Beveree Chat

Tony wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 10:47 am We only won three games in the season Iain McDonald was manager but not sure of the record for consecutive defeats. Cue Les.

There have been numerous runs of, how shall we put it, turning up and taking part but not adding much to the joy of supporters. As has been suggested, the seasons 2002/03 and 1993/94 probably stand out from others (for the wrong reasons). Ignoring cup results, league only.....

The 'highlights'......

2002/03 after beating Bishops Stortford 1-0 on 31st August, it was 24 games (9 draws, 15 losses) before beating Aylesbury United 3-1. Unfortunately, that was followed by another 15 games without a win (3 draws, 12 losses) before winning 2-0 at Billericay on the last day of the season.

As regards 1993/94...
after beating Rainham 3-0 on 22nd January 1994, it was 12 games (1 draw, 11 losses)..then 2 wins followed by 5 games (1 draw 4 losses). We were poor at times but we did keep popping up with wins on a 'irregular' basis.

There are also few instance of bad runs crossing over seasons...

2010/11 lost last 4 games; 2011/12 lost first 3
2013/14 lost last 2 games; 2014/15 lost first 5
2018/19 lost last game; 2019/20 lost first 4

Let's hope we are not in for another bad run 'crossing the rubicon'.

Thanks Les for the information.

One factor that has become apparent in recent years is that even at our level, the number of full time clubs is increasing and that does give them an advantage over the season. Others might have more facts but it would be interesting to see which clubs are full time and where they currently sit in our league. I doubt if there are many part time clubs in the league above, but again others may have more information?

Shepperton Supporter wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 9:29 am Several folk are questioning where is Roberts? Our leading scorer is not being selected when we are struggling to score. Any explanation would be handy!

I doubt we’ll be getting any explanation anytime soon.

Shepperton Supporter wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 9:29 am Several folk are questioning where is Roberts? Our leading scorer is not being selected when we are struggling to score. Any explanation would be handy!

I'd assumed Robert's absence was another cost cutting measure. Guessing he's one of the highest earners and therefore might be due a relatively high appearance fee or potential goal bonus that the club don't want to or simply can't afford to pay

I'd assumed Robert's absence was another cost cutting measure. Guessing he's one of the highest earners and therefore might be due a relatively high appearance fee or potential goal bonus that the club don't want to or simply can't afford to pay
[/quote]

If true and coupled with the redundancy of Will King it does look that way. But still no statement from the club. Looks like only new investors might save the club.

Shepperton Supporter wrote: Sun Mar 23, 2025 10:12 pm I'd assumed Robert's absence was another cost cutting measure. Guessing he's one of the highest earners and therefore might be due a relatively high appearance fee or potential goal bonus that the club don't want to or simply can't afford to pay

If true and coupled with the redundancy of Will King it does look that way. But still no statement from the club. Looks like only new investors might save the club.
[/quote]

I think we need to be very careful about using phrases like "might save the club." Surely the club isn't going to just die, or "need to be shut down" if there are no new investors? Yes, we'd obviously get relegated next season, and maybe the following season too, but wouldn't we just be another club operating in highly reduced circumstances? I know the brothers/owners use phrases like that, (ie save/shut down) but they don't understand that a lot of us would still support the club if we ended up a couple of divisions below. We were at that level for about the first 10 years of my attendance.

I heard that Will is being replaced so perhaps not a redundancy situation? Maybe the role is changing to part time? Time will tell.

If we do tumble back down the pyramid, who is prepared to run the club in those circumstances? Beveree is still an expensive place to run. Lower crowds and ancillary income. Probably still have to maintain some level of player budget. And all the maintenance costs of the ground.

I understand that Will has given two months notice, which will take him to the end of the season.

Another sign that the club is cutting costs. The brothers have clearly lost interest and are not going to raise any more funds. Time for them to step aside. The LinkedIn posts aren't aging well

EastTerracer wrote: Mon Mar 24, 2025 9:41 am The brothers have clearly lost interest and are not going to raise any more funds.

What you say is true, to facilitate any new investment would, I presume, involve the purchase of the shares from the brothers, whatever the value put on them and who would receive the money, is open to debate. I presume the original investors would be entitled to some, as from what I understand, they put in the bulk of the money.
If what I suggest is correct, then from the club’s point of view, what funds would be available to run the day to day expenses and playing budget?
Hopefully we will get some answers sooner than later as future plans are held on hold and uncertainty triggers resignations and players exodus.

I think that is exactly the problem. Any new investor would want any funds they invest to go wholly towards the running of the club. They would also very likely want the brothers/Ramayana to walk away, which could really only be achieved by buying out the Ramayana shares. Would the brothers insist on some sort of return for their investors rather than a total loss? I would guess they would insist on it, claiming that the original funds went on improving infrastructure and putting the club on a better footing than it was - so adding value. That would make any possible takeover by a new investor less attractive. Of course, it would depend on what price was set to buy out Ramayana.

Whether it's even possible to find anyone (or another synduicate) to take over the club is a big question. I guess these things are pretty clear to Ben and Jacques etc.

I suppose the other option (which may be what we are pursuing now) is that no new investor can be found so the club has to break even year on year now to survive and Ramayana stays in place, owning a business that will never be able to achieve its grand plans.

Would agree with what has been said, to a certain extent it might depend on the attitude of the original investors as to where they currently stand. To leave things as they currently are will mean their investment is a write off. To engineer some form of buy out of their investment by using their original investment as leverage might help. As far as I am aware the investment levels into Ramayana is not known. It will depend on how committed they are to the club certainly one of them is regularly attending.. Jules and Ben might know more and may have a plan? Hopefully that is the case.
As for your other suggestion I think to get to a break even might be impossible, only achieved by a reduction in playing standards.