Yasmin Western- Trust Election Thread

[Anonymous]

Noncompetitive =/= Unsustainable.

It's a question of priority. If we do not have enough budget from gate receipt and the trust to build a playing side capable of staying in League 2, I would rather see us get relegated than relinquish trust control of the club.
We have shown that under Trust ownership we can build teams to get promoted from non-league and stay competitive in L1/L2 over a long term period. So regardless of whatever position we are in over the short term I see no evidence that the club has been run unsustainably over the past decade.

 

[YasWestern]

You say that if we don't continue to make sales then the club will be uncompetitive. Is this the same as unsustainable? As you also say without these sales the club will be unsustainable.

If the club continues to operate as it is WITHOUT player sales, is it self sufficient and able to function and survive at the level it's at the moment? If so then personally i don't see a problem with this. What i do see a problem with is over ambition and putting the club at risk in a vain quest to be 'competitive'.

Yes everyone wants progress on the pitch and success but if the level we are at without stretching ourselves financially is league 2 then that's what we have to accept as fans. Just my view. A an adept manager may come along who overachieves on the same budget and we get success that way.

If we happen to be in a position whereby we need player sales or cup runs just to stay alive then this is unsustainable and something needs to be done about this asap to rebalance the books. Is this the case do you know? Is this what you are saying as i am getting conflicting information from your post.

If we can survive and function as a club as we are without the player sales and cup runs then in actual fact this is surely the ideal scenario. Chucking money at trying to get into league 1 is pointless and risky. Gates won't increase that much apart from the bigger games like Ipswich / Sunderland etc because most of league 1 is filled with run of the mill sides just like us. Away followings to SJP also won't increase other than for the visits of the sides i've just mentioned.

Burton Albion showed that a club run sustainably and prudently over a long period of gradual growth can achieve Championship football without pumping in stacks of cash. It just takes a good manager, a good stable club and a bit of luck.

What I mean by the term "unsustainable" is the fact that you cannot predict that we will make big sales every two years, it is not a guaranteed source of income and therefore makes it unsustainable. What I mean by being uncompetitive is having the funds to buy players and have resources in order to challenge for the top spots in the league. Yes money isn't necessarily always the most important thing but with the way technology in sport is moving, we need to make sure we are not leaving ourselves too far behind.

Simple answer in regards to remaining in the same position as we are now without player sales is no, we need to make player sales every two years or so in order to keep up with the consumption that we are currently putting out. Trust member subscriptions and other donations only account for £145,812 (as per the information released by the trust for this AGM) of Club income, even if that was just to go on the player wage bill for instance we'd have just over £12grand a month to pay all our players. Thats without accounting for the plentiful other costs the club incurs.

I 100% agree that we should not put ourselves in financial danger in order to chase some unobtainable goal, however I do believe we have to be competitive because it is a two edged sword. Both players and your casual fans want to see a club with drive, desire and purpose and we need to have that.

I also agree that finding a sustainable solution as to how we can be financially stable without relying on selling players is of paramount importance. Thats why I want to see a change in the way the trust raises money for the club, a specific 18-25 trust membership, integrated trust membership with Grecian Soc membership etc, to ensure that we are capturing more fans.

 

[YasWestern]

Noncompetitive =/= Unsustainable.

It's a question of priority. If we do not have enough budget from gate receipt and the trust to build a playing side capable of staying in League 2, I would rather see us get relegated than relinquish trust control of the club.
We have shown that under Trust ownership we can build teams to get promoted from non-league and stay competitive in L1/L2 over a long term period. So regardless of whatever position we are in over the short term I see no evidence that the club has been run unsustainably over the past decade.

I am in no way saying that the solution to being (in my eyes) more sustainable is to relinquish trust control, in fact that is the last thing I want. But there is no way to predict that we are going to make tonnes and tonnes of big sales to keep ourselves in this current position for years to come, which is why the Trust needs to look at more ways of getting revenue and why I seek to be elected.

 

[Anonymous]

I am in no way saying that the solution to being (in my eyes) more sustainable is to relinquish trust control, in fact that is the last thing I want. But there is no way to predict that we are going to make tonnes and tonnes of big sales to keep ourselves in this current position for years to come, which is why the Trust needs to look at more ways of getting revenue and why I seek to be elected.

So how do you tangibly improve "sustainability" in the existing ownership model? It's easy to say "get more trust subs" and "engage with the youth" as an answer but people have being saying that for a decade without showing any results.
I have no doubts about your ability and goodwill towards the trust. I just don't agree that we are "unsustainable".

 

[Matt Phillips]

I also agree that finding a sustainable solution as to how we can be financially stable without relying on selling players is of paramount importance. Thats why I want to see a change in the way the trust raises money for the club, a specific 18-25 trust membership, integrated trust membership with Grecian Soc membership etc, to ensure that we are capturing more fans.

