blueboy48
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 167
|
Post by blueboy48 on Apr 3, 2024 22:26:13 GMT 1
. I'm always amazed by fans who think we should be much higher in the pyramid when our long-term average gates are around 6,500. I don't think there are many fans who think we should be playing much higher, for many it's simply about aiming higher than 17th each season The realist in me accepts anything from 13th - 17th place. Because we are a well run club, current woes excepted, I never expect to get relegated. The optimist in me insists upon remembering Hurst's wonder season when we finished 3rd and telling me he can do it again. Always good to be optimistic and always wise to be realistic when it doesn't happen. I'll be there regardless.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 4, 2024 0:00:39 GMT 1
I just want to see us in the championship in my lifetime. Im 30. Surely that's achievable? Not whilst Roland is at the helm imagine having a chairman like Stoke City have with a net worth of two billion three hundred fifty-four million nine hundred eighty-one thousand and yet they have spent many seasons fighting off relegation to league 1 its not always about the money, its about the FFP too if you think our income is going to shoot up anytime soon even with a new owner, let us know how
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Apr 4, 2024 9:19:52 GMT 1
I don't think there are many fans who think we should be playing much higher, for many it's simply about aiming higher than 17th each season The realist in me accepts anything from 13th - 17th place. Because we are a well run club, current woes excepted, I never expect to get relegated. The optimist in me insists upon remembering Hurst's wonder season when we finished 3rd and telling me he can do it again. Always good to be optimistic and always wise to be realistic when it doesn't happen. I'll be there regardless. Not dissimilar to me really. My main gripe is when you hear claims of fans demanding owners spend loads of money and/or challenging for promotion, from my perspective it's nonsense, I don't see or hear any of that. Just because fans are fed up of drifting along with no idea of where we are heading, it doesn't mean we have unrealistic demands. I can't speak for anyone else but below is what I would like On the field, I'd like us to have a footballing identity beyond sticking ten mind behind the ball and watching the opposition pass it around for fun but just getting enough points to stay up. I'm not demanding to be challenging for promotion and free flowing football but simply seeing a team giving it a go and occasionally being entertained. Ideally we may be flirting with the play-offs but if we come up short then so be it. But it's just this annual process of hovering around the relegation zone, looking to hit the magical 50 point mark and being happy, it's just so repetitive. Off the field, I don't expect someone coming in spending millions. I'd be quite happy for a Roland type figure in terms of local businessmen running the club fairly sensibly and trying to stick to our budget. But I'd also like a board (not just one man) in place and one which is more forward thinking and crucially, more transparent with fans.
|
|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Apr 4, 2024 9:26:39 GMT 1
I think the Third Division....or whatever it's now called has always been the natural home of STFC. Apart from a ten year stint in the old Second Division, various episodes in the Fourth Division and one in the Conference. I would think that we have been in the third tier for most of our league history. I'm always amazed by fans who think we should be much higher in the pyramid when our long-term average gates are around 6,500. ...some of us remember games in what is now The Championship where we barely scraped 3,000 The best Season average which was the first season in Division 2 (I think), the average then was only 8500, with some pretty serious away followings.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 4, 2024 20:56:57 GMT 1
I know not everyone follows the podcast thread, but as Ricky says on there....... Everyone Shrewsbury Town supporter needs to take 45 minutes out of their life and listen to this. That's how important it is. He is right, listen to Ant give an in depth account of the accounts soundcloud.com/salopcast/202324extra-finance-special
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 5, 2024 7:49:04 GMT 1
The realist in me accepts anything from 13th - 17th place. Because we are a well run club, current woes excepted, I never expect to get relegated. The optimist in me insists upon remembering Hurst's wonder season when we finished 3rd and telling me he can do it again. Always good to be optimistic and always wise to be realistic when it doesn't happen. I'll be there regardless. Not dissimilar to me really. My main gripe is when you hear claims of fans demanding owners spend loads of money and/or challenging for promotion, from my perspective it's nonsense, I don't see or hear any of that. Just because fans are fed up of drifting along with no idea of where we are heading, it doesn't mean we have unrealistic demands. I can't speak for anyone else but below is what I would like I understand what you are getting at with the "loads of money" (although I guess in part that will come down to what people deem to be "loads of money") but from what I can tell last season we struggled to finance 12th place in this division under the current setup. I just think signs of progress would be welcome. But we have spent near on ten years at this level and can you honestly say we look in better shape now on the field than what we did when we returned to this level again? We managed a top half finish and yet look to where we are now. I just don't see how we progress if things stay as they are. Unless we get lucky and Hurst can work his magic again of course. I think you are right about the club being fronted by a local businessman but surely we can get others on board and from further afield. I mean when you look at other clubs they have managed to do so, so why can't we.
