Beveree Chat

TW10 wrote: Thu May 30, 2024 3:17 pm Do we think Seymour and Bloomfield were signed on two year contracts? Maybe Jordan Thomas and Revan? If do their agents are desperately trying to get some club to match their wages so they can jump ship..

Heard that Bloomfield has gone back to Farnborough and Seymour to Torquay, we shall see.

TW10 wrote: Thu May 30, 2024 3:17 pm Do we think Seymour and Bloomfield were signed on two year contracts? Maybe Jordan Thomas and Revan? If do their agents are desperately trying to get some club to match their wages so they can jump ship..

If budget rumours are true then we will be quite keen to see them jump ship as soon as possible.

Listening back on some of Mel’s remarks it would seem that it is most likely that Revan and Thomas were signed on for the 24/25. When Bloomfield was signed Spencer Day said Farnborough could not compete with our offer. It stands to reason that he too has another year on his contract. Mel tried to get Seymour when he first arrived and had to wait until the beginning of 23/24 to get him, again probably on a two year contract.
The other interesting one is Dreyer, he came on loan , he was allowed to complete the season with us when his parent club were getting loans recalled. It would seem to me we negotiated a transfer for him and he too will have another year to run.

If the rumoured budget level is correct then suspect that Revan, Thomas etc could need to be off loaded even if they were under contract.

Out of interest .
1-Does Luke Ruddick have any coaching qualifications?
2- What is this season’s training regime?

I suspect part of the issue is that remaining contracted players account for the largest part of the new budget. To rebalance the squad you need either to offload some of those players or renegotiate their contracts ( which is less likely). Otherwise you are having to bring in very inexperienced players on low wages to get the total numbers to where you need them. And then when a couple of the contracted players go on long term injury you have no flexibility to bring anyone in.

I wonder if we will ever see the brothers at a game again (I suspect not). While they have been slapping themselves on the back about increased attendences it seems doubtful whether that translated into income. Performance on the pitch is a key factor in attracting support and next season may be a slog. Alan has certainly been left a tough task given the financial situation.

I think match day income (turnover) will undoubtedly be up. What we don’t know is the profit generated from that increase. As I pointed out previously we didn’t have a paid shirt sponsor last season, no advertising board income and increased staffing costs. Will be interesting see if that strategy remains next season.

It is now apparent that a lot of money was spent on areas and overheads that could have been saved. Whether the brothers totally misjudged the task ahead and the relative strengths of our opponents as well as further up the pyramid is, to many of us, obvious. Perhaps they felt that they would come up with new investment to cover all of this expenditure for this coming season. If not forthcoming, then this might be one reason why we are in this current state .
Hopefully the possible solution might be as outlined by Tony, but players have financial commitments and cannot just change . How many contracted players follow Jake’s example is questionable, if not, then the pitfalls are obvious.
let’s hope something can be sorted, if not, then income will drop and accelerate the downward cycle.

Tony wrote: Sun Jun 02, 2024 2:56 pm I think match day income (turnover) will undoubtedly be up. What we don’t know is the profit generated from that increase. As I pointed out previously we didn’t have a paid shirt sponsor last season, no advertising board income and increased staffing costs. Will be interesting see if that strategy remains next season.

How many tickets were given away / discounted ? Not saying that shouldn't be done but can temporarily distort things.

How the brothers were allowed to stroll into the club and then leave it in it's present parlous state beats me. Surely someone chairman, directors or trust should have been more diligent in protecting the club from these charlatans.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not the same situation we were in prior to them arriving? So we are no worse off than we were then.