I don't want to be cynical but the Trust is never going to raise enough money to address the sustainability question. As long as we have a thriving academy, the Club will always run a cyclical budget with windfalls levelling out losses over a 3-5 year period. If the Club were able to improve its general revenue, then it will simply adjust our "as normal" cost base upwards and return to a profit and loss cycle.

The benefit of the, albeit small, Trust donation rather than a larger injection from a normal owner is the fact the the Trust doesn't take any money out. A normal owner might inject cash when times are tough, but unless we strike gold, they're guaranteed to take it out when the Club does get any windfalls.

That being said, both the Club and Trust do need to do more to look at revenue opportunities. The idea of an 18-25 membership sounds great, but these are normally used to offer a discount. Would you want to go below the current £2 per month minimum?
Do you think that the current donation from Trust to Club could potentially be cut back and then used to fund projects which have a specific focus on revenue generation - i.e. marketing, improved facilities etc?

 

[YasWestern]

So how do you tangibly improve "sustainability" in the existing ownership model? It's easy to say "get more trust subs" and "engage with the youth" as an answer but people have being saying that for a decade without showing any results.
I have no doubts about your ability and goodwill towards the trust. I just don't agree that we are "unsustainable".

I do believe that the problems at hand are harder to solve than a simple quick fix. What I would encourage if elected would be a shift to not just Trust membership being the only revenue stream from members. Like what the STARS campaign has done now but in other areas.

I think it would be really effective if all fans, regardless of whether they are members of the Trust or not could tangibly see where there money is going, by funding specific things. Like with the GPS sponsorship as well. It was worked with the EDGs really well, they fundraise for a specific item the club needs, they get it for them and then have stickers on everything that they have purchased. Things like that could make a real difference in extra money being put into the club aside from the £2 membership, and those that don't want to be members can still contribute.

 

[YasWestern]

I don't want to be cynical but the Trust is never going to raise enough money to address the sustainability question. As long as we have a thriving academy, the Club will always run a cyclical budget with windfalls levelling out losses over a 3-5 year period. If the Club were able to improve its general revenue, then it will simply adjust our "as normal" cost base upwards and return to a profit and loss cycle.

The benefit of the, albeit small, Trust donation rather than a larger injection from a normal owner is the fact the the Trust doesn't take any money out. A normal owner might inject cash when times are tough, but unless we strike gold, they're guaranteed to take it out when the Club does get any windfalls.

That being said, both the Club and Trust do need to do more to look at revenue opportunities. The idea of an 18-25 membership sounds great, but these are normally used to offer a discount. Would you want to go below the current £2 per month minimum?
Do you think that the current donation from Trust to Club could potentially be cut back and then used to fund projects which have a specific focus on revenue generation - i.e. marketing, improved facilities etc?

I do agree that the issue with sales will not be entirely solved under a trust model, but I think we have to look at ways of making money outside of Trust membership, another example would be using the space we have at SJP and the training ground as revenue streams for rental etc.

I agree with what you say about the Trust not taking money out except for its expenses. The idea of the 18-25 membership would be similar to that of a Junior Grecian really in that they'd get some sort of added benefits alongside being a Trust Member, the 18-25 demographic would be looking to extend the Junior Grecian model to something that fits more with what that audience wants.

I think an addition of more single issue focused campaigns would be massive at generating a short term buzz about the way in which the Trust raises money, like has been done with the STARS campaign, it will allow people to put money into what they specifically want to fund, as opposed to a generic pot.

 

[Legohead]

All i ask of the club is that it operates on the basis that it doesn't spend more than is coming in and also that it puts enough money in reserve to ride out tougher financial times. I believe a club with a large number of volunteers working at the club and over 4000 fans every home game shouldn't be in a unsustainable position and relying on transfer fees to survive.

It should have enough revenue coming in and the club should be looking at other innovative ways to get even more money into the club which i'm sure they are doing.

I'm happy to be in the Conference South so long as we remain fan owned and sustainable. This is not to say i don't want to be competitive but i am prepared to sacrifice success in order to simply have a club to go and watch. Bury tried to be 'competitive' and now they have no club.

That said, i have taken on board all your comments Yas and i am prepared to give you my vote.

 

[Legohead]

Noncompetitive =/= Unsustainable.

It's a question of priority. If we do not have enough budget from gate receipt and the trust to build a playing side capable of staying in League 2, I would rather see us get relegated than relinquish trust control of the club.
We have shown that under Trust ownership we can build teams to get promoted from non-league and stay competitive in L1/L2 over a long term period. So regardless of whatever position we are in over the short term I see no evidence that the club has been run unsustainably over the past decade.

This. 100%.

 

[HUFC1885]

How do you think we Exeter City can be more Eco friendly as a club.