1877 Club

[santaponsasaint 5,188]

Haha., like that. I dont want in for free, and i think you know that. I want to see the hefty wedge of club money invested in this bar see a real and meaningful return, as well as being accessible to all the saints support who help fund it. That, i believe is what the majority want.
if you seek to exclude by disposable income, can you call it a 'Fans Bar'? We aint Man U..!

You pay to get into Manchester Utd supporters club.

[div 13,514]

There you go. Free entry, free soup, and a free lift back into town.

Still, the clubs shit eh?

[pozbaird 20,991]

32 minutes ago, santaponsasaint said:

You pay to get into Manchester Utd supporters club.

 

Scunner. They come all the way from Surrey and Essex then get charged to enter?

[div 13,514]

Confirmed also that the licensed capacity of the club is 223.

 

[pozbaird 20,991]

2 minutes ago, div said:

There you go. Free entry, free soup, and a free lift back into town.

Still, the clubs shit eh?

 

Free Wodewick!

[St.Ricky 8,253]

I must admit to being a bit lost with all of this.

As I understand it - as things stand.

A club has been formed.

Members have paid a joining fee of £50

Members pay a monthly sum - currently £10

Club membership is open to all who wish to join and can afford to do so.

Members can attend before and after each game.

Members can introduce (sign in) 2 guests per game.

This is what I signed up for.

Am I in anyway incorrect in my understanding?

So before any changes are made:

Should current members be asked for their opinions?

And should they disagree then:

A refund of the joining fee should be given.

An opportunity given to cease monthly membership payments.

Now

I have no objections to any fans being able to use the facilities if they pay the same money.

Simply put

Either there is a payment structure in place matched by appropriate benefits.

Or

Entry is free for all subject to a nominal joining / registration fee.

 

 

 

Edited January 5, 2017 by St.Ricky

[div 13,514]

7 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

I must admit to being a bit lost with all of this.

As I understand it - as things stand.

A club has been formed.

Members have paid a joining fee of £50

Members pay a monthly sum - currently £10

Club membership is open to all who wish to join and can afford to do so.

Members can attend before and after each game.

Members can introduce (sign in) 2 guests per game.

This is what I signed up for.

Am I in anyway incorrect in my understanding?

So before any changes are made:

Should current members be asked for their opionions?

And should they disagree then:

A refund of the joining fee shuld be given.

An opportunity given to cease monthly membership payments.

Now

I have no objections to any fans being able to use the facilities if they pay the same money.

 

 

You can stop your membership at any time, there is no contract.

There is no joining fee, the only up front fee that was ever payable was the founder members fee to get the place built.

The free entry is for after the game. Entry for non-members before the game is via guest list access and is unchanged at £3 a head.

Netflix recently put up their monthly fee, as did Microsoft for Office 365. The bastards never asked me if it was ok.

[St.Ricky 8,253]

Just now, div said:

You can stop your membership at any time, there is no contract.

There is no joining fee, the only up front fee that was ever payable was the founder members fee to get the place built.

The free entry is for after the game. Entry for non-members before the game is via guest list access and is unchanged at £3 a head.

Netflix recently put up their monthly fee, as did Microsoft for Office 365. The cunts never asked me if it was ok.

Company v Community Interest Company

Neither Netflix nor Microsoft are Community Interest Companies run by their members for the members to benefit their community..

I am sure that you can see the difference.

If not then we are in trouble.

As for the initial fee?

The founder members fee / joining fee = same.

Monthly Fee/Contract

I must admit Div that your argument is essentially one that is saying "bugger off if you don't like it"

Very strange responses.

You also ignored the opportunity given to:

Allow everyone to be able to join for say a £1 registration fee.

I have no problem with that - do you?

This would enable:

The 1877 Club to retain that status by registering details of all members and setting criteria for memberhip.

Existing members to cease their £10 monthly payment (your suggestion)

I would be happy to leave my £50 in return for my name and those of other Founder Members continuing to be listed. (Mine isn't currently shown)

 

[steve_the_saint 163]

I'm a founder member of the club but have actually only been in twice due to no-one I go with being prepared to pay in. 

I'm more than happy continuing to pay my membership fee for at least a year to give the club a chance to get on its feet. 

However I think the club is missing a trick by not opening it to the general public. By making it member only or to pre-book at least a day in advance, it prevents the casual or occasional fan from visiting the club. It also prevents away fans from going which is a shame as it can encourage friendly relations with other clubs. 

