Jump to content
The Dark Blues
Sign in to follow this  
Wackyjim

Amalgamation

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Any amalgamation other than Dundee killing off United would be the day I give up on Scottish football being a 3rd generation Dee and following Dundee FC home and away since 1969.

New team would mean nothing to me and I would just save the money I spend on Dundee to take in a few games in England and Europe every season

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WeighorstsWang said:

Folk planning protests etc. need put on a list. They call it "passionate" though. 

Admittedly that type of thing's a bit OTT for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is any likelihood of an amalgamation then supporters of both clubs who are against it now have to stand up make their voices heard. 

If we do nothing then it will give the impression to the ‘powers that be’ that the fans of both clubs are in favour which judging by the bulk of the posts on this forum is certainly not the case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Remote as it seems that both Dundee clubs are amalgamated to become a one city club would I abandon my home town for the likes of Forfar, Arbroath, Montrose or God forbid one of the ugly sisters ... No!.. Dundee is where my heart is and always will be so if the unthinkable happens then the new club would get my support 100%

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the BoD's are only interested in the 1 question - would fans of both teams decide it's better to watch an amalgamated team than no team at all?  I'm not saying that's the choice we are facing, but it may be positioned that way to sell the idea.  

I personally don't see benefit for our football club, for the greater organisation I'm not sure.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both us and the dirty dayglo beasters play to around 4-5000 home fans at the moment. An amalgamated club would struggle to top either of ours or the tangy glory hunting cockwombles crowds.

Doesnt make financial sense given that the club would start at the bottom with no tv money, no away supports and no derbies all the while playing at a 15000 capacity stadium.

Maybe 10-20 after it happened we’d see a slightly bigger club but I’m not so sure.

All for groundsharing though 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Barkblue said:

Even during a season that's struggled for many highs, I find some of the opinions humbly accepting or even encouraging the logic behind an amalgamation to be the most depressing thing DFC related I've encountered all year.

I respect those opinions and in ways understand the logic behind them, but I honestly see anyone wanting to or willing to accept anything other than Dundee Football Club, on the grounds that the nameless, faceless thing we'd be left with would have the off chance of pushing for top six every season, to be akin to the glory hunters following the ugly sisters. 

Would I cash in the emotion, passion, history, good times, tough times and everything else for an occasional cup final or regular top six finishes? Not a chance, because it wouldn't be my team that did it. 

At the risk of sounding like a drama queen, if there's no DFC, then I've no interest in football. It honestly is that simple to me. Appreciate it's each to their own though.

One day we will lift that Scottish Cup

And the feeling as they walk up the stairs would be a million times better than anything a souless amalgamated club could give us.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, WeighorstsWang said:

If it gets rid of some of the "passionate" idiots that follow the club just now, then I'm all for it.

Passion is the most important thing though. If the emotional connection is not there, you have nothing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air and based either on opinions or depend a on begging prescribed (and apparently self-evident) answers to too many questions. Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - all in the interest of making the thread more thoughtful and maybe even a bit more entertaining, you jnderstand.

The new club would bring together the histories of both clubs. Why not? Rangers proved that what matters is what you choose to believe, not what others claim or even what the actual legal circumstances might indicate.

The new board are unlikely to insist that the new entity is distinct from and emotionally unattached to either of the amalgamated clubs. That would be commercial suicide.

Would that many people really give up on football if they chose to believe that their team no longer existed. Why choose to believe that?, and what exactly is it about Dundee Football Club that attracted you and kept you following it for years? Is the actual football part of that so small that you would even contemplate throwing it away completely?

Would that many people actually choose to switch allegiance to another team. Isn't that the very thing they are refusing to do for the amalgamated team? What's the difference?

How many of us can honestly feel that the future of our club is secure? If you worry about that security, what might be done about it? Here's my wee checklist of what we have tried in the past to try and ensure sustainability, along with my brief thoughts on it

  • Good football/competition success - too inconsistent and may be dangerous in current climate (eg what Neil McCann tried to do)
  • Ancillary services income streams - Dog track, say no more
  • Wealthy owner promising large financial injections - been there, bought the Tshirt.... and had to sell it again to pay off the creditors
  • Trying to live within our means, sensible spending, external investors underwriting losses - Arguably where we are now. Too many consecutive years of losses usually doesn't end well, though.
  • Extreme borrowing funding fantasy players and performances on the pitch - No guarantee of success (but thank you so much for the memories, obviously not the ones where loads of people lost their jobs and small business creditors didn't get paid - that bit was shameful, and why, ultimately the Caniggia, Caballero, Nemsadzi, Ketsbaia et all era was a mistake.

