BM Alternatives

[divas]

Someone mentioned on a thread recently that during the initial investigations for a return to the town there was the potential of moving back to the Arena, not into the existing stadium but to a purpose built ground built on the land that Mowden acquired next to the Arena that they have additional pitches on. It was also mentioned that they would "build us a ground"

I've been giving this some thought and maybe it's not as daft an idea as I first thought....

We now have the best part of £450K to build a ground, but we don't have and can't afford any land, or to build a clubhouse/infrastructure.

Mowden obviously still have a substantial amount of cash sitting in their bank account after the sale of Yiewsley Drive and purchase of the Arena...

They also have a number of different teams which play - presumably seconds, development, junior teams etc who play on the pitches behind the Arena.

Essentially comparing Blackwell to one of these "second pitches" there is little difference - at BM all there is at the moment is a pitch and a clubhouse. At the Arena site there is a pitch and the Arena which as we know has a lot of space on the ground and also a number of different "lounges" within. Now not having visited for a while I'm not sure what has been sub-let but I'd be surprised if there wasn't some spare space we could use as a bar, and a lounge/suite we could use for hospitality. Not to mention that ample parking already exists.

So what would be in it for Blackwell....well two things:

1) we'd have to pay a yearly rental which would expand there revenue stream
2) they could share the new ground on which their seconds/womens/development/junior teams could play when the football club were away from home.

Add to that, given the cash they have in the bank, they could potentially part fund this development (which we'd then pay back in terms of an annual lease) and we could end up with quite a tidy ground.

A 25 year lease at £20K pa I'd think should be manageable for us given our expected increased turnover, and would net Mowden £0.5m quid over the period - a figure not to be sniffed at, AND they'd have a good facility for another of their teams.

It's clear that Mowden are looking at additional ways to create revenue, and by all accounts doing quite well, this would just be a further extension of this.

[divas]

PLUS....the Arena site doesn't have a great big effin sewerage pipe running under it...uncle George already saw to that.

[poppyfield]

I like your thinking, but as we are speculating I would be happier if we could arrange a mortgage type thing over a longer period so at the end of it we owned the land, as with Blackwell in 25 years we could end up with nothing, it may sound along way off but when we talk about a long term future of the club its got to be a place we own, plus land is scarce at the moment god knows what the situation will be like in 25 years

[divas]

I like your thinking, but as we are speculating I would be happier if we could arrange a mortgage type thing over a longer period so at the end of it we owned the land, as with Blackwell in 25 years we could end up with nothing, it may sound along way off but when we talk about a long term future of the club its got to be a place we own, plus land is scarce at the moment god knows what the situation will be like in 25 years

Of course the preferred solution would be to own our own land and be masters of our destiny. We've seen before that the council will do what they can in terms of land sale - both the Arena and Blackwell land were bought for a song and then had the covenants applied to stop them being sold on for a profit.

However I'm not sure the tax payer would be overly happy with yet more land being sold on the cheap which is why the preferred option for the council is the sporting hub. There is however a dearth of playing pitches in the town and there is a playing pitch straggly published by the council that highlights this, along with the need for another artificial pitch in the town.

Sadly the problem isn't just land though...if you buy land and there is no existing infrastructure the costs can be huge - just getting sewerage, water, gas and electric installed would probably blow any money we have. That's why we really need somewhere that already has the basics there.

[bga]

[quote="divas"]Someone mentioned on a thread recently that during the initial investigations for a return to the town there was the potential of moving back to the Arena, not into the existing stadium but to a purpose built ground built on the land that Mowden acquired next to the Arena that they have additional pitches on. It was also mentioned that they would "build us a ground"

Mowden obviously still have a substantial amount of cash sitting in their bank account after the sale of Yiewsley Drive and purchase of the Arena...

Have Mowden ever said "build us a ground" I don't recall that? Also don't believe it is true they still have a "substantial amount of cash." They had their AGM earlier in the summer when finances I know were discussed, so someone who attended that may be able to confirm the above?

The big advantage for them of moving to the Arena was they were able I thought to accommodate all their teams there over a Saturday and a Sunday. I doubt their members would support a move to allow us to play there if it meant some of their teams have to play elsewhere again.

