Kmcalpin

Yes we need confirmed signings / re-signings to be in place for pre season training. Apparently no deadlines have been set but that can't continue surely?

I wouldn't be so sure, as there are too many variables. Sevco were a better team last season than they were in the play offs, but then again so were we. A lot will depend on new signings made by both teams before the tie. In short its too early to tell.

This is what I don't get. Often we hear of clubs offering players £x per week or £y per week. However we don't know if these figures include bonuses or appearance monies for example. However the total wage budget will include these extras.

I'd imagine it would be to ask TV whether they'd prefer particular Rangers games at Ibrox or away. The Police also would have had a hand settling the dates and games.

Ray MacKinnon is quoted in the Dundee Courier as saying "I wish I had the funds to go and spend £1500 each a week on eight players but I don’t." I take it from this, that thats what United were paying their players last season.

All ticket I presume?

Sounds about right. As far as I know we never made our initial interest public.

Interesting post Iain. I know we've had a series of mild winters recently but there's little doubt our pitch has improved no end and its now a decent playing surface. I believe this close season, some additional drains are being laid and of course it has been reseeded. Credit to our groundsman.

I don't know about that. Yes, of course, on paper we should win these games comfortably but early season these games can be tricky due to lack of match fitness and lower league teams having something to prove. I recall Terry Butcher vowing never to play pre season friendlies again against lower league teams after we were kicked off the park at Stranraer in a real battle.

Its not the location thats important its what the players do there. Remember a couple of years ago we had a pre season jolly to the Algarve and look what happened after that?

I recall seeing this information recently and was startled by it. Ok it does relate to 2013-14 but was shocked to see St Mirren and St Johnstone paying above our rates. That contradicts anything I've heard about these 2 clubs being frugal on wages. Its also interesting that the Ross County figure was very low - probably before their resurgence and increase in wages. I suppose though you could have a club paying a small squad big wages being lower in budgetary terms than another club paying a large squad low wages. We don't know how the figures were calculated. In terms of weekly wages though, ie £1200 pw, does this generally include bonuses and appearance money or are these extras which aren't quoted by players and their agents?

A very short close season!

Does anyone know pre season training starts?

Agree about Josh Law. Who is to say that the offers are derisory? I have no idea what Hammell & Lasley have been offered but for many the prospect of earning even say £600 pw is a mere pipedream. I suspect their offers are far from derisory and all too often we are just a tad quick to take the player's sides without knowing the full facts. I do understand that a footballer's career is a short one and if both lads receive better offers from other clubs and decide to move on then good luck to them. The club should only pay what it can afford. The same also applies to Ben Hall who seems to be a youngster in a hurry. The term "derisory" is emotive and suggestive of agentspeak.

I very very much doubt he will.

Is he possibly moving on?

I'm sure Weeyin can and will speak for himself Graeme but I can't see what is contradictory about these 2 statements. The first relates to his opinion about the calibre of people involved. The second spells out members' rights in respect of changing office bearers. I fail to see what is contradictory, let alone ridiculous as you put it, about these 2 statements. In fact I would go as far as to say that your term "faintly ridiculous" is more contradictory. Something is either ridiculous or it isn't.

????? I don't understand either.

The Brazilian has raised a point which I think needs clarified (Les is in an agreement his payback terms agreed). Its been widely reported over the past few weeks that Les Hutchison wants his money back sooner rather than later ie about 1-1/12 years into the 5 agreement. It also seems that the club & Society are eager to pay him off asap or are under pressure to do so or at least put arrangements in place to do so. Now, I have no idea what is in the agreement but assume as Iain does, that paybacks terms are agreed and fixed. Maybe simplistic but its analagous to me taking out a 5 year car loan with ABC Bank and paying the first 18 instalments in full and on time. The bank then comes to me and asks for the outstanding money back forthwith. Surely they cannot do that? Surely the Society and Club are only doing what they can to do Les a favour and give him money back more quickly. I would have thought that the ball was in our court. Surely he can only ask nicely or are there other strings attached? Does anyone know?

An important point which many have missed I think Iain - I'll expand on it in the Well Society AGM thread if I might.

Certainly good prices which for full price adults are cheaper than many lower division clubs. However, if you pay at the gate their prices for those aged 60-64 are dearer than ours. Also season tickets for those aged 16-18 are dearer than ours. Accies can well afford to subsidise season tickets, as I suspect their season ticket income is a small proportion of their overall income.

Not entirely sure thats true. The club and the Society have to maintain a separation for the time being, and if I recall rightly, in the early days, some members and non members were concerned that the two were too close. That of course will change when and if the Society takes on ownership of the club.

I'm the opposite. I've never had anything against the league cup but just think the organisation and format this year is shockingly poor.

I don't know if anyone picked this up from Mark McGhee's interview a couple of days ago. He said "We're pleased to have the first of our business complete in what will no doubt be a busy summer". Now I assume that he was talking about personnel changes given the context of his interview (Ferguson, Samson and Moore) resigning. It struck me as being a bit odd. Most of us were expecting a couple of players to leave perhaps (Moult orJohnson and /or Hall) and maybe 2 players to come in along with a batch of routine resignings. Maybe its just me but I wouldn't call that a particularly busy summer. So given his comment and rumours of Ainsworth attracting interest there may be more moves in the pipeline than many of us are expecting. MM will no doubt want to refashion the squad along his own lines. Maybe an interesting few months ahead?

A good deal of sense in that Andy. The only comment I'd add is that Clarkson and Fletcher were not required much last season as back up. So, you could say that their contribution and presence was limited and in effect largely unnecessary. IF we suffered injuries to Moult and (McDonald if he re-signs) I wouldn't be too happy about going with Mackin and Moore (touch wood we don't). Doubt we'll miss Hall much if or rather when he moves on. Reasonably happy with Samson.