CRFC the Champions
Meeting with Allan Doull
Here are Mr Doull's comments.
Clearly all he said was not recorded so I cannot "Prove" any of it.
1. Actual crowds are 65 - 75 % of the announced figures. The announced figure includes all tickets issued - Season tickets or whatever. Stressed this is "normal practice" in sports accounting. The fact that many ST holders were not using their tickets and were quite likely to reconsider the "value" of buying one next season did not seem to be as important to Mr Doull as the money through the till now. (This seems a little odd to me as we need to build a committed following)
2. Approx 85% of last season's ST renewed. ST sales are approx 25% up on last season. Many of the new STs have decided to try the stadium and / or would not have bought one at CAP (straw poll of new ST holders). (ATTR again the "new" was stressed rather than people who have walked away)
3. Club is trading, financially, more successfully this season than last with corporate business "very positive". Club accepts that profit will be secondary to building attendances over a few years and they expect to lose money over the short medium term. This, it is believed, will be "repaid" when the crowds grow over the longer term. (ATTR - It will be interesting to see the Accounts covering this season when they come out [in 2011]as they will show how we are trading this season compared to last)
4. Acknowledgement that communication has not been good enough.
5. Club were not aware of the issues regarding the "supporters' Bus". Club was under the impression that the buses were waiting at the final whistle to take supporters back into town. They did not realise that there was a wait for the buses to turn up.
6. The club gets 11% of the profit from the food and drink outlets on CB match days the rest goes to compass. This is the same arrangement as CCFC get. If outside events e.g. a concert or the like is arranged Compass will get all the money on such occasions.
7. We pay 25% of match day costs. This is capped so if costs were to go "through the roof" there is a limit to such costs.
8. CCC is putting immense political pressure on CAC to sell CAP. It WILL happen. CRFC Ltd is looking at plans for a new ground and clubhouse for the RFC side. The plan is to include a training facility. There is also a plan to get a clubhouse for the regional side near to the SdR.
9. The Club is "concerned" about the atmosphere at the stadium.
10. Club is optimistic as to Academy players coming through from U18 squad approx 11 will be offered contracts.
11. We will buy if the price and terms are right.
12. The Robinsons: Nicky left due to "non-financial" issues. Jamie left as he saw himself going down the pecking order.
Mr Doull also spoke "off the record" so I cannot reprint those items here.
Bookmark or share this story with:
Quote:Dim Cais
how far from the pitch does a clubhouse have to be?
Quote:ATTR
It is not a £regional clubhouse. It is a club house for the club: ALL of the club. It will be part of any move of the Rags to the athletic stadium. If that does not happen then other plans will be looked at.
Quote:Blues R Us4
"8. CCC is putting immense political pressure on CAC to sell CAP. It WILL happen. CRFC Ltd is looking at plans for a new ground and clubhouse for the RFC side. The plan is to include a training facility. There is also a plan to get a clubhouse for the regional side near to the SdR."
Quote:PhilBB - againQuote:Blues R Us4
"8. CCC is putting immense political pressure on CAC to sell CAP. It WILL happen. CRFC Ltd is looking at plans for a new ground and clubhouse for the RFC side. The plan is to include a training facility. There is also a plan to get a clubhouse for the regional side near to the SdR."
Jesus wept. You're not one of those people who doesn't understand what he is supporting, are you?
Quote:ATTR
Exactly. I thought people were able to understand the issues.
The WP stipulates a clubhouse at / near the ground. One of the ideas behind moving to the athletic stadium is that there will be a clubhouse close to the SdR so there will be a clubhouse "on site" for the club's members to use after regional games as well as Rags games. Building two clubhouses would have a serious cost impact, so ONE clubhouse for the ONE club that CRFC Ltd is makes sense. Of course if people wish to perpetuate the myth of two clubs.
Quote:ATTR
The club wants a clubhouse near to its ground. if both sides play close to each other one clubhouse for the one club will be the more most cosrt effective weay of doing that. If the two sides do not play close together (as now) then the desire to rectify the lack of an "on hand" club house at the SdR would involve a second club house for our one club.
I see no reason to make any futher explanation of mr Doull's comments I and all but one person who have read then have had no problem understanding them so far.
Quote:Blues R Us4
What's your point?
Quote:ATTR
So you really think that Thomas would build two clubhouses side by side: do you really?
If the two continue two play a distance apart then maybe they would build one for the regional team.
To explain in simpleton terms.
They realise that the SdR does not provide the "clubhouse atmophere they thought it would (in fact promised us!). they would like to have a clubhouse. By relocating the RFC side to the Athletic stadium it would allow a clubhouse (which would have to be built under WP regs) to be built to serve the club with only one set of running costs. This makes sense since it would be pretty stupid to have to build two clubhouses and incur two lots of running costs. Would it not?
Quote:Blues R Us4Quote:ATTR
So you really think that Thomas would build two clubhouses side by side: do you really?
If the two continue two play a distance apart then maybe they would build one for the regional team.
To explain in simpleton terms.
They realise that the SdR does not provide the "clubhouse atmophere they thought it would (in fact promised us!). they would like to have a clubhouse. By relocating the RFC side to the Athletic stadium it would allow a clubhouse (which would have to be built under WP regs) to be built to serve the club with only one set of running costs. This makes sense since it would be pretty stupid to have to build two clubhouses and incur two lots of running costs. Would it not?
