irnbru
-
Posts
6851 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Posts posted by irnbru
-
-
14 minutes ago, TRVMP said:
Yep, there'd need to be much more emphasis on the post-game offering.
That said, there must only have been about 20 there on Saturday...
-
6 hours ago, TRVMP said:
Avoiding use of floodlights and undersoil heating is unquestionably the right thing to do. These are, in the grand scheme of things, luxury goods.
There will be edge cases of people who bought season tickets who get off work at 2pm or something. That is a small problem. A far bigger problem would be burning money that we simply do not have.
It's a cost of living crisis and we need to start thinking in terms of that crisis, not of minor inconvenience.
Would need to be more creative with hospitality too. Can't see many people wanting to turn up at 930.
6 hours ago, Alibi said:The old mindset, basically that Douglas Rae or whoever would put some money in to cover excess expenditure, is out of date. I don't quite understand how energy prices have risen quite as high as now seems to be the case - the oil price for Brent is under $100 a barrel at the moment, less than it was in 2014, so why didn't we have mahoosive energy bills then? Also, when there's a moderate breeze, Scotland is self sufficient in energy from renewable sources and the cost of wind hasn't gone up, so why are we being ripped off? Anyway, given that we're stuck in this situation, for which I largely blame those who voted no in 2014, Morton need to act to mitigate the effects. Changing kick off times so that games are played during daylight hours might be an option, although in midwinter the light is often pretty poor even during the daylight hours. I don't think it would be a popular strategy, but it's probably what was done prior to about 1960 when floodlighting wasn't more or less universal - I think Cappielow only got floodlights in about 1958 or thereabouts, presumably when the cowshed was built, so before that games must have been scheduled during daylight hours.
It can't be said often enough - there is no magic money tree now, failing a good draw in the Scottish Cup maybe. Morton has to be run as a business, not a pet project. I'll be interested to see the bio of each candidate for election to the MCT board to find out what particular talents they bring to the table. I also think MCT need to have someone competent handling the PR side, as recent events have suggested it's not always being handled well.
MCT candidates aren't really anything to do with the day to day running of the club so aren't responsible for the PR. They should be responsible for holding the club to account though which they don't seem to do.
-
See that an MCT board member who's supposed to have a background in marketing saying the tone of the latest club update is good and it's good to see feedback from fans.
This has been the message from MCT for a while and I fail to see what they're doing to help or hold the club to account. Instead it seems like he's distancing them. Not a good look.
-
50 minutes ago, so72 said:
No idea where to ask/post this -
Are the players washing their own kits/training gear?
We've got a kitman so I'd be very surprised if they were.
-
The problem now is they just see it as communication. I think they need to accept a wider operation problem in how they go about things.
-
6 minutes ago, so72 said:
Annoys me that Chris often sits with directors and that, might not annoy you but annoys me
Just assumed he paid for the business season ticket thing they done.
-
2 minutes ago, so72 said:
If everyone who is moaning online actually bought the programme then perhaps it wouldn't be gone.
It's not just about sales - theres advertising, etc too and it sums up the approach of simply looking to cut costs rather than bring in more money.
-
1
-
-
Seems a bit daft to me. Must be at least ten advertisers and assume that's a minimum of £500 a season plus the sales so surely they they could cut costs and still make a profit.
Even if its closer to break even, the programmes in hospitality, for mascots, collectors, etc gives other benefits so can't really see how they can justify this decision unless it's lazieness/ a lack of staff to do things.
-
29 minutes ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:
Pretty grim reading. My first impression on reading it is that MCT have bitten off more that they could chew and harsh realty has now well and truly hit home.
One statement I found a quite baffling was, 'This has continued into the 2022/23 season, with energy and utilities being one of those unplanned costs that we have to pay. The club utilities bill has increased by 325% for example.'
Firstly, surely energy and utilities costs were not 'unplanned', and secondly, how the hell has the bill increased by 325%, when the average domestic energy increase is 36%??
Aye, talking about budgeting one minute and unplanned costs the next. Utilities are the kind of thing that should have been accounted for at best and worst case scenario.
-
21 minutes ago, DumfriesTon said:
It sounds to me that Gordon Ritchie was talking a lot of shite to keep us quiet/happy for the time being.
Agreed.
-
2 minutes ago, The Bewilderedbeast said:
From what I hear, from a good source, is that the investment discussed at the meeting last month, wont be happening.
One of the potential investors were rejected by the MCT board as "not being in the best interests of the club" and the remaining two pulled out as they feared being rejected by a public vote.
That leaves the sponsorship deal, which, as far as I know may well still be under discussion.
IIRC, and I may be wrong, but was it not said that the budget would be cut, but if the sponsorship went ahead, it would allow them to offer the same budget for players as they did last year.
This is the bit concerning me. I'm pretty sure Gordon Ritchie said the budget was already the same - it wasn't the same if we got new investment or sponsorship.
-
8 hours ago, TaunTon said:
Can only echo your opinion Nacho. I've never thought about the hospitality offered at Morton but based on this professional promotion fronted perfectly by Gerry and Andy I would now. This is sort of thing we've been screaming about for decades and shows what can be achieved by people who are interested enough to try.
Well done to all involved.
