Netcafe - 14 December 2018

[poppyfield]

It’s in the accounts isn’t it? My understand was always that rent was around £35K and the other £30K was a cost of service we pay to the rugby club. Depending on what agenda you have will depend on what number you want to use.

The rent I understand, could you please elaborate on the £30K 'cost of service' we pay the rugby club

[spen666]

.....

the only thing I could think of that could entice a sugar daddy here would be if we guaranteed them a certain percentage of any sell-on clauses from our Academy or club. .....

Not sure that is allowed as I think this would fall foul of rules on player "ownership".

[al_quaker]

By the way. How did FCUM fund their stadium?

There's a decent amount of detail on wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadhurst_Park#Funding

Raising £2m or £5m looks so phenomenally difficult. I genuinely can't see how we will do it in any sort of reasonable time frame.

But say we do somehow manage it. It all depends on the details, which sound like they will be presented soon, but I can't see any way that our club could spend £2m at BM without extensive renegotiation of what we can and cannot do there. Our revenue making capabilities are so low currently that we can seemingly barely afford a conference north team. What would be the point of spending £2m bring BM up to something resembling a football stadium if we still cannot generate the other money needed to support anything more than this level? But on a related note, would we be able to do this at our own stadium which is next to the Arena? Surely Mowden Park wouldn't want another club trying to do what, presumably, they are trying to do too in terms of external income?

Whole thing is a mess with no easy way out (congratulations Reynolds, Houghton and Singh for your contributions to this ).

[Robbie Painter]

It’s in the accounts isn’t it? My understand was always that rent was around £35K and the other £30K was a cost of service we pay to the rugby club. Depending on what agenda you have will depend on what number you want to use.

The rent I understand, could you please elaborate on the £30K 'cost of service' we pay the rugby club

The costs of staging a match - e.g:
DRFC share of car parking
Players & officials food
Stewards refreshments
Hospitality costs

These are supplied by DRFC & invoiced to DFC.

There are also other costs around insurance, utilities, etc.

[50 years]

It was good to see the support for the board in the netcafe yesterday by most of the people, those volunteers deserve our thanks and we would be in dire straights without them, (I quite liked his advert for the CEO job).

In the first couple of years after our demotion we were saved financially by a loan from one of the then board members, then later by the sell on clauses from earlier transfers otherwise we would have gone out of business in the first few, (what on the pitch were successful), years. Clearly every year we have overspent and possibly lived hand to mouth, and reliant on support from individuals and built up debt.

DJ has only been there a year, and the changes off the pitch has been substantial, finally getting back into better control of our financial position, with reality built in for the future. and we do now need to consolidate, plus have a bit of luck in the cup and develop young talent over the next few years.

It was nice to know the number of 500 club members and season ticket holders being over 900, higher than I thought, but obviously this is money we don't get at the gate on a game day. Now people understand the financial position, I hope that supporters turn up and not stay away, just enjoy the day out with their friends, (even if footy if not the best on the day ).

I know of one season ticket holder who still pays on the gate as he knows the club needs the money. Just as a thought I wonder if this is something that the 500 club and season ticket holders would consider just for the York game for example, (and extra 650 paying on the day would be a good bonus for the club). I am a 500 member who extended as well but also understand that on the first one although paying in advance which was a commitment, I realise that I also saved a touch of money as it was based on gate prices at the time. Although I have booked hospitality at York for game, after that I will really consider paying for the rest of the season on the gate. I realise that some will not be able to afford that and some may point out they put money in other ways, (possibly more tax efficient ways as well), as I also put into the BTB and buy 50/50 tickets etc, but I want the club to be here for me in the future and it is just a thought.

Hope we get a good following of home fans at the York game, (doubt York will bring as many as we will be expecting given there current performance), and get behind the team throughput the whole game. Certainly hope it does not get cancelled due to weather as that will impact cash flow again.

"Up the Quakers"

[PierremontQuaker03]

I think things are very clear after last nights Netcafe.
Hopefully we will remain in this league at the end of the season and then we need a complete reset.
We need to be a Northern Club for the time being, i.e. players need to be North East based - or relocate. This will keep costs down for both the club and the player and also means that players attending training becomes easier.
Secondly, with regard to DJ - I can completely understand his position regarding the abuse he and is wife got. I know he is getting criticized, but from what I know about what he does - this is a man who is best suited to run our club. We need someone at the helm who is experienced and who can see a crisis, or problem happening and deal with it as quickly as possible. This is not about personalities at the end of the day, and he may have upset a few people with his harsh words / tone last night.
After all he has said if anyone is prepared to step forward he will step aside. However, if he does intend to step aside I am sure he will give us adequate warning.