Hopefully others can add any more I may have missed. I'd especially love to see some suggestions that have proved successful in the past, and could work in the future.

What I would like to see, as I have said a few times before, is a city supported club that is truly part of the community that is Dundee. A club that benefits from and contributes to sport in the city. I don't think that is impossible. But I do To put it another way, I believe the fact that there are two senior city clubs is an obstacle to even thinking about building that city sport concept with football at it's heart.

I think that the price the city would extract would be one single city club. It is hard to see how it could be made to work otherwise.

By the way, I'm just getting started on this topic and would really like to read some reactions that go beyond the initial gut-wrenching and heart-breaking idea that our wonderful club might not last in its current form forever. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/12/2018 at 23:21, Islaydarkblue said:

Hi Spirit.

Sadly you did not read my post carefully otherwise you would have noticed that I also mentioned lunches. 

The restaurants at McDiarmid Park are extremely busy from Monday to Friday with lunches. It also a lot easier to get parked at McDiarmid Park as there is free car parking during the week at the rear of the Main Stand. 

If St Johnstone were only dependent on income through the gates they would not be nearly as successful as they currently are at present. 

Why do think former Chairman Geoff Brown wanted a direct road from the Perth Crematorium grounds to McDiarmind Park. 

 

They also bring in several thousand pounds per month for unregistered cars parking from local motor mile garages on their site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Blue4evr said:

They also bring in several thousand pounds per month for unregistered cars parking from local motor mile garages on their site.

Thanks for the information. I was not aware of that. The insurance costs, probably paid the garages on the motor mile must be quite hefty for parking in the McDiarmid  car parks instead of their own premises. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Andrak said:

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

If you don't understand why Dundee FC fans (diehards) on a Dundee FC forum aren't for the death of their club they've supported all their lives, the creation of a new club and a coming together with our city rivals, then you never will.

 

35 minutes ago, Andrak said:

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air 

They really aren't. See above. Arguing for some fantasy amalgamation is arguably much more out of thin air. 

40 minutes ago, Andrak said:

Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - 

Pretty condescending language to use to fellow Dees who are obviously against the ending of the club they support and love never mind the merging with our rivals.

The rest of your post raises some decent points for the counter argument tbf.

I've no problem whatsoever with Dees who would support an amalgamated team if that were to happen.

What I'm finding really odd is the active promoting of an amalgamated club on a DFC forum and the scratching of heads that Dundee fans would be anything other than fiercely against it.

  • Like 2
  • Star Post 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Andrak said:

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air and based either on opinions or depend a on begging prescribed (and apparently self-evident) answers to too many questions. Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - all in the interest of making the thread more thoughtful and maybe even a bit more entertaining, you jnderstand.

The new club would bring together the histories of both clubs. Why not? Rangers proved that what matters is what you choose to believe, not what others claim or even what the actual legal circumstances might indicate.

The new board are unlikely to insist that the new entity is distinct from and emotionally unattached to either of the amalgamated clubs. That would be commercial suicide.

Would that many people really give up on football if they chose to believe that their team no longer existed. Why choose to believe that?, and what exactly is it about Dundee Football Club that attracted you and kept you following it for years? Is the actual football part of that so small that you would even contemplate throwing it away completely?

Would that many people actually choose to switch allegiance to another team. Isn't that the very thing they are refusing to do for the amalgamated team? What's the difference?

How many of us can honestly feel that the future of our club is secure? If you worry about that security, what might be done about it? Here's my wee checklist of what we have tried in the past to try and ensure sustainability, along with my brief thoughts on it

  • Good football/competition success - too inconsistent and may be dangerous in current climate (eg what Neil McCann tried to do)
  • Ancillary services income streams - Dog track, say no more
  • Wealthy owner promising large financial injections - been there, bought the Tshirt.... and had to sell it again to pay off the creditors
  • Trying to live within our means, sensible spending, external investors underwriting losses - Arguably where we are now. Too many consecutive years of losses usually doesn't end well, though.
  • Extreme borrowing funding fantasy players and performances on the pitch - No guarantee of success (but thank you so much for the memories, obviously not the ones where loads of people lost their jobs and small business creditors didn't get paid - that bit was shameful, and why, ultimately the Caniggia, Caballero, Nemsadzi, Ketsbaia et all era was a mistake.