What I would like to see is the membership fee used for a discount on drinks, with the regular price being increased for non-members. So for example, the regular price could be £4 a pint for non-members and £3 for members. For people that want to ensure they gain entry, they'll just have to get there early. If I was to get there and the place was full, I wouldn't have a problem with it, despite being a member. 

[St.Ricky 8,253]

8 minutes ago, steve_the_saint said:

I'm a founder member of the club but have actually only been in twice due to no-one I go with being prepared to pay in. 

I'm more than happy continuing to pay my membership fee for at least a year to give the club a chance to get on its feet. 

However I think the club is missing a trick by not opening it to the general public. By making it member only or to pre-book at least a day in advance, it prevents the casual or occasional fan from visiting the club. It also prevents away fans from going which is a shame as it can encourage friendly relations with other clubs. 

What I would like to see is the membership fee used for a discount on drinks, with the regular price being increased for non-members. So for example, the regular price could be £4 a pint for non-members and £3 for members. For people that want to ensure they gain entry, they'll just have to get there early. If I was to get there and the place was full, I wouldn't have a problem with it, despite being a member. 

Now.

I like the outline of your approach. 

Something there to work with.

But

I have paid for my guests ..never thought of asking them to pay 

Edited January 5, 2017 by St.Ricky

[TediousTom 3,884]

I don't consume alcohol before a football match.  If I do then Tedious Jnr will need to be emptied on ten minutes, twenty minutes, half time, fifty five minutes and sixty five minutes and thats if I drink shorts!

 

No the football is for watching and suffering and not for leaking urine at regular intervals.  

 

Good on Mr Wardrop for trying something new.  I have every confidence that many on this forum will berate said Mr Wardrop and his compatriates because some who use this forum are just not very nice people, not very nice people indeed.

 

Right Im away for a pish!

 

 

[Eric Arthur Blair 6,234]

20 minutes ago, steve_the_saint said:

£4 a pint

Hilarious.

[Lord Pityme 6,723]

1 hour ago, div said:

There you go. Free entry, free soup, and a free lift back into town.

Still, the clubs shit eh?

Why would you say the club is shit?

because you have a different opinion, is every other one bad? This is the type of divisive rhetoric that only sows division. What you are basically alluding to is no other opinion, idea or comment is valid. How long will that track work?

edit: just to add a few months ago i commented that they couldnt make the attendance/membership/payment/entry policy more complicated if they tried.... shows you what I know... my bad.

Edited January 5, 2017 by Lord Pityme

[shull 30,901]

After a few hours in the Town Centre, will the free bus drop me hame tae Cardonald ? 

[Lord Pityme 6,723]

1 minute ago, shull said:

After a few hours in the Town Centre, will the free bus drop me hame tae Cardonald ? 

Naw... Asda Linwood or Mecca bingo only.

[shull 30,901]

Aw f*ck naw. 

[Buddymarvellous 495]

31 minutes ago, shull said:

After a few hours in the Town Centre, will the free bus drop me hame tae Cardonald ? 

But you could use your pensioners ticket on the Glesca bus......

 

[St.Ricky 8,253]

3 minutes ago, Buddymarvellous said:

But you could use your pensioners ticket on the Glesca bus......

 

Great Idea Shul. 

Taxi service to take people home from the 1877 after the game with say £1 going to the club as a booking fee 

[shull 30,901]

Time for my bed 

[melmac 876]

I applaud the efforts to get more folks in.

However, the joining fee needs to go really, what's that all about? Make the members say by the midweek whether they are attending or not, are signing members in or not and then announce whether its open to all before the game - numbers permitting. This isn't difficult.  

There is a train station 15 secs from the ground with a train to Gilmour Street at 6.15 which takes prob 1 minute and costs, if your canny, zero. However, I suspect most folks would not baulk at paying a nominal £1 or so if a small bus was to run into the town.

[civilsaint 628]

How many different iterations of access arrangements have there been now? Must be into double figures?

I get that they are devoting a lot of time and effort to this cause (for which they should be applauded) but the people involved need to realise that simplicity is most productive, efficient and effective.

As good as the facility may be, what a farce the whole process is. I dare say they are loosing a lot of custom for this reason. If folk have to look up the rules every other week to find out who is allowed in and when, the whole process is failing.

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

Edited January 6, 2017 by civilsaint

[slapsalmon 860]

There was a post earlier from kendo saying his group had a 100 quid kitty and 7 guests generating an extra 21 which was not bad for 3 hours work. 

 

I work in hospitality. Breaking it down with the known facts, which is the 7 guests, the £100 kitty and the £21 guest signing fee, no idea how many members, so 7 people with the 100 quid kitty and 21 pounds of signing in fees for 3 hours works out at 121/7/3 which is roughly 5.76 per head down per hour. Which in hospitality terms is pish. And that's not factoring in the members who are also in the kitty bringing the average spend down. 