[QuakerPete]

It was good to see the support for the board in the netcafe yesterday by most of the people, those volunteers deserve our thanks and we would be in dire straights without them, (I quite liked his advert for the CEO job).

In the first couple of years after our demotion we were saved financially by a loan from one of the then board members, then later by the sell on clauses from earlier transfers otherwise we would have gone out of business in the first few, (what on the pitch were successful), years. Clearly every year we have overspent and possibly lived hand to mouth, and reliant on support from individuals and built up debt.

DJ has only been there a year, and the changes off the pitch has been substantial, finally getting back into better control of our financial position, with reality built in for the future. and we do now need to consolidate, plus have a bit of luck in the cup and develop young talent over the next few years.

It was nice to know the number of 500 club members and season ticket holders being over 900, higher than I thought, but obviously this is money we don't get at the gate on a game day. Now people understand the financial position, I hope that supporters turn up and not stay away, just enjoy the day out with their friends, (even if footy if not the best on the day ).

I know of one season ticket holder who still pays on the gate as he knows the club needs the money. Just as a thought I wonder if this is something that the 500 club and season ticket holders would consider just for the York game for example, (and extra 650 paying on the day would be a good bonus for the club). I am a 500 member who extended as well but also understand that on the first one although paying in advance which was a commitment, I realise that I also saved a touch of money as it was based on gate prices at the time. Although I have booked hospitality at York for game, after that I will really consider paying for the rest of the season on the gate. I realise that some will not be able to afford that and some may point out they put money in other ways, (possibly more tax efficient ways as well), as I also put into the BTB and buy 50/50 tickets etc, but I want the club to be here for me in the future and it is just a thought.

Hope we get a good following of home fans at the York game, (doubt York will bring as many as we will be expecting given there current performance), and get behind the team throughput the whole game. Certainly hope it does not get cancelled due to weather as that will impact cash flow again.

"Up the Quakers"

For those 500 Club and Season Ticket holders who can and wish to “pay on the gate”, another option could be to set up an online payment system so it becomes a donation and avoids having to pay the VAT on it. It may also encourage those further away who can’t attend to chip in as well. All this, of course, is dependent upon personal circumstances. It might also attract regular giving under the right circumstances


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[loan_star]

Perhaps people will now realise why sacking Wright wasn't as straightforward as they thought it was. We have no money, simple as that.

Meanwhile, keeping him is causing further damage, both financially from the lower attendances, and in triggering anger from fans towards the board.

We don't have the money to sack Wright, but keeping him will make the situation worse.

Rock, meet hard place.

Alternatively, what good manager would come into a situation like this and try and work knowing his hands are tied and his budget could even reduce further.
For all his faults, we haven't heard Wright whinge at all about his budget being cut. Hopefully the new signings will give the team a kick start and we improve enough to retain our place in this league. Then at the end of the season we can reassess the managers position when we can either keep faith or say "thanks but all the best" and see who is up for the challenge, thus saving us the costs of sacking him and paying someone else as well.
With regard to the anger shown towards the board, hopefully that will cease now more information is out in the open. Personally I thought it was uncalled for anyway, any criticism on the playing front should be targeted at the team management, not the board.

[onewayup]

Mr Johnson, Mr tempest,
I hope you both have a rethink and keep doing what you have been doing for this football club, namely minimiseing the debt allowing the club to operate within its means, we would have certainly been close to death had you two not been on board, for that I and my friends thank you and really don't want you to leave, again the abusers should not be allowed to win, to you and your wife's I can only apologise for the mob mentality which created those shameful scenes.

[Darlogramps]

Perhaps people will now realise why sacking Wright wasn't as straightforward as they thought it was. We have no money, simple as that.

Meanwhile, keeping him is causing further damage, both financially from the lower attendances, and in triggering anger from fans towards the board.

We don't have the money to sack Wright, but keeping him will make the situation worse.

Rock, meet hard place.