Hopefully others can add any more I may have missed. I'd especially love to see some suggestions that have proved successful in the past, and could work in the future.

What I would like to see, as I have said a few times before, is a city supported club that is truly part of the community that is Dundee. A club that benefits from and contributes to sport in the city. I don't think that is impossible. But I do To put it another way, I believe the fact that there are two senior city clubs is an obstacle to even thinking about building that city sport concept with football at it's heart.

I think that the price the city would extract would be one single city club. It is hard to see how it could be made to work otherwise.

By the way, I'm just getting started on this topic and would really like to read some reactions that go beyond the initial gut-wrenching and heart-breaking idea that our wonderful club might not last in its current form forever. 

 

I was born into a Dundee FC supporting family, I've supported Dundee FC as long as I can remember and have no interest in any other football team not even our Scottish national team. I've lived in several different locations in the UK and have lived in Germany, during those times I didn't follow any local team but my focus was on Dundee FC - I timed visits home to coincide with Dundee home games but would travel when home if I had to just to see Dundee FC.

It's not just a football connection we have with our club it's emotional, that emotional connection makes us passionate about all things Dundee FC. We don't choose to be Dundee fans the way many United, Celtic and Rangers fans have we're born into it. To coin what I consider to be an incredibly corny phrase 'It's in the blood'.

Reason, logic and reality don't even enter the equation. I've quoted Joel Cohen before and will do so again 'It's a fool that looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart'. Your arguments can be as reasoned and sensible as you want to portray them however the reality is that for a huge number of us lifelong Dundee FC fans any other club will not be Dundee FC and we will not have the emotional or passionate attachment to it that we do to Dundee FC. Hence I personally would not feel able to follow any amalgamated club in the city, amalgamation or anything else that saw the end of Dundee FC would also see the end of my interest in football altogether. Like Cobra says above I'd follow Dundee FC in League 2 before I followed any merged, soulless club in the city.

Is the future of the club secure? I don't know but I hope it's here as long as I am.

I agree that having two clubs in the city is hindering the one club's progress. I'll argue Dundee FC should be the one team in the city whils United's fans will argue they should be, we are where we are though so we need to get on with it. It's worked well enough since United were formed in 1923 or whenever it was and it'll work going forward - if it doesn't then in my opinion football in the city of Dundee will fall flat on its face.

  • Like 1
  • Star Post 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Andrak said:

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air and based either on opinions or depend a on begging prescribed (and apparently self-evident) answers to too many questions. Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - all in the interest of making the thread more thoughtful and maybe even a bit more entertaining, you jnderstand.

The new club would bring together the histories of both clubs. Why not? Rangers proved that what matters is what you choose to believe, not what others claim or even what the actual legal circumstances might indicate.

The new board are unlikely to insist that the new entity is distinct from and emotionally unattached to either of the amalgamated clubs. That would be commercial suicide.

Would that many people really give up on football if they chose to believe that their team no longer existed. Why choose to believe that?, and what exactly is it about Dundee Football Club that attracted you and kept you following it for years? Is the actual football part of that so small that you would even contemplate throwing it away completely?

Would that many people actually choose to switch allegiance to another team. Isn't that the very thing they are refusing to do for the amalgamated team? What's the difference?

How many of us can honestly feel that the future of our club is secure? If you worry about that security, what might be done about it? Here's my wee checklist of what we have tried in the past to try and ensure sustainability, along with my brief thoughts on it

  • Good football/competition success - too inconsistent and may be dangerous in current climate (eg what Neil McCann tried to do)
  • Ancillary services income streams - Dog track, say no more
  • Wealthy owner promising large financial injections - been there, bought the Tshirt.... and had to sell it again to pay off the creditors
  • Trying to live within our means, sensible spending, external investors underwriting losses - Arguably where we are now. Too many consecutive years of losses usually doesn't end well, though.
  • Extreme borrowing funding fantasy players and performances on the pitch - No guarantee of success (but thank you so much for the memories, obviously not the ones where loads of people lost their jobs and small business creditors didn't get paid - that bit was shameful, and why, ultimately the Caniggia, Caballero, Nemsadzi, Ketsbaia et all era was a mistake.

