As far as suggesting serious alternatives per @DevC, I am wondering if the best course, instead of looking for big swings, is to chip away at that deficit through small, consistent initiatives...
Someone mentioned raising the trust membership amount - let's say we go from 10 pounds to 50 pounds, but lose a third of the trust. My understanding (based upon my membership number) is that there are around 1500 people in the trust. So we go from 15,000 pounds a year to 50,000 pounds a year, and that is 35,000 saved.
How about every home game, a penalty shoot out at half time, where a 50 pound buy-in gets you the opportunity to take against Yves, along with 9 other punters? It might sound silly, but that is 500 pounds per game, and 11,500 pounds per league season, for a casual competition that would not realize any extra cost to set up, and would certainly create serious bragging rights for the weekly winner.
More competitions, maybe? Winner of a prize draw gets to go behind the scenes training with the boys?
We could look for as many ways to utilize AP as possible, whether a benefit concert for the club every summer with local bands, sponsored runs around the pitch, car boot sales, and so forth.
Ultimately, even if enough decent ideas were put forward to come up with even half of the shortfall, we could take a lot of confidence that football fortune could deal with the rest a lot easier than it can currently.
I realize this all might sound naïve, and a bit rich coming from America, where my own participation is limited (see you against Fleetwood in May!), but my point is really that there is a large Trust with an enormous combined imagination, and we have not realized the predicament we are in up to the present, and therefore not really had motivation to try and come up with solutions. For me, instead of one big solution, it would be a series of smaller solutions, that add up to something big.
"> Someone mentioned raising the trust membership amount - let's say we go from 10 pounds to 50 pounds, but lose a third of the trust. My understanding (based upon my membership number) is that there are around 1500 people in the trust. So we go from 15,000 pounds a year to 50,000 pounds a year, and that is 35,000 saved."
Some good ideas there - some of which we have looked at. Thanks.
Trust membership subs bring in about £8-£9k a year at present as many pay the reduced £5 fee and some seniors are still on the old £2 per annum!
The Share Scheme was partly born out of a desire by some Trust members to pay £10 per month instead of just £10 per year and a good number signed up to do that (or more) for the 5 years of that scheme.
Most members pay their sub by bank standing order so it would need to be them who increases their payment.
@Shev I don't know what the current status is regarding the terms of the stadium licence but I know that some years ago the Trust did want to promote its use for music concerts and such like.
Sadly these never materialised because the licence only allowed its use for football related activities. This permitted it's use by Wasps for rugby football and our use for association football.
You have no idea of just how far out some of the suggestions were, e.g. freezing it as a giant skating rink, firework displays on the car park hill watched from the stand.
However,it would be good to ask the questions again if only so that Trust members might be aware of what restrictions there are on the stadium use.
@Malone said:
A fireworks display sounds easy.
The ice rink sounds truly insane.
Ice rink is not totally mad as they construct one in November/December every year in a park in Windsor. However can't see it being financially viable at Adams Park.
Many years ago, when playing away at Boston Utd. Their social club at York rd was advertising a female mud wrestling event that was coming up shortly ????
@aloysius said:
Spill the beans, Marlow old chap. Emergency meeting? Events this week show the chairman reads the Gasroom? What's going on?
What’s going on indeed
So it is announced today that the finance director who stood at the meeting this very topic thread is about ,only 16 days ago, vigorously supporting a sale to one of the investor groups he had nursed, encouraged and negotiated with for 2 years, who bristled at two questions from the floor about the timing of accounts, trust financial feedback meetings and his presentation about the thriving nature of our finances at the club under his watch 12 months ago , stands down.
He has done a thankless task like all who choose to volunteer their time and should be thanked.
But let’s look at the facts:-
Our club has been run by and influenced by a handful of individuals for the past 4 or so years.
Andrew Howard - Chairman then sporting director
Trevor Stroud - trust then dual chairman
Mark Burrell- trust director then group financial Director
Ivor beeks-club president
Within a few days Trevor Stroud and Ivor beeks will remain in post.
16 days ago Burrell and Stroud stood before us and told us that despite the thriving report they gave us in November 2017, we are in fact a hopeless cause financially. Despite our manager and team getting us to competing league 1 standard on our year to year budget, we can’t do so in future. We must be Havant level or we must sell.
No reasons given by Burrell or Howard can avoid the appalling timing of their departures in terms of our clubs stability and positioning at a time of serious ownership negotiations and debate.
No matter how objectively we look at it, questions are right to be raised and we are right to expect answers from the Chair. Something is clearly not right.
IF Burrell had made a decision he was moving on prior to the trust meeting on 12th of this month , it is extremely disingenuous to present and represent his strong case for selling up without declaring he was leaving. Especially as he contributed to the BDO report that he subsequently cited as being independent.
