Slo update monthly meeting

The club does have control over the Barnsley player. Cut ties with Radio Shitfield

 

Cheers good sir. The feedback and effort is much appreciated though I am as usual a little disappointed by the clubs responses.

The carpark issue is a bizarre one because they actually have a programme seller stationed at the bottom of the carpark but are saying they don't want people walking there? That is a massive contradiction isn't it?

Did they say whether the lighting in the carpark was part of their safety certificate for hosting games? The fault sounds bad but surely we have fans with abilities to rectify them. Surely the club isn't going to just let them rot forever unused.

Advertising space it would help if they promoted them more. Instead of blank poster boards why not put a 'your logo here for just xxx'? Advertise that it's available.

As usual the pointless discounted ticket which was never going to entice anybody was the fans fault. Thought as much.

Same with turnstiles. It's the fans fault. Here's a tip BFC. It's YOUR business. Why don't YOU have somebody out there directing fans instead of expecting your customers to do all the work?

Barnsley player? Not their fault. Hahahaha


Seems as usual they want their arse wiping and refuse to take any responsibility

I am shocked that they have AGAIN signed a contract that offers them no control over something with their name on it. Fans lambasted them for doing it with the catering. Slaughtered them for doing it with the club shop so what do they do? They do it with the commentary. Yay Barry is learning from his mistakes.

 

Sure about that? Every news item the club has ever posted is archived on the site. Can you give us a link to one of these?

 

Have seen the info on a couple of occasions.

 

If its advertised on the scoreboard about turnstiles it explains everything.

 

Ben told me in the chat I had that it was purely financial reasons that drove the decision to go with the BBC. They pay BFC.

 

But the fans are paying BFC for a service I would understand if the radio commentary was free to fans but it's not.

 

Has Supertyke said discounted tickets are a waste of time. Club can't win

 

Why would the BBC pay them when it is the BBC providing the service?

 

To get access to the information, which is the game.

 

They paid for that anyway as we were already covered by radio sheffield.

I'll tell you what I think has happened. I think the BBC now pay us LESS than before because they now pay us money AND provide a service to us. I think that Ben is being clever with his wording by correctly telling whitey that the BBC pays us without specifying what that actually means. I believe the reason for the change wasn't financial but was political because Matts style of commentary wasn't liked by certain people and that the financial reason is a smokescreen

That's just my opinion and most likely a load of ********. Tbh the most shocking thing is that the club havent got ANY control over the output anymore. In theory then the BBC could produce 90 minutes of silence at every future game and there would be nothing the club could do because they hadn't retained any control? That's as bad as lindleys being able to charge 500 quid for a pie and not stock anything ever again and the club being powerless

 

They wouldn't. They'll be contracted to provide commentary. 90 minutes of silence would not fulfil their obligations and would be in breach of contract. Once an outside production company has been brought in you lose control and can do little about the quality, but you damn well get some content. The charges for failing to do so are punitive. For obvious reasons. BBC1 or ITV can't have an hour of dead air. Because many football clubs have gone down the route of using local radio stations to provide commentary for their internet service, it will be a standard contract, so we won't get screwed over on this.

As far as how much we are getting paid is concerned, I can't see any benefit to the BBC to provide commentary that is not aired on a BBC channel. I don't even think it's legal. Even if Radio Sheffield are paying us nothing for the extra service, licence fee money is being used to pay for BBC staff and equipment that is providing content that is only available on a subscription service and is not available to regular licence fee holders. You're just not allowed to do that with money from the licence fee. Unless the BBC are being paid to provide the service.

However, there's summat else to consider. When we strike a deal with Radio Sheffield for the commentaries for the upcoming season to be broadcast on the radio, it will be based on the number of games they're going to cover. They'll pay us to commentate on, say, 6 home matches and 15 away matches. If they intended to do more they'd pay us more, if they intended to do fewer they'd pay us less. The chances are, with the current situation, we'll get more commentaries on the radio than was originally planned. Sheffield Wednesday's match is postponed due to a waterlogged pitch a couple of hours before kick off. No panic, no big deal, we have everything in place at the Barnsley game 'cos we were going to stream commentary over the internet. A Barnsley game which Radio Sheffield had not intended to broadcast on the radio is moved because it was postponed due to the weather or because of a clash with a cup tie or it's moved for TV. There are no other fixtures on the rearranged date, so that's the schedule for that evening sorted. Everything will already be in place for the internet commentary, there's no extra cost. The money we should receive for the extra games may offset the cost of the service they provide, so we don't actually have to pay, even if it turns out we don't get any extra games on the radio.

But I really don't know. Using a company that is paid for by a mandatory licence fee to provide content for a paid subscription service is a really weird situation and I'm not even sure if the regulators have caught up with what is happening.

 

BFC's response to everything

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/z7t-jPIoekE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Fans aren't going to want to exit the top gate. So because for some bizare reason we don't know where our own electrical fault is they expect fans to take the long way round at full time rather than use the bottom gate down by the food hut that's never open these days. Be better to shut the bottom gate.

Why did we accept a deal for Player we've no control over? That's barmy and it wouldn't be a shock if it came out subscriber numbers had gone down.

The turnstiles being flooded isn't a shock as when we get a bit of rain inside the stand gets big puddles. No point spending a fortune to improve the east stand drainage, but surely we can supply a couple of cheap brushes to the stewards so they can do a quick two minute job of sweeping the mass of excess water through the gaps in the advertising walls out of the way onto the gravel track? It's not like it's a new issue as the likes of ESL have mentioned getting drenched feet/coats etc for years on here. It's a long standing issue.

 

We might as well talk to the wall

Bull **** answers from bull **** Ben


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And you believed him, Andy. Ha.