Empowering the SMISA Membership to begin building for the future now.

[bazil85]

25 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

You can't just look at these average figures in isolation though bazil.
We need to look at numbers of home fans attending. I have no doubt these are up this season.
Also the away support, without old firm, I suspect is also up as evidenced by Dundee's two crowds this season. Apart from St. Johnstone and accies, I've been impressed by the rest of the away numbers.

The whole point of looking over seven seasons is it isn’t in isolation, same goes for looking at averages over full seasons. 

[bazil85]

24 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Look I'm a pretty reasonable person but I can't keep repeating myself over this.

The only thing that matters is how much extra revenue did the club bring in through the experiment of moving OF fans from W6 and W7 to the Family stand compared to what we would have had if we'd left them in W6/W7 and kept the Family stand for ourselves. Nothing else matters because nothing else actually happened. If you want to discuss any other numbers then I'm happy to leave you to discuss it with others.

It's Sunday. Let me be.

And as I have said I was looking at one stand to two stands, I never made any attempt to hide that or suggest I was looking at the move from W6/7 (which I see as a moot point because I don’t see it as a viable alternative anymore).

You were the one that said I was wrong in that, sounds like a simple case of comparing apples and oranges with us both looking at different stats. Fair enough 

[bazil85]

15 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Your analysis of why these numbers are so high this season is at the root of your problem.

You seem convinced that it's just because of the extra OF seats.

Why don't you try comparing our home crowds against Hibs, Hearts, Killie and the others against respective fixtures in the years you have listed and you'll see they are ALL up on the norm.

You’re again making an incorrect assumption about me, I am by no means saying it’s the only factor. My argument is against the people saying this approach doesn’t generate income or only generates ‘a few thousand’ That is simply untrue. 

Yep they are up, which again supports my point that this approach isn’t turning fans away. I would imagine the vast majority will understand why we have done it. That doesn’t mean we have to like it, again I absolutely do not like it. 

[bazil85]

18 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

Are you incapable. Full stop?

Others have pointed out all the inconsistencies and inaccuracies in your well researched politician like waffle that answers everything but the question and serves only to deflect.

It should be easy to calculate for a man of your numeracy.

Number of Family Stand season ticket holders.

Drop in income from them, which you totally denied even existed.

Do you deny you denied it now?

Sorry do you think there are inconsistencies in these figures? Feel free to elaborate where. 

I have never denied some people from the family stand may choose not to go to these games. You give me the stats I’ll do the maths for you. I’ve said very early on I don’t know what the drop off is. What I do no is we have generated more crowd income this season than any previous season at the new stadium. Do you deny this? 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

The whole point of looking over seven seasons is it isn’t in isolation, same goes for looking at averages over full seasons. 

Thanks for completely ignoring the points I raised.

[BuddieinEK]

Sorry do you think there are inconsistencies in these figures? Feel free to elaborate where. 
I have never denied some people from the family stand may choose not to go to these games. You give me the stats I’ll do the maths for you. I’ve said very early on I don’t know what the drop off is. What I do no is we have generated more crowd income this season than any previous season at the new stadium. Do you deny this? 

You are now talking about crowd.

You were originally talking about profit.

You then changed it to income.

You gave an exhaustive list of deductions, but omitted major ones.

You are like a yappy wee dug chasing its tail!

Rather amusing watching you run in circles with such determination!

[BuddieinEK]

Genuine footage of Bazil85 on the forum!

[bazil85]

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

3 hours ago, bazil85 said:

The whole point of looking over seven seasons is it isn’t in isolation, same goes for looking at averages over full seasons. 

Thanks for completely ignoring the points I raised.

Was your point not looking in isolation? There will be isolated incidents and variables every season but when it’s so considerable more this season, compared to ALL others, somethings got to give 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:

You are now talking about crowd.

You were originally talking about profit.

You then changed it to income.

You gave an exhaustive list of deductions, but omitted major ones.

You are like a yappy wee dug chasing its tail!

Rather amusing watching you run in circles with such determination!

They are linked. I quoted profits based on evidence regarding the extra bums on seats, police costs and ticket prices.

You and others came back with waffle about that still not proving we would make money. I then provided evidence that overal our average crowds are up so it is generations more money (in part) again do you disagree that more bums on seats = more money? 

Enlighten me to the considerable deductibles I’ve missed? 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:

Genuine footage of Bazil85 on the forum!
 

 

From the guy that’s failed to address each of my fact backed points. 

[oaksoft]

5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

And as I have said I was looking at one stand to two stands, I never made any attempt to hide that or suggest I was looking at the move from W6/7 (which I see as a moot point because I don’t see it as a viable alternative anymore).

 

Yeah and that's your problem. You can use whatever model you like to get a number. Your problem is that you haven't checked whether the number is valid before ploughing ahead and using it to make misleading conclusions like "we can buy two players for that".