Hopefully others can add any more I may have missed. I'd especially love to see some suggestions that have proved successful in the past, and could work in the future.

What I would like to see, as I have said a few times before, is a city supported club that is truly part of the community that is Dundee. A club that benefits from and contributes to sport in the city. I don't think that is impossible. But I do To put it another way, I believe the fact that there are two senior city clubs is an obstacle to even thinking about building that city sport concept with football at it's heart.

I think that the price the city would extract would be one single city club. It is hard to see how it could be made to work otherwise.

By the way, I'm just getting started on this topic and would really like to read some reactions that go beyond the initial gut-wrenching and heart-breaking idea that our wonderful club might not last in its current form forever. 

 

I'm far from one of the "toys out of the pram brigade"  Andrak,  and suspect I'd have any amalgamated team as my favourite Scottish team but that's a long way from where I am now where Dundee FC is the only team that turn me to despair and joy in equal measure.  I want Dundee FC to be THE team in the city, not 50% of such a team.  

As for combining histories, I don't want their history - we have our own. The Rangers situation is totally different - they did not amalgamate with another club rather they created  a new legal structure/entity - from a football perspective they look like the old, smell like the old and behave like the old and have retained their trophies officially.

Football clubs are not like businesses or even jobs - we don't change our club when we fancy something better.  

Gut-wrenching and heart-breaking are what we do as fans, Andrak.  If you are able to be dispassionate then that's great but plenty cannot.   

 

 

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cobra said:

It is strange reading some of the views on this thread.

Newcastle are a huge club that get crowds of 50,000. They haven't won the league since 1927, haven't won the FA Cup since 1955 and have never won the League Cup. Would any Geordies want to merge with Sunderland to create a Tyne and Wear superclub in the hope they might challenge the big clubs and finally win another trophy? I very much doubt it.

Personally I'd rather see Dundee compete in League Two than watch a merged Dundee team win the Scottish Cup. I wouldn't bitterly resent the new team. I just wouldn't be particularly interested.

Spot on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Andrak said:

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air and based either on opinions or depend a on begging prescribed (and apparently self-evident) answers to too many questions. Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - all in the interest of making the thread more thoughtful and maybe even a bit more entertaining, you jnderstand.

The new club would bring together the histories of both clubs. Why not? Rangers proved that what matters is what you choose to believe, not what others claim or even what the actual legal circumstances might indicate.

The new board are unlikely to insist that the new entity is distinct from and emotionally unattached to either of the amalgamated clubs. That would be commercial suicide.

Would that many people really give up on football if they chose to believe that their team no longer existed. Why choose to believe that?, and what exactly is it about Dundee Football Club that attracted you and kept you following it for years? Is the actual football part of that so small that you would even contemplate throwing it away completely?

Would that many people actually choose to switch allegiance to another team. Isn't that the very thing they are refusing to do for the amalgamated team? What's the difference?

How many of us can honestly feel that the future of our club is secure? If you worry about that security, what might be done about it? Here's my wee checklist of what we have tried in the past to try and ensure sustainability, along with my brief thoughts on it

  • Good football/competition success - too inconsistent and may be dangerous in current climate (eg what Neil McCann tried to do)
  • Ancillary services income streams - Dog track, say no more
  • Wealthy owner promising large financial injections - been there, bought the Tshirt.... and had to sell it again to pay off the creditors
  • Trying to live within our means, sensible spending, external investors underwriting losses - Arguably where we are now. Too many consecutive years of losses usually doesn't end well, though.
  • Extreme borrowing funding fantasy players and performances on the pitch - No guarantee of success (but thank you so much for the memories, obviously not the ones where loads of people lost their jobs and small business creditors didn't get paid - that bit was shameful, and why, ultimately the Caniggia, Caballero, Nemsadzi, Ketsbaia et all era was a mistake.

Hopefully others can add any more I may have missed. I'd especially love to see some suggestions that have proved successful in the past, and could work in the future.

What I would like to see, as I have said a few times before, is a city supported club that is truly part of the community that is Dundee. A club that benefits from and contributes to sport in the city. I don't think that is impossible. But I do To put it another way, I believe the fact that there are two senior city clubs is an obstacle to even thinking about building that city sport concept with football at it's heart.

