@bookertease said:
With respect @marlowchair my point is the opposite. Yes we might ‘win’ in the short-term with more money from the likes of pay-day loan companies but ‘lose’ in the long-term if we, for example get relegated and having given previously loyal sponsors the cold shoulder end up scaping the bottom of the barrel.
If your argument on this is that we should always take the highest bidder then I am afraid I fundamentally disagree with you and it puts the rest of your arguments about financial mismanagement in a very different pot.
If you do hold that fundamental and narrow view then, for me, I have lost faith with a fair proportion of your arguments.
I should add that it is the policy of our club from board level down to always take the highest bidder, so you may aswell lose faith in them too , as I have.
My point is they don’t achieve anywhere near the highest value that is available because our club is not represented well currently in negotiations of any kind except player recruitment.
Hence my grave concern that the men and those they employ cannot achieve best price from a friendly a supportive pool of main sponsors , yet we are in their hands to get best deal on the table from the market on a sale of the club.... frightening prospect indeed .
Is it really club policy to always take the highest bidder? Can you substantiate this? If it is recorded as such I agree with you that the board is a) incompetent on this issue and b) depressingly marrow-minded.
@marlowchair said:
We are not dismissing or upsetting any loyal local backers because of giving them the cold shoulder for bigger nationals,we are upsetting them because of bad management. Our financial revenue is adversely affected directly due to these issues.
Very few , if any league clubs are refusing larger offers for shirt sponsors than currently received, and none do who are telling supporters they are broke and it’s impossible to stay in the league unless we go private.
Out of curiosity how do you know we upsetting local backers? Who exactly are upset?
And your second point can only be uninformed speculation. You may be right but what evidence can you posdibly have for that?
So-you know it’s said we are losing £600000 pa-or whatever the figure is-we don’t have a working capital facility in the shape of an overdraft-that used to be with my previous employer-who once they got repaid didn’t want to know-not surprisingly-my question is-when we need to buy stuff-or pay wages-where does the actual money come from -who is-or whom are -funding those accumulated losses-weekly-monthly -when will we reach the point where we cannot pay wages-buy the burgers and the beer etc that we sell-unless an investor steps in? I know about some sources of the clubs income-the obvious ones-but what currently makes up all this shortfall? I am new to Gasroom so hoping someone can enlighten me?
This is serious. We could not have enough money to buy beer...???!!!
I really wish I could help with your question @blucket but there will be others on here far better placed than me to enlighten you. Welcome. And have some paracetamol handy.
Some genuine questions that if you, or anyone care to put some numbers around the below, I believe will give you an indication of a way or core business is able to improve that gap in funding substantially. Fully cover the gap ? No.
I know the answer and am happy to give my valuation after you’ve considered it Dev. But my point is,and always has been, better run and with a paid management who are experienced and delivering in areas of cost control, budget management and commercial sales,we will not be receiving the accounts that are about to land that show an alarming slide in financial performance from previous set of accounts that has nothing to do with increased player wages costs in league 1.
-how much do you think our terrace sponsorship could/should be worth in clear profit per year?
-how much do you think our shorts sponsorship could/should be worth in clear profit each year?
-how much do you think our front of home shirt sponsorship could-should be worth in clean profit each year?
-do you expect the total profit value of our playing kit sponsorship to have increased in the back of a promotion season or decrease? If so by how much? 5% 25% ?
how much do you think our Beechdean stand could/should be worth in clear profit each year?
how much do you think our away stand could/should be worth in clear profit each year?
-how much do you think our cup
Sleeve sponsorship should / could be worth each year ?
How much do we receive in profit per executive box sold each year ?
How many off pitch staff pay rises,if any,do you think would be prudent/acceptable in the financial climate of a board saying we are losing too much money over the past 12-18 months?
Just catching up after a day away. I have no idea how much the various Sponsorships are likely to be but I would imagine them to form a substantial pillar of our income. If @marlowchair has an indication on the figures then I for one would like hear what they are. I am assuming these figures are not good which if it is the case begs the question why and who exactly has had responsibility for doing the marketing. If you don't get the big things right the chances are you won't get the small things right.
Hmm. Burger and Chips anyone ?
Separate issue but one thing that has always bugged me is the number of Stewards required to police a fairly timid fan base at Adams Park. In a quiet spell today see how many you can count. We must be looking at 50/60 + for a likely 4,000 attendance. Sell out away attendances I can see the need for but not games like today. It all costs money.
With regard to off pitch pay rises I would expect cost of living or if an individual has performance against a specific target (e.g. increased club income) then maybe a bonus might be appropriate.
