Chairman's report on Club AGM

[hienzeECFC]

Seems very bitter about ending the two year roller.

he's not the only one

 

[Jason H]

But to counter that Jason, can you say with any certainty that they're recent success has anything to do with their new (or new at the time) stadium?

Of all of the examples quoted, I'd say yes. The revenue they came out with after selling the old ground and building the new one (not to mention all the off-field revenue generated by the new ground especially with its proximity to the FA facility) was able to be ploughed back into the squad. It wasn't necessarily that they became a rich man's plaything (Reading, Wigan etc.).

As John says, though, the chances of City being able to enjoy a similar leg up have long gone.

 

[Boyo]

...which we cannot do as we don't own the ground and anyway there are no cheap plots available in Exeter.

Every situation is different, and there is no point comparing us with other clubs. Burton is a Midlands town with more derelict land than you can shake a stick at. Exeter's topography and other factors are against this.

There is Zero chance of ECFC moving in the next decade or longer, and people who think otherwise are not being realistic.

This conversation started because Taggy raised it as an "exam question" in his AGM report. It seems a very strange thing to say, if it's so far off the radar it's not worth talking about.

 

[Jason H]

This conversation started because Taggy raised it as an "exam question" in his AGM report. It seems a very strange thing to say, if it's so far off the radar it's not worth talking about.

Although I caveated this as being the sort of question designed to get the correct answer:

Bernard Woolley: What if he demands options?

Sir Humphrey Appleby: Well, it's obvious, Bernard. The Foreign Office will happily present him with three options, two of which are, on close inspection, exactly the same.

Sir Richard Wharton: Plus a third which is totally unacceptable.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: Like bombing Warsaw or invading France.

 

[Red Bill]

Of all of the examples quoted, I'd say yes. The revenue they came out with after selling the old ground and building the new one (not to mention all the off-field revenue generated by the new ground especially with its proximity to the FA facility) was able to be ploughed back into the squad. It wasn't necessarily that they became a rich man's plaything (Reading, Wigan etc.).

As John says, though, the chances of City being able to enjoy a similar leg up have long gone.

Fair enough Jason, maybe my judgement on this is coloured by how much I hate their stadium!

 

[Jason H]

Fair enough Jason, maybe my judgement on this is coloured by how much I hate their stadium!

Oh I hate it too - grey breeze block hell, felt like the temperature had dropped several degrees on entering, so cold-looking is it!

 

[Edward]

It simply isn’t good enough to claim an extra £500k is required to be competitive at League 2 level especially as recent history suggests that is not the case. Nor is it acceptable to suggest the only way to provide this cash is via (uncertain) transfer income or changes to the ownership model. It is a complacent approach and is only viable as an option because there is money in the bank with more to come from the Ampadu fee. There are other options.

In my view, the Trust membership should have received a wholly upbeat report from the club Chair which centred on plans to invest not only in the playing squad and the club infrastructure but, most importantly, on initiatives designed to increase revenue and reduce future reliance on windfalls. Whilst some time was spent on the first two matters, no time was devoted to the third. Instead, the Chair used the opportunity to launch a thinly veiled attack on the Trust, dish out some cronyism which was verging on the embarrassing and utter an odd quote that made no sense at all. Oh, and there was a suggestion that time would be spent on some seemingly questionable activities. It would certainly be helpful if a Trust Board member could explain why a ground share is still being considered especially as it presumes there is a club that would welcome a share.

Now is the time to push on. The ground development will provide a catalyst and the bank balance provides the opportunity. Messrs Lee and Mason are providing some long overdue gravitas in the boardroom; Morrish, who will be forever associated with the absurd Chorlton/Conway/Williams/ Wolfenden era and the need for loans to stave off insolvency, has finally gone and Tagg is hinting that he might not be around for too long especially if the Trust keeps misbehaving and upsetting everyone by expecting the manager to be employed on a fair contract.

Developing from a position of (financial) strength will be a huge attraction to any new recruit and there is a strong argument to bring in a CEO now who is entirely focussed on the business operation of the club and has some vision to bridge the £500k ‘hole’.

Finally, the Trust should ask for its £800k back: it is probably a safer guardian for that money. It certainly shouldn’t allow it to ‘top up’ a cash mountain which the CEO suggests will just buy the club some time. It is far more valuable in the right hands.

 

[rightwing]

It would certainly be helpful if a Trust Board member could explain why a ground share is still being considered especially as it presumes there is a club that would welcome a share.

This certainly puzzles me too Edward. The only possible share would be with the Chiefs. It wasn’t a practical solution in 2007 when I persuaded Drivers Jonas to change their report which originally showed this as the best option. It’s certainly not a practical solution now. The Club have always stated that the only way that they would entertain a ground share would be on a 50/50 basis. Consequently a 2007 buy in price of £15m would certainly be past £25m by now.

I’m sure the only motive for the Chiefs considering a ground share in 2007 would have been for us to finance their continuing capital redevelopment programme. Their subsequent bond issue however has solved that problem.

Further, the Chiefs have expanded their conferencing and bar income to such an extent that they would not want to share any of that. They would only possibly consider us as tenants. Consequently our off field income would be smaller than that generated at St. James Park.

I don’t know who it is that still lives in cloud cuckoo land with this level of thinking. This was always the type of problem I faced when a BOS member. The Trust Board should have had the nous to recognize that should never even have appeared on the current agenda.

 

[GrecianLez]

Morrish, who will be forever associated with the absurd Chorlton/Conway/Williams/ Wolfenden era and the need for loans to stave off insolvency, has finally gone

I find this quite unfair.. He created and delivered the Club’s V10 strategy and plan for restructure and growth, which in my opinion is the foundation of what we have today. We may be slightly off par on the pitch but everywhere else within the club has grown, and still is...

I think at the time the finger should be pointed at the BOS at the time.. Chorlton lost his way, Williams took his eye off the ball.. Conway became a Provident Loan shark and the wolf didnt know you kicked the ball, quite the opposite of hit it and catch it.....

Paul was doing what he did best.. Pushing commercial

The issue being and that the communication between club and trust boards were through one man..

Now you have 4 on 4.. which is great 4 exec and 4 trust board members..

 

[RichardYoung]

It does read like Taggy may be preparing to move on at some point, particularly if the rumours of his mate, Steve Perryman retiring at the end of the season are correct as well. Would this be a bad thing? I'm not sure it is and maybe this would be the time for the Trust Chair to also become the Club Chairman and really influence the way the club is run for the first time!

Totally agree with this, although Dr Dave and Denise Watts may disagree with the bits in bold! Not sure why we ever moved away from this model to be honest!