Stadium

Think this was actually in last weeks freepress ..


SENIOR councillors have demanded to be told details about crisis talks over the future of Doncaster’s publicly-funded £32 million Keepmoat Stadium.


Urgent discussions have been held between Doncaster Council finance bosses and the Stadium Management Company (SMC), which runs the complex on behalf of the authority, after council documents revealed taxpayers are shelling out more than £500,000 annually to house main tenants Doncaster Rovers football club.

The stadium is expected to have lost £4 million by March, the Free Press revealed in October.

Many of the talks regarding the stadium’s finances have always been held in private, with the public kicked out of council meetings while the issue has been discussed.

But now Coun Ted Kitchen, part of the council’s regeneration and environment overview and scrutiny panel, wants more financial details released so taxpayers can be given more clarification when the committee meets again on January 31.

He said: “We need to get some more financial information that we are lacking at the present.

“The stadium is in a mess and taxpayers have been paying for it.

“We cannot keep digging into our pockets. It’s not fair when cuts are being made across the council.”

Mayor Peter Davies admitted the Keepmoat could lose £2 million this financial year alone if action was not taken.

His fears, along with the shocking financial figures, were revealed during a heated meeting at the Mansion House in October.

Members heard the financial position of the SMC has deteriorated since a £1 million overdraft guarantee was re-approved by the council in March 2011.

Colin Harker, the Keepmoat’s stadium finance manager, said measures had been taken to improve finances including asking for voluntary redundancies and reducing electricity costs.

The overview and scrutiny panel also made a number of recommendations for council and stadium bosses to discuss.

They included the mayor finding the best deal to keep the stadium open, considering the SMC form a leisure trust allowing tenants of the stadium to have a partnership status and holding an ‘open day’ for Doncaster children to see the facilities and meet with teams including Rovers.

In September the Free Press exclusively revealed the council had admitted it could offload the Keepmoat. It denied a deal had already been struck with Rovers.

The Keepmoat complex, which opened in December 2006, is also home to Doncaster Rovers Belles football club, Doncaster Rugby League Football Club and Doncaster Athletic Club.



from doncaster free press

Apparently a 125 year lease from the Council is all ready to be signed. The SMC themselves are are now only responsible for the Cleaning and Maintenance side of the business whilst a body called the EMC (Entertainment Management Committee) are resposible for the Catering and Function arrangements. I was talking to someone today who works there and despairs as to the reasons why this side has never been developed as a proper business. Weddings particularly are a massive source of revenue but NEVER persued to anywhere near the degree that the venue can cater for.
I understand that the kitchens are equipped almost to a Michelin grade level with fully trained chefs frustrated at the lack of opportunities to use their skills. Currently there are 3 major venues over-subscribed in the town i.e. the Racecourse, Dome and Castle Park, meanwhile the EMC swans around rather than chasing punters to use all these great facilities.

I notice they didn't mention how much they lost on the Westlife concert inc £800 on the moveable billboard they didn't have clearance from H&S to actually move!

hoolahoop wrote:Apparently a 125 year lease from the Council is all ready to be signed. The SMC themselves are are now only responsible for the Cleaning and Maintenance side of the business whilst a body called the EMC (Entertainment Management Committee) are resposible for the Catering and Function arrangements. I was talking to someone today who works there and despairs as to the reasons why this side has never been developed as a proper business. Weddings particularly are a massive source of revenue but NEVER persued to anywhere near the degree that the venue can cater for.
I understand that the kitchens are equipped almost to a Michelin grade level with fully trained chefs frustrated at the lack of opportunities to use their skills. Currently there are 3 major venues over-subscribed in the town i.e. the Racecourse, Dome and Castle Park, meanwhile the EMC swans around rather than chasing punters to use all these great facilities.

