Jump to content

Dna Founding Member Souvenir Pack


Recommended Posts

Think it's been explained poorly. People seemed to want/expect a signing that was made with 'DNA money'. Which is a bit silly as Wilson wasn't signed with DNA money any more than Shinnie is paid with season ticket money or GMS paid with TV money. But it's about perception. We want 1 star player, not a deeper squad.

 

So Wilson has (rightly or wrongly) become the poster boy of 'DNA money'. Yeah, it hasn't so far worked out for him but hasn't it still done what it was supposed to do? Bring in players we wouldn't have otherwise got. Wilson didn't work out but that's (arguably) poor recruitment, it's not the concept of AberDNA at fault. Money allows us to bring in players, it doesn't guarantee they'll catch fire. And people are giving up after one? Will people be saying 'well, that's proven that AberDNA doesn't make a difference'. Unfortunately I suspect so.

 

I just realised I don't really have a point I'm getting to. I think it's that it was never going to be possible that something would happen on the pitch that people could point to and say 'that's thanks to AberDNA, that's why I pay each month' but that's the expectation the club have to deal with.

 

I can see the point you're making and I do agree with it.  Uptake was always going to be lower after the first year - which was a quite incredible success.  Some folk were unhappy with membership pack and some folk are unhappy with the way the football budget has been managed this seasons.  It was inevitable there would be some drop off... i just think the club marketed this badly.  Using Wilson as the poster boy has backfired spectacularly and will definitely result in increased DNA casualties!  If Forrester and Wilson had been hugely successful, you can bet the club would be carrying on; 'all this was possible thanks to DNA'!

 

Incidentally, I get what you are saying about how money is not specifically apportioned.  However, would we have been able to afford Wilson's loan fee and the rumoured 7k p/w salary contribution without DNA money?  Would we have been able to afford to purchase Forrester for 200k?  the answer to both those questions is probably 'No'.

 

I'm gutted personally... as I've mentioned this revenue stream could have been massive for AFC.

Link to comment

Think it's been explained poorly. People seemed to want/expect a signing that was made with 'DNA money'. Which is a bit silly as Wilson wasn't signed with DNA money any more than Shinnie is paid with season ticket money or GMS paid with TV money. But it's about perception. We want 1 star player, not a deeper squad.

 

So Wilson has (rightly or wrongly) become the poster boy of 'DNA money'. Yeah, it hasn't so far worked out for him but hasn't it still done what it was supposed to do? Bring in players we wouldn't have otherwise got. Wilson didn't work out but that's (arguably) poor recruitment, it's not the concept of AberDNA at fault. Money allows us to bring in players, it doesn't guarantee they'll catch fire. And people are giving up after one? Will people be saying 'well, that's proven that AberDNA doesn't make a difference'. Unfortunately I suspect so.

 

I just realised I don't really have a point I'm getting to. I think it's that it was never going to be possible that something would happen on the pitch that people could point to and say 'that's thanks to AberDNA, that's why I pay each month' but that's the expectation the club have to deal with.

 

 

I can see the point you're making and I do agree with it.  Uptake was always going to be lower after the first year - which was a quite incredible success.  Some folk were unhappy with membership pack and some folk are unhappy with the way the football budget has been managed this seasons.  It was inevitable there would be some drop off... i just think the club marketed this badly.  Using Wilson as the poster boy has backfired spectacularly and will definitely result in increased DNA casualties!  If Forrester and Wilson had been hugely successful, you can bet the club would be carrying on; 'all this was possible thanks to DNA'!

 

Incidentally, I get what you are saying about how money is not specifically apportioned.  However, would we have been able to afford Wilson's loan fee and the rumoured 7k p/w salary contribution without DNA money?  Would we have been able to afford to purchase Forrester for 200k?  the answer to both those questions is probably 'No'.

 

I'm gutted personally... as I've mentioned this revenue stream could have been massive for AFC.

 

Why are you arguing with your Dad on a public forum?

 

Show some respect!

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

In what way have they made him the poster boy?

I'm not sure AFC have (Did McInnes once mention him in the same breath as DNA at one point, I can't remember) He's become the poster boy, regardless. It's something AFC have to deal with. It's easy (and possibly correct) to say fans have talked themselves into using Wilson as the benchmark of DNA's success but that's what's happened. Is it fair? No. Do the club have to deal with that if they want people to resubscribe? Yes.