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Apr 5, 2024 10:15:55 GMT 1
I know not everyone follows the podcast thread, but as Ricky says on there....... Everyone Shrewsbury Town supporter needs to take 45 minutes out of their life and listen to this. That's how important it is. He is right, listen to Ant give an in depth account of the accounts soundcloud.com/salopcast/202324extra-finance-special It's an interesting listen and good to hear some expert & sensible discussions on it. But to be honest, there wasn't any major revelations/surprises about the going's on, so whilst I'd agree it was a good listen, I didn't come away feeling I knew any more than I did before. That's not a criticism of Ant or anyone else on the pod, they only can discuss as much as they know which is the same as the rest of us.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 5, 2024 10:46:25 GMT 1
I know not everyone follows the podcast thread, but as Ricky says on there....... He is right, listen to Ant give an in depth account of the accounts soundcloud.com/salopcast/202324extra-finance-special It's an interesting listen and good to hear some expert & sensible discussions on it. But to be honest, there wasn't any major revelations/surprises about the going's on, so whilst I'd agree it was a good listen, I didn't come away feeling I knew any more than I did before. That's not a criticism of Ant or anyone else on the pod, they only can discuss as much as they know which is the same as the rest of us. yeah, no surprises sums it up, its exactly as I presumed what happened
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 5, 2024 11:46:13 GMT 1
I know not everyone follows the podcast thread, but as Ricky says on there....... He is right, listen to Ant give an in depth account of the accounts soundcloud.com/salopcast/202324extra-finance-special I didn't come away feeling I knew any more than I did before. I agree, whilst it is a good listen doesn't it tell us that under the current setup the amounts needed to obtain a 12th place finish are unsustainable. Which we already knew for a while. So then the question is whether they could be or would be under a different setup.
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Apr 5, 2024 11:52:19 GMT 1
I think this is where I give Roland a lot of credit - bringing in Liam as the new CEO has been a superb appointment and you can clearly tell he's been given the brief of increasing the revenue, with some really good ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Apr 5, 2024 12:25:17 GMT 1
I didn't come away feeling I knew any more than I did before. I agree, whilst it is a good listen doesn't it tell us that under the current setup the amounts needed to obtain a 12th place finish are unsustainable. Which we already knew for a while. So then the question is whether they could be or would be under a different setup. Correct, the thought that it’s some gotcha or conclusive proof is fanciful, it’s just one man’s (albeit a very qualified man) highlighting specific numbers that stand out.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 5, 2024 12:35:12 GMT 1
I agree, whilst it is a good listen doesn't it tell us that under the current setup the amounts needed to obtain a 12th place finish are unsustainable. Which we already knew for a while. So then the question is whether they could be or would be under a different setup. Correct, the thought that it’s some gotcha or conclusive proof is fanciful, it’s just one man’s (albeit a very qualified man) highlighting specific numbers that stand out. a very qualified man v a few unqualified guys with blinkers on and fingers in their ears singing la la la ;-)
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Apr 5, 2024 13:07:46 GMT 1
Correct, the thought that it’s some gotcha or conclusive proof is fanciful, it’s just one man’s (albeit a very qualified man) highlighting specific numbers that stand out. a very qualified man v a few unqualified guys with blinkers on and fingers in their ears singing la la la ;-) No one is doing that. Tell me what Ant and the podcast told us that we didn't know already?