[quakersam]

I'm not sure how far your clubhouse is allowed to be away from your pitch, potentially a non-starter

[Darlofan97]

I'm not sure how far your clubhouse is allowed to be away from your pitch, potentially a non-starter

The ground grading rules are quite consistent in regards to a clubhouse, this is from both Grade A (Step 1) and Grade E (Step 5) ground grading regulations;

1.5 Clubhouse

There must be a clubhouse facility either on or adjacent to the ground and which should be open on match days to provide refreshments to spectators.

Now, I could be wrong, but isn't Newton Aycliffe's clubhouse quite far from their actual football ground? I think that it is the 'Sports Club' that they share with on the Moore Lane Park site.

Should the rules be consistent then it might be OK. All hypothetical mind.

[princes town]

I'm not sure how far your clubhouse is allowed to be away from your pitch, potentially a non-starter

The ground grading rules are quite consistent in regards to a clubhouse, this is from both Grade A (Step 1) and Grade E (Step 5) ground grading regulations;

1.5 Clubhouse

There must be a clubhouse facility either on or adjacent to the ground and which should be open on match days to provide refreshments to spectators.

Now, I could be wrong, but isn't Newton Aycliffe's clubhouse quite far from their actual football ground? I think that it is the 'Sports Club' that they share with on the Moore Lane Park site.

Should the rules be consistent then it might be OK. All hypothetical mind.

Theres a building right next to the turnstiles at Aycliffe. I also remember a separate building much closer to the sports hub entrance and cricket pitch which is where the old sports club you used to be.

[Beano]

Someone mentioned on a thread recently that during the initial investigations for a return to the town there was the potential of moving back to the Arena, not into the existing stadium but to a purpose built ground built on the land that Mowden acquired next to the Arena that they have additional pitches on. It was also mentioned that they would "build us a ground"

I've been giving this some thought and maybe it's not as daft an idea as I first thought....

We now have the best part of £450K to build a ground, but we don't have and can't afford any land, or to build a clubhouse/infrastructure.

Mowden obviously still have a substantial amount of cash sitting in their bank account after the sale of Yiewsley Drive and purchase of the Arena...

They also have a number of different teams which play - presumably seconds, development, junior teams etc who play on the pitches behind the Arena.

Essentially comparing Blackwell to one of these "second pitches" there is little difference - at BM all there is at the moment is a pitch and a clubhouse. At the Arena site there is a pitch and the Arena which as we know has a lot of space on the ground and also a number of different "lounges" within. Now not having visited for a while I'm not sure what has been sub-let but I'd be surprised if there wasn't some spare space we could use as a bar, and a lounge/suite we could use for hospitality. Not to mention that ample parking already exists.

So what would be in it for Blackwell....well two things:

1) we'd have to pay a yearly rental which would expand there revenue stream
2) they could share the new ground on which their seconds/womens/development/junior teams could play when the football club were away from home.

Add to that, given the cash they have in the bank, they could potentially part fund this development (which we'd then pay back in terms of an annual lease) and we could end up with quite a tidy ground.

A 25 year lease at £20K pa I'd think should be manageable for us given our expected increased turnover, and would net Mowden £0.5m quid over the period - a figure not to be sniffed at, AND they'd have a good facility for another of their teams.

It's clear that Mowden are looking at additional ways to create revenue, and by all accounts doing quite well, this would just be a further extension of this.

Whilst it may be premature, there has certainly been far worse ideas.

Like you've already stated, we cannot start from scratch as that is seven figures and beyond our scope.

I remain hopeful that it will work out at BM; the location is preferable, too.

[Darlo_Pete]

Is the land still available at West Park, that Mowden were supposed to have been moving too? Obviously it would be far from ideal, as it's miles from the town centre and we'd be starting from scratch on a greenfield site.

[Sussex Phil]

The Arena, only option in the short term to get back to Darlo and start raising money for our own ground one day. Time we approached Mowden cap in hand!!

Sent from my Z10

[DarloPeGi]

Is the land still available at West Park, that Mowden were supposed to have been moving too? Obviously it would be far from ideal, as it's miles from the town centre and we'd be starting from scratch on a greenfield site.

Land at West Park has been earmarked for a huge development of houses and a school. West Park Garden Village is the proposed name. So no chance there.........

[poppyfield]

I know its a greenfield site with all the issues that go with that cost been the main one, but, Tommy Crooks park (its the playing fields opposite Cummings )does tick a lot of boxes ,
1 its owed by the council
2 its got 4 football pitches already there
3 road infrastructure is good
4 it should be big enough area for what we require
Not sure how much football is played there.
If it could be earmarked for our future use it would be something to aim for.
Anyway just a thought.

