Q&A - question re. programmes by Dewsbury unreg

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 12:46:57, 57 views.

Regarding the tizzy on here last night about the missing answer…

If it wasn’t for the tizzy on here, the question wouldn’t have been in the Q&A published today. James mentioned something about judging whether or not a question was worth answering, and for whatever reason decided that the programme question didn’t fit the bill. I would like to know why, and also what criteria a question must meet for James to decide whether or not it should be answered. Maybe that is a question I should submit for the next Q&A?

Anyway, I am disappointed to learn that the club does not factor in the likelihood of postponed games into its calculations for setting the programme budget. We all know that games get postponed during the winter, so is it not sensible to factor in that for 2 or 3 matches each season we are going to be left with unsold programmes?

I also have to say that this sentence: "To say the programme profitability runs at a loss is not to look at the whole picture of why the loss occured last season." and the subsequent explanation would do any Westminster politician proud. The programme made a loss. Don’t try and twist away from that simple fact. What we need to know is what the club is doing to address that issue for the future. Also, what is the club’s aim for the programme financially? To just break-even? To sell a certain number of copies (percentage) based on the match attendance? To limit the loss to a certain level? If the club aimed to run the programme at a £1000 loss last season, but we kept it down to £600, then that’s fantastic. However if the aim was to generate a £500 surplus, then we have failed - and we need to take steps to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

RE: Q&A - question re. programmes by safc communications User: safc communications

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 13:33:26, 57 views. In reply to 'Q&A - question re. programmes'

Simon, in reply…. The programme question was ALWAYS going to be answered in the Q&A. I wrote the reply on July 6th (I just checked back in my mail when I wrote the draft), but have been awaiting the other answers from Richard before publishing the whole lot in one go. I put the question up last night to appease Pirate/Michelle/Boroman. So, please don’t confuse that as me not wanting to publish the question and my answer in some form of cloak and dagger exercise, as I’m offended you think that of me to be honest.. I have no reason to dodge any question and in the Q&A, and will gladly answer any and all questions I can. So far we have answered all but one question posed to us since April - which was of a commercially sensitive nature.

Regarding your second point of factoring postponed games into the programme budget. Honestly, no, I have never thought to do so. I’m not a financial planning genius with the foresight to see how many games will be postponed. It’s a very unprecise art is measuring programme numbers, etc, and I could factor in one or two postponed games, but then if four or five get postponed the budget would still be ruined. What I did last season was attempt to recitfy the loss after the postponements with lower page numbers and lower print runs. I also attempted to ’employ’ a second programme seller to go around the ground and actively sell the programme - but no-one was willing to help out unfortunately. Anyone who would like to do so this season - please shout up!

"What we need to know is what the club is doing to address that issue for the future"

Firstly, a survey was undertaken at the end of the season in which 60 or so Boro fans from 70 questioned answered that they would be happy to pay up to £2 per copy for the programme. With this in mind, and with a slight rise in printing and delivery charges, the cover price will be £1.70.

Secondly, content has been re-managed to reduce page numbers. Articles have been reduced in size (just one page for the away team info for example, and a combined society/boardroom page). I am at pains to do this because the quantity of content reduces, but it’s a financial decision I decided to take. There will be only 28 or 32 pages in each programme, and the pagination won’t go higher than this - last season we had 36 and 40 pages mainly. Less pages = less costs.

Thirdly, there will be lower print-runs at all matches to ensure sell-outs occur. This is where the unexact science comes in. There might be 350 at the Lincoln game… there might be 550. It is impossible to know any attendance for any given match, and therefore possible to know how many programmes to print. It is all best guess. I have offered the option to all fans of paying for programmes up front to guarantee a copy will be there for them on matchdays to collect. Only two people have taken this option with me at the minute, although Keith Crowe continues to have a high order for his collectors.

As a guideline I attempt to guess the possible attendance, and print programmes to cover 40% of that attendance. For example I am guessing at 500 for the Lincoln game, therefore I will be ordering 200 programmes. With maybe 800 for the Brid game I will print 300. With around 40 for pre-orders and 20 or so for sponsors, officials, league, referees etc that leaves 140 to sell to an attendance of 500. My maths tells me that should be a sell-out.

Regarding surplus/deficit: The programme has never been a money making machine in terms of it’s profitability from cost price to expenditure. Hence the reduction in numbers and page sizes, and the increase in cover price this season to make that happen. However, income from the advertising and player sponsorships, which would be impossible without a programme in which to house them, do bring in a steady income stream. This season I have attempted to increase paid-for adverts, but unfortunately not had much luck so far with businesses dropping out due to their own budget cuts. I introduced the Classifieds section to help increase this, but as of yesterday, not one confirmation had dropped through the door. I’d love to have a week going round everyone in town, suited and booted speaking about the club and the future, and offering advertising deals to businesses. But that just isn’t possible. That’s a shame for me as with my sales background I;d hopefully have a good chance of forming some long term relationships for the club.

One point I would like to clarify now which was previously touched on by Boroman/Pirate, is that there are no printers in the local Scarborough area who can print the product we get from our current printers and beat the price. Scarborough printing firms charge a vast amount for printing and their turnaround times are far too long for our requirements. And yes, I have spoken to them all at some point over the past four summers. Our current printer does a great job, for low cost, at brilliant turnaround times (48 hours from copy to delivery.) The fact he is based in Manchester and not Scarborough is a shame, but not the be all and end all of the product.