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 5, 2024 13:19:20 GMT 1
a very qualified man v a few unqualified guys with blinkers on and fingers in their ears singing la la la ;-) No one is doing that. Tell me what Ant and the podcast told us that we didn't know already? im not listening maybe it wasnt Ant, it could have been Phil
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Apr 5, 2024 13:23:57 GMT 1
a very qualified man v a few unqualified guys with blinkers on and fingers in their ears singing la la la ;-) No one is doing that. Tell me what Ant and the podcast told us that we didn't know already? Might be some wait that ! I never bother with the podcast but did on this occasion and enjoyed listening to ant provide some explanation and clarity but there was no great reveal was there? Just confirmation of what was already known. Which to my mind confirms the view that the control and governance of the club failed at a time when it should really have been all over the financial aspects of running the club. The Board of Directors knew about the effects of covid, they knew about the issues with the withholding of any Premiership funding and yet they still lost control. But it’s ok, because we have two people to blame who are no longer associated with the club.
|
|
|
Post by dibblydobbly on Apr 5, 2024 13:29:28 GMT 1
No one is doing that. Tell me what Ant and the podcast told us that we didn't know already? im not listening maybe it wasnt Ant, it could have been Phil Think that makes you Naughty Boy not Sam Smith, Pilch. They told us Wrexham were being charged interest and Shrewsbury were not, they did add some clarity on what certain things mean, and explained what the Related parties note meant on later Director Loans among other things. The did try to explain the academy cost coming in to the P&L and off the balance sheet, which was also the prior year adjustmensts and effect on reserves. So it answered the question of why we lost more money in the year before which had already closed. Not a fun subject for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 5, 2024 13:33:55 GMT 1
No one is doing that. Tell me what Ant and the podcast told us that we didn't know already? But it’s ok, because we have two people to blame who are no longer associated with the club. you know its true
|
|
|
Post by dibblydobbly on Apr 5, 2024 13:40:58 GMT 1
But it’s ok, because we have two people to blame who are no longer associated with the club. Apologies - I thought looking at the list of comments online it was way more than that? I had it down as eight people have taken flak at different levels of heat of whom only one is still with the club. Is the truth not likely to be that all of them had some responsibility for the outcomes of their decisions or non-decisions, and therefore the present situtation, some much more than others, but because no-one has perfect knowledge of why people did what they did and what they were thinking at the time, no-one can ever know in full all of what happened? Big parts of it yes, but in full, not possible? So while we can throw blame around and it might be fair or unfair, none of that gets us moving forward, and the only thing that matters is the Club continuing to get stronger every single day? Will get off the soap box now as I am probably starting offend people again, for which I apologise in advance.
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Apr 5, 2024 13:58:46 GMT 1
But it’s ok, because we have two people to blame who are no longer associated with the club. Apologies - I thought looking at the list of comments online it was way more than that? I had it down as eight people have taken flak at different levels of heat of whom only one is still with the club. Is the truth not likely to be that all of them had some responsibility for the outcomes of their decisions or non-decisions, and therefore the present situtation, some much more than others, but because no-one has perfect knowledge of why people did what they did and what they were thinking at the time, no-one can ever know in full all of what happened? Big parts of it yes, but in full, not possible? So while we can throw blame around and it might be fair or unfair, none of that gets us moving forward, and the only thing that matters is the Club continuing to get stronger every single day? Will get off the soap box now as I am probably starting offend people again, for which I apologise in advance. You are certainly right that this is not just down to one individual. The way I see it (from this forum) is there are some posters who believe Roland is to blame alongside Caldwell and Cotterill, whereas some posters just see it as being down to Cotterill & Caldwell. I have not seen a single poster claim that Cotterill & Caldwell are not guility of any wrongdoing. They may say that Roland has to be held accountable too but that's not the same as saying Cotterill & Caldwell are innocent. As for whether blame gets us anywhere, of course you are right that you can argue it doesn't really get us anywhere but I'd say that we are discussing it on a football forum, whatever we do has no impact on what happens with the future of the club. Personally, I feel that as the reserves of this football club have been wiped out and there was/is a threat to our future, then there should be some accountability. Two of the men responsible for the mess have left the club and I shed no tears over that, I do however also hold Roland accountable and therefore have concerns over his continual running of the club.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Apr 5, 2024 13:59:42 GMT 1