I think that the price the city would extract would be one single city club. It is hard to see how it could be made to work otherwise.

By the way, I'm just getting started on this topic and would really like to read some reactions that go beyond the initial gut-wrenching and heart-breaking idea that our wonderful club might not last in its current form forever. 

 

I have dark blue blood running through my veins   😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Andrak said:

Still don't understand most of the comments here.

The arguments against, such as they are, seem to be created out of thin air and based either on opinions or depend a on begging prescribed (and apparently self-evident) answers to too many questions. Let me try and engage the 'toys out the pram' mob - all in the interest of making the thread more thoughtful and maybe even a bit more entertaining, you jnderstand.

The new club would bring together the histories of both clubs. Why not? Rangers proved that what matters is what you choose to believe, not what others claim or even what the actual legal circumstances might indicate.

The new board are unlikely to insist that the new entity is distinct from and emotionally unattached to either of the amalgamated clubs. That would be commercial suicide.

Would that many people really give up on football if they chose to believe that their team no longer existed. Why choose to believe that?, and what exactly is it about Dundee Football Club that attracted you and kept you following it for years? Is the actual football part of that so small that you would even contemplate throwing it away completely?

Would that many people actually choose to switch allegiance to another team. Isn't that the very thing they are refusing to do for the amalgamated team? What's the difference?

How many of us can honestly feel that the future of our club is secure? If you worry about that security, what might be done about it? Here's my wee checklist of what we have tried in the past to try and ensure sustainability, along with my brief thoughts on it

  • Good football/competition success - too inconsistent and may be dangerous in current climate (eg what Neil McCann tried to do)
  • Ancillary services income streams - Dog track, say no more
  • Wealthy owner promising large financial injections - been there, bought the Tshirt.... and had to sell it again to pay off the creditors
  • Trying to live within our means, sensible spending, external investors underwriting losses - Arguably where we are now. Too many consecutive years of losses usually doesn't end well, though.
  • Extreme borrowing funding fantasy players and performances on the pitch - No guarantee of success (but thank you so much for the memories, obviously not the ones where loads of people lost their jobs and small business creditors didn't get paid - that bit was shameful, and why, ultimately the Caniggia, Caballero, Nemsadzi, Ketsbaia et all era was a mistake.

Hopefully others can add any more I may have missed. I'd especially love to see some suggestions that have proved successful in the past, and could work in the future.

What I would like to see, as I have said a few times before, is a city supported club that is truly part of the community that is Dundee. A club that benefits from and contributes to sport in the city. I don't think that is impossible. But I do To put it another way, I believe the fact that there are two senior city clubs is an obstacle to even thinking about building that city sport concept with football at it's heart.

I think that the price the city would extract would be one single city club. It is hard to see how it could be made to work otherwise.

By the way, I'm just getting started on this topic and would really like to read some reactions that go beyond the initial gut-wrenching and heart-breaking idea that our wonderful club might not last in its current form forever. 

 

No toys. No pram. I simply disagree with every single word of that. 

I don't go to watch my team 'win things'. if it happens, then that's wonderful, but a League Cup win the year I was born, a few 1st Div/Champs and a Soccer Sixes win (never forget that!) have been more than enough to keep me believing that we can do something. Honestly, if it just about improved opportunity for success on the park, then you are welcome to follow Manchester City, who just buy success, or Chelsea before them and Manchester United before them. Just change team every season and you'll be fine. You'd even have a season supporting the Leicester underdog.

I can't see a single positive to supporting a new entity.

I'm maybe different mate. I don't watch football on TV very much. I enjoy the occasional game as a neutral but nothing more. Would I walk away form the game? Yes, absolutely. I couldn't transfer my passion for Dundee Football Club onto Forfar, or St Johnstone, so why could I transfer it to Dundee City? That's like say, let's just pretend Dundee United are actually Dundee FC and go down the road and watch that mob every week. For me it just doesn't work that way.

I find it just as bizarre that someone who appears to be as passionate abut DFC as you do mate would actively be trying to illustrate the positives of fundamentally ending the thing we all love, as you do that some people are approaching this with heart over head. To be fair though, many are approaching it with their head too and still not seeing how it would benefit anything.

