Fans forum

[jjljks]

A number of facts have to be faced, some of which are very unpleasant, but won't go away.

1. BM will take a lot more money before it is up to FL standard
2. Overspending cannot be financed by 'sticking plaster' fundraising
3. Fan-based ownership will impose restrictions unless we can increase the fan-base
4. We need some new Directors -preferably with good business sense and footballing contacts
5. There was no formal business plan presented to the fans at the Forum last night.

The solutions to these points are complex and will be controversial but need to be discussed in a transparent way which allows those with a vested interest in the club to have some input. Without the likes of Wayne Raper, John Tempest & the goodwill of volunteers, we would not have any club at all.

We need the Board to present some proposals which can then be discussed / debated in the open, and a consensus arrived at which would be to the benefit of the future of the club.

Now, the best we can do is get down to Blackwell Meadows, bring a friend and support the lads who have been outstanding in their ability to block out all this furore and keep winning

[Beano]

Thing is there is an actual fundraising push going on now...

Hands up who is motivated to invest when there is the talk of an investor? You can already see that anyone who has had their head turned by that isn't going into their own pocket.

Head turned by what? [bold]Tangible investment[/bold]? Do you not trust what Gray has said tonight? Did you challenge him on this or question it?

Nothing tangible, or anything close, yet.

[murtonquaker]

Could the German 50+1 be applied and work in clubs in this country, although i dont fully understand it, it seems to work there

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[princes town]

The 50+1 rule (German: 50+1-Regel) is a german football rule that a club must hold a majority of its own voting rights. The rule is designed to ensure that the club's members retain overall control, protecting clubs from the influence of external investors. German football is based on the membership concept. RB Leipzig however seem to have found a way of getting round this restriction by limiting member numbers mainly their own workers.

[jjljks]

Not keen on the German shareholder model if Dortmund are anything to go by. A nutter bombing the team coach in order to lower the share price isn't what we need.

Perhaps someone to blow-up the damn pipe under the BM pitch would be useful, or get a firm in with massive insurance cover to redo the pitch. If they could accidentally drill through the pipe, there would be a massive crater that could wipe out the clubhouse.......

Just a thought.

[Santino]

I always thought sustainability meant becoming a profitable club and finding our natural level based on that, not "sustaining a promotion challenge year after year".

[princes town]

I always thought sustainability meant becoming a profitable club and finding our natural level based on that, not "sustaining a promotion challenge year after year".

Up to a point correct. However, I suspect that most Darlington fans will not like plodding around in mid-table and that could diminishing future revenue as fans disappear. For most Northern League clubs there wouldn't be an issue but Darlington is a bigger club and expectations are very much football league. History and tradition can be a curse.

[HarryCharltonsCat]

At what point will they be happy plodding around mid table? Conference, Division Two. Our whole history has mainly been plodding around the lower reaches of the football league, struggling for crowds. Will they be happy as long as we reach the valhalla of the EFL and resume our natural order or will that no longer be acceptable?

[H1987]

Honestly, I have had some time to mull it all over and not sure where I stand.

Does it have to be 51-49? As someone says, why bother? The private owner then has the controlling interest.

50-50 where by the private owner makes business decisions, but the fans can veto anything they believe to be reckless or endangering the long term stability of the club?

[HarryCharltonsCat]

I always thought sustainability meant becoming a profitable club and finding our natural level based on that, not "sustaining a promotion challenge year after year".

It did at the start, when our crowds gave us the moral highground and we could take pleasure in calling out "Spendymoor" for being a rich man's plaything. What will happen when Brad pulls his money out, we used to challenge them. Now we're no longer the biggest boy in the playground, being a plaything doesn't seem such a bad idea. Christ, some people have even said they'd be happy for Radged Strings to come back on board. The fickle nature of football fans should never be underestimated.

[shawry]

I always thought sustainability meant becoming a profitable club and finding our natural level based on that, not "sustaining a promotion challenge year after year".