IF Burrell made a decision at some time after the 12th meeting and this week (emergency meeting), then why ? That is very concerning too.
I wonder if someone giving up their own time, working hard doing a "thankless task" in the best interest of the club might get sufficiently hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity and honesty to think 'is it really all worth it?' and decide that enough is enough?
@marlowchair I agree, “something is clearly not right”.
Someone put a post up recently saying they had no interest in who had been a backer of Steve Hayes, it was in the past and all that mattered now was the football. I’d suggest taking a close look at what happened in the past, to see who you’d trust now in making the important decisions. If Beeks had had his way we’d have lost Adams Park and been paying rent to the council while sharing a stadium built for the benefit of Wasps. (Take a look at Coventry to see how well that works, and they have the (potential) benefit of a large city based fan base).
Any plan that has the backing of Beeks should be treated with suspicion, if not contempt.
@bookertease said:
I wonder if someone giving up their own time, working hard doing a "thankless task" in the best interest of the club might get sufficiently hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity and honesty to think 'is it really all worth it?' and decide that enough is enough?
"hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity"?
@bookertease said:
I wonder if someone giving up their own time, working hard doing a "thankless task" in the best interest of the club might get sufficiently hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity and honesty to think 'is it really all worth it?' and decide that enough is enough?
You say attacks, some would say valid questions that anyone standing for elected office should expect and act in a way that is transparent enough to avoid the heat getting too hot in the kitchen.
@Wendoverman said:
so is your view that Trevor Stroud and Mr Beeks have forced Howard and Burrell out @marlowchair ?
No not necessarily Wendover. I was more making the point that two is a significant number of that small power group to lose in a short space of time.
Regardless of reasons it is extremely significant to our club in current climate.
My own personal view is that Trevor will now be without two important contributors who have done most of the boards work.
Whether that work was good , mediocre, positive in terms of the potential sale or a hindrance remains to be seen.
I don’t feel comfortable that the main proponent of the grand plan we had outlined on September 12th has left with a whimper only days after presenting said grand plan and it only re-enforces my concerns around the substance & thoroughness of the due diligence, research and strategic planning at board level leading up to this point.
It’s not personal, it’s fact. No sound and robust strategic plan at board level contemplates two key directors tendering resignations within days of the public launch of said strategic plan- regardless of their reasons for resigning.
People perhaps rightly have taken me to task for being single minded in my focus and open questioning of the sale process in recent months, long before anything was even close to being public. I can be dour and overly persistent such is my passion for good practice at our football club and I apologise for the tiresome nature of my posts at times.
That said , even those who have argued and defended the board/club from my questions in recruit months cannot possibly be pleased that their solid and passionate defence of the board and process has now delivered these two resignations? It really doesn’t help their case.
@Doob I think the poster you quote was talking about not being interested in which posters on here had been for or against Hayes rather than the substantive issues of who runs it. I agree there are questions to be asked once we know what/who is wanting to involve themselves.
There is no doubt that losing two of the main drivers behind the management of the company at the same time is bad news. New management will need to be identified very quickly. Whether that new management is delivered by recruitment from the current structure or from the new "investors" waits to be seen.
Remember, there's an opportunity to stand for election to the Trust Board of Directors at this year’s Annual General Meeting. Three Directors retire by rotation and standing for reelection, plus one standing down.
God you do take it all very seriously @marlowchair.
And it depends. My interpretation of your comments on here would be an 'attack'. I'm not sure what the right place to ask your valid questions and expect answers is, but I'm pretty sure it isn't on here.
I actually think you are right to openly raise the issues you do, but (in my view) you can't help yourself from making them appear personal more times than not.
As an example from your post just above: "...the main proponent of the grand plan we had outlined on September 12th has left with a whimper..." You have absolutely no evidence to support that he has 'left with a whimper' (or at least haven't presented it) and appear to be putting your own spin on it to fit in with your internal dialogue of what is happening within the club.
I'm not saying you aren't right, it is entirely possible you are, but you are stating a lot of these things as facts when they are really only conjecture at this stage.
And if you believe that saying someone has left with a whimper isn't a personal dig at someone then either you or I seriously misunderstand what being personal is.
You consistently refer to your being passionate about the football club as an excuse for 'the tiresome nature of your posts' but be aware that one of the problems about inflamed passions is that it can cloud good judgement.
Having said all that I do really value your contributions on here. You do bring a good insight to the inner machinations and despite my personal attacks on your posting style I don't (generally) find them tiresome.
Keep it up Marlow Chair. Despite some of the criticisms you are taking, I am enjoying your thought provoking posts, and your almost forensic analysis. We are in danger of sleep walking to disaster.
Comments
One of Santa’s little helpers may have done so.
I am sure a commitment to Wycombe would dwarf any previous club entanglements.