The hospitality at Cappielow is one of the best about. They've got the mix of it being slightly formal while still a relaxed day out spot on.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, ChampTon said:
He wasn't always on his game sadly, but Gozie was a somewhat effective presence up top. The 1-1 with Killie near the end of the season I thought he was outstanding. I think his previous injuries had him playing with some nerves.
I was critical of him most games but when watching back the highlights he was normally a big part of any chances we created.
-
31 minutes ago, RossMcC1874 said:
Heard we might be in for Josh Rae ex QOTS if Hamilton does leave.
Is that guy who was time wasting against us from early in the game? Hopefully not.
-
37 minutes ago, dunning1874 said:
Over the course of his time with us McLean's been a solid player despite a very poor first season, but that's definitely good news. There's too much to be done to the squad to retain a fourth choice centre back who's 37, spent a long time out injured last season and can't cover any other positions. Even if Strapp stays we still need left back cover; use McLean's wage on someone who can cover both centre back and left back and it allows that money to be put to greater use elsewhere in the squad.
Aye, I think he's contributed more than people give him credit for. I might be wrong but would guess our form has been better when he's in the team - seems to be a good influence and organiser even if he's not the player he was.
Wasn't dead against him staying but with the signings we've already made, it would be a bit of a waste of a wage.
-
Need to ditch whoever doesn't want a contract and get a squad together now.
-
36 minutes ago, dunning1874 said:
I’m hoping this is an approach of balancing a relatively poor wage with the security of two year deals, enabling us to offer more to some targets who would otherwise be out of our reach and are only likely to accept one year anyway in the hope of attracting better offers after a season. The alternative is players being given two year deals as they’re going to be considered the spine of the team who we’re looking to build around for a couple of years, when they shouldn’t be considered guaranteed starters.
It's fine margins between good and bad teams in this league so possibly Dougie values the continuity.
The likes of Luke Donnelly aren't world beaters but have been part of a fairly successful and settled Arbroath team.
-
11 hours ago, Madton said:
Think there needs to be an element of trust in the GMFC board here.
We clear need investment, they clearly know the people in question and will undoubtedly have done background checks. They are not going to sell us doon the water to the next Hugh Scott. If they don't pay up, they lose their shares so we are fully protected.
I don't think we need to know each individual agreement, knowing who they are is enough.
I'll be bitterly disappointed if we say no to additional income streams It's utter madness for me when we all want Dougie to have the best budget possible to give us the best chance of success.
Agree to an extent that some investment would be good and we can't know every detail. But I think effectively having shares on loan (which seems to be an option) or getting rid no questions asked is a pretty big difference and one the members need a vote on.
-
3 hours ago, dunning1874 said:
It also states that the confirmatory vote of the membership will take place after a deal is agreed, so the terms for each investor will surely be put to the membership for that vote as well as disclosing the identity of the investor(s). If the MCT board aren’t providing a satisfactory level of transparency about any individual deal the membership can still vote no to individual investors at that stage.
The way I read it is the veto is only over who, not how. This leaves it open to shares being sold with terms that might not be as entirely favourable or scrutinised.
I'm not suggesting the MCT board wouldn't act in the clubs best interest but I'd like a vote on the eventual terms - not just the ideal of selling shares in any way.
-
49 minutes ago, port-ton said:
The email states that once negotiations are agreed there would be another member vote on whether to sell to them and they'd be named.
I'm not really seeing an issue with that? My only issue with them not being named was that we'd be agreeing to sell to people we didn't know and we'd have no opportunity to reject it when we did find out.
The terms aren't know. Could be give them shares if they meet donations, a one off, etc. It presents a lot of uncertainty.
-
New mail out. Despite having a yes or no on who, there's no detail on how it will work and it'd still to be decided. I'm out.
-
2 hours ago, Jamie_M said:
They have it on display inside.
Aye, the point is its not very good for passing trade and impulse buys. I assumed it wasn't out yet and I'd be surprised if many people just go in there for a browse.
-
6 hours ago, Doddie said:
Strip arrived today from smiths and I ended up getting the turquoise polo too. Really don’t like the back of it but imagine the player one will look better with a name and number in between the sponsors.
Passed Smiths today on the way to get a haircut before going on holiday on Sunday. Thought to myself if I like the top in the window I'll maybe go buy it but no sign of the new one...
Edit to add. Probably wouldn't have bought it. Just looks like a top you'd see in the Sunday league there.
-
5 minutes ago, TRVMP said:
That's getting bought. Pisser that you have to email the club to secure delivery though. It says a tenner for delivery but I'm assuming that's domestic? (It's steep for domestic, but it doesn't say anything about international.)
Everything going via the new commercial manager seems to be leaving us with a bit of a bottle neck.
While it's good to see the club looking at ways of bringing in money, I'd imagine this isn't a big earner and would hope he's not doing too much admin - this is the time of year clubs need to be be getting pitch side sponsors, etc sold.
Commercial Activity
in General Morton Chatter
Posted
Aye, I guess so. As with the gate price going above £20, it's went over the £100 mark and I think that's the kind of thing people subconsciously or otherwise makes people change their minds.
I noticed the price listed for the dundee game is actually lower but as far as I can see there's no promotion of it being lower.
I really feel for the commercial guy though - he seems to cover pretty much everything whereas Lesley Ann was basically hospitality and lottery. We've got people of both the club board and MCT board with their selling point as having marketing backgrounds - I've yet to see any joined up approach to marketing or a strategy (this is different from the commercial job but should support it).