Windfall Spend

[ExmouthMart]

Questions? What questions? You're not really asking any questions, your just banging on about your pet topic in a thinly veiled attempt to smear the club and Trust as badly run. I suppose its not that surprising you're currently picking on OTR arrangements at present, as given the very clear progress the club has made in the last few years on every front, compared to the previous 100, provide pretty slim pickings for smears right now.

If the club wasn't Trust owned, you wouldn't even be aware of the OTR arrangement. But if we were privately owned how do you think the board deliberations would go? My guess is something like this:
"Well colleagues, our business that usually operates at break even point, currently has some money in the bank over and above what was expected due to recent transfer income. What should we do with it? Shall we?

A) continue to invest in the infrastructure of the club in a way that we believe will bring dividends in the future, such as continuing the redevelopment at the training ground. Which we expect to help attract better players to the club and help us move forward towards our goal of achieving championship football with all it financial benefits. Whilst also further improving our highly respected academy facilities which we hope will continue and progress the existing success that is responsible for our current windfalls whilst also continuing to attract talented youngsters from all over the west country and beyond to develop for our own first team and future transfer revenue.
B) invest in the current playing budget in the hope that we can quickly achieve promotion to the championship and the significant financial rewards that would bring.
C) blow the lot buying out OTR, which whilst currently being an appreciable yearly expense, is comfortably manageable within our budget without exposing the business to financial risk. And the acquisition of which does nothing to further the business' future development plans.

My guess is there wouldn't be too many votes for 'C'!!!. But then again we'd never know because it would be none of our business.

If you really care about the OTR situation and aren't just throwing smears about from they safety of your keyboard. Why don't you propose a resolution for the next AGM suggesting that either the Trust buys OTR out and rents the building to the club on a peppercorn rent, or if that's not possible, makes an interest free loan to the club to buy out OTR, which it repays at £60K per year. You can do this as your a Trust member, and if you genuinely believe in this I'm sure you would be able to put a very powerful business case to the membership for them to support your proposal.

You do of course have a right to your opinion as I have a right to mine. My opinion is that your opinions in relation to Trust and club ownership are utter nonsense and unfounded repetitious slurs!

Where are the slurs and smears from me?! You seem to be implying that I’m suggesting something underhand is or has gone on. You seem particularly self righteous. You are mocking and calling me out for asking a question which to me never gets properly answered. As people say we are light years away from when this deal was originally set up and things don’t need safeguarding anymore to protect our existence like it was in those dark days. In the context of this thread on our current windfall if we weren’t committed to this deal we would have a bit more money in the pot. I posted a quote from Nick Hawker from 2021 saying that an agreement had been reached to settle the OTR arrangement but obviously things have changed as a new lease has been signed. It’s just as simple as that. Steve Perryman had his loan repaid by the Club and Julian Tagg as well, and that was some years a go.
Am I right in saying we have three Landlords. The City Council, Cliff Hills Family and OTR. Wouldn’t it be prudent to pay off OTR as the other two relate to something completely different and it’s a much clearer arrangement, namely the training ground and stadium. To me the Club settling this would just bring everything under one roof and free up expenditure thats all. We could then utilise an asset to make money and not be paying rent on it as well. That’s all I’m trying to say.

 

[Red Bill]

Where are the slurs and smears from me?! You seem to be implying that I’m suggesting something underhand is or has gone on. You seem particularly self righteous. You are mocking and calling me out for asking a question which to me never gets properly answered. As people say we are light years away from when this deal was originally set up and things don’t need safeguarding anymore to protect our existence like it was in those dark days. In the context of this thread on our current windfall if we weren’t committed to this deal we would have a bit more money in the pot. I posted a quote from Nick Hawker from 2021 saying that an agreement had been reached to settle the OTR arrangement but obviously things have changed as a new lease has been signed. It’s just as simple as that. Steve Perryman had his loan repaid by the Club and Julian Tagg as well, and that was some years a go.
Am I right in saying we have three Landlords. The City Council, Cliff Hills Family and OTR. Wouldn’t it be prudent to pay off OTR as the other two relate to something completely different and it’s a much clearer arrangement, namely the training ground and stadium. To me the Club settling this would just bring everything under one roof and free up expenditure thats all. We could then utilise an asset to make money and not be paying rent on it as well. That’s all I’m trying to say.