Steward numbers are set for a stand / section regardless of how many actual fans go in there. It is a football wide problem. It is why on small checkstrade games for example the family stand or FA may be closed. Our self assessing certificate that was well earned by some directors and staff helped this situation and gives us some flexibility which is good.
New to the Gasroom @blucket ? I couldn’t recall hearing from you before so had a peep at your joining date expecting to see 4.50 am - ie today. In fact you appear to have joined soon after Gasroom 2 started so maybe you are new in the sense that you have not previously posted a comment. If so, you have in excess of 1,400 comments to catch up with (excluding brought forward posts that are being commented upon) and you have my sympathy ! No end is in sight in this calendar year. Good luck.
@marlowchair said:
We are not dismissing or upsetting any loyal local backers because of giving them the cold shoulder for bigger nationals,we are upsetting them because of bad management. Our financial revenue is adversely affected directly due to these issues.
Very few , if any league clubs are refusing larger offers for shirt sponsors than currently received, and none do who are telling supporters they are broke and it’s impossible to stay in the league unless we go private.
Out of curiosity how do you know we upsetting local backers? Who exactly are upset?
And your second point can only be uninformed speculation. You may be right but what evidence can you posdibly have for that?
Look, I have previously taken issue with you about the tone of your presentation but genuinely think you have more information about the workings of the Trust than most.
You are trying to convince me, and others on here, that your view that the off-field management is inept and/or incompetent is sufficiently bad that we should take little credence of their views on the selling off on the club.
Now, I trust the Trust about as far as I could throw them or you but any actual examination of your arguments leads to the inevitable conclusion that they are built on sand or your prejudice.
Sooner rather than later we will have to make a decision on the future of our club. You know enough to help inform that decision. If I am not going to dismiss your views as those of someone with a personal axe to grind (and I don’t want to) you need to provide more weight to your evidence/facts.
Sorry. I know I’m having a go at you but I actually think you do have enough knowledge to actually really help people like me who don’t possess much information about how the club operates. But at the moment you are doing nothing (for me) to support your arguments.
Yes-am new-to posting-and a returnee after a long absence-your checking up on me is mildly amusing though micra-I will soon become the self styled horrible courgette in liaison with my friend nice carrots?
As someone who does post, it's sometimes easy to forget that there are many dedicated, active and long-term supporters that don't ever post on here (or anywhere else). Some do read the forums though!
I prefer “taking an interest in people of similar persuasions, what motivates them and what they have to say” to “checking up on them” as you put it @blucket but, if I have offended/irritated you, I apologise.
As @ValleyWanderer implies, I find it difficult as a compulsive poster to understand how anyone could hold back for so long! Perhaps it’s just as well though. If even a third of registered Gasroomers were regular contributors, I would spend most of the day reading their comments, painstakingly tapping out my two penn’orths and incurring even greater wrath from mrs micra for being an idle good for nothing.
Not sure if I have missed this in this very long thread but do we know when the Board are coming back to the members with an update on the ongoing discussions with the potential investors?
@Blue_since_1990, the Board want the investors to meet with a small group of fans, who may or may not be members. I don't think that is the correct approach, they should meet with Legacy Members first, they are the ones who are voting.
i agree, the boards plan to arrange meetings between their chosen potential investors and the”fans council” who are not representative in any way of the greater membership , is flawed and pointless .
It is also probably counter productive for the board and proposed investors because if the plan is to try and “ win over “ an influential section of the suporter bass they will be sadly mistaken.
A fans council endorsement is not a ringing endorsement. Nor is it any mandated view of the voting membership .
Terrible idea and whoever came up with it is out of touch and out of their depth in this process in my opinion.
Has anyone any info on the extent of new candidates for election to the board? By the sound of it we need someone we can trust to ask the right questions, analyze the answers, check the data and come up with viable options for revenue maximization and long term financial stability at the highest achievable level of football.
The current board does not believe this is possible with a supporter owned model and therefore recommends the sale of (a portion of) our club; that that is our best shot at long term stability and we do not have the means to support ourselves otherwise.
The question of where the excess funds are coming from is a valid one, as is that of where the balance will come from if the will is not there to sell to outside investors. Of course we would all fancy a cup run in many ways, not least earning enough to buy back the training ground and ensure financial stability for a time after the initial giant killing glory fades... But how are we going to bridge the gap if we don’t win the lottery?
So full circle to my initial question, do we have any quality candidates? Or will we only find out the week before the AGM?