Alternatively, what good manager would come into a situation like this and try and work knowing his hands are tied and his budget could even reduce further.
For all his faults, we haven't heard Wright whinge at all about his budget being cut. Hopefully the new signings will give the team a kick start and we improve enough to retain our place in this league. Then at the end of the season we can reassess the managers position when we can either keep faith or say "thanks but all the best" and see who is up for the challenge, thus saving us the costs of sacking him and paying someone else as well.
With regard to the anger shown towards the board, hopefully that will cease now more information is out in the open. Personally I thought it was uncalled for anyway, any criticism on the playing front should be targeted at the team management, not the board.

Still not seeing any argument in favour of keeping Wright on the basis of his ability. He's clinging on purely for money, knowing we can't afford to sack him. I've lost all respect for the man.

We said at the time it was important to get the appointment correct. We haven't got it correct and are stuck with a useless dud.

The fans are perfectly entitled to criticise the board. They appointed Wright after all. The personal abuse post-Nuneaton was unacceptable obviously, but the board did get this appointment wrong, so it's legitimate to criticise them.

Nor will the anger subside if the team continue putting in lifeless performances at home.

[loan_star]

Aye but its common knowledge that others were preferred so although Wright was the deemed best of the rest the board obviously hoped for better initially.
Also if you were in Wrights position would you walk away from what you are due? Very few managers are that generous, they all hang on for what they are owed.

[theoriginalfatcat]

He's clinging on purely for money

I disagree.

He must have strong self confidence as he's made a good career in pro football as a striker. I reckon he believes he can turn it round, and wants to be given the chance to do it.

Whether or not he will turn it round , or whether or not you or I believe he will is a different question.

[Darlogramps]

Aye but its common knowledge that others were preferred so although Wright was the deemed best of the rest the board obviously hoped for better initially.
Also if you were in Wrights position would you walk away from what you are due? Very few managers are that generous, they all hang on for what they are owed.

Yep, but they decided he was suitable to take the job. He's not demonstrated any semblance of that at all in 14 months in charge.

As for managers clinging on, of course he's perfectly entitled to hold out for money. But when something is clearly not working out (regardless of what happens today BTW!) I'd have respect for someone who puts the club first above themselves.

[Darlogramps]

He's clinging on purely for money

I disagree.

He must have strong self confidence as he's made a good career in pro football as a striker. I reckon he believes he can turn it round, and wants to be given the chance to do it.

Whether or not he will turn it round , or whether or not you or I believe he will is a different question.

That's delusional. Wright knows it's not working out and wants his money. He won't admit that of course. He's not going to say: "I don't think I can turn this around, but I'm staying anyway."

And if he has such strong self-confidence, it'd be nice to see that reflected in his managerial ability. I've seen none of that in 14 months.

Otherwise he'd have resigned already.

[theoriginalfatcat]

It's not "delusional" it's just an opinion that differs to yours.

I don't think he's hanging on in entirely for ££, you think he is - so there you go....

[loan_star]

but they decided he was suitable to take the job

And since they were the ones that did all the interviews I would think they were in the best position to make that call. The fact that it hasn't worked out as planned happens at clubs up and down the country, thats why being a football manager is a short term thing at most clubs.

[Darlogramps]

but they decided he was suitable to take the job

And since they were the ones that did all the interviews I would think they were in the best position to make that call. The fact that it hasn't worked out as planned happens at clubs up and down the country, thats why being a football manager is a short term thing at most clubs.

All that suggests to me is there were flaws in the interview and appointment process. Or that the board weren't very good at recruitment.

Ultimately TW was appointed by the board, and it's been a bad appointment. He's taken us into relegation battles in consecutive seasons, despite having resources and players with the ability for better results. As such, it is fair to criticise the board for appointing TW.

[loan_star]

but they decided he was suitable to take the job

And since they were the ones that did all the interviews I would think they were in the best position to make that call. The fact that it hasn't worked out as planned happens at clubs up and down the country, thats why being a football manager is a short term thing at most clubs.

Suggests there was a flaw in the interview process. Ultimately TW was appointed by the board, and it's been a bad appointment.

As such, it is fair to criticise the board for appointing TW.

