Investment

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

User avatar
dfc4me
Posts: 327
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by dfc4me » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:31 am

If 1 or 2 people wanted to buy 15% of the club and take a seat on the board it probably wouldn't be a problem. It is just important to many people that the DFCSG retain the majority share and with it control of the club.

m62exile
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by m62exile » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:32 am

We’re still run with no full time staff operationally or commercially, for totally understandable reasons so far. There’s got to be a point though where we invest in this area so we can grow our own revenue in a more sustainable and long term way.

It would be a brave decision but it’s an inevitable one I’d have thought, taking away some of the operational burden from the board and volunteers and allowing us to pursue partnerships and opportunities with the wider community.

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by al_quaker » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:37 am

m62exile wrote:We’re still run with no full time staff operationally or commercially, for totally understandable reasons so far. There’s got to be a point though where we invest in this area so we can grow our own revenue in a more sustainable and long term way.

It would be a brave decision but it’s an inevitable one I’d have thought, taking away some of the operational burden from the board and volunteers and allowing us to pursue partnerships and opportunities with the wider community.
Yep - I can't imagine many conference (or maybe even top half conference north) teams are run entirely by volunteers?

If the medium term goal is to become established in the conference, then employing someone who can add value in terms of commercial involvement, community involvement, and operational efficiency might well be necessary. Easier said than done of course, and it'd be interesting to know how others with similar aims to us manage the off-field side.

H1987
Posts: 2073
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by H1987 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:38 am

What a weird original post. Tell you what, fair enough if it's genuine, and if it is, contact board. It comes across as a wind up merchant, toying with peoples feelings. We've had enough disappointments over the years.

Back on to the discussion from the rest of the thread though: Yes, i agree we're pretty open to investment, depending on what it is, and what type of influence said investor wants. We just want appropriate safe guards in place to ensure our club is never taken from us, or needlessly endangered as it was in the late 90's to early 00's by reckless, self interested parties.

Oh and i sort of agree with the fans money running dry. Honestly, are we going to raise 45k by the end of December...? I mean i certainly hope so, but that's a *lot* of money in a very short time period. The ground definitely needs some kind of terracing as well to improve the viewing experience. Probably some of it covered as well. Not being in the tinshed or seats on Saturday would not have been fun, and we'll have plenty of that weather to come.

UTQ.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Quakerz » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:45 am

When we're talking about lack of cover, we're no different to Bishop in that respect.

In fact there's more places to take cover at BM because a few people can hide under the balcony and in the red seats.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

H1987
Posts: 2073
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by H1987 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:51 am

Correct, but we're talking about growing attendances, not maintaining the ones from them, and whilst I really liked Heritage Park, that's rightly not what we're aiming for. It's safe to say we've got a core who will go regardless, it's the floating fans we need back.

User avatar
Robbie Painter
Posts: 2289
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:37 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Robbie Painter » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:57 am

H1987 wrote:What a weird original post. Tell you what, fair enough if it's genuine, and if it is, contact board. It comes across as a wind up merchant, toying with peoples feelings. We've had enough disappointments over the years.

Back on to the discussion from the rest of the thread though: Yes, i agree we're pretty open to investment, depending on what it is, and what type of influence said investor wants. We just want appropriate safe guards in place to ensure our club is never taken from us, or needlessly endangered as it was in the late 90's to early 00's by reckless, self interested parties.

Oh and i sort of agree with the fans money running dry. Honestly, are we going to raise 45k by the end of December...? I mean i certainly hope so, but that's a *lot* of money in a very short time period. The ground definitely needs some kind of terracing as well to improve the viewing experience. Probably some of it covered as well. Not being in the tinshed or seats on Saturday would not have been fun, and we'll have plenty of that weather to come.

UTQ.
I am 100% confident the money will be raised by the end of December.

DFC Fans have raised over £750k since 2012
DFC Fans have raised over £140k since May
DFC Fans have pledged £6800 since yesterday

We are 26% of the way to the £50k target already.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:04 am

Quakerz wrote:When we're talking about lack of cover, we're no different to Bishop in that respect.

In fact there's more places to take cover at BM because a few people can hide under the balcony and in the red seats.
I was thinking this Quakerz. At the moment, if the Tin She'd holds 1100, and 250 can go in the seats, you can get another 120 or so under the red seats and maybe another 100 tucked right under the clubhouse. That's 1500 already.