Thanks to anyone with info, it will be interesting to see what experience potential board members have and get to know what they stand for.
The list of candidates will be known only after closing date for applications ends in two weeks time. roughly three weeks after that to assess them. Any reason to believe that the existing trust board members have not asked the right questions and analysed the answers?
Thank you for your answer Steve. I certainly agree with regards to the potential investors meeting the legacy members. I certainly cannot see the point of just meeting with the fans council only.
As new as the Fans Council are, surely the members there are equal to any other club supporter, everyone is welcome, and it certainly is not exclusive. Trust members, Legacy members, Board members, everyone is welcome. So why not the Fans Council.
Nothing against the Fans Council @TrueBlu but if it is the Legacy Members who are ultimately going to vote on the matter, then why not present the potential investors to that audience. Further, even if the Fans Council thought it a good move, it would still need to come back to the Legacy Members if over 25% of the equity is involved in the investment.
I thought the Fans Council was formed to encourage the non Trust Membership.
All Supporters have a wide choice of membership.
Trust Members( Share Holders-Legacy Members-Ordinary Members)
WWISC and OWWSA
Comments
I should add that it is the policy of our club from board level down to always take the highest bidder, so you may aswell lose faith in them too , as I have.
My point is they don’t achieve anywhere near the highest value that is available because our club is not represented well currently in negotiations of any kind except player recruitment.
Hence my grave concern that the men and those they employ cannot achieve best price from a friendly a supportive pool of main sponsors , yet we are in their hands to get best deal on the table from the market on a sale of the club.... frightening prospect indeed .
Is it really club policy to always take the highest bidder? Can you substantiate this? If it is recorded as such I agree with you that the board is a) incompetent on this issue and b) depressingly marrow-minded.
Out of curiosity how do you know we upsetting local backers? Who exactly are upset?
And your second point can only be uninformed speculation. You may be right but what evidence can you posdibly have for that?
So-you know it’s said we are losing £600000 pa-or whatever the figure is-we don’t have a working capital facility in the shape of an overdraft-that used to be with my previous employer-who once they got repaid didn’t want to know-not surprisingly-my question is-when we need to buy stuff-or pay wages-where does the actual money come from -who is-or whom are -funding those accumulated losses-weekly-monthly -when will we reach the point where we cannot pay wages-buy the burgers and the beer etc that we sell-unless an investor steps in? I know about some sources of the clubs income-the obvious ones-but what currently makes up all this shortfall? I am new to Gasroom so hoping someone can enlighten me?
This is serious. We could not have enough money to buy beer...???!!!
I really wish I could help with your question @blucket but there will be others on here far better placed than me to enlighten you. Welcome. And have some paracetamol handy.
Just catching up after a day away. I have no idea how much the various Sponsorships are likely to be but I would imagine them to form a substantial pillar of our income. If @marlowchair has an indication on the figures then I for one would like hear what they are. I am assuming these figures are not good which if it is the case begs the question why and who exactly has had responsibility for doing the marketing. If you don't get the big things right the chances are you won't get the small things right.
Hmm. Burger and Chips anyone ?
Separate issue but one thing that has always bugged me is the number of Stewards required to police a fairly timid fan base at Adams Park. In a quiet spell today see how many you can count. We must be looking at 50/60 + for a likely 4,000 attendance. Sell out away attendances I can see the need for but not games like today. It all costs money.
With regard to off pitch pay rises I would expect cost of living or if an individual has performance against a specific target (e.g. increased club income) then maybe a bonus might be appropriate.
Steward numbers are set for a stand / section regardless of how many actual fans go in there. It is a football wide problem. It is why on small checkstrade games for example the family stand or FA may be closed. Our self assessing certificate that was well earned by some directors and staff helped this situation and gives us some flexibility which is good.
New to the Gasroom @blucket ? I couldn’t recall hearing from you before so had a peep at your joining date expecting to see 4.50 am - ie today. In fact you appear to have joined soon after Gasroom 2 started so maybe you are new in the sense that you have not previously posted a comment. If so, you have in excess of 1,400 comments to catch up with (excluding brought forward posts that are being commented upon) and you have my sympathy ! No end is in sight in this calendar year. Good luck.
Where there is smoke there is fire
Just to be clear @blucket, that’s 1400+ comments on this thread alone!
Is that genuinely the extent of your argument?
Look, I have previously taken issue with you about the tone of your presentation but genuinely think you have more information about the workings of the Trust than most.
You are trying to convince me, and others on here, that your view that the off-field management is inept and/or incompetent is sufficiently bad that we should take little credence of their views on the selling off on the club.
