The best programme

[Schumi]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
that's obviously you're opinion

I'm shocked.

[WeAreRovers]

Of course this is all personal (biased) opinion but does the fact that Rovers programme wins Programme of the Year consistently not have any bearing?

IMHO colour and layout do count for an awful lot, which I assume is why Rovers' wins so many awards. Cork's programme is pretty good as is Pats. They'd be the best 3 for me.

UCD's is a fanzine and Boh's is straight out of the 50s. Colour, lads, colour. Then again I work in publishing so what do I know.

KOH

PS my favourite programme fook up of recent times - an ad in the gypo news (or whatever it's called) for ringtones. Soul Man by..........Chas and Dave.

[Dodge]

Over the last couple of years rovers has been the best but this years Cork's has improved dramatically

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
Ok we're getting into personal opinion here but both the Pats one and the UCD one had roughly 20 pages of content. The pats one is full colour, the UCD isn't. Although we have more ads, they are matched by content so it isn't an absurd amount.

I also said our's wasn't great, but it serves its purpose in terms of PR, informing supporters of club events and the ads bring in much revenue.

Right - might as well finish this off before it gets as tedious as another manager's comments!

I still don't think colour can offset content - in terms of content, ours is definitely the most varied. Pat's is obviously much better in terms of ads and PR, but I'd say what makes a good programme, especially from a fan's point of view, is content, not ads; again colour isn't content.

Your comment Pat's one was that it looks the best (agree), but that the content isn't great yet it's good value for money - contradiction surely???

Maybe I overpraised ours - easy to do really! - but I also think such words as "appalling" and "not good" were over the top. There is content and formatting/layout, which from a fan's point of view is 90% of the battle surely?

Anyway, I did say that the Pat's one was OK, so I am ceding yez something!!

[Dodge]

how is not good over the top...

And I'm only going on the UCD v Pats one which you admitted had some faults (which lead to the appaling comment (as regards presentation)

[WeAreRovers]

Originally posted by Dodge
Over the last couple of years rovers has been the best but this years Cork's has improved dramatically

I was very impressed by Cork's programme the other night (not that I bought a copy!)

Considering it's been touched by the hand of Dolan it's damn good.

KOH

[max power]

i think what macy is trying say can be put another way, new orders song blue monday was the biggest selling 12" single of all time , but they made no money because of the lavish blue vynal and the expensive blue velvet sleeve, what was the point of really expensive production costs if it meant you were going to make no money, surley the point fo a programme is to tell about the players and club and to inform away supporters while making as much money as possible for the home club ???

if the product is more important then maybe we should get in professional writers and a design team and go for the booker prize each year ???

i agree with macy, but he'll probably change his mind once he sees i've agreed with him. LOL

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
how is not good over the top...

And I'm only going on the UCD v Pats one which you admitted had some faults (which lead to the appaling comment (as regards presentation)

Surely though you can't make such broad and blunt (i.e. "not good") conclusions based on one issue which had a one-off problem on a couple of pages? That's like saying your programme is appalling because you missed out on four of our players in the team line-outs or because our crest was only in black and white throughout the programme! The content is really what makes a programme (again from the fan's viewpoint), and I'd much rather read interesting snippets on the Iraqi league (or even four "hit-and-miss" articles for that matter) than five columns, each of which rehashed the previous two weeks' games. You've admitted the Pat's content isn't great yet you still rate it good value for money - how's that? You rate the Pat's programme better than the UCD one because it has more colour and roughly the same number of pages of content -

both the Pats one and the UCD one had roughly 20 pages of content. The Pat's one is full colour, the UCD isn't.

Again, by that logic, if a programme contained twenty pages of "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" in red font, it'd be better again.

Anyway, are we finished cyber-ranting at each other yet?

Oh, and I'd like to answer James' earlier comment by stating that most of the proceeds from the programme do indeed go back (indirectly) to the club.






That club being Angel's...

[The Donie Forde]

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
I was very impressed by Cork's programme the other night (not that I bought a copy!)

Considering it's been touched by the hand of Dolan it's damn good.

KOH

Thanks for the praise, cheapskate!
Always good to hear a positive word or two from visiting fans. FYI, Pat Dolan's contribution to City Edition is simply and solely his programme notes.

Robert Goggins is doing a top job with your own issue, IMO, and he's also extremely helpful to us whenever we request anything Rovers-related.

Donie

[James]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
by stating that most of the proceeds from the programme do indeed go back (indirectly) to the club.

where do the rest of the proceeds go
tut tut so much for doing prog for the love of your club..student scum

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by James
where do the rest of the proceeds go
tut tut so much for doing prog for the love of your club..student scum

That's ex-student scum to you!

Most of the proceeds go to Angels', the rest go to the girls of course!

[Macy]

Originally posted by max power
i think what macy is trying say can be put another way, new orders song blue monday was the biggest selling 12" single of all time , but they made no money because of the lavish blue vynal and the expensive blue velvet sleeve,

Actually they lost 30p per copy..... Good old Tony Wilson business sense!!!!

Originally posted by max power
i agree with macy, but he'll probably change his mind once he sees i've agreed with him. LOL

James you were right all along...

[max power]

still amcy it had been relased again since then and kylie used it too so over all it should have made a bit of money by now, but not for tony wilson or factory records......do you agree ??

[Countyman]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
What's the standard of programme like in the First Division like then? (Might as well get prepared... ) I presume they have to suffer somewhat from a lack of contributors and to a lesser extent from a lack of money?

Some first division programmes are actually very good.

