Beveree Chat

RogerSW wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 2:41 pm There must be an opportunity for a new TV series with anti-Ted Lasso characters running a football club - (nearly) everything they do makes things worse ?

A situation where people talk utter bo**ocks, surround themselves with clueless yes men, removes anyone who disagrees with them and makes ludicrous decisions that cause one disaster after another? Isn't that show already running in the White House?

JimS wrote: Mon Apr 14, 2025 12:36 pm

RogerSW wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 2:41 pm There must be an opportunity for a new TV series with anti-Ted Lasso characters running a football club - (nearly) everything they do makes things worse ?

A situation where people talk utter bo**ocks, surround themselves with clueless yes men, removes anyone who disagrees with them and makes ludicrous decisions that cause one disaster after another? Isn't that show already running in the White House?

Well the brothers certainly did their best to Trump that...
Yep. Let's now try to get back to where we were and be the club we want to be again.

It's the time of year to look on the bright side of life. What's good after the previous disastrous owners have left, amongst the myriad of bad things?

We've stayed up
We have Jules and coaching team in place
We haven't lost our ground
We haven't gone into administration or liquidation
We have new electrics
The fan zone is good
Some people are still volunteering (or donating forced payment to charity)?
The club hasn't been sold to a person of terrible repute
The Supporters Trust exists with a democratically elected Board
Anything else?

Add:
The pitch is vastly improved from what it was

Of course it's not all bad news. The consortium had a lot of money to spend and invest in the club, and even if all the plans did not work out, the view was taken that we would still have the benefit of the infrastructure investment. As it turned out we didn't get either the 3G or the floodlights so the plan to become more financially sustainable without new shareholder funding is no further forward. Hopefully we now have a more realistic plan but we are yet to hear what that might be and how long the new shareholders are committed.
The cost of mid-table obscurity in the NLS is considerably more than a few years ago and at some point owners and fans will want to see "success," be it promotion or cup runs. If the height of ambition is to have a local team turn out and take no risks, then that can be achieved at much lower cost in the lower leagues but that strategy probably means you'll be playing in front of 100-200 at best, with less community appeal and engagement. The debate for Step 2 and 3 teams is now how do you compete with the clubs who have already found new levels of investment - the likes of Dorking W , Worthing, Eastbourne B, Truro, not to mention the ex League clubs with much larger supporter bases such as Maidstone, Torquay, Yeovil etc? Even Dorking, who have been the exemplar of how to progress off and on the pitch, could only sustain two seasons in the NL. Ebbsfleet, who had a player budget of over £15,000 per week when last in the NLS, are coming straight back down. There is no simple answer to this challenge. Having a diversified investor base, good management disciplines and a consistent and clear plan probably goes some way to achieving sustainability.

It's great that Jules is staying on, and lots of things seem to be getting more positive but I'd also like to see the following next season:

Less player turnover
Less loanees from academies (I can see the exception for goalkeepers)
Much better communication between club social media and supporters
Info re arrivals/departure/injuries (league clubs seem to be able to cope with making this info public)
A real effort made to make it worthwhile for volunteers to return
A recognition by some fans that still having a club at ANY level is a positive thing.

Would agree with Tony’s assessment. The key point is at the end, we need to get a sound footing with several streams of investment, the Dorking model is a good one, plenty of sponsors. Whether it be kit sponsorship, advertising around the ground etc. For financial reasons, as Tony alluded to, to keep us a mid table team in our current league must be the best financial model, if you look down the pyramid there are many well known team names languishing there with low crowds , poor football and probably little ambition to recover to former status.
Let’s see what the new owners plans are, we might be able to form a better judgement as a result.

As I have said before, being at a lower level (say step 4 or lower) doesn't make survival that much easier.There is a level of fixed cost you have to fund at any level before any consideration is given to a playing budget. Smaller crowds and less interest in commercial income has to fund all of this if you have no recourse to shareholders stumping up the balance. I would hazard a guess that fixed costs are near to £150K per annum. You would be lucky to generate £50K through the turnstiles.

Tony made a good point that folk don’t understand that all clubs have to fund a level of costs which remain regardless of the league they play in. It may be that is why clubs merge and ground share when they find themselves in this situation..