It did at the start, when our crowds gave us the moral highground and we could take pleasure in calling out "Spendymoor" for being a rich man's plaything. What will happen when Brad pulls his money out, we used to challenge them. Now we're no longer the biggest boy in the playground, being a plaything doesn't seem such a bad idea. Christ, some people have even said they'd be happy for Radged Strings to come back on board. The fickle nature of football fans should never be underestimated.

The problem is our moral high ground was misplaced from the start. We've had loans from fans and directors, and we've consistently overspent.

So why are we actually bothered about being fan owned, we've largely made similar mistakes as our past owners have despite saying we'd never over spend.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[shawry]

With regards to us having lost income from the 500 club, would it not be possible to offer them a top up every year at early bird prices? This should recover much of what we've lost out on in immediate funds. We can stop when the ground is complete

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[don'tbuythesun]

I've been so chuffed with the team's success but devastated with the play-off debacle. Unlike so many other clubs that have either made a slow and steady progress and developed their grounds or the ones that have tumbled down bringing fit for purpose stadia with them we're as Scott says, at a crossroads. I've loved the visits to so many unusual places but I would dearly love to revisit those league grounds again. I'd personally welcome the right investor as we don't have assets and once the ground is sorted and the long term season tickets end I don't see why we couldn't be reasonably self sufficient. Those fantastic bucket collectors have made more than some clubs get in a couple of games over the season but hopefully one day they can just come to the game and relax. Whatever the outcome the journey has been amazing.

[shildonlad]

To say investment = inevitable implosion is patronising and wrong. Who's to say the investors won't be more like Graham Wood/the Bennetts at Gateshead, or Brad Groves at Spennymoor?

The trouble is that we've had investors three times in the last 20 years and it's always ended in tears.

Where are the rich people who just want to waste a load of their money just for the fuck of it?

At other clubs, we will never be that lucky.

Coming in to Darlo to propel us up to the league would cost millions.

The only time we have had an investor with money to burn was Reynolds. However he was a fruitcake and wasted the money on something that was never going to work. Houghton was only interested in the land around the arena, and as for Singh, who knows what his motivation was?

Whilst george reynolds was crazy at least he had ambition for the club in the early days anyhow and created a buzz and alot of publicity. Did singh and other guy have any true ambitions for the club?

[44 years]

Martin Jasper told us at the AGM a few of years ago after the loss of I think £50k in the previous year that we would have to make a decision in the near future to have an investor if we are to move on and we are now at that cross roads. I cant see our fans (who have been fantastic in supporting the club) being able to raise possibly £100k plus every year (wages budget and development of the ground) to keep us just in the national league north and much more if we get into the national league as we would need to have full time paid staff (rules of the league). For me I would be happy with a 51 / 49% split as long as this included a member from the supporters group on the new board.

[Darlogramps]

To say investment = inevitable implosion is patronising and wrong. Who's to say the investors won't be more like Graham Wood/the Bennetts at Gateshead, or Brad Groves at Spennymoor?

The trouble is that we've had investors three times in the last 20 years and it's always ended in tears.

Where are the rich people who just want to waste a load of their money just for the fuck of it?

At other clubs, we will never be that lucky.

Coming in to Darlo to propel us up to the league would cost millions.

The only time we have had an investor with money to burn was Reynolds. However he was a fruitcake and wasted the money on something that was never going to work. Houghton was only interested in the land around the arena, and as for Singh, who knows what his motivation was?

Whilst george reynolds was crazy at least he had ambition for the club in the early days anyhow and created a buzz and alot of publicity.

Don't delude yourself. Reynolds only had ambition for himself and his own ego.

The only person he cared about was himself. He even named the stadium after himself! He didn't give a stuff about the club. Oh, and don't forget his bullying and intimidation of anyone who dared speak up against him.

He was just as bad as Singh and Houghton. Let's not rewrite history here by pretending otherwise.

[MKDarlo]

An awful lot to take in from that forum on Friday and as Scott has said we are now at a cross roads in our journey.