None of the above is personal Andrak. However, I simply can't put into words how distasteful I find the suggestions in your post. 

I am intrigued about the part in bold however. Can you elaborate what you mean regarding that mate?

  • Love 1
  • Star Post 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Barkblue said:

No toys. No pram. I simply disagree with every single word of that. 

I don't go to watch my team 'win things'. if it happens, then that's wonderful, but a League Cup win the year I was born, a few 1st Div/Champs and a Soccer Sixes win (never forget that!) have been more than enough to keep me believing that we can do something. Honestly, if it just about improved opportunity for success on the park, then you are welcome to follow Manchester City, who just buy success, or Chelsea before them and Manchester United before them. Just change team every season and you'll be fine. You'd even have a season supporting the Leicester underdog.

I can't see a single positive to supporting a new entity.

I'm maybe different mate. I don't watch football on TV very much. I enjoy the occasional game as a neutral but nothing more. Would I walk away form the game? Yes, absolutely. I couldn't transfer my passion for Dundee Football Club onto Forfar, or St Johnstone, so why could I transfer it to Dundee City? That's like say, let's just pretend Dundee United are actually Dundee FC and go down the road and watch that mob every week. For me it just doesn't work that way.

I find it just as bizarre that someone who appears to be as passionate abut DFC as you do mate would actively be trying to illustrate the positives of fundamentally ending the thing we all love, as you do that some people are approaching this with heart over head. To be fair though, many are approaching it with their head too and still not seeing how it would benefit anything.

None of the above is personal Andrak. However, I simply can't put into words how distasteful I find the suggestions in your post. 

I am intrigued about the part in bold however. Can you elaborate what you mean regarding that mate?

Barkblue, this thread was just a reaction to the coincidence of two sets of Americans possibly owning both clubs in Dundee and linking that to the DFC stadium development. Amalgamation might appear to an outsider to be logical and to make very sound economic sense. Like appointing JM and then being taken aback at the lack of enthusiasm for that appointment if Doddsy was to be the assistant. 

If you have a discussion about amalgamation and more importantly what the consequences of such a proposal might mean, you are helping to point out pitfalls and to raise questions about the potential size of the support base. Most supporters would accept , I think, that the main reason for amalgamation would be to be a bigger club in terms of the number of supporters and the level of commercial income. 

From what I have read on here there seems to  be no likelihood that the amalgamated team would attract all the existing supporters and there might be a very strong anti reaction from the business community who have probably used the same emotional arguments to justify their support for either DFC or our neighbours.

At the first hurdle the whole concept seems flawed. If we don't make these points the people who actually have to build the business plans may be unaware of the idiosyncrasy of Scottish football fans.

Some years ago, I met on holiday a couple who were very heavily involved with FCUM FC. They were former Man U fans who totally objected to the Glazers, apologies for the spelling error, buy out of Man U. These fans took the decision to start a new football club in whatever division would have them and just give up on their deeply loved club. They have won promotions now own their own ground and have a successful club. Who would have believed that fanatical Man U fans would pack in their club?

I believe those who say that if there were to be an amalgamation then they would find something else to do or support football in a way that does not entail regular attendance at games.

Andrak is right to put forward what he sees are the advantages of an amalgamated team in Dundee. For all the effort put in by FPS they are still running at a substantial loss, the only way to turn this round is by reducing the squad size and stopping the annual merry go round of new manager and almost a complete new team signed every 2 years. Our turn as top team in the city has failed to bring in more supporters and for me this is a massive disappointment. I don't really see much improvement unless our team really has turned a corner and manages to get into 10th, and much more importantly JM stays as the manager with Jimmy Boyle as his assistant. For me JM has shown that he does know what he is doing and much much more importantly, for him, he has learned that he does not need a cheeky chappy communicator to help him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BCram said:

Barkblue, this thread was just a reaction to the coincidence of two sets of Americans possibly owning both clubs in Dundee and linking that to the DFC stadium development. Amalgamation might appear to an outsider to be logical and to make very sound economic sense. Like appointing JM and then being taken aback at the lack of enthusiasm for that appointment if Doddsy was to be the assistant. 