Link to comment

In what way have they made him the poster boy?

 

It was mentioned a few times that the Wilson signing wouldn't have been possible without DNA funding.

 

In reality, they should have kept quiet.  It was a PR mistake.  You work for a large company yourself MT you know full well that you can kill an initiative instantly by attaching it to a dead duck! 

Link to comment

Think it's been explained poorly. People seemed to want/expect a signing that was made with 'DNA money'. Which is a bit silly as Wilson wasn't signed with DNA money any more than Shinnie is paid with season ticket money or GMS paid with TV money. But it's about perception. We want 1 star player, not a deeper squad.

 

So Wilson has (rightly or wrongly) become the poster boy of 'DNA money'. Yeah, it hasn't so far worked out for him but hasn't it still done what it was supposed to do? Bring in players we wouldn't have otherwise got. Wilson didn't work out but that's (arguably) poor recruitment, it's not the concept of AberDNA at fault. Money allows us to bring in players, it doesn't guarantee they'll catch fire. And people are giving up after one? Will people be saying 'well, that's proven that AberDNA doesn't make a difference'. Unfortunately I suspect so.

 

I just realised I don't really have a point I'm getting to. I think it's that it was never going to be possible that something would happen on the pitch that people could point to and say 'that's thanks to AberDNA, that's why I pay each month' but that's the expectation the club have to deal with.

 

I agree with this bit, same with transfer fees etc.  Anything in the budget, the club decide how to spend.  If that is deciding they have capacity for a transfer fee or suchlike, then so be it, we expect them to get on and manage the club.

 

They marketed this differently though, and I thought it was a scheme to extort more money from fans originally, but got on board with it when I read up on it and saw the way it was being discussed.  I now have reverted back to my original thoughts, as a season ticket holder, and paying this as well, I am now basically paying over the odds for the same thing.  It is just a small amount (in the scheme of things) boosted on the top of the overall budget to go against all the running of the club (and still perhaps replace some of the funds being diverted elsewhere).  I said earlier in the thread, I wouldn't have been happy if they had expected me to pay that much extra for my season ticket this year, yet I paid a net £160 extra (net of season ticket discount) this year for a shirt and some extra loyalty points.  

 

I see the value in the scheme to fans who find it difficult to pay money in to the club by alternate means.  I think that element will remain strong.  On the season ticket side, I am not sure how much they will retain. I would certainly only consider extending it if I wasn't renewing my season ticket for any reason.

Link to comment

I agree with this bit, same with transfer fees etc.  Anything in the budget, the club decide how to spend.  If that is deciding they have capacity for a transfer fee or suchlike, then so be it, we expect them to get on and manage the club.

 

They marketed this differently though, and I thought it was a scheme to extort more money from fans originally, but got on board with it when I read up on it and saw the way it was being discussed.  I now have reverted back to my original thoughts, as a season ticket holder, and paying this as well, I am now basically paying over the odds for the same thing.  It is just a small amount (in the scheme of things) boosted on the top of the overall budget to go against all the running of the club (and still perhaps replace some of the funds being diverted elsewhere).  I said earlier in the thread, I wouldn't have been happy if they had expected me to pay that much extra for my season ticket this year, yet I paid a net £160 extra (net of season ticket discount) this year for a shirt and some extra loyalty points.  

 

I see the value in the scheme to fans who find it difficult to pay money in to the club by alternate means.  I think that element will remain strong.  On the season ticket side, I am not sure how much they will retain. I would certainly only consider extending it if I wasn't renewing my season ticket for any reason.

 

I think this was probably always going to be the way for DNA eventually... those of us who want to give something, but are unable to hold a season ticket (myself included).  However, I think this will come to pass sooner than anticipated - I don't think many season ticket holders will be following up next year!

Link to comment

I'll resubscribe. I only make it to about 8-10 home games a season, so the donation eases my guilt.

 

I can see why folk would potentially be disappointed with the return on investment though.

These folk would be disappointed at what exactly? They've invested about a hundred quid...over 6 months.

 

The 'return' is in having a higher wage bill than all the clubs currently below us in the league and only 2 behind a club that utterly dwarfs us in wages.

 

What exactly did these folk you mentioned expect to get for their tiny investment?

 

 

Also, for the avoidance of doubt, DNA income does not pay for any individual player. It simply adds to the squad budget and that is fucking obvious. That said, whoever scores the winner v the huns on Wednesday, I'll be imagining that we couldn't have afforded his wage without DNA money.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Ok so not really a poster boy, eh?