Do we seek investment and surrender control of the club in the hope that this delivers us to the promised land of the football league or do we accept that this season is the best it will get and that fighting to stay in this division is the furthest we can go?

Personally while I would love the club to progress simply on the backs of our work and investment as fans this simply isn’t realistic considering our fan base and the financial results discussed on Friday. We have overspent and nearly failed a couple of times during the last 5 years. We are not sustainable and without drastically cutting our expectations I cannot see how we become sustainable. That is before we even look at how we improve the ground to an acceptable standard.

To that end I am not against investment from a third party, however accepting this investment is a one shot deal. Once we take the money we lose the club. Even with a clear legal ownership structure in place the issuing of new shares at regular intervals will quickly water down the shareholding held by the supporters group as we will lack the finance to buy up new shares in the required numbers to maintain our position. Once we give up control we won’t get it back and will be in the same position we were in before 2012 with no say and no ability to manage the direction of the club.

I am also concerned that MG might be overreaching himself. He has done us fantastically well but he is just a manager. He can be replaced. I hate to say that after what the has delivered but is his ambition worth sacrificing the club for? We as shareholders have to do what is right for the club not what is right for MG. If the two interests can be combined then perfect however IF we decide we accept we have reached our level and don't want external funding ( or the terms of that external funding are not acceptable) then we will have to thank Martin for his hard work and success and admit we simply can’t provide him with a vehicle to express his talents and deliver his potential and support him in moving on with our heartfelt thanks and best wishes.

I also do not see what is in it for any investor. What do we as a small non-league club have to offer them by way of security or as a return in the investment? We don't own a ground or any land, we don't have any real assets and we don't have a large fan base to milk for easy money. All I can see is an interest in the development of young players and the associated sell on fees. It simply doesn't add up for me and smacks of group companies, intra group loans, loss transfer and tax planning among other things.

That brings me to the identity of the investor and their plans. IF it turns out to be Singh then I am out. I will give him the chance to explain himself and his actions before Peugeot day but without mitigating circumstances of the frankly incredible kind he can, bluntly, sod off. Surely we can’t have all developed amnesia about what went on under his fit and proper leadership? Surely we can’t have forgotten the absolute hell we have been through because of his actions?

I will be honest and say I don't know what to think at present. IF there are investors out there ( where have they been?) we need to know who they are and hear from them clear and transparent plans for the future, what is in it for them and what legal security they will offer the SG and shareholders in the future. I would love us to be able to put in place a 50%+1 rule ( as in Germany) for the club but simply cannot see any serious business person agreeing to this unless they were part of a group that owned say 20% each. They would stand to lose their investment without control over the levers of the business. I will listen to an offer of investment but need to be convinced about the ethics, efficacy and transparency of this investment. If we are not convinced then we must accept that we have reached our level, will have to find a new manager and team on reduced terms, battle to retain our current status, invest in a ground that isn’t perfect and we don’t own and give up hopes of progression in the short to medium term. Will we survive that as a club?

As I said I am really conflicted and don’t know which way to turn.

[JE93]

It' taken a while for me to piece together my thoughts from the fans forum. But here's a very rudimentary version of what I'm thinking.

The club is most certainly at a cross-roads of purpose. Truth is the first thing we need to do is congratulate ourselves as fans, our amazing volunteers, our former directors and our current ones. We have achieved our 5 year plan that we set out back when we were a northern league side. We have achieved 3 promotions in 5 years and have moved back to our home town (which has seen an increase in attendances, albeit smaller than we would have liked).

But what does that now mean for our purpose? Are we:
1) a fan owned club looking to use a sustainable model to find our 'natural' level. .
2) a new generation of Darlington FC who are looking to play at the absolute highest level we can. [Moving back into league 2 where we may need further external finance to compete].