It really is criminal how under utilised that stadium is..we have said it before but small things like opening the bar on a Sunday when the boot sale is on or having Sunday dinners in the restaurant..i hope the 125 year lease is true and that if basically hands over control of the ground to the club maybe then it can stop been a drain on the tax payers of doncaster..having said all that i dread to think what it will look like in 30 years time never mind 125 years..hopefully i will still be around to see it in 30 years but thank god i won't be here when the lease is up for renewal..

would it not make sense to put it to the council that any sale would both free up and provide more money so as to either keep one or two libraries open (but maybe not the same hours or something) or to pump into something else that the public will need/use?

RedJ wrote:would it not make sense to put it to the council that any sale would both free up and provide more money so as to either keep one or two libraries open (but maybe not the same hours or something) or to pump into something else that the public will need/use?

Unfortunately Doncaster Council find it impossible to work thing out logically only politically. Olds habits die hard despite the efforts of the mayor.

Council to inject a further £174000 to keep the ground ticking over...but it seems a lease is in the offing...the sooner the better...

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/stadium_to_get_more_cash_from_taxpayer_1_4148594

yorkie64red wrote:Council to inject a further £174000 to keep the ground ticking over...but it seems a lease is in the offing...the sooner the better...

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/stadium_to_get_more_cash_from_taxpayer_1_4148594

"The Stadium Management Company (SMC), which is owned by the council, currently receives an annual rental payment of £281,000 from Rovers but the local authority may have to accept less under a lease agreement to persuade the club to take on a loss-making operation"

I always thought that the club said the annual cost was £1million - am I going barmy, or can anyone else recall this? With these figures it only pans out at £7-8k per week during the season (9 months).

I'd heard a million too - maybe that's including all the operational costs we'd take on with having control of the stadium?

Upwind wrote:

"The Stadium Management Company (SMC), which is owned by the council, currently receives an annual rental payment of £281,000 from Rovers but the local authority may have to accept less under a lease agreement to persuade the club to take on a loss-making operation"

I always thought that the club said the annual cost was £1million - am I going barmy, or can anyone else recall this? With these figures it only pans out at £7-8k per week during the season (9 months).

That was reduced months ago back to what they were originally paying...

JR said it was 1m at the fans meeting

the vicar wrote:JR said it was 1m at the fans meeting

It's been said on numerous occasions, sometimes JR isn't the best with numbers.

He usually gets the Einstein that is Dave Morris to do all the maths stuff.

I was just going to say (at the risk of spawning another spleen venting debate ) that JR also said Billy's release clause was £3M on 1st Jan

However I've been to a few fans forums where its been said by senior members of the club and Sean O'Driscoll that they were paying £1M - I remember their disgust for want of a better word that they could pay £1M in rent and still have to pay an extra £50 if they wanted a meeting room outside of normal use.

But wasn't it proposed by the SMC that tenants paid more for what was being used? The first team trained on the astroturf at the stadium today because of a frozen training ground. I know the centre of excellence are using the facilties more - are we now paying a lower rate for the stadium for match days but spending money on the other facilities? Thats just a guess btw

Interesting thread, one which has occupied some of my time for quite a while. What I can tell you is this, the figures quoted sometimes don't match with the time line. We were paying a very low rent, but then the agreement was changed to allow DRFC to grab the car park charges, the stadium advertising, and other revenue streams in exchange for the higher rental costs. Because of the recession the advertising revenue dried up, so DRFC declined extending the contract on that basis, but we still love to quote the higher figure when it suits us. The fact is we don't pay very much and the pressure is on the SMC to meet the costs.

Have I said too much?