Donnercaster Rovers
Elverton?
As far as suggesting serious alternatives per @DevC, I am wondering if the best course, instead of looking for big swings, is to chip away at that deficit through small, consistent initiatives...
Someone mentioned raising the trust membership amount - let's say we go from 10 pounds to 50 pounds, but lose a third of the trust. My understanding (based upon my membership number) is that there are around 1500 people in the trust. So we go from 15,000 pounds a year to 50,000 pounds a year, and that is 35,000 saved.
How about every home game, a penalty shoot out at half time, where a 50 pound buy-in gets you the opportunity to take against Yves, along with 9 other punters? It might sound silly, but that is 500 pounds per game, and 11,500 pounds per league season, for a casual competition that would not realize any extra cost to set up, and would certainly create serious bragging rights for the weekly winner.
More competitions, maybe? Winner of a prize draw gets to go behind the scenes training with the boys?
We could look for as many ways to utilize AP as possible, whether a benefit concert for the club every summer with local bands, sponsored runs around the pitch, car boot sales, and so forth.
Ultimately, even if enough decent ideas were put forward to come up with even half of the shortfall, we could take a lot of confidence that football fortune could deal with the rest a lot easier than it can currently.
I realize this all might sound naïve, and a bit rich coming from America, where my own participation is limited (see you against Fleetwood in May!), but my point is really that there is a large Trust with an enormous combined imagination, and we have not realized the predicament we are in up to the present, and therefore not really had motivation to try and come up with solutions. For me, instead of one big solution, it would be a series of smaller solutions, that add up to something big.
Nice few ideas there @Shev
Before someone else says it...have you emailed those to (whoever?)
"> Someone mentioned raising the trust membership amount - let's say we go from 10 pounds to 50 pounds, but lose a third of the trust. My understanding (based upon my membership number) is that there are around 1500 people in the trust. So we go from 15,000 pounds a year to 50,000 pounds a year, and that is 35,000 saved."
Some good ideas there - some of which we have looked at. Thanks.
Trust membership subs bring in about £8-£9k a year at present as many pay the reduced £5 fee and some seniors are still on the old £2 per annum!
The Share Scheme was partly born out of a desire by some Trust members to pay £10 per month instead of just £10 per year and a good number signed up to do that (or more) for the 5 years of that scheme.
Most members pay their sub by bank standing order so it would need to be them who increases their payment.
@Shev I don't know what the current status is regarding the terms of the stadium licence but I know that some years ago the Trust did want to promote its use for music concerts and such like.
Sadly these never materialised because the licence only allowed its use for football related activities. This permitted it's use by Wasps for rugby football and our use for association football.
You have no idea of just how far out some of the suggestions were, e.g. freezing it as a giant skating rink, firework displays on the car park hill watched from the stand.
However,it would be good to ask the questions again if only so that Trust members might be aware of what restrictions there are on the stadium use.
A fireworks display sounds easy.
The ice rink sounds truly insane.
We did try the ice rink once; Barry Fry and his Peterborough side kept falling over.
Ice rink is not totally mad as they construct one in November/December every year in a park in Windsor. However can't see it being financially viable at Adams Park.
Many years ago, when playing away at Boston Utd. Their social club at York rd was advertising a female mud wrestling event that was coming up shortly ????
@mooneyman , not mad if you leave it there for a couple of months, but completely mad for a team who play home fixtures on average every 2 weeks.
@ChasHarps tell me again your favourite story about @devc and trains.
Are you DevC's love child Chris ?
So it is announced today that the finance director who stood at the meeting this very topic thread is about ,only 16 days ago, vigorously supporting a sale to one of the investor groups he had nursed, encouraged and negotiated with for 2 years, who bristled at two questions from the floor about the timing of accounts, trust financial feedback meetings and his presentation about the thriving nature of our finances at the club under his watch 12 months ago , stands down.
He has done a thankless task like all who choose to volunteer their time and should be thanked.
But let’s look at the facts:-
Our club has been run by and influenced by a handful of individuals for the past 4 or so years.
Andrew Howard - Chairman then sporting director
Trevor Stroud - trust then dual chairman
Mark Burrell- trust director then group financial Director
Ivor beeks-club president
Within a few days Trevor Stroud and Ivor beeks will remain in post.
16 days ago Burrell and Stroud stood before us and told us that despite the thriving report they gave us in November 2017, we are in fact a hopeless cause financially. Despite our manager and team getting us to competing league 1 standard on our year to year budget, we can’t do so in future. We must be Havant level or we must sell.
No reasons given by Burrell or Howard can avoid the appalling timing of their departures in terms of our clubs stability and positioning at a time of serious ownership negotiations and debate.
No matter how objectively we look at it, questions are right to be raised and we are right to expect answers from the Chair. Something is clearly not right.