[JE93]

While i agree the three sites being mentioned would all be sites to be considered i just dont see it being possible to raise the funds we'd need in any sort of reasonable time. All of which time we would be at Bishop and suffering the commercial ramifications of that. To even flatten one of these propsed sites and install the electricity connection a plumbing connection etc would probably use up most if not all of the money we currently have (which was raised through fan donations not through operating profits of the club). We would then have to find ways to raise further funds to put down any infrastructure up to id suppose would have to be conference standard if thats our mid term aim. I just don't see it as achievable.

While BM and the pipe that runs under the pitch is far from ideal it already has this infrastructure. Plus moving in with the rugby club and creating a sporting hub makes a far more attractive proposition when applying for support grants to improve facilities in the future which would help take financial burden away from the club and the fans.

[shawry]

While i agree the three sites being mentioned would all be sites to be considered i just dont see it being possible to raise the funds we'd need in any sort of reasonable time. All of which time we would be at Bishop and suffering the commercial ramifications of that. To even flatten one of these propsed sites and install the electricity connection a plumbing connection etc would probably use up most if not all of the money we currently have (which was raised through fan donations not through operating profits of the club). We would then have to find ways to raise further funds to put down any infrastructure up to id suppose would have to be conference standard if thats our mid term aim. I just don't see it as achievable.

While BM and the pipe that runs under the pitch is far from ideal it already has this infrastructure. Plus moving in with the rugby club and creating a sporting hub makes a far more attractive proposition when applying for support grants to improve facilities in the future which would help take financial burden away from the club and the fans.

Yet it appears the rugby club don't want us.

Its only a 25 year lease

We still wouldn't own our ground

All in all the only benefit of BM is that it's in darlo

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[JE93]

While i agree the three sites being mentioned would all be sites to be considered i just dont see it being possible to raise the funds we'd need in any sort of reasonable time. All of which time we would be at Bishop and suffering the commercial ramifications of that. To even flatten one of these propsed sites and install the electricity connection a plumbing connection etc would probably use up most if not all of the money we currently have (which was raised through fan donations not through operating profits of the club). We would then have to find ways to raise further funds to put down any infrastructure up to id suppose would have to be conference standard if thats our mid term aim. I just don't see it as achievable.

While BM and the pipe that runs under the pitch is far from ideal it already has this infrastructure. Plus moving in with the rugby club and creating a sporting hub makes a far more attractive proposition when applying for support grants to improve facilities in the future which would help take financial burden away from the club and the fans.

Yet it appears the rugby club don't want us.

Its only a 25 year lease

We still wouldn't own our ground

All in all the only benefit of BM is that it's in darlo

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

All are fair points Shawry. What I would say in reply is:

We have to remember that around this time last year the rugby club voted to allow a ground share between the two clubs, which they did not have to do. In some sense I believe that this shows the rugby club in general are not against us being there, I think many realise this is a way to help make them sustainable long term and improve their facilities. The current situation regarding commercial revenues is incredibly frustrating but I wouldn't go as far to say its proof that the rugby club don't want us.

The leasing of the land is a concern , but I have a feeling that in fact if BM was to become a community sports hub, then through our investment in the infrastructure of building a ground we may in time gain some level of ownership through a constructive trust. There would be lots of legal arguments this way and that but its entirely plausible. Add this to on going support of DBC and I'm sure something could be worked out.

I also wouldn't say the only benefit to BM s that it was in darlo. It would have the start up infrastructure (clubhouse, changing rooms, pitch, electric, plumbing). It would be in a good position transport wise. Easy for away fans, just off the A1, the walk from town centre to BM is only around half a mile, so easily accessible. The council has just improved the bus stop outside BM obviously with the intention of it being used, once the improvements are carried out there will be plenty of car parking.

I would love to think we could have our own ground but the truth is, if we built a ground it would have to be minimum conference standard because by the time its built that's where we'll hope to be. So we'd need to get a piece of land that was appropriate (either buy it or be gifted it by the council), we'd have to level it install connection to electricity and plumbing. For these few steps the costs could be massive. Then on top of that we'd need to build a clubhouse, changing rooms, a covered seated stand, one other covered stand (ground capacity 4,000), lay a suitable pitch, install flood lights, all other costs which are numerous to mention. A realistic guesstimate price would be around £4 million at least. Where are we going to find that money. The club runs at a small operating profit. Fans can't raise that quickly (baring a euromillions win) could take a decade easily and that would be if we maintain the interest in the club while we were out in bishop. Starting from scratch is too big a job.