If you have a discussion about amalgamation and more importantly what the consequences of such a proposal might mean, you are helping to point out pitfalls and to raise questions about the potential size of the support base. Most supporters would accept , I think, that the main reason for amalgamation would be to be a bigger club in terms of the number of supporters and the level of commercial income. 

From what I have read on here there seems to  be no likelihood that the amalgamated team would attract all the existing supporters and there might be a very strong anti reaction from the business community who have probably used the same emotional arguments to justify their support for either DFC or our neighbours.

At the first hurdle the whole concept seems flawed. If we don't make these points the people who actually have to build the business plans may be unaware of the idiosyncrasy of Scottish football fans.

Some years ago, I met on holiday a couple who were very heavily involved with FCUM FC. They were former Man U fans who totally objected to the Glazers, apologies for the spelling error, buy out of Man U. These fans took the decision to start a new football club in whatever division would have them and just give up on their deeply loved club. They have won promotions now own their own ground and have a successful club. Who would have believed that fanatical Man U fans would pack in their club?

I believe those who say that if there were to be an amalgamation then they would find something else to do or support football in a way that does not entail regular attendance at games.

Andrak is right to put forward what he sees are the advantages of an amalgamated team in Dundee. For all the effort put in by FPS they are still running at a substantial loss, the only way to turn this round is by reducing the squad size and stopping the annual merry go round of new manager and almost a complete new team signed every 2 years. Our turn as top team in the city has failed to bring in more supporters and for me this is a massive disappointment. I don't really see much improvement unless our team really has turned a corner and manages to get into 10th, and much more importantly JM stays as the manager with Jimmy Boyle as his assistant. For me JM has shown that he does know what he is doing and much much more importantly, for him, he has learned that he does not need a cheeky chappy communicator to help him.

I think that's the point mate. This thread is a reaction to not even a rumour. It's a coincidence. 

There's no magic money tree that would sprout if the clubs amalgamated and the journey would be long, arduous and in my opinion, fruitless. What American businessmen would look at the situation in Dundee football and think, you know what? There's gold in them thar hills! To be fair, it makes no sense for the Keyes family and it makes no sense for potential US investors in United, but it makes even less sense for the two of them to then join together. Which of the two would benefit most? even of things went remarkably well, they'd only have half each.

The investment in time and money that an amalgamation would require would move into decades and millions. Whether that be new stadiums, or whatever. There would be no short term boon.

And yet still people are actually putting down an agenda for joining the two clubs, when it's clear and always has been clear that the vast majority (not all admittedly) of supporters from both clubs have no appetite for it. 

I don't understand why we're having this discussion. If the Americans can't see from their time at Dens that the core support we have still going to games only does so out of a love for the dark blue and that anything else would likely drive the majority of them away, then they are fools. The biggest event in their time at the club has been the Doon Derby. It's that sort of passion, belief and sales they cannot replicate under any other circumstances other than winning the Championship. If, after that night and day atmosphere compared to say, Wednesday night in a 4-0 win, they still can't see the folly of any sort of amalgamation, then, they will do it no matter how many people like me tap away on a keyboard - and hell mend them. 

I'm not sure where this fallacy that us being a league above United would suddenly find folk flocking to Dens Park came from and those that thought it would happen are utterly deluded. Those lapsed supporters only turn up when we play AGAINST United, not on any other occasion. Being the city's top club was never going to suddenly guarantee that we'd beat St Johnstone, Kilmarnock, Hibs or whoever every week. The two have zero influence on each other and only really will if we can stay that far ahead of them for going on a decade, when new supporters are choosing clubs etc. And even then, we are influenced by family and friends etc regarding what team we follow. There's no logic to suggesting three years 'in front' of them suddenly would equate to us winning trophies are pulling crowds of 8000 when Scottish football is a pretty tedious product that's poorly marketed. In fact United getting relegated actually reduced our financial prospects, because they were the biggest guaranteed crowd at Dens.

Both your and Andrak's posts are well written and well thought through and I'm not denying for a second that there's a possible logic to bringing the two clubs together, but that is vastly outweighed by the hurdles and anyone who can't see that either doesn't want to, or is simply deluded, in my opinion, of course. 

There is no value in this discussion. All we are doing is legitimising the idea by giving it page after page on this forum. 

  • Star Post 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barkblue said:

I think that's the point mate. This thread is a reaction to not even a rumour. It's a coincidence. 