IF Burrell had made a decision he was moving on prior to the trust meeting on 12th of this month , it is extremely disingenuous to present and represent his strong case for selling up without declaring he was leaving. Especially as he contributed to the BDO report that he subsequently cited as being independent.
IF Burrell made a decision at some time after the 12th meeting and this week (emergency meeting), then why ? That is very concerning too.
I wonder if someone giving up their own time, working hard doing a "thankless task" in the best interest of the club might get sufficiently hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity and honesty to think 'is it really all worth it?' and decide that enough is enough?
so is your view that Trevor Stroud and Mr Beeks have forced Howard and Burrell out @marlowchair ?
Burrell and Howard deserting a sinking ship?
@marlowchair I agree, “something is clearly not right”.
Someone put a post up recently saying they had no interest in who had been a backer of Steve Hayes, it was in the past and all that mattered now was the football. I’d suggest taking a close look at what happened in the past, to see who you’d trust now in making the important decisions. If Beeks had had his way we’d have lost Adams Park and been paying rent to the council while sharing a stadium built for the benefit of Wasps. (Take a look at Coventry to see how well that works, and they have the (potential) benefit of a large city based fan base).
Any plan that has the backing of Beeks should be treated with suspicion, if not contempt.
"hacked off by persistent attacks on their integrity"?
Just the two posters on here isn't it?
You say attacks, some would say valid questions that anyone standing for elected office should expect and act in a way that is transparent enough to avoid the heat getting too hot in the kitchen.
No not necessarily Wendover. I was more making the point that two is a significant number of that small power group to lose in a short space of time.
Regardless of reasons it is extremely significant to our club in current climate.
My own personal view is that Trevor will now be without two important contributors who have done most of the boards work.
Whether that work was good , mediocre, positive in terms of the potential sale or a hindrance remains to be seen.
I don’t feel comfortable that the main proponent of the grand plan we had outlined on September 12th has left with a whimper only days after presenting said grand plan and it only re-enforces my concerns around the substance & thoroughness of the due diligence, research and strategic planning at board level leading up to this point.
It’s not personal, it’s fact. No sound and robust strategic plan at board level contemplates two key directors tendering resignations within days of the public launch of said strategic plan- regardless of their reasons for resigning.
People perhaps rightly have taken me to task for being single minded in my focus and open questioning of the sale process in recent months, long before anything was even close to being public. I can be dour and overly persistent such is my passion for good practice at our football club and I apologise for the tiresome nature of my posts at times.
That said , even those who have argued and defended the board/club from my questions in recruit months cannot possibly be pleased that their solid and passionate defence of the board and process has now delivered these two resignations? It really doesn’t help their case.
@Doob I think the poster you quote was talking about not being interested in which posters on here had been for or against Hayes rather than the substantive issues of who runs it. I agree there are questions to be asked once we know what/who is wanting to involve themselves.
There is no doubt that losing two of the main drivers behind the management of the company at the same time is bad news. New management will need to be identified very quickly. Whether that new management is delivered by recruitment from the current structure or from the new "investors" waits to be seen.
An update at the AGM will be interesting.
@mooneyman Rather than leaving a sinking ship, perhaps they no longer wish to paddle their own canoe.
Never paddle a canoe in shark infested waters!
Remember, there's an opportunity to stand for election to the Trust Board of Directors at this year’s Annual General Meeting. Three Directors retire by rotation and standing for reelection, plus one standing down.
God you do take it all very seriously @marlowchair.
And it depends. My interpretation of your comments on here would be an 'attack'. I'm not sure what the right place to ask your valid questions and expect answers is, but I'm pretty sure it isn't on here.
I actually think you are right to openly raise the issues you do, but (in my view) you can't help yourself from making them appear personal more times than not.
As an example from your post just above: "...the main proponent of the grand plan we had outlined on September 12th has left with a whimper..." You have absolutely no evidence to support that he has 'left with a whimper' (or at least haven't presented it) and appear to be putting your own spin on it to fit in with your internal dialogue of what is happening within the club.
I'm not saying you aren't right, it is entirely possible you are, but you are stating a lot of these things as facts when they are really only conjecture at this stage.
And if you believe that saying someone has left with a whimper isn't a personal dig at someone then either you or I seriously misunderstand what being personal is.
You consistently refer to your being passionate about the football club as an excuse for 'the tiresome nature of your posts' but be aware that one of the problems about inflamed passions is that it can cloud good judgement.
Having said all that I do really value your contributions on here. You do bring a good insight to the inner machinations and despite my personal attacks on your posting style I don't (generally) find them tiresome.
Keep it up Marlow Chair. Despite some of the criticisms you are taking, I am enjoying your thought provoking posts, and your almost forensic analysis. We are in danger of sleep walking to disaster.