• Hello Guest, You'll need to login or signup to be able to post on here.

JGFC to return to Wincham Park

the green shed said:
Wish people could collaborate the stories so many variations of bs I'm losing my roof. Also Vic's average last season was 144 not much less than what you guys were averaging towards the end of the season
Click to expand...

That might be true but after playing 35 home games it was expected that attendances may drop. Either way those gates were still higher than Vics average across the entire season. As a direct comparison across the whole season, our average, (taken off the Hallmark Security League Site) is 309.
 
partisan said:
Just to point out that Connolly was offered reduced terms at CoL due to injuries and reduced stats ie his appearances and goal returns, which he rejected fair enough and is now on £160 a week at Vics, whcih is a big improvement on what he got with the purps.

Camozzi wasn't offered improved terms and I believe has now doubled what he was paid by CoL.

Both are really nice lads but Vics are paying a big premium in order to convince them to go and play in front of 120 people.
Click to expand...

Seen it all before. We know how this story goes.

Money in
Money gone
Administration
Repeat
 
the green shed said:
Wish people could collaborate the stories so many variations of bs I'm losing my roof. Also Vic's average last season was 144 not much less than what you guys were averaging towards the end of the season
Click to expand...

Our lowest crowd was only 3 short of your average, but okay then....

Capture.png
 
Sorry I was also one out. knew it was roundabout the 140 mark. Are you saying we are going to neglect our responsibilities and not pay our bills, just because connet and Rushe did that, does not mean to say we will or have do the same. Fact we are the only folks in recent years to take responsibility the club's debts are we not. If you're not very happy with the way we are running the club then we/I will gladly vote for you to become chairman. you appear to be blaming us for how the previous two owners ran the club
 
Last edited:
Just Giving took responsibility in the end though, didn’t they? ;)
 
Your assistant manager has already said he is ‘investing’ in the club, why deny it? My prediction is a couple of years of bought success before the Kray twins decide to move on leaving you crying about the injustice of it all.
 
on home attendances of 142 average the club is roughly bringing in about £500 per game, minus groundshare fee, hospitality & match officials. How are you paying Connolly £160 a week (from the horse's mouth that by the way!)?

And that's just home games, never mind away games.

Are you not a fan owned football club? 1 member 1 vote etc etc everybody pays the same membership fee?

Accepting 3rd party money to pay your way and buy success is very poor. I don't agree with everything that happens at CoL but at least we know we are all in it together and are sustainable, we pay our own way and the success we have had tastes all the more sweeter because of it.
 
Spot on partisan, it just doesn't add up...but then their finances haven't added up for years. As for the fans owned bit, they are Fan owned, they have 1 fan owner who has 1 vote.....who voted to follow the tried and trusted Vics business model again. It's a real shame, I had a huge amount of admiration for the Vics fans who took on the club and kept it going, they had the chance to do the right thing but have blown it yet again in the hope of returning to the glory days. Ah well it'll be Short term gain for Long term pain....again..
 
I don't claim to know much if anything about Vics or the history or 1874 if i'm honest, but Vics brought a good amount of supporters to the game at Bootle on the last saturday of the season, so I am surprised that they have allowed this to happen.
 
Those supporters have zero influence on what happens - their "fan-owned" is a title they give themselves on their website with no foundation or justification (other than the single fan owner George2 refers to). There is no transparency and silence in response to any queries - including from people enquiring how to become a member-owner. It is merely a bandwagon they have jumped on - but without securing the axle holding up the wheels.
 
Let's assume the home gates cover the groundshare costs.

That just leaves the wage bill to fund which means the management team are unsackable.
Or should they leave for big & better things the club are stuffed.

And if they are fan owned then why is there no mention of how to become an owner anywhere?
 
seems a strange way to go about it then to be honest, who would pretend to be fan owned when they weren't? It's an awful lot of hard work to go through just for impressions sake!

There seems to be a number of managers in and around the league who bring the money with them to try and buy themselves success and the club is merely the vehicle that allows them to do that. Again it seems very strange to me.
 
I think there are a couple of issues in play here and both are being dealt with in the same sentence. The first is club ownership and the second is club investment. I suspect that not everyone who is a member of 1874 makes an equal contribution. Some will pay more than others depending on their personal circumstances. That's not really an issue unless some memberships are "worth" more than others and that then tips over into a few people effectively owning the club. I think the same is true of NVFC. Unless the investment for NVFC comes with some ownership criteria attached that breaks the members model, is it that much of a concern? Fan owned still means fans responsible for liabilities and I haven't seen anything that says NVFC are back to being a limited company which enables clubs to fold without paying their debts?
 
I think a more fundamental point is that 1874 is legally a fans owned Club, each owner entitled to one vote at the AGM irrespective of their personal or financial contribution and are registered with the Financial Conduct Authority as such.

Does NVFC have that legal and organisational structure?
 
You use the word Investment presumably to imply that paying players wages (who incidentally can leave on 7 days notice) is an investment in the club which I don't think it is. There is no long term benefit to the club in infrastructure. This management duo will simply throw money at the playing squad to try and buy success and when it doesn't arrive (although it might do I suppose) they will part company with the club.

Player "expenses" is merely an expenditure, it does not show on a balance sheet plus who invests in a business without holding at least a minority shareholding, never mind a majority shareholding?

Investment would be buying the club a plot of land and building a stadium, but other than that I suppose you are right, if the current members or even supporters are happy with this new development, then its nobody else business, although I have heard that the club secretary or it might be treasurer has resigned in protest?
 
Tell that to the oligarchs of premier league clubs who have invested billions in players
 
well no, because in professional football players are on fixed term contracts 2,3,4,5 years or whatever and therefore those contracts are considered an asset and therefore they do show on the balance sheet. The player will either have a re-sale value or the value on the balance sheet shows as a diminishing asset.

Paying jimmy Smith the local plumber his expenses at Step 5 on merely a registration form, when Jimmy can leave next week if he wants to is not going on the balance sheet. Its just an expenditure.

Sorry but this isn't "Investment" its just spending and in the case of Northwich Victoria this coming season, it is clearly spending more than the club can afford, without a 3rd party spending the money and that's coming from someone with no axe to grind with Vics / 1874.

Good luck for the coming season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top