But it’s ok, because we have two people to blame who are no longer associated with the club. Apologies - I thought looking at the list of comments online it was way more than that? I had it down as eight people have taken flak at different levels of heat of whom only one is still with the club. Is the truth not likely to be that all of them had some responsibility for the outcomes of their decisions or non-decisions, and therefore the present situtation, some much more than others, but because no-one has perfect knowledge of why people did what they did and what they were thinking at the time, no-one can ever know in full all of what happened? Big parts of it yes, but in full, not possible? So while we can throw blame around and it might be fair or unfair, none of that gets us moving forward, and the only thing that matters is the Club continuing to get stronger every single day? Will get off the soap box now as I am probably starting offend people again, for which I apologise in advance. I’m not offended in the least. It’s reasoned debate and opinion. That said, I think your reference to eight people having culpability for the present situation to be somewhat tenuous. Agreed, there may have been others closer to the decision making than most but only one person made the decisions. As it has always been. The buck stops there.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Apr 5, 2024 14:24:29 GMT 1
Think what Towns accounts, and those of many other clubs show is how badly regulated football is compared to other industries and sectors in terms of financial management. There seems very little basic businesses administration going on, or checks and balances from a regulator to keep things operating on a sound economic basis
I’m a trustee of a charity in a sector which is heavily regulated and as a charity we have to have all sorts of policies and checks and balances on spending, and a strict governance structure. These are then checked by a regulator and if compliance with the regulations can’t be clearly demonstrated the charity can be fined or shut down
Football clubs are businesses but seem to have very little basic governance around them. It’s hardly surprising the debts of clubs are building and building
|
|
|
Post by tarporleyblue on Apr 5, 2024 14:26:27 GMT 1
Eight people?
I can only think of 4 that could and possibly should be accountable.
|
|
|
Post by tarporleyblue on Apr 5, 2024 14:30:29 GMT 1
I’m a trustee of a charity in a sector which is heavily regulated and as a charity we have to have all sorts of policies and checks and balances on spending, and a strict governance structure. These are then checked by a regulator and if compliance with the regulations can’t be clearly demonstrated the charity can be fined or shut down I'm a non executive director and Trustee of a local charity too and I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. Our governance structure is second to none and I, for one would not have it any other way.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 5, 2024 14:31:42 GMT 1
Eight people? I can only think of 4 that could and possibly should be accountable. I'm the other 4 ;-) allegedly, didn't a lady get fired from 'accounts' despite questioning the CEO but not blowing any whistles ?
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Apr 5, 2024 15:15:15 GMT 1
Correct, the thought that it’s some gotcha or conclusive proof is fanciful, it’s just one man’s (albeit a very qualified man) highlighting specific numbers that stand out. a very qualified man v a few unqualified guys with blinkers on and fingers in their ears singing la la la ;-) Ant's not the only qualified person on here. Not saying I disagree with Ant because I haven't heard what he's said, but qualified people can see things differently to each other.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Apr 5, 2024 15:30:06 GMT 1
Apologies - I thought looking at the list of comments online it was way more than that? I had it down as eight people have taken flak at different levels of heat of whom only one is still with the club. Is the truth not likely to be that all of them had some responsibility for the outcomes of their decisions or non-decisions, and therefore the present situtation, some much more than others, but because no-one has perfect knowledge of why people did what they did and what they were thinking at the time, no-one can ever know in full all of what happened? Big parts of it yes, but in full, not possible? So while we can throw blame around and it might be fair or unfair, none of that gets us moving forward, and the only thing that matters is the Club continuing to get stronger every single day? Will get off the soap box now as I am probably starting offend people again, for which I apologise in advance. I have not seen a single poster claim that Cotterill & Caldwell are not guility of any wrongdoing. They may say that Roland has to be held accountable too but that's not the same as saying Cotterill & Caldwell are innocent. Woah, hang on a minute. What happened to the presumption of innocence? There is nothing in the public domain to confirm that Cotterill and Caldwell are guilty of anything, and the public domain is the only forum open to me - and, I suspect, the vast majority of us. So I'll say publicly that they're not guilty of any wrongdoing until there's any evidence to the contrary - and gossip on a messageboard isn't evidence. If anyone wants to name them as guilty men then let them stand by their claim with some verifiable evidence of guilt, not point fingers and call names. The club (ie the chairman) chose to blame them by inference but provided no verification. It was the club's/his decision not to go any further and I appreciate that might have been the most sensible way forward. In that case, it might have been better not to have pointed fingers in the first place, particularly as it could be interpreted as an exercise in deflection, given the latest accounts. Worth remembering that neither Cotterill nor Caldwell were directors. Who has the primary responsibility for a company's affairs?