Yes it would be expensive but it is also what you have suggested in your initial post.
I thought the Athletics stadium was a non-starter?
Quote:ATTR
[
I suggested no such thing. The fact that you put 2 and 2 together and made 5 is not down to me nor the words of mr Doull.
Quote:BlueButtyBoy
You get caught in the showers down at CCS as well!
Quote:ATTR
THey need a clubhouse for supporters who go to the SdR.
If the Rags move they will need a clubhouse. By moving down to Leckwqith they can achive both aims by building ONE clubhouse for the ONE club. Can you not see?
Who told you that the Athletic stadium is a non stater?
Quote:Blues R Us4
Yes, thats very clear but thats not what Doull said, is it.
I'm sure that I read somewhere, during the CAC AGM, The Athletics stadium and Sophia Gardens had both been written off as possible new sites for Cardiff RFC as they were too expensive?
Quote:Dim CaisQuote:Blues R Us4
Yes, thats very clear but thats not what Doull said, is it.
I'm sure that I read somewhere, during the CAC AGM, The Athletics stadium and Sophia Gardens had both been written off as possible new sites for Cardiff RFC as they were too expensive?
That was similar to my understanding too.
Sophia gardens was too expensive as it would involve moving the astro turf pitch etc and the athletics stadium at present doesn't comply with WRU rules. Both would require a clubhouse as well to add to the expense.
Also at the AGM, the chairman didn't give the impression that "CCC is putting immense political pressure on CAC to sell CAP".
Quote:Blues R Us4
Aye - I thought it was more of a "We're staying put" comment from the chairman, although I did get that second hand. Did you go DC?
Quote:Blues R Us4Quote:ATTR
THey need a clubhouse for supporters who go to the SdR.
If the Rags move they will need a clubhouse. By moving down to Leckwith they can achive both aims by building ONE clubhouse for the ONE club. Can you not see?
Who told you that the Athletic stadium is a non stater?
Yes, thats very clear but thats not what Doull said, is it.
I'm sure that I read somewhere, during the CAC AGM, The Athletics stadium and Sophia Gardens had both been written off as possible new sites for Cardiff RFC as they were too expensive?
Quote:ATTRQuote:Blues R Us4Quote:ATTR
THey need a clubhouse for supporters who go to the SdR.
If the Rags move they will need a clubhouse. By moving down to Leckwith they can achive both aims by building ONE clubhouse for the ONE club. Can you not see?
Who told you that the Athletic stadium is a non stater?
Yes, thats very clear but thats not what Doull said, is it.
I'm sure that I read somewhere, during the CAC AGM, The Athletics stadium and Sophia Gardens had both been written off as possible new sites for Cardiff RFC as they were too expensive?
Try reading with a bit of logical thought! Both sides need a club house = the problem. Answer build one near to the SdR and relocate the other side to a ground so we only build ONE. Think about it. You need to learn what people mean not just read the words.
The Athletic stadium does not presently meet the criteria. If a clubhouse is bulit by the co for the WHOLE club then the cost will not be prohibitive on the Rags so that problem goes away. However, it is down to the membership.
The stadium was not written off and the club will consider any proposal that is put as they will have to move at some point.
Quote:ATTR
Obviously not. But then if it does not then I doubt that yo uwill see a clubhouse at leckwith.
Quote:ATTR
Obviously not. But then if it does not then I doubt that yo uwill see a clubhouse at leckwith.
Quote:ATTR
That is not the plan. The conversation went into more detail with some part that I said were "off the record" but the plan is not 2 clubhouses.
Quote:ATTR
From the article:
"Mr Doull also spoke "off the record" so I cannot reprint those items here."
Quite obviously it was not a verbatum report. Still chose to ignore if you like. As I also said; "I cannot prove any of it.".
Quote:ATTR
It is not for me to say why he would or would not wish a particular comment to be either on or off.
Quote:ATTR
If he had said that I would not have written what I did. I wrote what was not off the record.
Surely you could answer your obvious question.
Let's put it in Kindergarden terms.
Told off the record = Not published
Told ON the record = Published
Something like the SNK would not be 10 next season was "ON". Who his replacemete was was"OFF".
Some information about a topic was on the record whilst more detailed ( sesnsitive) bits were not.
Do you understand any better now.
By the way don't try fishing as no off the record stuff will be told.
Quote:ATTR
Well some of the Cardiff Blues fans think it is beautiful. Mind you some folk buy expensive flats (sorry apartments) down the Docks / Bay
Quote:bluebadger
Damn the working class!!!
The proletariat should be shot and the bourgeoisie can bulldose the hovels and build beautiful homes(in Leckwith) and eat cake!
Quote:ATTR
Please learn to understand the english language:
"Some information about a topic was on the record whilst more detailed ( sesnsitive) bits were not."

Quote:SAD NEWSBringer of bad news
Taurus is no more.
Quote:Not that long ago. Camilla did not take long to plaster windows with "Go to Charlstons" I remember the night well!ATTR
Went a long time ago!
So for all those who did not know it can't be that sad as you haven't been there for so long anyway!
Quote:ATTR
Surely if it was that wonderful / popular it would have been busy and stayed open.