[poppyfield]

While i agree the three sites being mentioned would all be sites to be considered i just dont see it being possible to raise the funds we'd need in any sort of reasonable time. All of which time we would be at Bishop and suffering the commercial ramifications of that. To even flatten one of these propsed sites and install the electricity connection a plumbing connection etc would probably use up most if not all of the money we currently have (which was raised through fan donations not through operating profits of the club). We would then have to find ways to raise further funds to put down any infrastructure up to id suppose would have to be conference standard if thats our mid term aim. I just don't see it as achievable.

While BM and the pipe that runs under the pitch is far from ideal it already has this infrastructure. Plus moving in with the rugby club and creating a sporting hub makes a far more attractive proposition when applying for support grants to improve facilities in the future which would help take financial burden away from the club and the fans.

Yet it appears the rugby club don't want us.

Its only a 25 year lease

We still wouldn't own our ground

All in all the only benefit of BM is that it's in darlo

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I think this my point until we have our own ground we will always be at the mercy of others ,I would rather wait even if it is a few more years at least then we have something to aim for, 25 years is not long in what we are trying to achieve.

[Fatty eats roadkill]

Fuck it, tell the FA we are playing at Wembley and become squatters!

[Darlofan97]

While i agree the three sites being mentioned would all be sites to be considered i just dont see it being possible to raise the funds we'd need in any sort of reasonable time. All of which time we would be at Bishop and suffering the commercial ramifications of that. To even flatten one of these propsed sites and install the electricity connection a plumbing connection etc would probably use up most if not all of the money we currently have (which was raised through fan donations not through operating profits of the club). We would then have to find ways to raise further funds to put down any infrastructure up to id suppose would have to be conference standard if thats our mid term aim. I just don't see it as achievable.

While BM and the pipe that runs under the pitch is far from ideal it already has this infrastructure. Plus moving in with the rugby club and creating a sporting hub makes a far more attractive proposition when applying for support grants to improve facilities in the future which would help take financial burden away from the club and the fans.

Yet it appears the rugby club don't want us.

Its only a 25 year lease

We still wouldn't own our ground

All in all the only benefit of BM is that it's in darlo

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I think this my point until we have our own ground we will always be at the mercy of others ,I would rather wait even if it is a few more years at least then we have something to aim for, 25 years is not long in what we are trying to achieve.

You might want to wait, but you do have to question how this would be viable?

Crowds and sponsorship will decline continuing in Bishop. Even more-so should we have problems with not being able to get promoted due to ground grading regulations (I'd like to point out that this will not be a problem this year).

I'm hopeful of a deal being struck for us to play at BM, but if its becoming increasingly obvious that a deal will not be done then I hope we get onto DMPRFC straight away.

[theoriginalfatcat]

I'll bump this thread back to the start.

Someone mentioned on a thread recently that during the initial investigations for a return to the town there was the potential of moving back to the Arena, not into the existing stadium but to a purpose built ground built on the land that Mowden acquired next to the Arena that they have additional pitches on. It was also mentioned that they would "build us a ground"

I like this idea. A nice modern little stadium we could call our own, and of course a lot of the stuff we need is already there.

Too good to be true.

[Fibonacci0112358]

I'll bump this thread back to the start.

Someone mentioned on a thread recently that during the initial investigations for a return to the town there was the potential of moving back to the Arena, not into the existing stadium but to a purpose built ground built on the land that Mowden acquired next to the Arena that they have additional pitches on. It was also mentioned that they would "build us a ground"

I like this idea. A nice modern little stadium we could call our own, and of course a lot of the stuff we need is already there.

Too good to be true.

Yes, I can just see the council granting planning permission for a stadium right next door to a stadium!

[Fibonacci0112358]

The Arena, only option in the short term to get back to Darlo and start raising money for our own ground one day. Time we approached Mowden cap in hand!!

Sent from my Z10

Not happening.

They didn't want us there for just one game this time last year!

[lo36789]

Which game?

I still think something could be sorted with BM. I had a chat with a mate last night and it does sound like some really fine line stuff.

It isn't as simple as a cut of the revenues, if what I was told is true then there are some requests we have in place which I can see why they'd be pushed back. I don't quite understand why we'd be that bothered though.