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by al_quaker » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:23 am

Vodka_Vic wrote:
Quakerz wrote:When we're talking about lack of cover, we're no different to Bishop in that respect.

In fact there's more places to take cover at BM because a few people can hide under the balcony and in the red seats.
I was thinking this Quakerz. At the moment, if the Tin She'd holds 1100, and 250 can go in the seats, you can get another 120 or so under the red seats and maybe another 100 tucked right under the clubhouse. That's 1500 already.
That may be so, but by the red seats or tucked under the clubhouse are terrible views of the game - we're not going to grow crowds if people can't get a decent view of what's going on. It's why I think we haven't had the expected decent crowd bounce from returning to Darlo - anything above 1500 and it's hard to see for some (and even then, flat standing a distance away from the pitch is still hardly appealing at £14 a pop). Work in progress of course, and the new seats will help (although probably not that much if they sell out for STs next season as I imagine they will).

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13213
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by divas » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:34 am

If all of the new seating sells out for season tickets we'll be in a great position! As it is I'm sure there'll be 200 seats to be used on a casual basis.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Quakerz » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:36 am

divas wrote:If all of the new seating sells out for season tickets we'll be in a great position! As it is I'm sure there'll be 200 seats to be used on a casual basis.
Hope we're going to charge a couple of quid for people to sit in the spare seats.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Quakerz » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:41 am

al_quaker wrote:
Vodka_Vic wrote:
Quakerz wrote:When we're talking about lack of cover, we're no different to Bishop in that respect.

In fact there's more places to take cover at BM because a few people can hide under the balcony and in the red seats.
I was thinking this Quakerz. At the moment, if the Tin She'd holds 1100, and 250 can go in the seats, you can get another 120 or so under the red seats and maybe another 100 tucked right under the clubhouse. That's 1500 already.
That may be so, but by the red seats or tucked under the clubhouse are terrible views of the game - we're not going to grow crowds if people can't get a decent view of what's going on. It's why I think we haven't had the expected decent crowd bounce from returning to Darlo - anything above 1500 and it's hard to see for some (and even then, flat standing a distance away from the pitch is still hardly appealing at £14 a pop). Work in progress of course, and the new seats will help (although probably not that much if they sell out for STs next season as I imagine they will).
The next thing we can do after the stand is completed, is to terrace the rest of that side from the tin shed to the pipe exclusion zone.

This will have the effect of raising the overall capacity by a couple hundred or so if it's an 8 step terrace, it will give more and better vantage points for fans, and it should be relatively cheap.

Then if and when we get promoted, look to develop the open end + carry out any other work that is required for Cat A.

I'd definitely look to stick a terrace there as an intermediate ground improvement.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 14080
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Darlo_Pete » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:50 am

Any terracing down the side won't be cheap, I'd imagine the costs would be similar to building the two stands. However, I do think there are grounds for doing some of the work ourselves, IE helping with digging foundations and that could reduce the costs significantly.

User avatar
Allan Quatermain
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:01 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: Investment

Post by Allan Quatermain » Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:55 am

Darlo_Pete wrote:The club has gone as far as it can being funded by the fans,
No it hasn't
Alun's promise to the fans: “I’ll make sure I’ll bring players in that are value for money and I want players that want to play for Darlington Football Club, want to progress and move up the league and show the fans that passion.”

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by al_quaker » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:02 pm

divas wrote:If all of the new seating sells out for season tickets we'll be in a great position! As it is I'm sure there'll be 200 seats to be used on a casual basis.
Hope you're right (well, actually I hope you're wrong as it may mean more STs sold :lol: ).

I think terracing down the sides (as much as is possible) is more important than developing the open end - as steep and high as possible up to the pipe. For me personally, being able to get some decent height on the side of the pitch and thus to actually be able to see the whole game properly, may actually completely change my feelings towards BM. Although I understand that developing the open end first may make more sense.