You have skipped a crucial step and simply assumed the number is relevant. If I was your boss, I would be putting you over my knee for doing that and then insisting blindly that you were right to omit it.

Bad basil! Bad basil! 

Also, your assumption about being able to reverse the decision is irrelevant. We were sold a pup that we could have 6 figures of extra money. That was either deliberate or a cock-up. Either way it was a crock of shite and that is what an endless stream of us keep telling you.

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

You’re again making an incorrect assumption about me, I am by no means saying it’s the only factor. My argument is against the people saying this approach doesn’t generate income or only generates ‘a few thousand’ That is simply untrue. 

Yep they are up, which again supports my point that this approach isn’t turning fans away. I would imagine the vast majority will understand why we have done it. That doesn’t mean we have to like it, again I absolutely do not like it. 

I understand where you are coming from but you are not asking WHY the gates have gone up which means you have no way of knowing whether it's a temporary high blip or not.

What will you say if we stay up and gates settle back to or below the long term averages you posted earlier?

How do you know that people are venting their anger by dumping OF games in their droves but coming to the others?

Your analysis is one-dimensional because you are seeking out evidence which backs your view without feeling the need to be rigorous critical. Then you are dumping the evidence which doesn't suit your argument.

It's confirmation bias.

[oaksoft]

I'll even help you out a wee bit basil.

One of the prime reasons we have such high crowds this season is because we have sold significantly (record?) numbers of season tickets off the back of the joy from the end of last season. We have, to my recollection, never had such optimism before the start of a new season.

In addition, Hearts were pushing top of the league at one point, as were Killie and Aberdeen. Hibs were even doing well at one point. Add in more OF fans because Rangers have actually competed well this season and so both clubs have seen an upturn in interest and then finally throw in some relegation battles between the likes of us and Dundee and it's obvious where a lot of the increase has come from.

Like, I said, you need the bigger picture.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Was your point not looking in isolation? There will be isolated incidents and variables every season but when it’s so considerable more this season, compared to ALL others, somethings got to give 

No my point was you need to interrogate this year's figures to see what has caused the average to go up.
Is it more home supporters attending? Is it larger numbers of visiting fans from teams other than old firm.
How much are old firm numbers up by? Is it as much as the capacity of the family stand?

You are comparing average figures only.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Yeah and that's your problem. You can use whatever model you like to get a number. Your problem is that you haven't checked whether the number is valid before ploughing ahead and using it to make misleading conclusions like "we can buy two players for that".

You have skipped a crucial step and simply assumed the number is relevant. If I was your boss, I would be putting you over my knee for doing that and then insisting blindly that you were right to omit it.

Bad basil! Bad basil! 

Also, your assumption about being able to reverse the decision is irrelevant. We were sold a pup that we could have 6 figures of extra money. That was either deliberate or a cock-up. Either way it was a crock of shite and that is what an endless stream of us keep telling you.

 

So are you suggesting we could go from the two stand model to one stand and W6/W7 again if we decide this one hasn’t worked? I wholeheartedly disagree, I think there would be even more of an up roar given what W7 has become. 

The mistake you’re making is assuming I was looking back when in reality I was looking forward. ‘The club decide to take the second stand away, what would happen? It would be one stand and the income that brings’ so I think you’ll find that’s a perfectly valid and completely transparent way to look at it. As I’ve said before though I am happy to look at the previous model if you want, if you think it is still a valid alternative. Do you? 

Youre also failing to acknowledge the boards promise on X season tickets equals west stand fully for St Mirren fans. (Another reason why I think looking back is moot and you’ll find a very valid one) A very crucial point you have overlooked, can you discipline yourself? 

up to six figures, and the claim would be absolutely valid if we got top six, I think you’ll find my figures more or less back that up when you factor in the strengthened catering position. 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

I understand where you are coming from but you are not asking WHY the gates have gone up which means you have no way of knowing whether it's a temporary high blip or not.

What will you say if we stay up and gates settle back to or below the long term averages you posted earlier?

How do you know that people are venting their anger by dumping OF games in their droves but coming to the others?

Your analysis is one-dimensional because you are seeking out evidence which backs your view without feeling the need to be rigorous critical. Then you are dumping the evidence which doesn't suit your argument.

It's confirmation bias.

What I am doing is looking at several other seasons and ruling out one off events. Our crowds are also up on the first season after our last promotion as well. When you take out variables over a large sample and still see significantly larger numbers something has to give. Yet again I am not saying this is the single factor which many seem to be suggesting I am. 

My argument is the exact opposite of one dimensional. I have given several examples, all of which have backed up my point. Is there a single opposing argument that has done the same on here? You’ll find not.   

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

I'll even help you out a wee bit basil.

One of the prime reasons we have such high crowds this season is because we have sold significantly (record?) numbers of season tickets off the back of the joy from the end of last season. We have, to my recollection, never had such optimism before the start of a new season.

