Re: IMG scores : Wed Jul 03, 2024 9:26 pm  

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10 ... 7168214109

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10 ... 7168214109

Re: IMG scores : Thu Jul 04, 2024 6:31 am  

Willzay wrote:

Cas saying they expect maximum points for their stadium.

Maximum points for being a massive ****hole.

It will all be very basic and minimum quality to get points I suspect.

Things like sprucing up and re purposing rooms, throwing some comfy seat covers on some seats and putting a section barrier round them calling them media seats etc. Things like that I would imagine.

Re: IMG scores : Thu Jul 04, 2024 7:45 am  

Trojan Horse wrote:

It will all be very basic and minimum quality to get points I suspect.

Things like sprucing up and re purposing rooms, throwing some comfy seat covers on some seats and putting a section barrier round them calling them media seats etc. Things like that I would imagine.

Yes, I said it before and I'll say it again, there are some clubs out there that are(granted with a bit of a push from IMG) that are genuinely looking to make sustainable improvements for all of the right reasons and become a better club with better facilities etc. I think just looking at the things we are doing as a club, we fall into the category.

Then you have the clubs that aren't buying into it, that will scrape the bare minimum with sticking plasters (quite literally in some cases) all over the place just to pick up points on the technicality that they do meet a minimum criteria on something, this is Cas, it's very clear to see. This is a club that is going to pick up points under financial investment because there "investor" transferred a million pounds into the clubs bank account, with zero plans to actually use the money on the club and will be back in his pocket the first signs they've picked that point up... Again a loophole in the criteria.

Lets not forget though, before Matt Ellis arrived we probably fell into this category too.

[PopTart]

Re: IMG scores : Thu Jul 04, 2024 9:08 am  

homme vaste wrote:

Yes, I said it before and I'll say it again, there are some clubs out there that are(granted with a bit of a push from IMG) that are genuinely looking to make sustainable improvements for all of the right reasons and become a better club with better facilities etc. I think just looking at the things we are doing as a club, we fall into the category.

Then you have the clubs that aren't buying into it, that will scrape the bare minimum with sticking plasters (quite literally in some cases) all over the place just to pick up points on the technicality that they do meet a minimum criteria on something, this is Cas, it's very clear to see. This is a club that is going to pick up points under financial investment because there "investor" transferred a million pounds into the clubs bank account, with zero plans to actually use the money on the club and will be back in his pocket the first signs they've picked that point up... Again a loophole in the criteria.

Lets not forget though, before Matt Ellis arrived we probably fell into this category too.

The thing is Cas can command and big crowd and large social media following even with an old stadium.
They don't need the change as badly as us.
Thar will only take them so far though.
If Toulouse or Bradford kick on, or even Widnes get some investment, they'll be left behind.

Re: IMG scores : Thu Jul 04, 2024 11:35 am  

PopTart wrote:

The thing is Cas can command and big crowd and large social media following even with an old stadium.
They don't need the change as badly as us.
Thar will only take them so far though.
If Toulouse or Bradford kick on, or even Widnes get some investment, they'll be left behind.

Agree that Cas’s crowd is good but I think they will fall into the same media bracket as us and alot of teams in SL as it’s a very large jump to the next step of the bracket. (Think us and Cas would sit in the 100k plus subscriptions and associated interaction banding.

Re: IMG scores : Thu Jul 04, 2024 11:37 am  

homme vaste wrote:

Yes, I said it before and I'll say it again, there are some clubs out there that are(granted with a bit of a push from IMG) that are genuinely looking to make sustainable improvements for all of the right reasons and become a better club with better facilities etc. I think just looking at the things we are doing as a club, we fall into the category.

Then you have the clubs that aren't buying into it, that will scrape the bare minimum with sticking plasters (quite literally in some cases) all over the place just to pick up points on the technicality that they do meet a minimum criteria on something, this is Cas, it's very clear to see. This is a club that is going to pick up points under financial investment because there "investor" transferred a million pounds into the clubs bank account, with zero plans to actually use the money on the club and will be back in his pocket the first signs they've picked that point up... Again a loophole in the criteria.

Lets not forget though, before Matt Ellis arrived we probably fell into this category too.

Just on that million pound for financial investment.

I wonder if Ellis will do the same and leave it there for the grading and then after points secured use it for the new restaraunt/bar/ground improvements?

Maximum points on finance would be excellent. I’m sure the club have it under control.

Re: IMG scores : Fri Jul 05, 2024 9:52 am  

Trojan Horse wrote:

Just on that million pound for financial investment.

I wonder if Ellis will do the same and leave it there for the grading and then after points secured use it for the new restaraunt/bar/ground improvements?

Maximum points on finance would be excellent. I’m sure the club have it under control.

That £1m investment is split over 3 years, the first injection of approx 1/3rd of it wen in to last years accounts about 48hrs before the deadline for it to be considered in 2023's IMG assessment, the 2nd payment has gone in this year and you can presume if they stay in SL that the 3rd will go in to next years. it isn't £1m in this years accounts.

Re: IMG scores : Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:33 am  

financialtimes wrote:

That £1m investment is split over 3 years, the first injection of approx 1/3rd of it wen in to last years accounts about 48hrs before the deadline for it to be considered in 2023's IMG assessment, the 2nd payment has gone in this year and you can presume if they stay in SL that the 3rd will go in to next years. it isn't £1m in this years accounts.

So can we do the same or have we done the same? I assume at least for this year and possibly last as Ellis was providing some funds/investment for players.

I’m sure that the club will be all over securing maximum points that it can in every area. I just don’t know how it works and actually transitions to points.

Re: IMG scores : Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:35 am  

Trojan Horse wrote:

So can we do the same or have we done the same? I assume at least for this year and possibly last as Ellis was providing some funds/investment for players.

I’m sure that the club will be all over securing maximum points that it can in every area. I just don’t know how it works and actually transitions to points.

ME's investment in to Trinity Dwarfs MJ coppers in to Cas

Re: IMG scores : Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:46 am  

financialtimes wrote:

ME's investment in to Trinity Dwarfs MJ coppers in to Cas

I don’t doubt that and I’m really enjoying the ride so far. Got the feeling we are setting foundations for some success over the next decade presently.

The nerves will be frayed running up to IMG score time but I’m really confident knowing what works been done at Trinity.

The key thing is to make absolute certain that there’s no mistakes like in the Castleford submission last season.