To be fair you could say that for every club thats sacked their manager. DJ has enough business knowledge and experience to know how to do an interview. Tempest does recruitment for a living too. I think you are doing them a disservice by piling the blame on them.
If they had a crystal ball then maybe we would have gone with someone else. We could still have been in this exact position no matter who took over.

[Darlogramps]

It's not "delusional" it's just an opinion that differs to yours.

I don't think he's hanging on in entirely for ££, you think he is - so there you go....

Yep, and beyond wishful thinking, I don't think there's anything to say Wright is doing anything other than clinging on for money.


Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Darlogramps]

but they decided he was suitable to take the job

And since they were the ones that did all the interviews I would think they were in the best position to make that call. The fact that it hasn't worked out as planned happens at clubs up and down the country, thats why being a football manager is a short term thing at most clubs.

Suggests there was a flaw in the interview process. Ultimately TW was appointed by the board, and it's been a bad appointment.

As such, it is fair to criticise the board for appointing TW.

To be fair you could say that for every club thats sacked their manager. DJ has enough business knowledge and experience to know how to do an interview. Tempest does recruitment for a living too. I think you are doing them a disservice by piling the blame on them.
If they had a crystal ball then maybe we would have gone with someone else. We could still have been in this exact position no matter who took over.

I'm not "piling blame" on anyone. I'm saying it's fair to criticise them for appointing TW, given you said earlier it wasn't fair.

If an appointment doesn't work out, it's fair to look at who did the recruiting.

Ultimately, the people doing the recruitment thought Wright was a good appointment, and it's turned out to be wrong.

[loan_star]

How many good appointments have Darlo made ever? In my time only Knowles, Little, Gray and maybe Hodgson and Penney. How many clubs sack their managers because it doesn't work out? You are expecting our board to do what a small select number of boards have ever done for this club ever. Whats the chances? 100/1?

[theoriginalfatcat]

You need to keep in mind the circumstances that a manager works under too.

Mick Tait for instance, held things together with a weak playing squad as I remember it - it fell apart a bit near the end though.

[Darlogramps]

How many good appointments have Darlo made ever? In my time only Knowles, Little, Gray and maybe Hodgson and Penney. How many clubs sack their managers because it doesn't work out? You are expecting our board to do what a small select number of boards have ever done for this club ever. Whats the chances? 100/1?

Depends what you mean by "work out".

Wright is massively underperforming and has in consecutive seasons taken a side into a relegation battle despite having players who are at the very least mid-table.

So to me that's not just your standard "not working out". It's a full on poor appointment which is doing damage to the club.

Therefore, your suggestion the board are immune from criticism for appointing Wright is nonsense.

Also - do most appointments "not work out"? That's a hell of an assumption to be making without backing it up.

[loan_star]

How many good appointments have Darlo made ever? In my time only Knowles, Little, Gray and maybe Hodgson and Penney. How many clubs sack their managers because it doesn't work out? You are expecting our board to do what a small select number of boards have ever done for this club ever. Whats the chances? 100/1?

Depends what you mean by "work out".

Wright is massively underperforming and has in consecutive seasons taken a side into a relegation battle despite having players who are at the very least mid-table.

So to me that's not just your standard "not working out". It's a full on poor appointment which is doing damage to the club.

Therefore, your suggestion the board are immune from criticism for appointing Wright is nonsense.

Also - do most appointments "not work out"? That's a hell of an assumption to be making without backing it up.

Haway, even you must admit that virtually every manager going has ended up being sacked because things end up not working out. Very rare for a manager to call time on his own career at a club and that club not want them to go, Little for example. Even Knowles ended up "not working out" at Darlo despite that fact he had earned some leeway with what he had done in previous seasons.
No need for me to back it up when you just have to open your eyes as to what goes on in the game worldwide when it comes to managers and being fired.

[lo36789]

End of the day. The names in the hat were Hardy, Armstrong, McGurk and Wright. In order of preference it was McGurk, Armstrong, Hardy & Wright.

The first two walked away because of the budget constraints. The third seemingly didn’t want to be interviewed and that left us Wright.

I think in the circumstances to suggest the board have been fairly criticised when you know the criticism that has been directed at them has been in the form of personal abuse at them and their families is a tad inflammatory. I don’t think anyone sees a problem with decisions being questioned but to say they have been “rightly criticised” no they haven’t - they’ve been criticised entirely wrongly.