This is a similar fight that clubs such as FCUM are now finding. Some started supporting the club as a stand against the money and tv involvement in modern football. Going any higher that they currently are would bring them into the football media world. However there are others who want to support a successful grassroots club in which they have ownership and control. In this sense they can go as high as they like with no conflict of interests.

We need to have a collective vision of what Darlington FC will look like at the end of 2022. Something that is ambitious yet achievable that fans, staff and volunteers alike can support and work towards. For me this would be a top half National League side with a home ground of 5,000 capacity, and 1000 seats. With a demonstrable plan of how we will achieve the other 1000 seats within 3 years (to satisfy FL membership).

What is evident from the fans forum is that we are currently fighting fires without a long term plan. We are overspending on budgets or not budgeting efficiently enough, meaning we are constantly relying upon fans good will to fund playing budget, operational costs and ground improvements.

Personally, I am not against an outside investor putting their money into the club. I would prefer this to come with certain safeguards, such as; the DFCSG having a representative on the board and the DFCSG having an option on purchasing the club. However the announcement of MG at the fans forum probably harmed him in the short term as Fans have been far more tentative to put their hand in their pockets and contribute to both the improvements to BM and to fund a deficit in his playing budget.

What do I need from our directors and Darlington FC:
1) an ambitious and realistic plan of where Darlington FC will be at the end of the 2022 season.
2) the basics upon which we will be budgeting for next season. eg average of 1750 fans + [advertising revenue + DFCSG contribution]*. *I don't require an exact figure from these but would like to see the differing income streams.
3) If MG wants to introduce external investors for them to come forwards and be identified. To begin the process of negotiation and DD.
4) an increased push for volunteers across all functions to reduce club running costs.
5) if BM is to be our long term home, detailed plans of how it will be brought up to 5,000 (2,000 seated standard) with general costs associated.

[darlo reborn]

I fail to see how BM will ever be up to FL standard seeing as we only have a lease to play there,Something big has got to change with the rugby club surely

[Undercovered]

What do I need from our directors and Darlington FC:
1) an ambitious and realistic plan of where Darlington FC will be at the end of the 2022 season.
2) the basics upon which we will be budgeting for next season. eg average of 1750 fans + [advertising revenue + DFCSG contribution]*. *I don't require an exact figure from these but would like to see the differing income streams.
3) If MG wants to introduce external investors for them to come forwards and be identified. To begin the process of negotiation and DD.
4) an increased push for volunteers across all functions to reduce club running costs.
5) if BM is to be our long term home, detailed plans of how it will be brought up to 5,000 (2,000 seated standard) with general costs associated.

That's what we all need but you hit the nail on the head in terms of firefighting versus a strategic approach. I think the general consensus from the fans forum was that the continual turnover of the board and the lack of time they have by being full time employed has severely hampered this kind of long term vision.

There seems to be a lot of knowledgeable people on here in terms of strategy so why not put yourselves forward, it doesn't have to be as a directors of the football club, simply a role that looks at this type of thing over the summer.

[lo36789]

What do I need from our directors and Darlington FC:
1) an ambitious and realistic plan of where Darlington FC will be at the end of the 2022 season.
2) the basics upon which we will be budgeting for next season. eg average of 1750 fans + [advertising revenue + DFCSG contribution]*. *I don't require an exact figure from these but would like to see the differing income streams.
3) If MG wants to introduce external investors for them to come forwards and be identified. To begin the process of negotiation and DD.
4) an increased push for volunteers across all functions to reduce club running costs.
5) if BM is to be our long term home, detailed plans of how it will be brought up to 5,000 (2,000 seated standard) with general costs associated.

I don't think this is unreasonable. I think that DFC can control everything but number 3.

[H1987]

Meh. They simply need more details on the investors and how it's going to work if we go for it.

5 year planning is pointless without it. If we're selling the majority share, what incentive is there for fans to even pay to expand the current seating. Let alone anything else.

If we're selling to private investment, they should put the money up for it. Not fans.

[Mr_Tibbs]

We are not allowed to sell anything to private investors.