Now, I trust the Trust about as far as I could throw them or you but any actual examination of your arguments leads to the inevitable conclusion that they are built on sand or your prejudice.
Sooner rather than later we will have to make a decision on the future of our club. You know enough to help inform that decision. If I am not going to dismiss your views as those of someone with a personal axe to grind (and I don’t want to) you need to provide more weight to your evidence/facts.
Sorry. I know I’m having a go at you but I actually think you do have enough knowledge to actually really help people like me who don’t possess much information about how the club operates. But at the moment you are doing nothing (for me) to support your arguments.
Beautifully put @bookertease.
Booker, it’s an answer.
Not a very good in my opinion Marlow
Yes-am new-to posting-and a returnee after a long absence-your checking up on me is mildly amusing though micra-I will soon become the self styled horrible courgette in liaison with my friend nice carrots?
As someone who does post, it's sometimes easy to forget that there are many dedicated, active and long-term supporters that don't ever post on here (or anywhere else). Some do read the forums though!
I prefer “taking an interest in people of similar persuasions, what motivates them and what they have to say” to “checking up on them” as you put it @blucket but, if I have offended/irritated you, I apologise.
As @ValleyWanderer implies, I find it difficult as a compulsive poster to understand how anyone could hold back for so long! Perhaps it’s just as well though. If even a third of registered Gasroomers were regular contributors, I would spend most of the day reading their comments, painstakingly tapping out my two penn’orths and incurring even greater wrath from mrs micra for being an idle good for nothing.
Not sure if I have missed this in this very long thread but do we know when the Board are coming back to the members with an update on the ongoing discussions with the potential investors?
@Blue_since_1990, the Board want the investors to meet with a small group of fans, who may or may not be members. I don't think that is the correct approach, they should meet with Legacy Members first, they are the ones who are voting.
i agree, the boards plan to arrange meetings between their chosen potential investors and the”fans council” who are not representative in any way of the greater membership , is flawed and pointless .
It is also probably counter productive for the board and proposed investors because if the plan is to try and “ win over “ an influential section of the suporter bass they will be sadly mistaken.
A fans council endorsement is not a ringing endorsement. Nor is it any mandated view of the voting membership .
Terrible idea and whoever came up with it is out of touch and out of their depth in this process in my opinion.
Has anyone any info on the extent of new candidates for election to the board? By the sound of it we need someone we can trust to ask the right questions, analyze the answers, check the data and come up with viable options for revenue maximization and long term financial stability at the highest achievable level of football.
The current board does not believe this is possible with a supporter owned model and therefore recommends the sale of (a portion of) our club; that that is our best shot at long term stability and we do not have the means to support ourselves otherwise.
The question of where the excess funds are coming from is a valid one, as is that of where the balance will come from if the will is not there to sell to outside investors. Of course we would all fancy a cup run in many ways, not least earning enough to buy back the training ground and ensure financial stability for a time after the initial giant killing glory fades... But how are we going to bridge the gap if we don’t win the lottery?
So full circle to my initial question, do we have any quality candidates? Or will we only find out the week before the AGM?
Thanks to anyone with info, it will be interesting to see what experience potential board members have and get to know what they stand for.
The list of candidates will be known only after closing date for applications ends in two weeks time. roughly three weeks after that to assess them. Any reason to believe that the existing trust board members have not asked the right questions and analysed the answers?
Now you know what will happen now! Light blue touchpaper and retire to a safe distance. Still it is nearly bonfire night I guess
Thank you for your answer Steve. I certainly agree with regards to the potential investors meeting the legacy members. I certainly cannot see the point of just meeting with the fans council only.
As new as the Fans Council are, surely the members there are equal to any other club supporter, everyone is welcome, and it certainly is not exclusive. Trust members, Legacy members, Board members, everyone is welcome. So why not the Fans Council.
Nothing against the Fans Council @TrueBlu but if it is the Legacy Members who are ultimately going to vote on the matter, then why not present the potential investors to that audience. Further, even if the Fans Council thought it a good move, it would still need to come back to the Legacy Members if over 25% of the equity is involved in the investment.
I would anticipate that the majority of the Fans Counil are actually Legacy Members. They do a great job and I am a big fun.
Fan
I thought the Fans Council was formed to encourage the non Trust Membership.
All Supporters have a wide choice of membership.
Trust Members( Share Holders-Legacy Members-Ordinary Members)
WWISC and OWWSA
It appears that Stroud considers the Fans Council to be the most important body of the club.