Hardly shouting it from the rooftops or, you know, making a poster of it

It’s not the club that have made him the poster boy though, it’s basically just the stupid element of our support have jumped on the back of McInnes’s comment that we wouldn’t have that type of signing without DNA. Now they will use him as an excuse not to renew. I still don’t get how so many people didn’t understand that the DNA scheme wasn’t designed for purely signing first team players and was NEVER(MT™️) sold/advertised as such.

 

If they were to change the scheme so the money going into the club might go towards part/full fan ownership like Hearts have done, there would be a serious uptake

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I find the aberDNA concept interesting.. Dont think we have anything like that in North America where you are basically giving a "donation" or a "subsidy" to a club run by millionaires. It shows me how important the club is to their fans.  The reason I say that it looks more like a donation or subsidy to me as it is highly lucrative to the club even adjusting for VAT and expenses (fan experiences, discounts and goodies) based on public figures.

 

 

With aberDNA and selling kits in the US, can't say management is not looking at new innovative revenue streams to keep the club ahead of the capital and provincial clubs. The only way we would ever be remotely competitive to old firms revenue turnover would be TV revenues going up dramatically (as they are split evenly) to the point where gate receipts are significantly diluted as a portion of mix.  Currently tv revenue is a drop in the bucket for old firms and a significant portion of the smaller club budgets.

Link to comment

Just had DHL on the phone saying that they need to collect $23 (for customs) for the value of the AberDNA pack that they delivered in September.

 

Some cheek considering it's now 2019 and that I picked up my jersey in person.

DHL and Fedex will deliver goods if the duties have yet to be officially charged before delivery and than will come back to you retroactively when the duties are finalized.   I also got a delayed call from DHL.  

Link to comment

These folk would be disappointed at what exactly? They've invested about a hundred quid...over 6 months.

 

The 'return' is in having a higher wage bill than all the clubs currently below us in the league and only 2 behind a club that utterly dwarfs us in wages.

 

What exactly did these folk you mentioned expect to get for their tiny investment?

 

 

Also, for the avoidance of doubt, DNA income does not pay for any individual player. It simply adds to the squad budget and that is fucking obvious. That said, whoever scores the winner v the huns on Wednesday, I'll be imagining that we couldn't have afforded his wage without DNA money.

Well, for a start, £18 x 12 = £216.

 

I'd imagine some may feel that there's been little obvious difference in the calibre or strength of the playing squad compared to the season before.

 

It'll certainly be costing more, as I'd bet gleeson, Forrester and Wilson were/are all on good wages.

Link to comment

Well, for a start, £18 x 12 = £216.

 

I'd imagine some may feel that there's been little obvious difference in the calibre or strength of the playing squad compared to the season before.

 

It'll certainly be costing more, as I'd bet gleeson, Forrester and Wilson were/are all on good wages.

Quite right too. If I'd put in an extra £216 to the club I'd expect to see some pretty big changes.

Link to comment

The club are saying it's added £700,000, after expenses, to the playing budget, over the course of a year.

I'm still struggling to understand why anyone would give a couple of multimillionaires their hard earned...especially when we consider the totally scandalous way the Wig has handled AFC's finances over the last 20 years...that said plenty folk hand over much larger sums for his ridiculously over priced wood and brick boxes...hey ho.
Link to comment

I'm still struggling to understand why anyone would give a couple of multimillionaires their hard earned...especially when we consider the totally scandalous way the Wig has handled AFC's finances over the last 20 years...that said plenty folk hand over much larger sums for his ridiculously over priced wood and brick boxes...hey ho.

 

... because Milne is not going to plough hundreds of thousands of his own cash into AFC.  It's not going to happen.  He's had ample opportunity to do so over the years, but it's not happened.

 

Once you've reconciled that our multi-millionaire board members are not going to part with large sums of their own cash, then it becomes easier... or it did for me.  Either we get an extra 700k from AberDNA, or we do not.

 

I'm more than happy to help fund a scheme, from my own pocket, that's going to provide AFC with further disposible income.  I just want to see AFC succeed - that's important to me.  More important than a couple of hundred quid, that I'd probably just pish up the wall anyway.

 

Also, i don't have a season ticket - so my only regular donation to the club was my RedTV subscription. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...