And of course, any terracing down the sides would help towards Cat A capacity requirements, so wouldn't be a waste in terms of ground grading.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:09 pm

I think either JT or Wayne or both said at the infamous fans' forum that once we had funded the stand then the costings were going to be produced for the next steps re:improving the ground and long term plans shown for getting Category A. Once this is done then we'll know what it entails.
Regarding fan investment slowing right down, I know that there were more than a few potential fan investors who would not invest whilst MG was at the helm. Now that he's left then I think(hope) it'll speed up again. Looks like it is.
Also, when we do get promotion, or even before to fund a terrace, what about an initiative involving DFCSG renewals. If the renewal is £20 or £25 we make this a minimum renewal, and if people say want to renew for £50 as a one off then this goes towards another pitch. If 500 people paid an extra £20 then there's 10k immediately.

tezza
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: Investment

Post by tezza » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:51 pm

al_quaker wrote:
divas wrote:Make that 27%
:shock:

Fair play to whoever's chucked that in :clap:
Munro,..perhaps ? :lol: :lol: :lol:

sada8022
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:17 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by sada8022 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:39 pm

I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 14080
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Darlo_Pete » Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:47 pm

Apparently it's a mains pipe and Northumbrian Water won't allow any structure to be built on top of it.

m62exile
Posts: 2242
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by m62exile » Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:51 pm

Quakerz wrote:
divas wrote:If all of the new seating sells out for season tickets we'll be in a great position! As it is I'm sure there'll be 200 seats to be used on a casual basis.
Hope we're going to charge a couple of quid for people to sit in the spare seats.
I’d hope not. Let’s try and get people in the place by offering them a chance of seeing the game. I think £14 to experience BM is quite enough myself and we could do with trying to attract people through the gates in the first place.

sada8022
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:17 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by sada8022 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:53 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:Apparently it's a mains pipe and Northumbrian Water won't allow any structure to be built on top of it.
The whole of Darlo is built on mains pipes

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 12644
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Spyman » Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:13 pm

sada8022 wrote:I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.
This has already been covered. It is the entrance to the Bat Cave.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Investment

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:40 pm

sada8022 wrote:
Darlo_Pete wrote:Apparently it's a mains pipe and Northumbrian Water won't allow any structure to be built on top of it.
The whole of Darlo is built on mains pipes
For whatever reason it can't be done... moving it costs about a million quid so that's a no go as well...

There is another option tho so be interested to see what the new plans look like once the next stand goes up....

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:17 pm

What's the other option you mention?

H1987
Posts: 2073
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by H1987 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:35 pm

Spyman wrote:
sada8022 wrote:I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.
This has already been covered. It is the entrance to the Bat Cave.
Can't we just go full Bane and lock him down there in the tunnels. Although he did blow up a stadium to do it....

It is a bit mad. There must be a process where we could try again, and if Northumbria water moan again, then make our case to the council. There absolutely must be other far more substantial structures built over the thing in other places, and the stands are tiny anyway (and, i would imagine, wouldn't completely block access as the seated bit looks like it could be moved if we wanted to from the existing structure, it's the foundations and roof that are the more substantial bit).

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13213
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by divas » Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:38 pm

H1987 wrote:
Spyman wrote:
sada8022 wrote:I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.
This has already been covered. It is the entrance to the Bat Cave.
Can't we just go full Bane and lock him down there in the tunnels. Although he did blow up a stadium to do it....

It is a bit mad. There must be a process where we could try again, and if Northumbria water moan again, then make our case to the council. There absolutely must be other far more substantial structures built over the thing in other places, and the stands are tiny anyway (and, i would imagine, wouldn't completely block access as the seated bit looks like it could be moved if we wanted to from the existing structure, it's the foundations and roof that are the more substantial bit).
R
Have a look on Google maps and you can see exactly where the pipe runs through Darlington - it's the bit where all of the housing developments etc don't have any buildings - it actually runs right by the side of my house where the developer has conveniently had to provide some "green space". The only places where building has been made on top of the original route are where the pipe has been diverted i.e. The Arena

In the rare event that access was needed Northumbrian Water don't want to be spending hours dismantling structures just to get to the pipe whilst the population of the area is without water and they sure as shite aren't going to leave things like they found them once they've finished

Darlofan97
Posts: 5690
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Darlofan97 » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:43 pm

I think that it is unfair to suggest that we have reached our potential as a fan-owned club. I think that many forget that we will 'unlock' additional revenue in the Summer of 2020 when the 5-year ST deal expires.