Makes perfect sense to me SM

The Yorkshire Post has reported that the Keepmoat Stadium is to receive a further £170,000 from Doncaster Council to keep it running until the summer. Doncaster Rovers have been in talks to take over the running of the stadium, but it now seems that they are unwilling to take over until the end of the season.
The Stadium Management Company receive an annual rental of £281,000 from Doncaster Rovers, despite an agreement by Rovers to up that to closer to £1 million after the initial deal between Rovers and Doncaster Council proved uneconomic, and had caused huge losses by the stadium in the first two years of operation. However, for their own reasons, which we suspect are linked directly to their wish to take over the stadium, Rovers have since reneged on the increased rental, which has directly led to the current financial problems at the stadium.
John Ryan, Rovers' chairman, told the Yorkshire Post this week: “It is a loss-making operation and we would have to turn it back into profit. We already have a loss-making operation in Doncaster Rovers and we don’t want to make it worse.”
Rovers are reported to be hoping to sign a 50 year lease with the council, although the council are wanting to safeguard community usage, as well as allowing the rugby team and Doncaster Rovers Belles to continue to play at the stadium.


from doncaster rovers.co.uk

Silent Majority wrote:Interesting thread, one which has occupied some of my time for quite a while. What I can tell you is this, the figures quoted sometimes don't match with the time line. We were paying a very low rent, but then the agreement was changed to allow DRFC to grab the car park charges, the stadium advertising, and other revenue streams in exchange for the higher rental costs. Because of the recession the advertising revenue dried up, so DRFC declined extending the contract on that basis, but we still love to quote the higher figure when it suits us. The fact is we don't pay very much and the pressure is on the SMC to meet the costs.

Have I said too much?

Basically what you're saying (I think) is that we are gradually forcing them into making a decision to lease/sell. Tactically very good business and should put us on the front foot in any negotiations.
AmI right ?

hoolahoop wrote:

Basically what you're saying (I think) is that we are gradually forcing them into making a decision to lease/sell. Tactically very good business and should put us on the front foot in any negotiations.
AmI right ?

The SMC are skint the mayor want the thing of there books and theres no one else to take it on other then us...lets hope something is concluded soonr rather then later ...if the doncaster public decide they no longer want a mayor then it might be difficult with a labour council back in power...

hoolahoop wrote:

Basically what you're saying (I think) is that we are gradually forcing them into making a decision to lease/sell. Tactically very good business and should put us on the front foot in any negotiations.
AmI right ?

More or less. But they also purposely misquote the actual rent they pay so they don't look like the bad guys. They might not be the bad guys but they pay, proportionately, less than anybody else. The Belles pay quite a bit to say they don't need the same facilities as we do.

I do think that the chance we may be relegated this season has caught them on the hop though, its an easy decision if we're a championship club but a much harder one to make if we have a substantially reduced income.

yorkie64red wrote:




The SMC are skint the mayor want the thing of there books and theres no one else to take it on other then us...lets hope something is concluded soonr rather then later ...if the doncaster public decide they no longer want a mayor then it might be difficult with a labour council back in power...

True a lot hinges on how obstinate a Labour controlled Council can be and how political mantras can override economic sense...........we've seen it so many times in the past.
We need to move on this as fast as possible.

Silent Majority wrote:

More or less. But they also purposely misquote the actual rent they pay so they don't look like the bad guys. They might not be the bad guys but they pay, proportionately, less than anybody else. The Belles pay quite a bit to say they don't need the same facilities as we do.

I do think that the chance we may be relegated this season has caught them on the hop though, its an easy decision if we're a championship club but a much harder one to make if we have a substantially reduced income.

I had heard that the rents payable were vastly disproportionate to the usage, I would hope to see us address this if we became the major lessor. The Belles need our help and I certainly would like us to develop a far closer relationship with the Belles in the same way as Arsenal and Chelsea do for instance with their Ladies teams.

hoolahoop wrote:

I had heard that the rents payable were vastly disproportionate to the usage, I would hope to see us address this if we became the major lessor. The Belles need our help and I certainly would like us to develop a far closer relationship with the Belles in the same way as Arsenal and Chelsea do for instance with their Ladies teams.

You mucky old Bugger...you never give up trying i'll give you that...

yorkie64red wrote:



You mucky old Bugger...you never give up trying i'll give you that...

wasn't there a plan to get the Dons/Lakers/whatever the bloody hell they call them these days moved off to Castle Park a while ago? could we do that if the Knights would accept it?.. save them ruining the pitch!