|
|
|
Post by dibblydobbly on Apr 5, 2024 15:53:53 GMT 1
I’m a trustee of a charity in a sector which is heavily regulated and as a charity we have to have all sorts of policies and checks and balances on spending, and a strict governance structure. These are then checked by a regulator and if compliance with the regulations can’t be clearly demonstrated the charity can be fined or shut down I'm a non executive director and Trustee of a local charity too and I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. Our governance structure is second to none and I, for one would not have it any other way. The Club's governance was the Board of Directors which at the time was three people, two of whom have since left. It is externally Audited and has a going concern test every year in the accounts. The accounts are then scrutinised by the public and interested parties. I appreciate that that means that the decisions of the experienced CEO should have had scrutiny from all those levels. Semes like all those levels should or could have stood up a bit sooner ? Anyway - I for one still long to watch football and have this be an old memory.
|
|
|
Post by tarporleyblue on Apr 5, 2024 16:16:11 GMT 1
I'm a non executive director and Trustee of a local charity too and I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. Our governance structure is second to none and I, for one would not have it any other way. The Club's governance was the Board of Directors which at the time was three people, two of whom have since left. It is externally Audited and has a going concern test every year in the accounts. The accounts are then scrutinised by the public and interested parties. I appreciate that that means that the decisions of the experienced CEO should have had scrutiny from all those levels. Semes like all those levels should or could have stood up a bit sooner ? Anyway - I for one still long to watch football and have this be an old memory. Thanks. Clearly therefore what ever reporting structure was in place during the financial year was nowhere near up to to the task, something the club has now said it has put right. Serious financial lessons have had to be learnt, sadly, but hopefully the club will soon be back on an upwards trajectory.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Apr 5, 2024 16:35:50 GMT 1
Having listened to the pod cast there wasn’t a single accusation of fraud or any other legal wrong doing. According to Ant it was down to lack of control on BCs shift, misjudging risk and expected income and the general significant increases in overheads and academy costs that weren’t included last year prior to the adjustment.
The pod cast isn’t shy on coming forward yet no one asked if there was any sign of misappropriation of funds. Maybe Glyn would have asked the question but I’m sure Ant would have been diplomatic and swerved any speculation.
The facts are we lost £3.5 million whilst BC was CEO and SC was manager…..RW and others are keeping the club afloat at this difficult time and should be thanked for that.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Apr 5, 2024 16:40:56 GMT 1
I'm a non executive director and Trustee of a local charity too and I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. Our governance structure is second to none and I, for one would not have it any other way. The Club's governance was the Board of Directors which at the time was three people, two of whom have since left. It is externally Audited and has a going concern test every year in the accounts. The accounts are then scrutinised by the public and interested parties. I appreciate that that means that the decisions of the experienced CEO should have had scrutiny from all those levels. Semes like all those levels should or could have stood up a bit sooner ? Anyway - I for one still long to watch football and have this be an old memory. Just a question but does the Company Secretary have the same responsibilities as other directors
|
|