 

I understand though the membership fees are paying the building costs, so essentially for me whoever is in charge needs to decide what's more important. A busy facility or one with a guarantee of paying off the cost.

 

7 guests signed in on the basis of 2 max per member would be 11 people in the group. They spent £121. The capacity is 232 so if the club was full with groups like that it would be roughly 21 groups of 11 people generating £2.5k gross revenue. Is that enough to sustain it. I would say probably not. BUT the membership fees are paying off the costs so it's a double edge sword. 

 

I put thpoint across during the early days that I didn't think it was the right way to go about it but I can see why the option was chosen. 

 

How long at current membership rates will it take for it to be paid in full, and how soon after it is paid will the entry be looked at to make it less complicated as per the post above?

Edited January 6, 2017 by slapsalmon

[Kendo 7,162]

7 hours ago, civilsaint said:

How many different iterations of access arrangements have there been now? Must be into double figures?

I get that they are devoting a lot of time and effort to this cause (for which they should be applauded) but the people involved need to realise that simplicity is most productive, efficient and effective.

As good as the facility may be, what a farce the whole process is. I dare say they are loosing a lot of custom for this reason. If folk have to look up the rules every other week to find out who is allowed in and when, the whole process is failing.

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

Who told you that? It appears to be a big success to me but far from perfect.

[Kendo 7,162]

6 hours ago, slapsalmon said:

There was a post earlier from kendo saying his group had a 100 quid kitty and 7 guests generating an extra 21 which was not bad for 3 hours work. 

 

I work in hospitality. Breaking it down with the known facts, which is the 7 guests, the £100 kitty and the £21 guest signing fee, no idea how many members, so 7 people with the 100 quid kitty and 21 pounds of signing in fees for 3 hours works out at 121/7/3 which is roughly 5.76 per head down per hour. Which in hospitality terms is pish. And that's not factoring in the members who are also in the kitty bringing the average spend down. 

 

I understand though the membership fees are paying the building costs, so essentially for me whoever is in charge needs to decide what's more important. A busy facility or one with a guarantee of paying off the cost.

 

7 guests signed in on the basis of 2 max per member would be 11 people in the group. They spent £121. The capacity is 232 so if the club was full with groups like that it would be roughly 21 groups of 11 people generating £2.5k gross revenue. Is that enough to sustain it. I would say probably not. BUT the membership fees are paying off the costs so it's a double edge sword. 

 

I put thpoint across during the early days that I didn't think it was the right way to go about it but I can see why the option was chosen. 

 

How long at current membership rates will it take for it to be paid in full, and how soon after it is paid will the entry be looked at to make it less complicated as per the post above?

Erm the kitty was between 5 of us as £20 a head. We were in two groups not sure what the other group spent.

[zurich_allan 1,176]

There was a post earlier from kendo saying his group had a 100 quid kitty and 7 guests generating an extra 21 which was not bad for 3 hours work. 
 
I work in hospitality. Breaking it down with the known facts, which is the 7 guests, the £100 kitty and the £21 guest signing fee, no idea how many members, so 7 people with the 100 quid kitty and 21 pounds of signing in fees for 3 hours works out at 121/7/3 which is roughly 5.76 per head down per hour. Which in hospitality terms is pish. And that's not factoring in the members who are also in the kitty bringing the average spend down. 
 
I understand though the membership fees are paying the building costs, so essentially for me whoever is in charge needs to decide what's more important. A busy facility or one with a guarantee of paying off the cost.
 
7 guests signed in on the basis of 2 max per member would be 11 people in the group. They spent £121. The capacity is 232 so if the club was full with groups like that it would be roughly 21 groups of 11 people generating £2.5k gross revenue. Is that enough to sustain it. I would say probably not. BUT the membership fees are paying off the costs so it's a double edge sword. 
 
I put thpoint across during the early days that I didn't think it was the right way to go about it but I can see why the option was chosen. 
 
How long at current membership rates will it take for it to be paid in full, and how soon after it is paid will the entry be looked at to make it less complicated as per the post above?

I get what you're saying, but a social club / club bar within a bigger business doesn't have the same standalone overheads that an individual bar or restaurant has, so the formulae you might use in analysing the success of the facility based on income is not the same. Back in 2001 - 2004 I was the general manager for a hospitality group that owned different types of facilities (bar / restaurant / hotel & retail), and the forecasting / profitability on each facility was worked out very differently, especially for hotels which had different income streams.