The main dispute from rugby club members hear say is that we want to bring our own caterers in on match days to use their kitchens (which seems quite easy to resolve), also they want to be sure that there will be sufficient space on our match days for all the players/spectators of potentially 3 rugby matches to fit in and that they will have free access with their rugby membership. It sounds like our demands are that we want the entire upstairs and downstairs for football people all we are leaving them is a 40capacity members room at the back.

They are now however completely aware that the idea was for a football/rugby membership card which would re-route money to the relevant party for stuff bought over the bar. I suspect that there is still negotiation on what the percentage is and I can understand why the rugby club would feel they deserve a percentage (they could have someone else renting the facility with 100% profits after all).

These feel like concessions we could make. That is why I am a little dubious over the story being told as to what the challenges are. I don't know what MJs business plan looks like maybe these things are quite critical to it.

[darlo reborn]

Does that mean if you have a rugby membership you can get in to watch the football as well for nothing ???

[love it!]

The chairman runs his own business from Blackwell meadows. The office he uses,mand I assume pays for, has 3 windows facing the main pitch which we have asked to use on match days. This request has been declined as he doesn't want to move his business just for match days and cannot relocate his business due to the type of business it is. Th rugby club have offered only 5% of the bar takings and want to run all of the catering on match days which is why we paused negotiations whilst they had there AGM. They have a new manager for Blackwell MEadows starting shortly and let's hope she brings new ideas to the place as a profit of £2100ish for 12 months which was declared at the AGM isn't a lot considering this is only after sacking all the paid for staff 6 months ago.

I can see both clubs point of view and we don't exactly have a strong position to negotiate and I get the feels we might just have to accept their terms even on a temp basis. It would be at a huge expense to start looking somewhere else. The grant money they were awarded which was held by the council, from sport England, has also been returned to sport England as the reasons it was granted have now not been met.

That's all I know so far but the deal, in my opinion, is still very much on the table

[poppyfield]

5% that's crap, lets say we have a good crowd in and take 2000 over the bar we would get 100 , and sell then 1000 worth of food that's another 50 quid for us , that's 150 to the club, now I know we would not take anything like that over the bar on match days but it just shows how small 5% is, Christ we make more on the50/50

[uncovered]

If what love it says is correct then we must walk away from this. We cannot move forward based on a flawed business plan. How can ever hope to grow and build with those demands. It's astonishing.

We are a bit snookered here but just because we are we are not desperate enough to accept unreasonable demands on a ground where expansion is already limited due to underground assets which the rugby already claim they knew nothing about.

[Fatty eats roadkill]

Do boro own the riverside? Is it a quango that own it? If so when we get swallowed up into an official tees valley authority why don't we demand to play there for the same peppercorn rent that boro pay? Sure they got it on a 999 year lease for a quid a year. We offer £2 a year and claim we are giving taxpayers a better deal!

[lo36789]

5% that's crap, lets say we have a good crowd in and take 2000 over the bar we would get 100 , and sell then 1000 worth of food that's another 50 quid for us , that's 150 to the club, now I know we would not take anything like that over the bar on match days but it just shows how small 5% is, Christ we make more on the50/50

Thing is we don't that is hugely over inflated figures, and remember the rugby club continue to have the burden of cost of sales. I am not actually sure it is worth arguing over.

Someone in the bar/pub industry must know what the general markup on a pint of beer is. I suspect cost is around the 25/30% mark - at least that is what the first few hits on google tell me, and given a normal business looks to be at about 50% costs to revenue 20%-25% for overheads sound reasonable.

A £3 pint has already cost the rugby club 90p so I think it is only fair that they get the rest of that back. I'd have though a 70:30 or 60:40 split in favour of the rugby club on the profit would be more fair. That would equate to about 21% of revenue in total.

Why is that fair, you ask, well it's simple. Under normal circumstances the rugby club would be renting out those facilities and would be taking 100% of the profit over the bar. If you have a function there you don't get back a percentage of your bar takings at the end of the day.

There is a balance between the guaranteed use of the facilities, and also what could be deemed 'lost revenue' by the rugby club.

[Bogratsteve]

When I owned a pub & also did stock taking/accounting for pubs you had to be looking at a 45% GM to break even, not many pubs managed that, depending on the tie in on beer purchases (I.e. Franchised or free trade) it was a struggle to make decent margins on wet sales alone, any decent return was on food.

If the rugby club are covering ALL costs on the bar/kitchen etc then 5% on Sales although on the low side is not unreasonable, if it's on profit then far to low.

If we got 10% on sales then I would be very happy