Finn Harps - excellent glossy programme with good mix of articles and ads.

Dublin City - glossy but full of ads. Little content

Kildare County - Full colour, great new stats section, regular contributors plus the compulsory ads, very rarely has anything on the opposition...probably not our fault. Down to 24 pages from 36 last year i think?

Sligo Rovers - of a good standard with some decent emphasis on local soccer news

Galway United - haven't seen this years, last years was ok

Kilkenny - have none

Limerick - heard they had none for our game

Athlone - much improved from last years with new colour cover

dundalk - same cover for each game with sticker on front, no colour, cheap looking effort.

Monaghan - cant remember if they had one or not

Cobh - cheap looking with not much content.

Bray - haven't seen yet

[Macy]

I thought it was League rules that you had to produce a programme?

On New Order axmpower: Of course it's made money, but not on the format it was actually released in...

[NewDrogFan]

Att Pineapple Stu:
Just to set the record straight. I am the editor of the Claret & Blue Review - otherwise the Drogheda united Programme. The resaon that the UCD pen pictures were incorrect is very simple. OUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FELL ON DEAF EARS . We had to resort to taking the incorrect and patchy information from your website.

Also could you get your facts correct - where does it say "Had of gone in" - Anyway where do you get off on correcting grammer - if you want to do something useful may I suggest that you sort out your own pamphlet - sorry programme - Even your stadium announcer had to correct the errors that your programme had - and not because you had downloaded wrong information from our website

For anyone requiring information of any Drogheda United player - contact our offices at (041) 9802702

[The Donie Forde]

Originally posted by NewDrogFan
Att Pineapple Stu:

For anyone requiring information of any Drogheda United player - contact our offices at (041) 9802702

As the editor of City Edition we included NO Drogs penpix in our last issue as we received NO reply from (a) Drogheda United FC and (b) North East printers, where I had earlier in the season been requested to send CCFC penpix. I did oblige on that occasion, my gesture was NOT reciprocated, unfortunately.

Just to set the record straight, like.

Donie

[pete]

Originally posted by Macy
I thought it was League rules that you had to produce a programme?

Yup unless they also changed that rule i think all clubs have to produce a programme (minimum of a team sheet or something) as part of the league membership.

[NewDrogFan]

Donie Forde.

Our apologize for that. As I said if you contact our commercial offices in future we will be more then happy to oblige. When I contacted you earlier this year you were more then helpful with your assistance.

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by NewDrogFan
Att Pineapple Stu:
Just to set the record straight. I am the editor of the Claret & Blue Review - otherwise the Drogheda united Programme. The resaon that the UCD pen pictures were incorrect is very simple. OUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FELL ON DEAF EARS . We had to resort to taking the incorrect and patchy information from your website.

Also could you get your facts correct - where does it say "Had of gone in" - Anyway where do you get off on correcting grammer - if you want to do something useful may I suggest that you sort out your own pamphlet - sorry programme - Even your stadium announcer had to correct the errors that your programme had - and not because you had downloaded wrong information from our website

For anyone requiring information of any Drogheda United player - contact our offices at (041) 9802702

New Drog Fan - Who exactly did you e-mail about the pen pictures? Shels e-mailed the club and it was forwarded to me, so I can only imagine that if you did that, I would have gotten it and sent you the info. I e-mailed all clubs with addresses I had to hand - most got back very promptly.

I personally e-mailed Drogheda for our league game two weeks before the Cup game about the pen pictures from the official website - I was aware that they were out of date (and ridiculously so!), so I got in touch about them. I was just told that I could take them and that they were out of date. No attempt was made to say a) where they were out of date; b) who had left or come since or c) to provide up-to-date pen pictures. The squad we were left with from the website then went into the team line-outs in the programme. As they were over a year old - with, as you just denied, wrong information downloaded from your website - there were obviously errors. In my view, this is Drogheda's fault, not ours as we contacted you and received minimal assistance.

Having been in touch with you so soon before the game, there was no excuse for you not to reply to us asking for pen pictures. You quite obviously didn't "have to resort" to our website, and with a bit more care, you would have seen that the pen pictures were out of date and could have got back in touch with us (apparently Robbie Martin scored a hat-trick against Monaghan in the league this season!!). I'm open to correction here, but although our official website isn't very well maintained, I seriously doubt if Pat Jennings' profile begins with Barry Ryan's old profile, as it did in your programme!!! You also had our programme - on the first page is an e-mail address to contact us! Did you do this either? No! Maybe you could enlighten us further as to where you did get the pen pictures from? Needless to say, no source was credited!

As for getting my facts correct - check Harry McCue's column - second row, where it uses the term "had of".

As for our "pamphlet - sorry, programme", I would much sooner pay €2 for our programme which has, by and large, what we call "layout" and "content" rather than pay €2 for yours, which had innumerable typos, very little content (manager's column, sundry stats - possibly taken directly from the internet and some patently wrong - an editor's note making reference to an article which wasn't included and the rest ads). Many errors would have been spotted by proof reading - such as the comment that Brazil are the only country to have been in all 11 World Cups since the series started in 1950! The stats page in the centrefold was half-complete - matches listed with no line-outs or line-outs with no matches in most cases! Not even the Second Round Cup game was updated - in fact, the fact that you were playing Harps wasn't even included!

The Drogheda programme seems to be first and foremost a money-spinner for the club - fair enough. But a) there must surely be some minimum content to justify charging €2 for what is otherwise just coloured paper and b) if you are going to try and defend what really was an indefensibly poor and inaccurate programme, you surely should "check your facts first"!

I await your reply with interest!