Recruitment goes wrong in companies up and down the country every single hour of every day. There are no guarantees in life it’s a balanced argument and you employ the best candidate for a job - are you saying you know that Wright wasn’t the best candidate for the job? That isn’t a flaw in our recruitment process as we don’t know who the next best candidate was - or how they would have done with resources available.

[Darlogramps]

But as I said earlier, it's not that TW simply "isn't working out". He's failing miserably and for me, lacks the skills necessary to be a good manager. His record before coming to us was poor and his record here is utterly dire.

That goes beyond "not working out". It's appointing someone who is blatantly not very good at the job he's employed to do. And it was Johnston and Tempest et al who appointed him.

As such, it is not unfair to criticise the people who appointed TW, when it becomes apparent TW is a poor manager.

I think in the circumstances to suggest the board have been fairly criticised when you know the criticism that has been directed at them has been in the form of personal abuse at them and their families is a tad inflammatory. I don’t think anyone sees a problem with decisions being questioned but to say they have been “rightly criticised” no they haven’t - they’ve been criticised entirely wrongly.

Lo - you're conflating criticism with abuse deliberately. I said earlier in the thread the abuse post-Nuneaton was unacceptable but the board can be questioned and criticised for making a poor appointment. If you've read all my comments and come to the conclusion I'm endorsing or even diluting the abuse the board received last week, then you're not very bright at all.

Saying "it happens elsewhere" doesn't make it any less of a poor appointment. And frankly I don't really care how often it goes wrong elsewhere. TW was a bizarre appointment given his lack of achievement elsewhere. If he hadn't been an ex-Darlo player, we wouldn't have gone near him.

The board appointed TW. TW is a poor manager. Therefore the board can be criticised. Not a difficult thought pattern to follow.

[LoidLucan]

I don't think sufficient account was taken of TW's extremely patchy record. He had had a relegation with Corby, was allowed to revamp the squad but was sacked after a disastrous start to the new season. At Nuneaton he initially kept them up, was allowed to revamp the squad but they started the new season badly and were just above the relegation zone with discontent rising among fans when we deemed him a sound choice for the job here.

He had no knowledge of the non-league scene up here and seemingly not much in the way of contacts in this part of the world.

There were plenty of warning signs and the TW pattern has played out again.

Looking at all of this and some of the comments I have read about him I'm not surprised we have ended up here.

[Darlogramps]

I don't think sufficient account was taken of TW's extremely patchy record. He had had a relegation with Corby, was allowed to revamp the squad but was sacked after a disastrous start to the new season. At Nuneaton he initially kept them up, was allowed to revamp the squad but they started the new season badly and were just above the relegation zone with discontent rising among fans when we deemed him a sound choice for the job here.

He had no knowledge of the non-league scene up here and seemingly not much in the way of contacts in this part of the world.

There were plenty of warning signs and the TW pattern has played out again.

Looking at all of this and some of the comments I have read about him I'm not surprised we have ended up here.

Exactly this. Reading loan_Star and lo's comments, you'd think the board weren't aware of his mediocre record elsewhere. They were, or at least should have been. Most fans certainly were.

[lo36789]

The point was he was 4th choice. Three rejected us - what is the next one on the list was Steve Staunton? Was Wright still the wrong appointment?

Your missing our point isn’t that Wright is a particularly successful manager but he has illustrated capability to get promotions and manage a team theoretically beyond their means (Nuneaton) previously - look at where they are now versus when Wright managed them.

Our point is he could have still been the best candidate who wanted the job - we have no real evidence otherwise.

[Darlogramps]

Your missing our point isn’t that Wright is a particularly successful manager but he has illustrated capability to get promotions and manage a team theoretically beyond their means (Nuneaton) previously - look at where they are now versus when Wright managed them.

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. The Nuneaton of today aren't the same side as the Nuneaton of 12 months ago. They had a lot more funding and were far more stable off-the-field 12 months ago. His circumstances were far more advantageous. If anything, Nuneaton were underperforming when Wright was their manager - even their own fans say that. They should have been much higher up the table, not in the bottom third (which is where they were when he left). He wasn't punching above his weight at all.

If you're going to debate with me fine, but don't just make stuff up.

As for Wright being 4th choice - my point is he shouldn't have been that high on the shortlist. The board overrated Wright's abilities, which is why they deserve criticism for this decision.