I'm not implying you're suggesting anything underhand, I'm implying that you're suggesting incompetence. Your use of terms like, "the committee", "village fete" and the context in which you used them. "No one seems to care" when talking about the OTR situation, all of this kind of language and terminology implies incompetence and mishandling. I would describe that as slurs, particularly when none of it is evidence based. I infer and I would imagine others do too, that you're suggesting this implied incompetence is due to our ownership model as this is the only reason I can think of for using terms like "village fete committee".

I'm certainly no expert in business finance, but even without any expertise, I can see the our club is more professionally run, organised and resourced than at any time in my life and probably the club's life. All of this has been achieved under the watch of the Trust. It would be good at the right point to resolve the OTR issue. Personally I would be in favour of the Trust having ownership of the building as the would provide security of tenure for the club, whilst still keep the club an unattractive takeover target. In an ideal world, I'd like to see the Trust own SJP for the same reason. Although that's unlikely to happen.

In the here and now however, I don't believe it would be prudent to blow windfall money (if indeed there is actually enough anyway) on buying up the freehold of a building when I trust the finance people at the club to make those decisions re budgeting for its rental expenditure. If there is half a million quid extra in our account right now that could be given over to capital projects that will put the club and business on a better footing, I would regard that as better use of resources than one which eventually saves us £60k per year but is relatively easily manageable to service budget wise at present.

As I said previously, as a Trust member you can suggest a course of action to change things to the way you feel they should be. And this can be voted on. The Trust does have enough money in its account to either buy the building itself of loan the club money to do so. We know this as we made a loan facility available to the club for the CH redevelopment which wasn't taken up. I would suggest that would be a far better way to use your energy than typing slurs like "village fete committee " on exweb! Of course the membership may not agree with you and might vote down your proposal, but at least in trying you'd be doing something positive rather than negative.

 

[ExmouthMart]

I'm not implying you're suggesting anything underhand, I'm implying that you're suggesting incompetence. Your use of terms like, "the committee", "village fete" and the context in which you used them. "No one seems to care" when talking about the OTR situation, all of this kind of language and terminology implies incompetence and mishandling. I would describe that as slurs, particularly when none of it is evidence based. I infer and I would imagine others do too, that you're suggesting this implied incompetence is due to our ownership model as this is the only reason I can think of for using terms like "village fete committee".

I'm certainly no expert in business finance, but even without any expertise, I can see the our club is more professionally run, organised and resourced than at any time in my life and probably the club's life. All of this has been achieved under the watch of the Trust. It would be good at the right point to resolve the OTR issue. Personally I would be in favour of the Trust having ownership of the building as the would provide security of tenure for the club, whilst still keep the club an unattractive takeover target. In an ideal world, I'd like to see the Trust own SJP for the same reason. Although that's unlikely to happen.

In the here and now however, I don't believe it would be prudent to blow windfall money (if indeed there is actually enough anyway) on buying up the freehold of a building when I trust the finance people at the club to make those decisions re budgeting for its rental expenditure. If there is half a million quid extra in our account right now that could be given over to capital projects that will put the club and business on a better footing, I would regard that as better use of resources than one which eventually saves us £60k per year but is relatively easily manageable to service budget wise at present.

As I said previously, as a Trust member you can suggest a course of action to change things to the way you feel they should be. And this can be voted on. The Trust does have enough money in its account to either buy the building itself of loan the club money to do so. We know this as we made a loan facility available to the club for the CH redevelopment which wasn't taken up. I would suggest that would be a far better way to use your energy than typing slurs like "village fete committee " on exweb! Of course the membership may not agree with you and might vote down your proposal, but at least in trying you'd be doing something positive rather than negative.

