mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 23 minutes ago, nzlatic said: Think these numbers are right... Last season... in north stand with 3 course meal designed by award winning chef, padded seat, new facility = £45 pp This season... 2 course meal by those guys with a Facebook page, rickety old stand, stained old seat next to Barry = £50 pp Yeah I’m sure he’ll be raking it in. Make a small bit or lose money? If it was still TTA running the OEC everyone would think the decision to take catering elsewhere was a great idea if it meant not losing money. Remember not so long ago lots said the north stand should be boycotted because it didn't make the club money. Now the chairman is boycotting it to avoid losing money and everyone is up in arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 8 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: Make a small bit or lose money? If it was still TTA running the OEC everyone would think the decision to take catering elsewhere was a great idea if it meant not losing money. Remember not so long ago lots said the north stand should be boycotted because it didn't make the club money. Now the chairman is boycotting it to avoid losing money and everyone is up in arms. This view on this bit has flipped rather sharply hasn’t it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 9 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: Make a small bit or lose money? If it was still TTA running the OEC everyone would think the decision to take catering elsewhere was a great idea if it meant not losing money. Remember not so long ago lots said the north stand should be boycotted because it didn't make the club money. Now the chairman is boycotting it to avoid losing money and everyone is up in arms. That was before the more detail of the figures were revealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, singe said: That was before the more detail of the figures were revealed. So we should have flocked in under SC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 2 hours ago, OAFC1984 said: It’s especially crass when you suspect he would have been treated with exactly the same contempt as everyone else by were he still here It's hard to imagine Gordon just tugging the forelock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 16 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: Make a small bit or lose money? If it was still TTA running the OEC everyone would think the decision to take catering elsewhere was a great idea if it meant not losing money. Remember not so long ago lots said the north stand should be boycotted because it didn't make the club money. Now the chairman is boycotting it to avoid losing money and everyone is up in arms. What price would you put on goodwill because we sure could do with some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 8 minutes ago, kowenicki said: This view on this bit has flipped rather sharply hasn’t it... Yes. Because there is a fair chance that the operators have the club's long term interests as a high priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Just now, Dave_Og said: What price would you put on goodwill because we sure could do with some. Regardless of what AL does (and he's done plenty wrong) people on here will hammer him and flip their views when needed to do so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 16 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: Make a small bit or lose money? If it was still TTA running the OEC everyone would think the decision to take catering elsewhere was a great idea if it meant not losing money. Remember not so long ago lots said the north stand should be boycotted because it didn't make the club money. Now the chairman is boycotting it to avoid losing money and everyone is up in arms. How come you’re now so confident that the new deal definitely makes the club money? Are you aware of the costs/revenue breakdown etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said: Regardless of what AL does (and he's done plenty wrong) people on here will hammer him and flip their views when needed to do so They'll hammer him because by and large he's made a complete cock of pretty much everything he's done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Just now, nzlatic said: How come you’re now so confident that the new deal definitely makes the club money? Are you aware of the costs/revenue breakdown etc? Nobody knows. I imagine it's more profitable (loses less money than using OEC) and that's why he's done it. If that's shown not to be the case, I'll happily say that in this case he's fucked up again. Still waiting for any logical reason why some of FLG won't say who they are as well.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: What price would you put on goodwill because we sure could do with some. Or the fact we make 5 figures on each of those boxes which are now sat redundant. As was clearly stated in Paul Whiteheads letter. I've given up arguing with McFluff he really is a lost cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Just now, Dave_Og said: They'll hammer him because by and large he's made a complete cock of pretty much everything he's done. Some hammer him even if he does something decent. Too blinkered and stubborn to say well done where appropriate are most on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said: Regardless of what AL does (and he's done plenty wrong) people on here will hammer him and flip their views when needed to do so It’s blatantly obvious and understandable why views have flipped on this. The FLG’s main intention is to have the facility benefit the club. And they are long standing fans. Couldn’t be more different to situation under Brassbank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Just now, GlossopLatic said: Or the fact we make 5 figures on each of those boxes which are now sat redundant. I've given up arguing with McFluff he really is a lost cause. 5 figure income. But nobody knows what that equates to in total profit or loss with the deal that was offered. What if it was shown the new catering deal made the club more money? Would you say AL had done the right thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, nzlatic said: It’s blatantly obvious and understandable why views have flipped on this. The FLG’s main intention is to have the facility benefit the club. And they are long standing fans. Couldn’t be more different to situation under Brassbank. So if the new deal made he club more money, would you say AL has done the right thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said: Nobody knows. I imagine it's more profitable (loses less money than using OEC) and that's why he's done it. If that's shown not to be the case, I'll happily say that in this case he's fucked up again. Still waiting for any logical reason why some of FLG won't say who they are as well.. The only reason for him not going with the OEC but choosing this deal instead is because it’s more profitable? No other possible reason at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: So if the new deal made he club more money, would you say AL has done the right thing? Not necessarily. There’s more to business than the bottom line as at today. Also, hasn’t this cost thing been covered before? The FLG stated the costs. Unless there are other service costs I’m missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, nzlatic said: The only reason for him not going with the OEC but choosing this deal instead is because it’s more profitable? No other possible reason at all? I didn't say that's the only reason. If he feels he's being shafted then it could be 2 fingers up to them. And who could blame him if he feels thats what they're doing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Just now, nzlatic said: Not necessarily. There’s more to business than the bottom line as at today. Ah ok. So he cant win unless he gives the FLG his business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: So if the new deal made he club more money, would you say AL has done the right thing? No. Because he appears to not even had a stab at negotiating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Dave_Og said: No. Because he appears to not even had a stab at negotiating. So if the original deal wasn't profitable for the club and let's say the new deal is, then AL should be crucified for not negotiating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said: Ah ok. So he cant win unless he gives the FLG his business? Eh? Your question was vague. But to clarify, if whatever he chooses to do benefits the club in the short, medium and long term and that in turn benefits the playing budget and brings an upturn in form and maybe even a small bit of success, then I’d absolutely support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Can someone clarify.... It’s the OEC, not the FLG isn’t it? Have they actually bought the OEC shares or not? They said they had, but companies house says otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 8 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said: So if the original deal wasn't profitable for the club and let's say the new deal is, then AL should be crucified for not negotiating? Moving your customers from a modern purpose built facility to a portakabin shouldn't be applauded no matter how much money it is saving you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.