I also believe that we will see a benefit from having the capacity to offer an additional 250 covered seating season tickets over next Summer.

I personally believe that it should be an option to go ahead and terrace the area from the Tin-Shed to the water-pipe easement. However any such works would possibly require the re-location of the floodlight situated right in front of that area. I think that this would raise the capacity by a couple of hundred, improve the matchday experience and be more cost effective than raising the funds to develop the open end in the short-term. With the re-calculated capacity with new terracing and the new seated stand, then we wouldn't be a million miles away from the 4,000 capacity needed for Cat A.

Just an idea, but I do think that this club can continue to stride ahead in its current form without doubt, however patience is perhaps needed.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Investment

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:50 am

H1987 wrote:
Spyman wrote:
sada8022 wrote:I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.
This has already been covered. It is the entrance to the Bat Cave.
Can't we just go full Bane and lock him down there in the tunnels. Although he did blow up a stadium to do it....

It is a bit mad. There must be a process where we could try again, and if Northumbria water moan again, then make our case to the council. There absolutely must be other far more substantial structures built over the thing in other places, and the stands are tiny anyway (and, i would imagine, wouldn't completely block access as the seated bit looks like it could be moved if we wanted to from the existing structure, it's the foundations and roof that are the more substantial bit).
I'm assuming you know where the pipe intersects, both behind the goal and on the side next to the current seated stand?

Ok so let's say you stood in front of the club house and looked at the pitch.... if you move the pitch (so just re do the pitch lines) roughly 20 yards to the right, then the pipe intersects the corners... this means we can not only build the full width behind the opposite goal, it means we can build on the rest of that side where the seated stand is up towards the tin shed, AND, the club house will then sit more in one corner, which will give us about 30 yards of space where the away turnstiles are....all this would require would be some ground work behind the open end/away end, moving the fence back etc... with the tin shed it may be that making it deeper would work or worst case, moving it up... but that wouldn't cost as much as we have the structure, it would just be groundwork and moving it... if you look on google maps you will see that this won't take out any rugby pitches, so the RFC shouldn't have any objections. Thereby your pipe problem isn't a problem anymore... :D

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 14080
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by Darlo_Pete » Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:00 am

SwansQuaker83 wrote:
H1987 wrote:
Spyman wrote:
sada8022 wrote:I don't get this about the mystery pipe , most towns are build upon pipes why is this one so special you cannot build on it, its not like we are building the shard which is built over bigger pipes.
This has already been covered. It is the entrance to the Bat Cave.
Can't we just go full Bane and lock him down there in the tunnels. Although he did blow up a stadium to do it....

It is a bit mad. There must be a process where we could try again, and if Northumbria water moan again, then make our case to the council. There absolutely must be other far more substantial structures built over the thing in other places, and the stands are tiny anyway (and, i would imagine, wouldn't completely block access as the seated bit looks like it could be moved if we wanted to from the existing structure, it's the foundations and roof that are the more substantial bit).
I'm assuming you know where the pipe intersects, both behind the goal and on the side next to the current seated stand?

Ok so let's say you stood in front of the club house and looked at the pitch.... if you move the pitch (so just re do the pitch lines) roughly 20 yards to the right, then the pipe intersects the corners... this means we can not only build the full width behind the opposite goal, it means we can build on the rest of that side where the seated stand is up towards the tin shed, AND, the club house will then sit more in one corner, which will give us about 30 yards of space where the away turnstiles are....all this would require would be some ground work behind the open end/away end, moving the fence back etc... with the tin shed it may be that making it deeper would work or worst case, moving it up... but that wouldn't cost as much as we have the structure, it would just be groundwork and moving it... if you look on google maps you will see that this won't take out any rugby pitches, so the RFC shouldn't have any objections. Thereby your pipe problem isn't a problem anymore... :D
Blimey if the pitch was moved any further from the tinshed end, I'd need to take binoculars to see the game.

User avatar
don'tbuythesun
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Investment

Post by don'tbuythesun » Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:01 am

The pipe has been discussed at length before and it seems every option was looked at. Someone posted some really useful diagrams of exactly where the pipe runs. It seems that what we don't have a choice but to comply and as Divas says imagine the mess of ripping stuff up to get to it even though it's pretty unlikely they would need to.

Post Reply