I don’t think I’m the first to use that term and it was a joke! It’s obviously not a village fete committee. I think what you’re suggesting about the ownership of OTR is what I am saying as well and it did seem as though this was happening from what Nick Hawker said back in 2021. This seems to have changed. My understanding is the rent pays off the original loan and the building work needed at the time. This was 1998?! Perhaps you know what this figures was.
OTR

”There are some aspects that need clarification about the position regarding the building known as OTR, or the Centre Spot to some, St James Building to others.

Everyone should be very clear. The rent paid to OTR by the club goes directly to pay off the loan taken out to build and fit out the building at the outset. It should be made equally clear that the directors by the rule of the mem and arts cannot, do not, and have not taken, nor been allowed at any point to take one penny over the past 20 years from OTR Ltd.

The loans, which were placed 20 years ago are completely interest free. Recently on retirement Steve Perryman asked if his interest free £30k loan could be repaid. The club decided to buy, at par, Steve’s share. It also magnanimously asked if I would like my £15k bought out at the same time. I gratefully accepted and my £15k was returned. When I put it in to help the club in 1999 it would have paid for a deposit on a house last year when I got it back its barely enough for a deposit on a new Range Rover!

Finally it should be clear that the M&A’s also say that the club can demand its ownership by payment at par (ie only loans outstanding no interest nor dividend) whenever it wants. It’s something that is currently being looked at in the round by club and Trust. I hope that clears it up once and for all but, somehow, I doubt it…”
This is a quote from Julian Tagg from 2018. As he says I hope this clears it up. I’m sorry about the upset caused to you, that was never my intention. As you say we are in a much happier place as a Club and hopefully the OTR thing will be resolved in ten years when the lease runs out.

 

[Grecian in Guzz]

I don’t think I’m the first to use that term and it was a joke! It’s obviously not a village fete committee. I think what you’re suggesting about the ownership of OTR is what I am saying as well and it did seem as though this was happening from what Nick Hawker said back in 2021. This seems to have changed. My understanding is the rent pays off the original loan and the building work needed at the time. This was 1998?! Perhaps you know what this figures was.
OTR

”There are some aspects that need clarification about the position regarding the building known as OTR, or the Centre Spot to some, St James Building to others.

Everyone should be very clear. The rent paid to OTR by the club goes directly to pay off the loan taken out to build and fit out the building at the outset. It should be made equally clear that the directors by the rule of the mem and arts cannot, do not, and have not taken, nor been allowed at any point to take one penny over the past 20 years from OTR Ltd.

The loans, which were placed 20 years ago are completely interest free. Recently on retirement Steve Perryman asked if his interest free £30k loan could be repaid. The club decided to buy, at par, Steve’s share. It also magnanimously asked if I would like my £15k bought out at the same time. I gratefully accepted and my £15k was returned. When I put it in to help the club in 1999 it would have paid for a deposit on a house last year when I got it back its barely enough for a deposit on a new Range Rover!

Finally it should be clear that the M&A’s also say that the club can demand its ownership by payment at par (ie only loans outstanding no interest nor dividend) whenever it wants. It’s something that is currently being looked at in the round by club and Trust. I hope that clears it up once and for all but, somehow, I doubt it…”
This is a quote from Julian Tagg from 2018. As he says I hope this clears it up. I’m sorry about the upset caused to you, that was never my intention. As you say we are in a much happier place as a Club and hopefully the OTR thing will be resolved in ten years when the lease runs out.

Seems to me whoever is OTR has organised their pensions very well !

 

[ExmouthMart]

Seems to me whoever is OTR has organised their pensions very well !

Behave…. It’s all been explained. You can check at Companies House to see who the Directors are. I’ve already apologised. Ten years time it will be gone for good.

 

[grecian-near-hell]

Seems to me whoever is OTR has organised their pensions very well !

How? Sometimes Guzz you quote the most inane things! The quote from EM by Julian Tagg emphasised the fall in real terms of the value of the initial money, and as have all the News sites over The past few months. If you think this is setting up you pension I’d love to be your IFA.