah blah Unity blah will pay possible dividends in the future with people becoming lifelong fans etc – but if they’re already knocking round enough to go to a party or whatever, then they probably would anyway. Investing shares is a tangible way to support the club in the immediate sense, and to put further power into the hands of supporters – who are, as I just said, more than mere customers.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ironfan

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

What power did the trust have with all their shares when Hilton took over, absolutely none! Doubt they were even consulted.
And having spent thousands buying theirs Hilton swans in and buys the whole club for £3

“Power to the people” Lol.

Nihilistic bollocks, this.

[Apollo11]

JOHNMMAW wrote:

If the play off final is 10th May and the team gets together again for preseason end of June begin July a matter of a few weeks it would be crazy to have your team on a 44 week contract. A no stability or continuity within the team. What incentive is there to a player if he knows that at the end of the season he hasn’t a job. If, like we normally do, we do not offer new contracts until the season has ended, the whole team could reject new contract leaving about eight weeks to put a team together from scratch. I cannot see any reasonable player signing to come here for 44 weeks when other clubs, may offer less wages but offer long term contracts. Defiantly a recipe for disaster.

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong and misremembering, but at the Trust meeting didn’t Michelle say some of the players who are out of contract will be more likely to accept lower wage offers if the contracts are longer?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

What’s the idea behind the trust buying more shares in the club than the ones they already own other than a piece of paper what do they get, are they after a place on the board?

They get: A translation of their cash into ownership of the club. For each share they buy, that amount of ownership and level of power increases. I’d say that’s what they’re after – a greater stake in the club and its affairs. Rather that than just mouthing off on here or on Facefuck, eh?

[Apollo11]

ironfromafar wrote:

i may be mistaken but arent / weret the winnings from fundraising football cards and auctions paid out as vouchers for the club shop ?? .. if so not all would be going to the club as a percentage has to be taken off to pay suppliers like Kelme etc..surely it would be better to hand 100% of funds raised to the club directly.

Or, better still, to the Trust to buy shares – thereby ensuring money to the club and (some) actual power to the hands of supporters.

[Apollo11]

Doesn’t seem a lot of enthusiasm for it on SUFG or social media in general.

This would be, surely, the point at which you’d just sack it off and give the 18K to the Trust on the condition that they use it to approach Michelle and buy shares. Perhaps they could even get some sort of special recognition from the Trust for doing so. Honorary Bucket Rattler status or something?

[Apollo11]

I called out the sidekick months ago on here, following his release from porridge. I didn’t buy any of the self-deprecating cheeky chappy charm, ingratiating himself back into the fold. To an extent, though, it’s worked and it seems as though he’s an accepted figure or credible voice again. After his antics first time around (Hilton time around, I mean) I despair. Oh well.

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

If Maw, Priestley and co had any real unity plans to support the Iron they would get behind the Iron Trust and funnel any fund raising through them, that’s where the real unity is being formed IMO in terms of members and shares in the club.

No-one seems to have asked: What would actually stop the Unity group buying 18K worth of shares in their own name? Wouldn’t doing this rocket them to the Top Of The Pops in terms of fan groups, a position from which they could annihilate Matt Ellis and crush the Trust to dust?

18K of shares would definitely be the best smartest use of that money in my opinion, but it would be best if they did it through the Trust. The legals and infrastructure are already in place and a bunch of credible people are aboard. However, it’s absolutely the Unity’s right to set up if they want to – and the 18K ‘belongs’ to no-one else, so they can invest it in the club however they see fit.

Maybe they could use it to buy up all of the absolute design-nightmare tat merchandise in the club shop and put it in a landfill – perhaps on some land they acquire on a site off Warren Rd? This would clear the decks at the club for some aesthetically decent stuff to emerge, for which eyes would be truly thankful and they’d be deemed heroes.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

Could be tricky, aren’t play offs usually in May?

Late April in NL, aren’t they?

[Apollo11]

This toxicity has continued heavily on Twitter (X) through the weekend, with other people joining in. ‘Francis Austin’ has doubled down on his “facts” and “evidence” around various financial / club issues. He’s labelled Michelle “thicko” and called the Board liars (about the state of the club’s finances including debt).

It hasn’t made for pleasant reading. Why not ignore it, then?

Because it has all the hallmarks (language / aggression) of Hilton’s previous nasty rants, so it may very well be him – and therefore you have to ask what the endgame might be? Or is it just some ‘fuelled rant’ to blow off steam?

Additionally, adding further credence, it also turns out Hilton previously posted a long statement (I think on the cult group) under the name ‘Francis Austin’. This was around the time he was leaving SUFC.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Bring back Dave you know it makes sense!

What an absolute cult.

[Apollo11]

This is a lie. I have sourced this comment on the Facebook group and this Sherbert post is not liked by a single person, never mind Harness of Sharp.
If this account is prepared to lie about something so trivial, what else is he prepared to lie about?

Very interesting.

[Apollo11]

LOL

[Apollo11]

[Apollo11]

[Apollo11]

[Apollo11]

[Apollo11]

i get the feeling something is not quite right…then bosh new revelations about debt and director loans surface on another SM platform.
Another sh8t storm brewing ???

Revelations? Actual evidence?

Or just rumour?

[Apollo11]

Cripes.

[Apollo11]

It’s worth noting, if this Twitter mind-shit was actually Hilton, that the only other person who has been using the term “Director Loans” is Sherbert. Still being a Useful Idiot and stirring the pot?

[Apollo11]

Jason Herbert also banging on about Director Loans on the cult page.

[Apollo11]

And then this, in reply to Kieran Maguire talking about new ownership of Matlock Town…

[Apollo11]

ironfromafar wrote:

IMO Butterfield should have been kept at all cost .. how we could do with him now!!

“At all cost” would have defeated the object of putting a sensible wage structure in place. When his wife kicked off on socials about insulting offers and other players being on more, etc, she neglected to mention the specifics. His contract had run out and the offer(s) made to him were in line with club policy. Same will happen when ‘the seven’ come to the end of their contracts.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Why move anyway, are any of them going to play in front of any bigger crowds or play in a better stadium.

Butterfield was happy with his lot here and he was prepared to take a wage cut just to stay, why shouldn’t others.

After his contract had expired, he wasn’t prepared to fall into line with the new wage structure.

[Apollo11]

ironfromafar wrote:

Still loosing 65k a month is head shaking after all the progress in the last year plus .. maybe lowering the bar and off loading some of the over paid Hilton era players could be agood idea even at the cost of longer in the NLN

uti

It seems there are seven players who exist outside of the new regime’s wage structure, due to contracts. When those expire the players will either move on or sign up on reduced terms. The club can’t do anything in the meantime, other than accept offers if they come in and if they are decent. It looks like there haven’t been any offers so far – but do we ever really know, until someone walks out of the door? These things can sometimes happen fast. With Roberts in particular, I find the apparent lack of offers unfathomable. But that’s where we are, or where we appear to be.

[Apollo11]

The war machine is revving up.

[Author]

Posts