There is no budget restraint to say the programme must make X amount. A break even situation would be good for me, as the goal is of course to not lose money on the publication this season as occured lasy year. The goal is for me, and always has been, for the programme to act as the ’fortnightly newsletter’ to all supporters in attendance at games. It is the matchday link between the fans and the club, and that will always be my goal for it’s use. It advertises everything the club does to the highest number of stakeholders who may or may not have internet access. A gentleman my girlfriend knows often remarks how without the programme he wouldn’t have a clue what is going on as he doesn’t buy a paper on have internet access.

Finally, and I thank you for the query Simon as I am happy to share, I see the programme making a nice surplus this season with all the measures put in place.

And as a postscript, the fresh design this year is lovely ;)

www.scarboroughathletic.com | www.back2boro.co.uk | info@scarboroughathletic.com

RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes by Dewsbury unreg

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 14:11:01, 46 views. In reply to 'RE: Q&A - question re. programmes'

Thanks for the prompt answer. I don’t why you are offended by what I wrote, as I did not explicitly state, nor imply, that you were involved in any form of cloak and dagger exercise. Far from it. I was picking up something you said last night about assessing the questions which come into you via the q&a e-mail address - and I’m sure you said that the programme question was not going to be answered. So I was merely asking how you judged which questions should be answered.

Secondly, you do not have to be a financial genius to know that there will be postponed games during the season. The tricky part is estimating how many there will be. Better to get that part wrong than to assume you will have no unsold programmes at all.

Glad to hear that the financial target is to break-even. Do you have a sales target?

Finally, I have to say that I was unaware that you needed a programme seller for this season - until your post just now.

RE: RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes by safc communications User: safc communications

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 14:30:16, 45 views. In reply to 'RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes'

Can’t remember even saying that question wouldn;t be answered - otherwise the time I spent drafting an answer would have been a bit pointless! No offence taken really, as it’s obviously just crossed wires.

Sales target - Sell every programme produced. That occurs, we make a nice surplus (even with a couple of postponed matches) and my spare room is empty. Simples! :) Hard to put a financial figure on it because I don’t know a) how many games there will be at home - could be just the 20 we are guaranteed at present, or over 30 if cup games are won and home draws occur, and b) I’ve no idea how attendances will pan out game on game.

Re: programme seller - I have one (and sometimes two) in Bill and Rachel Hunter, who work from the hut, and we have copies on the club shop in the bar. What I need is an additional seller to walk the ground and pick up those who may have missed an original opportunity to purchase a copy. You offering Simon? ;)

www.scarboroughathletic.com | www.back2boro.co.uk | info@scarboroughathletic.com

RE: RE: RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes by dogtanian User: dogtanian

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 23:08:47, 29 views. In reply to 'RE: RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes'

i hope you’re getting paid a lot for doing the programme james because boy you’re getting a hell of a bent ear about it.

maybe we should all remember that most people in our club are doing things on a voluntary basis

Huh? by Dewsbury User: Dewsbury

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 23:31:50, 37 views. In reply to 'RE: RE: RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes'

Two fans ask questions about the programme’s budget, and you dive in to defend him, claiming we’re giving him "a hell of a bent ear"? Are you serious?

The amount someone is getting paid for their time is immaterial - everyone who works (paid or unpaid) for this club should be accountable to us the fans. I profoundly disagree with the notion that people should be above scrutiny and/or criticism just because they give their time for no financial reward. If we dare not point out failings, or ask questions, then our club will stagnate. Healthy criticism and questioning should be encouraged, not dismissed.

* Simon Cope * I am not a sheep *

RE: Huh? by safc communications User: safc communications

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 23:43:34, 36 views. In reply to 'Huh?'

"Healthy criticism and questioning should be encouraged, not dismissed."

For what it is worth - I totally agree. That is why we set up the Q&A, and I made a decision to post on here once again for the sake of the fans. I, and every director, doesn’t mind having a bent ear now and again, and as long as we can give answers we will do so. I prefer to do it in person or via a proper communication from a trusted source than through anonymous log-ins on here, but there you go.

Everyone now knows the inner workings of everything to do with the programme. Whether they agree or not , that’s how I work it. If ideas are put forward which I think would be of benefit I am open to listening to those ideas. I may, after listening to the idea in full, chose not to use said ideas, but I will always listen to the feasibility of them. Same goes for all my operations for the club, which, paid or unpaid, will always be for the benefit of SAFC, it’s fans, it’s stakeholders and football in Scarborough.

**Politician mode switched off, time for bed :)**

www.scarboroughathletic.com | www.back2boro.co.uk | info@scarboroughathletic.com

RE: Huh? by dogtanian User: dogtanian

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 23:46:24, 37 views. In reply to 'Huh?'

ok simon all i was just trying to hint at was that he could just walk away from it. Its been two consecutive nights of this now. Hell many people would. I don’t really care, was just saying lay off the guy - wish i hadn’t bothered - lay off me too!

Thank you Dewsbury by Pirate User: Pirate

Posted: 29/7/2010 at 14:39:08, 53 views. In reply to 'RE: RE: Q&A - question re. programmes'

Thank you for taking up the mantle and explaining everything so that ALL Seadog fans can now see my question, which I kept harping on about for ages, was a serious question and not, as some have intimated, a personal vendetta against our Communications member. I hold no gripe with James over this matter … the fun last night was caused by the unprofessional response to PIRATE / MICHELLE / BOROMAN.

P.S. For those that tell me to go to games and help the club … I might add … I attend most Home games ( Family of 3 ) and was keen enough to join the B2B Steering Committee until recently. … Nuff said on the matter.

Always Believe - B2B - Bring Back the Boro Boys