you can argue the toss as much as you like - 4.30 is a non starter and late sessions are hated.

The demand is for prime time evening ice (i.e 5.45/6.00 + 8.00/8.15) sessions. If the demand is there - which it is in kinross, as they apparently sell 3 X 4sheet sessions (the late one which is forced on everybody just to get ice) then 2 x 6 sheets sessions makes perfect sense and no getting away from it.

You can whinge all you like about workload etc, but you have to supply what the customer is wanting and i cannot see 6 sheets taking much longer than 5 to prepare.

I have reservations about the cost of the facility but that does not revolve around the size of ice pad. As they say "if you dont have any sweeties in the jar to sell ........"

I

So, what you're saying is that we don't need an NCA..., or a curling rink in Kinross..., or, presumably one in Cupar?
Once the rink in Kinross closes, we can all drive up to Perth. No more juniors, school players coming through, fewer curlers..., one more ice tech unemployed.

Think it through again, Ken.

Well, that message was well hidden - especially in the bit where you say "Go curl in Perth"

So, is this assertion based on some kind of analysis - in which case, could you share it please - or just some wild figure plucked from the air?

OK, so I've done a quick analysis over lunch.
Area 7 has 4 provinces - East Fife, West Fife, Lochleven, Cupar

All of the East Fife clubs curl at Kirkcaldy, all of the Lochleven clubs curl at Kinross.

In West Fife, 7 out of 11 curl at Kinross, the remaining 4 at Kirkcaldy

In Cupar, 4 curl in Perth,  2 at Kirkcaldy, 5 at Kinross, 1 at Forfar (!)

I think it's fair to say that in the event of a rink opening in Cupar, all of the Lochleven clubs would stay at Kinross, and a quick look at the geography would suggest that the West Fife clubs currently curling at Kinross would almost certainly stay there rather than drive past Kinross to get to Cupar.

So, the probable loss to Kinross would be the 5 Cupar clubs. I counted 27 clubs currently at Kinross, so that would be a reduction of 18% in the number of clubs.

The 5 Cupar clubs are
Ceres
Crawford Priory
Cupar
Forret
Stratheden

I think it's also fair to say that these are relatively small clubs, so I would be surprised if their loss to Kinross would impact the number of curlers by more than 10%.

Of course, there is another imponderable, and that is, faced with the prospect of curling at Kirkcaldy or a new rink at Kinross, how many of the West Fife clubs currently at Kirkcaldy would move to Kinross?

Incidentally, this also shows that Perth would get a bigger hit than Kirkcaldy in the event of a new rink at Cupar.

From the website of Fife Curling Trust:

"There are currently 1,287 curlers in 38 clubs within Fife and a further 424 curlers in 14 clubs within Kinrossshire. These members are split into the following areas: - East Fife Province – 396 members, Cupar Province – 325 members, West Fife Province – 566 members, Loch Leven Province – 424 members."

It is likely that David Steel loaded his figures in the Cupar direction and that SteveW is loading it in the Kinross direction. There seems to me to be some hefty discrepency, but I know Dave and he gets his facts right. I agree, Kirkcaldy and Perth will be the heavy losers here. I don't really know how many curlers Kirkcaldy has left to lose!

Curlingranger:
"Also your point about Tesco and it being shut for 4 months doesn't really add up either as the running costs of an ice rink during the summer must be a fraction of what they are during the season. What costs there are should be part of a yearly budget which sets the ice fees."

In my experience the running costs of a curling rink (which is not an "ice rink" for general ice use), is just as high in summer, if not higher. The only savings will be on casual staff, which will only be taken on when there is high demand, and therefore higher revenue to pay for them.

I believe Ken is correct with his estimate of a 25% loss to Kinross when Cupar opens. This will be offset a little by gain from being a new facility and being the NCA. Having seen the projections for the new facility, I must tell you that these too have been loaded in favour of the Kinross six-sheet argument. Anyone can load figures. If I had to build a curling rink in this modern financially difficult environment, I would certainly build it a little too small than a lot too big. Increasing the ice by 50% with no obvious increase in revenue -- and a substantial increase in building and running costs, not to mention a serious loan -- makes no sense at all.

Perhaps the point we're all ignoring here is that a six sheeter requires 50% more work every day than a four, with roughly the same amount of time within which to deal with it. If any of you are curling-ice technicians, I would be grateful to hear how you plan to do it. I'm always happy to learn.

In fact, a rapid analysis of the figures from the Fife Curling Trust actually shows a figure much closer to mine than yours John.

East Fife Province – 396 members, 396 playing at Kirkcaldy
Cupar Province – 325 members, 5 clubs from 12 playing at Kinross, so 5/12* 325 = 135
West Fife Province – 566 members, 7 clubs from 11 playing at kinross, so 7/11 * 566 = 360
Loch Leven Province – 424 members, 424 playing at Kinross

Therefore, total playing at Kinross = 424 + 360 + 135 = 919
So, if all 5 Cupar clubs move to a new Cupar rink 135/919 = 15%

So, show me where I've loaded it.

I accept that there may be inaccuracies in the database, but I repeat, that I did not get numbers of curlers from there, only numbers of clubs, and association of clubs to ice rinks. In the absence of any more accurate figures, I submit that my numbers are more accurate than a figure of 25% chosen by gut feel.

Not as far as I know, but no-one tells me anything! But you are perfectly right, all these figures really do raise many questions. How often does each curler pay to curl? At peak I was curling three or four times a week, and all weekend, in the same rink, while others would curl once a month at most! As for gut feel, I believe Ken got his figures from other posts, and those figures are probably based on the gut feel of experienced people who know curling and who probably know Kinross inside out. I have always tried to be careful when using any figures, but it is usually the case that gut feel plays a part somewhere. Not to worry, the point(s) have been made and well explored.

What worries me most, though, is that so many decisions in the modern curling world are being made by projected figures, gut feel and so on, often ignoring some very serious factual evidence that can be conveniently brushed aside as "someone's opinion". This is why I am prepared to push these concerns of numbers, etc., and let's see where it leads!