In addition, Hearts were pushing top of the league at one point, as were Killie and Aberdeen. Hibs were even doing well at one point. Add in more OF fans because Rangers have actually competed well this season and so both clubs have seen an upturn in interest and then finally throw in some relegation battles between the likes of us and Dundee and it's obvious where a lot of the increase has come from.

Like, I said, you need the bigger picture.

So you agree with me the choice to give two stands hasn’t impacted fans willingness to buy tickets? Great, we’re on the same page, more traction to my point that this set-up isn’t great but it’s generating income and not greatly hindering income. 

As I previously stated our crowds are still higher than our last promotion so it won’t be the only factor. I think you fail to understand I understand variables perfectly well, this is why I picked a large sample (seven but I could have picked more, this is our highest crowd in a number of years) during that time other clubs have done well, Motherwell have pushed for europe, Hearts pushed Celtic, Abserdeen pushed Celtic. You make it out like this season is the perfect storm, we may have seen some high crowds but categorically two stands to the bigot brothers has been a factor. We’ve also had games against Hamilton & Livi who take about seven fans each  

it baffles me that no one on here is willing to accept this set-up has created money. No matter how much evidence I present that it has. It’s like debating creationists... and I’m the bias one 

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:

No my point was you need to interrogate this year's figures to see what has caused the average to go up.
Is it more home supporters attending? Is it larger numbers of visiting fans from teams other than old firm.
How much are old firm numbers up by? Is it as much as the capacity of the family stand?

You are comparing average figures only.

There won’t be one factor, it’ll be a combination, I have never denied that. What I am saying is anyone denying this arrangement has generated significant income is kidding themselves. It’s literally maths 

[BuddieinEK]

So are you suggesting we could go from the two stand model to one stand and W6/W7 again if we decide this one hasn’t worked? I wholeheartedly disagree, I think there would be even more of an up roar given what W7 has become. 
The mistake you’re making is assuming I was looking back when in reality I was looking forward. ‘The club decide to take the second stand away, what would happen? It would be one stand and the income that brings’ so I think you’ll find that’s a perfectly valid and completely transparent way to look at it. As I’ve said before though I am happy to look at the previous model if you want, if you think it is still a valid alternative. Do you? 
Youre also failing to acknowledge the boards promise on X season tickets equals west stand fully for St Mirren fans. (Another reason why I think looking back is moot and you’ll find a very valid one) A very crucial point you have overlooked, can you discipline yourself? [emoji38]
up to six figures, and the claim would be absolutely valid if we got top six, I think you’ll find my figures more or less back that up when you factor in the strengthened catering position. 

So the board should keep that promise yet it was ok to break the one to consult fans before deciding on allocation?
Hypocrite!

[BuddieinEK]

There won’t be one factor, it’ll be a combination, I have never denied that. What I am saying is anyone denying this arrangement has generated significant income is kidding themselves. It’s literally maths [emoji38]

"significant income" [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

It was two players very recently!
[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji38] [emoji38] [emoji23] [emoji23]

[alanb]

"significant income" [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

It was two players very recently!
[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji38] [emoji38] [emoji23] [emoji23]

Maybe the significant income helped move on two players

[BuddieinEK]

There won’t be one factor, it’ll be a combination, I have never denied that. What I am saying is anyone denying this arrangement has generated significant income is kidding themselves. It’s literally maths [emoji38]

[Guest TPAFKATS]

There won’t be one factor, it’ll be a combination, I have never denied that. What I am saying is anyone denying this arrangement has generated significant income is kidding themselves. It’s literally maths [emoji38]

The only one kidding themselves is you because you have linked an increase in average gates so far this season with giving the OF an extra stand.
Now you are backtracking to significant income which is what Isle of Bute Saint was saying about a week ago.
So basically we're back where we were days ago with folk now going to ask for a definition of significant income.

And here we go for another fortnight. It's like an international break...

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

So are you suggesting we could go from the two stand model to one stand and W6/W7 again if we decide this one hasn’t worked?

 

 

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

So you agree with me the choice to give two stands hasn’t impacted fans willingness to buy tickets?

it baffles me that no one on here is willing to accept this set-up has created money.

You are now resorting to deliberately manipulating my carefully chosen words and introduced apparent arguments which I have not made. Not a single person on here has said this has not created money. Not one person. Neither has anyone said we should go back to the old model.

If you want to believe that engaging in this sort of pish wins you an argument then fill your boots because I have better things to do with my time.

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by oaksoft

[antrin]

4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

There won’t be one factor, it’ll be a combination, I have never denied that. What I am saying is anyone denying this arrangement has generated significant income is kidding themselves. It’s literally maths 

 Surprised someone as erudite as Orcsoft didnae pick you up on this.

the one thing that it literally isn’t is - maths.

you’re thinking of - literally - arithmetic.

 

this may help...

https://www.mathmedia.com/whatisdifbet.html