Summary Of The MYFC Document

[Santa]

Do you know if the operating losses quoted include those of Fleet Leisure ?

[Stu M]

Originally Posted By: Riverview Red

they state that their business plan for development is based on higher gates, more sponsorship

Gates, perhaps naive, sponsorship, no. The deal with a kit manufacturer and the rumoured big deal with Electronic Arts, plus the major national media interest, mean that sponsorship opportunities for the Fleet have never been so good. Whether this will last long-term I have no idea, but the club's merchandising and marketing possibilities are far far better than they have ever been.

[Riverview Red]

I so hope that you are proved right Stu, but you know me doom and gloom!

 

However, the team are playing the best football of the season right now. Nice passing moves, no kicking in the air

 

I can't wait to get to Histon on Saturday and spank them - we owe them that after how we played at home to them

[doheochai]

Originally Posted By: Santa

Do you know if the operating losses quoted include those of Fleet Leisure ?

No, they don't

[BustaGut]

Originally Posted By: Unrecognized Genius

The statement addresses this:
"Prior to takeover, the monthly trading losses of the Club (without any additional income) were somewhere between GBP26,000 and GBP28,000 (on the assumption that the Club loses every cup game). This deficit is largely down to funding a playing staff capable of challenging for promotion to the Football League.
We would like to report that during our financial due diligence we found the club's day to day financial management generally to be in good order (ie. VAT and PAYE were up to date, which is not the case with a lot of clubs). Clearly, however, the Club could only continue to fund the ongoing deficit through director's and others loans.

Not being a business man I don,t fully understand all the terms that are being used.
So does the statement above, mean that is just based on gate takings?
If so then the debt is not as bad as it first looks, approx £7000 a week, which some of that would be covered by sponsorship, the trust,advertising boards,even the bar catering, programs the 50/50, would all be a income lowering that debt, I do wonder if it is worded, the way it is, to make the take over seem a better deal? I am sure someone will put me right, but as I say I am not a business man accountant, or a lawyer.

[Yorkshire Fan]

I would assume it means all known regular sources of income (gate money,TV revenue etc). As for additional income, it would include contract clauses (IE sell on fee's) and cup gate/prize money. As you said, it's not going to be as large as the figure in that article.

[Graham S]

Originally Posted By: Riverview Red

As for your comments on the Board's good negotiating skills, you make me laugh

They might have spent their time better of the past few years buying a calculator or slide rule (or gone back to junior school to do basic addition and subtraction sums) to see that you can only spend out to a level that is the same or lower than what is coming in.

The £700K + debt never just crept up on them overnight did it!

The statements from MFC.com are also quite concerning and very naive, where they state that their business plan for development is based on higher gates, more sponsorship etc etc. We all know it won't happen, we are what we are "A very small Conference Club with a definitive fan base of 900 to 1,500 on a good day"

But anyway at least we still have a club to watch on Saturday !

I think whatever you might think about their ability to balance the books (or not) you have to accept that a good job was done in drawing in Eurostar & in persuading MyFC (sorry to be pedantic, but it's MyFC.co.uk - full url, myfootballclub.co.uk, not MFC.com) to take us on. Sure you can argue that we wouldn't be in a parlous financial state without the current directors, but would we be in the Conference National & would we have achieved this "rescue" package? (Which of course you could argue we wouldn't have needed without them.)

Also not sure you are right about the naivity of MyFC's business plan - You should have seen the new memberships flying in yesterday (1 every minute during the day & stilll 1 every 5 minutes at midnight; sure they've slowed today, but still creeping in with 8 since just before 2pm.) You should also go on their site when the Fleet are being broadcast online on the world wide web - quite something. Except you'd have to pay your £35 to do so & I sense you're not quite ready for that yet. I know this hasn't been translated into higher home gates yet, but the momentum is clearly building as far as the profile of the Club is concerned. Whether it builds enough to sweep up Monsieur Lardarse, Original Citizen of Gravesham, or his newbie cousins moving into the brave new Ebbsfleet & associated Gateway developments will of course be crucial to whether it is maintained or ebbs away.

Totally agree with the sentiments of your last sentence, though.

[EUFC FAN]

Originally Posted By: Graham S

...Also not sure you are right about the naivity of MyFC's business plan - You should have seen the new memberships flying in yesterday (1 every minute during the day & stilll 1 every 5 minutes at midnight; sure they've slowed today, but still creeping in with 8 since just before 2pm.)...

Is this something to be worried about? In my opinion MyFC should have closed new membership for the seven days of the vote. What is to stop people joining to make sure Ebbsfleet is not chosen?

[Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted By: Riverview Red

We all know it won't happen, we are what we are "A very small Conference Club with a definitive fan base of 900 to 1,500 on a good day"

Oh blx now I am having to agree with R.R.

Originally Posted By: Riverview Red

But anyway at least we still have a club to watch on Saturday !

Typical, you dont agree with anything a bloke posts for years and then twice in one post.

[Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted By: Graham S

ebbs away.

