Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Understood, although if the deal on the table had a lot more affordable housing and a proposal to make the club fan owned and sustainable going forward, there's got to be a possibility that Southwark would be prepared in return to include some element of Greendale.

That is never going to happen Siduhe. Southwark have had the money set aside for the Greendale renovation for over a year now and are rightly set on not losing that facility. It will be overhauled quite rapidly now.


Meadow?s only chance would be to build, or keep, the statium and any housing on the land that they actually own. A previous developer submitted plans for sixty flats on the carpark out front. But of course sixty if far fewer and less profitable than five hundred so I suspect that they will just try to sell it on. They will have to take a haircut but a big health and fitness chain might be interested.

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And Meadow are withholding full information about

> bar profits, which is a huge moneyspinner ? never

> mind taking into account the monies that could be

> earned from a properly-run gym, venue hire,

> astroturf pitch etc etc.


I'm sure the bar does very well, but is it profitable to the tune of tens of thousands per year which is what DHFC need? I struggle to believe it's *that* profitable. Exeter's income from "associated businesses" (including their bars but also other companies) was ?156k. They average almost three times the number of fans that DHFC do, so unless DHFC fans drink three times as much as ECFC fans I think you're overestimating the ability of the bar to provide sufficient revenue.


Perhaps if all those revenue streams were up and running at full capacity then it would be a different story. But even then they would bring associated costs which DHFC don't currently incur. For example, do you know how much it costs to install and maintain a 4G pitch? They're not cheap, at all, and they wear out after 10 years(ish) which means a replacement at the same price of a new installation.

Plural bars and businesses only generate an income of ?156000? Is that profit after overheads ,costs wages whatever or just an income ?


Even if the latter it seems very low to me ,not that I have any facilty at all with numbers .Not entered for O level Maths because I'd be a "waste of the entrance fee" Me ,bitter Miss Gibbs ? Noooooo.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If the average gate is 1500 and a pint costs ?4,

> each spectator would need to drink 25 pints a

> season to generate ?150,000 of revenue.


If 816 people drink two pints at all 23 home games, then they would hit the ?150,000 mark. And that's before you consider crisps, soft drinks and pork scratchings.

> If 816 people drink two pints at all 23 home games, then they would hit the ?150,000 mark. And that's before you consider crisps, soft drinks and pork scratchings.


I'm beginning to confuse this thread with the coach parking in Townley Rd one ,everything is starting to sound like those complex maths questions .


But ,seriously I wish there were a clear set of figures somewhere showing income ,expenditure ,input from Meadows .

Smething to answer Ruffers questions above .

When considering club finances do please remember that bar, health club etc. headline revenues are not the same as contributory profits. I don't know how profitable the bar itself is, but once wholesale costs of consumables, staff payments and other overheads are taken into consideration, net profit (which could be used to support the club) may be as low as 5%-7% of till receipts. A key issue here is what the beer etc. can be bought-in at. Even assuming a 100% mark-up on till prices there will still be significant overhead to take account of. Health clubs tend to depend on sign-ups with no real follow through after month 1. If the club is actually popular (i.e. people really use it) then the profits tend to plummet.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hello everyone, We are excited to introduce our new Maths Essentials course this Summer term, designed to help students gain confidence and build strong foundations. Day: Mondays - starting, 28th April 2025 Time: 5pm to 6pm Format: Remote instructor-led Level: Beginner Ages: 9 to 16 years old Our classes are free for families receiving any form of benefit or with a household income of £30k or under. Otherwise, the term fee is £45. We also offer a bursary fund so cost is never a barrier to learning with us. For more information and to register, please visit https://www.ignitehubs.org.uk/maths Join us to succeed in Maths! Regards,   Lin Maths Essentials Summer 2025.pdf
    • "Dedicated to the purpose-built student accommodation sector. PBSA News is the leading source of news, insights and analysis for professionals, investors and stakeholders in the purpose-built student accommodation sector. With a mission to provide the latest information and foster collaboration within the rental community."   The PBSA take on the strength of the market seems much more upbeat than does the govt. research paper. Perhaps they are right or perhaps it is in their interests to talk up the market?    
    • I think a lot of people here are just speculating about empty student accommodation properties. Student accommodation developments are very popular because they provide really great rates of return for the owner. A large student accommodation owner, Unite Students, saw 97.5% occupancy across their assets in the 2024/2025 academic year. They have many properties in London; https://pbsanews.co.uk/2024/10/09/unite-students-reports-record-occupancy-rates-in-q3-2024-update/ Here's a bit from CBRE on PBSA properties in London from May 2024: https://www.cbre.co.uk/press-releases/london-plan-policy-fails-to-deliver-affordable-student-accommodation - "According to new research by CBRE and QX Global, the gap between demand for PBSA and available supply in London currently stands at 100,000 – 105,000 full-time students, underscoring how demand for student housing has outpaced supply." - The development pipeline in London isn't keeping up with the demand. Ultimately this development wouldn't be built if student accommodation wasn't in demand. It's proximity to the station means that a student could get to any number of universities easily in a short span of time. Is it ideal? No. Would more affordable housing be better? Yes. Is speculating about channel migrants occupying the space uninformed idiocy? Absolutely.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...