By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
This must be the third option that would blow the others out of the water mentioned by Richard Knight during the Oxford game.
This looks like an investment into the club as a community asset and getting it to run on a sustainable basis rather than pumping money in to get up the leagues. This sits well with me and what I have read online about him from the various links suggests that the statement is not just hot air. Hopefully they put some people in to sort the organisation of the club out.
Enjoyable day out and good performance but they played onto our hands by not pressurising the back 4 and the keeper. They allowed us so much time unlike other teams. Nice of the opposition goalkeeper to gift us a goal for a change. Second goal was a lovely move with first time passes.
I gave my proxy to the Trust and in the survey reluctantly voted in favour of all motions apart from the audit one. I left it as late as possible before leaving for the Barnet game in case something else came up.
I am not impressed at the chairman's remarks mentioned above.
I hope both the club and Trust boards put every effort into getting the golden share idea into discussions with investors. That would give me some comfort for voting away my say.
We now have to hope that the investors are genuine and professional.
Just listened to Jim's interview. I can't believe he thought we deserved to win. We could barely pass to one another and they always seemed to win the ball off us. A large proportion of the game was around our box because they put us under pressure as we tried to pass it out. We had a bit of momentum after Uchegbulam came on but it didn't last long enough. A pretty easy game for their keeper, especially the first half, when the only thing he really had to do was pick the ball out of the net after our unexpected goal.
I hope we do better on Tuesday as it was pretty frustrating today. Their first goal was just ridiculous.
I find myself with the same dilemma as you. I am not sure what to do and might abstain. I am hoping the forum tomorrow will give more clarity even if it is unwelcome clarity.
There should have been a more open debate months ago with time to discuss possible contingencies, particularly around the ground.
I can't remember the last time we had an election for trust board members. I presume this is because not enough people put themselves forward to justify an election so the same people stay on. I know that other trusts have people putting forward manifestos, holding interviews and hustings so members can judge whose vision matches their own.
This lack of public debate around the membership of the Trust Board has been a problem. There are posters on here with many different views but they only have influence within the Trust if they or others representing their views are on the inside. I don't really know what the board members thought individually about the way forward for the club in the last few years because there has been no need for them to put their views out there as individuals to get votes.
If we end up sold to a rich investor then the Trust will simply become a supporter group with limited if any influence over club direction, the same as at most other clubs. It would not be correct to say there would be no point in the Trust, but its role could be more like the one at Charlton rather than an organisation with voting power as now.
I seem to remember at the June 2021 EGM that the Trust's shares were split according to the ratio of members voting for and against. Col was asked if he could do this by a trust member in the room and he agreed. Perhaps there has been further advice since then or it was not the same sort of vote.
Is the EGM going to be based on 75% of people in the room or acting as proxies or will the shareholding each person holds count. They added up the shareholdings in June 2021. Is it different this time?
On a separate matter, if it can be streamed will it also be recorded?
He is also going to be playing in a much better atmosphere on and off the pitch in that the team are doing the best they can in the circumstances and the fans are behind them. That has got to give him a better chance of doing well compared to what it was like when he was here before.
I looked at the video of the highlights (the incident is at 4:10 onwards) and my immediate thought was that he was lucky not to smash his head into the top of the crush barrier in front of the fans after trying to hurdle the advertising hoarding frame. That could have been even worse given the pace he was going. Looks like he was pushed a bit as well.
Important to note from that piece that Exeter were bailed out to a large extent by a two games against Manchester United in 2005 including a draw at Old Trafford. Prior to that they were in a very bad state financially due to very dodgy owners. They also went into admin and paid back 7.1p in the pound, which was another big factor in clearing their debts.
If you look at the accounts of our competitors they are all in debt supported by their owners or shareholders with one or two exceptions (and even then I am not sure). However, to be honest as a non-accountant I find it difficult to interpret exactly what is going on with subsidies from 'outside' sources. Some club accounts are very limited in detail as well because they are small companies.
Wasn't he sent off with a second yellow card for celebrating?
That was a bad result but I seem to remember it was a bit of a freak result in that we were pretty good and they were the opposite and hardly ever scored (away). Not like the 8-0 at Orient!
I took that to mean that we only have 13 outfield players and two goalkeepers available so it is difficult to compete in lots of competitions. Gateshead have 25 players apparently. It is just a question of who starts and who is on the bench really. Rodney out for a while again now.
It was very noticeable yesterday how often Wealdstone put the ball into the box very early, and they always went into a dangerous place. The highlights only show a few examples other than the goals- their second is the best example. I imagine the key to playing against them is to stop the crosses as the quality was very good.
In contrast we usually passed the ball around in the same positions trying to get a perfect angle but this gave then time to set their defence. However, elsewhere someone said that we are the fifth top scorers so really despite complaints about our style that is only a problem because we can't defend. Because of this, missing chances becomes critical whereas if we could keep the opposition to 0 or 1 occasionally we would be doing OK. Perhaps Cameron John coming back will help shore things up.
I really don't understand why we seem to have gone back to these short goal kicks. On one occasion in the first half it did work and we got the ball out to create a passing move resulting in a chance but usually it fails. On at least one occasion in the first half we had 5 men in the box for a goal kick and Wealdstone put 3 on the edge of the box putting us under instant pressure. At Boreham Wood we had three in the box to draw them towards the goal at which point Moulden did a long pass to Mitchell or a winger to create space up there, but this was not the tactic yesterday.
On a completely separate note I did enjoy reading their programme yesterday.
I would support you on that but I wonder how many others would. I have already realigned my expectations. The club's financial stability is more important to me than chasing after status as long as we do our best on and off the pitch.
As regards Exeter the post above said that they had raised £2m over 21 years which is £100k a year more or less so I do not suppose that makes much of a dent in their running costs. I believe that they are also relying on the add-on money they must have received for Ollie Watkins rather like we did over the years with Dawson etc. However, we can copy them in other ways with people taking on voluntary roles.
Hereford are an ex-League club (not legally but same fanbase) with similar home attendances to ours. I imagine they were reformed with the long-term ambition of getting back to the EFL if finances allow. Someone on the other thread mentioned that their playing budget was £300k. Other people have very patronisingly called them and our other part-time opponents pub teams. I am not sure what Hereford's ownership structure is but I believe it may be partly supporter-owned.
It seems to me that the alternative to an investor is not liquidation but a future as a club like Hereford without going through what happened to them and Bury etc. It also occurs to me that without an investor or the parachute payments we probably do not have the financial or voluntary resources to fund a full-time club. So one question for this discussion is how important is it for us as fans to stay full time and gamble on getting back to the EFL or see the National League as our level perhaps as part-time or low-paid full time club? To what extent are we prepared to take that psychological step as other fanbases (like Hereford) have had to do before us? What is more important to us - EFL status at all costs including selling out to an outside 'investor' or a community/supporter-owned club in the NL or NLN?
If we are prepared to accept the second option (which we might be forced to by circumstances) then that takes a bit of the pressure off finding an investor as we can plan ahead on that basis or plan to do so if we do not return to the EFL by the end of next season. That does not mean compromising on putting out a competitive entertaining team but it does mean compromising on the level we play at. Those who look down on our part-time league opponents are overlooking the fact that they are very successful clubs in their own rights.
Speaking purely for myself, I accepted in my own mind that the second option was a likely outcome if we voted for the fan-owned approach as we did at the EGM in 2021. That does not mean I wanted us to be relegated out of the EFL only that I assumed it would make it more likely to happen at some point. Now that we are in the NL I am not that bothered about it from a status point of view provided the club remains financially viable and stays solvent.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