There's no magic money tree that would sprout if the clubs amalgamated and the journey would be long, arduous and in my opinion, fruitless. What American businessmen would look at the situation in Dundee football and think, you know what? There's gold in them thar hills! To be fair, it makes no sense for the Keyes family and it makes no sense for potential US investors in United, but it makes even less sense for the two of them to then join together. Which of the two would benefit most? even of things went remarkably well, they'd only have half each.

The investment in time and money that an amalgamation would require would move into decades and millions. Whether that be new stadiums, or whatever. There would be no short term boon.

And yet still people are actually putting down an agenda for joining the two clubs, when it's clear and always has been clear that the vast majority (not all admittedly) of supporters from both clubs have no appetite for it. 

I don't understand why we're having this discussion. If the Americans can't see from their time at Dens that the core support we have still going to games only does so out of a love for the dark blue and that anything else would likely drive the majority of them away, then they are fools. The biggest event in their time at the club has been the Doon Derby. It's that sort of passion, belief and sales they cannot replicate under any other circumstances other than winning the Championship. If, after that night and day atmosphere compared to say, Wednesday night in a 4-0 win, they still can't see the folly of any sort of amalgamation, then, they will do it no matter how many people like me tap away on a keyboard - and hell mend them. 

I'm not sure where this fallacy that us being a league above United would suddenly find folk flocking to Dens Park came from and those that thought it would happen are utterly deluded. Those lapsed supporters only turn up when we play AGAINST United, not on any other occasion. Being the city's top club was never going to suddenly guarantee that we'd beat St Johnstone, Kilmarnock, Hibs or whoever every week. The two have zero influence on each other and only really will if we can stay that far ahead of them for going on a decade, when new supporters are choosing clubs etc. And even then, we are influenced by family and friends etc regarding what team we follow. There's no logic to suggesting three years 'in front' of them suddenly would equate to us winning trophies are pulling crowds of 8000 when Scottish football is a pretty tedious product that's poorly marketed. In fact United getting relegated actually reduced our financial prospects, because they were the biggest guaranteed crowd at Dens.

Both your and Andrak's posts are well written and well thought through and I'm not denying for a second that there's a possible logic to bringing the two clubs together, but that is vastly outweighed by the hurdles and anyone who can't see that either doesn't want to, or is simply deluded, in my opinion, of course. 

There is no value in this discussion. All we are doing is legitimising the idea by giving it page after page on this forum. 

I think that rather than legitimising the idea we are creating a constructive discussion, where IMO, the people who are arguing for the status quo are making very valid points that do not appear, at least to me, to be refuted by those who suggest that amalgamation is the way forward. 

Andrak mentioned finding a way to keep both traditions alive in an amalgamation and the club being part of a much expanded sports club. Turning our passion for our city into the motivation for everyone supporting the team. That's quite a different concept and one that I have never considered.

Edited by BCram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BCram said:

I think that rather than legitimising the idea we are creating a constructive discussion, where IMO, the people who are arguing for the status quo are making very valid points that do not appear, at least to me, to be refuted by those who suggest that amalgamation is the way forward. 

Most of the points being made against amalgamation can't be refuted. There's no empirical evidence to back them up however they're made from the heart which, for me, overrides any data or other so called common sense points that anyone might put forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BCram said:

I think that rather than legitimising the idea we are creating a constructive discussion, where IMO, the people who are arguing for the status quo are making very valid points that do not appear, at least to me, to be refuted by those who suggest that amalgamation is the way forward. 

I understand where you're coming from BC. However, even if they are the minority, people talking up amalgamation may well plant the seed that it could be possible to convince the larger fan base, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

I don't think there's any doubt that if plans were announced to amalgamate, those behind it would very quickly understand the weight of feeling against any such notion. 

I really do think 'grown up' discussion about it merely legitimises the whole idea as being open for debate, when it really never should be.

  • Like 1
  • Star Post 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barkblue said:

I understand where you're coming from BC. However, even if they are the minority, people talking up amalgamation may well plant the seed that it could be possible to convince the larger fan base, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

I don't think there's any doubt that if plans were announced to amalgamate, those behind it would very quickly understand the weight of feeling against any such notion. 

I really do think 'grown up' discussion about it merely legitimises the whole idea as being open for debate, when it really never should be.

Fair point of view Barkblue. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.