The investors need to present their proposals on how they'd like to invest in the club, and how that would benefit the community. Anything more than that probably wouldn't be allowed - even if every last one of us wanted it. I think we'd get shot dead by the powers that be.

[bga]

Just received email from DFCSG regards Community Share Issue, very interesting last paragraph which reads.
"Regarding the external investors mentioned at the fans forum we were not made aware of this development in advance and are currently in the process of gathering facts . A further update will follow shortly."

[tezza]

Like many I am still trying to take in the events of last Friday forum, lest we forget was primarily to discuss the next round of funding.
Yes we know there was going to be a deal of argument about the inability to compete (assumes appeal not successful) in this seasons play offs.
However I had expected that at the end there would be at least a clear direction for the next 2 seasons, beyond that with the current board structure I thought was optimistic.
I did not however expect the outcome to almost be in a state of limbo, with fans asking them selves to "I twist or stick" in regard to further investment. Lets remind ourselves we are not really talking 188 investors, save season ticket sales we are talking about a hard core of around 300 investors.
How have we got to here? We listened while Wayne outlined investment details, John Tempest seemingly dealt with outside investors. No approaches made.
Then bang ..the hand grenade in the middle of the table .. and everything up in the air. Certainly a question of the left hand not knowing what the right was thinking/doing. A clear disconnect between those that run the club and those that serve the club. We have all known of MG ambition, who could forget the look on David Mills face at the very last forum at Blackwell Grange when MG announced he would need £1m playing budget by 2017 - 2018 season. That is where there should have been some kind of reality check as to what resources and ambitions were and best aligned. I know of few industries football included where an employee of the board makes independent policy and survives to implement it. For me it was clear MG was actually saying the club and its ambition have outgrown the board, and he seems to have served notice that he intends to get his own, and that they are on the same page as he.
I agree that without MG valued input and commitment we would likely not be where we are today in football standing, however it is one mans input no more valuable than many others , including every volunteer that is and has been.
Given the suddenness of this statement :- or was it an outburst, he has been prone in the past:, what he has done is effectively place the club in limbo, though thankfully a few are coming round from the coma and starting to drive forward.
MG brought this about and in my opinion having ambushed the board it is his responsibility to qualify his words and intent, including where he sees himself in the set up, sooner rather than later. Until he does and some stability is restored then he will be a central part of to the "laughing stock" he so woefully spoke of.
Its put up or shut up time.

[tezza]

1883 investors Apologies

[super_les_mcjannet]

Until the way forward is clearer we will largely be in a state of stick/twist confusion.

Gray outlined his takeover plan on Friday and now the boards will need to play catch up and meet with the investors to see what they want and obviously who they are.

I feel sorry for the DFCSG board as they will now need to complete a lot of work in a short time to try and keep things moving, wouldn't surprise me if some of them also step down at some point. They will need to offer a stand point position on a situation which is either go with Gray and hand over the club which could fall apart in the future or stick as we are which could also fall apart in the future (no guarantees on either way).

[bga]

We are in limbo I feel at present. Let's hope the "Further update" mentioned by DFCSG is produced "shortly."

[lo36789]

DFCSG have sent out an e-mail and confirm that "Regarding the external investors mentioned at the fans forum we were not made aware of this development in advance and are currently in the progress of gathering facts. A further update will follow shortly."

Concur with Les that they've been left in a terrible position where they have to react to a complete curveball.

[tezza]

DFCSG have sent out an e-mail and confirm that "Regarding the external investors mentioned at the fans forum we were not made aware of this development in advance and are currently in the progress of gathering facts. A further update will follow shortly."

Concur with Les that they've been left in a terrible position where they have to react to a complete curveball.

All of which underlines the points made by several contributors.

The Board & DFCSG were intent on bringing about clarity and some stability. All of which was destroyed in a matter of a few minutes, with not a shred of evidence to support the claim. Hence the speculation of Singh, McLaren Et Al and so free rides on the laughing stock merry go round continue.