[Graham S]

Originally Posted By: EUFC FAN

Originally Posted By: Graham S

...Also not sure you are right about the naivity of MyFC's business plan - You should have seen the new memberships flying in yesterday (1 every minute during the day & stilll 1 every 5 minutes at midnight; sure they've slowed today, but still creeping in with 8 since just before 2pm.)...

Is this something to be worried about? In my opinion MyFC should have closed new membership for the seven days of the vote. What is to stop people joining to make sure Ebbsfleet is not chosen?

In theory, this could happen, just as fans of rival clubs could join to deliberately screw up team selection. However, it's not going to happen in sufficient numbers - they just aren't going to fork out that £35.

However, I would guess that the surge of people joining is mostly made of people who joined MyFC in the early days when you could do so without having to pay up the £35 for full involvement & were waiting for the thing to become a certainty before stumping up the money. They have now rushed to join so they can get involved & vote on the deal. You may recall that when they agreed a deal with us in principle in November, myFC had 50,000 members, but only around half of those people had actually paid up.

[PatMan]

Originally Posted By: Graham S

In theory, this could happen, just as fans of rival clubs could join to deliberately screw up team selection. However, it's not going to happen in sufficient numbers - they just aren't going to fork out that £35.

I think the only likely way of getting team selection affected would be a huge number of people deciding not to vote - or unable to due to 'technical reasons', combined with a planned vote by another majority. And while it is possible, I wonder how likely it is?

I think its a pity that MyFC have decided against a "Let Liam Decide" option for team selection - I would think this would be a popular choice while things are going well - and easily enough to ignore if results change

[John Pearce]

Originally Posted By: DA11

Surely any questions we have unanswered can be directed to Jason in the bar at the next home game.

Yeah! of course you can

I'm sure he'll give you a straight and honest answer

[John Pearce]

Originally Posted By: Stu M

Originally Posted By: John Pearce

We will have to agree to disagree then won't we!

I guess so, but I'm still wondering how one can disagree with a fact not an opinion!

Okay if you want a fact ......

I have it from a souce very close to the club that if Macdoanld had been offered a two year deal, rather than a deal for a further single season, he would have re-signed.

Now that would have been money well spent, unlike the cost of the name change, the cost of running Fleet Leisure etc etc.

Still perhaps the current board should visit Fleet Leisure more often, they couldn't organise the preverbial pi55 up in a brewery.

[Stu M]

Originally Posted By: John Pearce

Okay if you want a fact ......

I have it from a souce very close to the club that if Macdoanld had been offered a two year deal, rather than a deal for a further single season, he would have re-signed.

Being pedantic, I'm not sure that's a fact but a rumour. Point still stands that FGR have behaved no more cannily over Fleetwood than we did over MacDonald though.

[Alan ( GNFC )]

Originally Posted By: Stu M

Given the operating losses of £26k a month, one wonders whether the goal of League football is worth it for most clubs. I don't know the income figures for another step up (Unc?), but would they really be worth it bearing in mind the outlay to get there in the first place? And then to try and stay there?

Many clubs must be bleeding themselves dry just to finish in mid-table in the Conference.

Stu, a question asked for years, probably since the Maidstone debacle, but shot down by the 'ambitious' fans accumulated since promotion to the Conference.

As noted by Riverview Red and John Pearce, MYFC have come along like the cavalry in those westerns I grew up on.

[Stu M]

Originally Posted By: Alan ( GNFC )

MYFC have come along like the cavalry in those westerns I grew up on.

Cos there's 27,000 of 'em and your average takeover with a couple of blokes in suits wouldn't make so much noise!

[John Pearce]

Originally Posted By: Stu M

Originally Posted By: John Pearce

Okay if you want a fact ......

I have it from a souce very close to the club that if Macdoanld had been offered a two year deal, rather than a deal for a further single season, he would have re-signed.

Being pedantic, I'm not sure that's a fact but a rumour. Point still stands that FGR have behaved no more cannily over Fleetwood than we did over MacDonald though.

Believe me its FACT, it came from a conversation with Macdonald himself.

[Big J R]

Originally Posted By: John Pearce

Originally Posted By: Stu M

Originally Posted By: John Pearce

Okay if you want a fact ......

I have it from a souce very close to the club that if Macdoanld had been offered a two year deal, rather than a deal for a further single season, he would have re-signed.

Being pedantic, I'm not sure that's a fact but a rumour. Point still stands that FGR have behaved no more cannily over Fleetwood than we did over MacDonald though.

Believe me its FACT, it came from a conversation with Macdonald himself.

?? So it must be true !!

[Claudius]

What´s the take on the club paying up to 40K a year regarding a new stadium in the future?

I´ve heard that Stonebridge Road has character and can also be quite easily updated to league standard if that becomes a need.

History the place certainly has.

Do the club really need to play the football in a bland little plastic bowl of a new stadium in the future?..and is it justifiable to pay up to 40K a year for that prospect now?

Now,I am a fella that likes the old stadiums more than the new one´s(Huddersfields Galpharms nice though).