panters statement

[city4evaa]

www.worcestercityfc.co.uk/SelectedNewsItem/tabid/833/Default.aspx?nid=811&hc=55 ( very interesting but not everybody in worcester reads the website!)

[prestonwcfc]

Agreed we now need to all get behind the club to whatever degree we can afford. Not sure i'll do City Gold, but I'll double my membership of teambuilder and the 50:50 at the weekend. Thats added to the matchball sponsorship I've just done, who next .....

[city4evaa]

does anybody know how much a player is paid a week, i might be willing to cover one or twos players wages,

[Tim Munslow]

If the annual wage bill for the players is the £175,000 Jim Panter quotes (and assuming that figure doesn't include the manager) and there are say 18 players on the payroll, that equates to £186 per week. I know that's simplistic, because they probably get more in the Winter and less in the Summer (or do they get paid during the Summer?) but it puts it somewhere in context.

The statement itself is a very sobering read, but at least it tells it as it is and sets out clear options.

[stgeorge]

How about trying to get this statement published in the Worcester news/BBC Hereford & Worcester website/chamber of commerce website? Some very good points but only around 158 people have read them.

[birdfeeder]

Jan 28, 2010 22:51:15 GMT stgeorge said:

How about trying to get this statement published in the Worcester news/BBC Hereford & Worcester website/chamber of commerce website? Some very good points but only around 158 people have read them.

All of the media have got it.

[StopfordianWCFC]

Jan 28, 2010 18:37:37 GMT @city4evaa said:

www.worcestercityfc.co.uk/SelectedNewsItem/tabid/833/Default.aspx?nid=811&hc=55 ( very interesting but not everybody in worcester reads the website!)

Fianlly, as they might say in the X-files, the truth is out there!

I'm glad that there now seems more desire for transparency and at least there now seems at least a hint of future planning and strategy. Just what we were all asking for. In my view at least, this board now at least deserve some support and I hope that we as a group of supporters can now put the bitterness of the past to one side and fight for the future of the club.

[Bstander]

Jan 28, 2010 23:31:30 GMT birdfeeder said:

Jan 28, 2010 22:51:15 GMT stgeorge said:

How about trying to get this statement published in the Worcester news/BBC Hereford & Worcester website/chamber of commerce website? Some very good points but only around 158 people have read them.

All of the media have got it.

All over the front page of the WN...........and the comment section.
Well done Steve Carley!

[city4evaa]

lets hope people come in thier droves tomorow! and cheer on the boys!

[B*ue dragonstander]

I think the best option is to change the articles and write to every oil baron in the middle east and ask them to help build a club from the ground up (Literally!).

The risk of abuse that might be suffered at the hands of a wealthy majority shareholder cannot be worse than what has happened over the recent history of the club.

I think there is a greater awaremess of the risks of handing control to one person (as Kings Lynn have discovered - although there is no suggestion of abuse here) and clubs like Kettering seem to be thriving on it.

I dont hold out much hope for JP's plea to the community to be answered. It is very very difficult to tempt people back after they have got out of the habit. It is very hard to forget that the future of our club has been sold down the river Severn in the last few years and the financial position devastated which in effect is the thanks that loyal supporters get for a lifetimes support.

Tmorrows game is one I would have swum to from East Anglia a few seasons back. A big match , my favourite competition , a home game etc. Tomorrow - just cant stiffen the sinews to do it. Sorry Jim.

[Deleted]

Sadly I agree 100%. Having given money to the club in times past, and seen it pissed up against the wall, I don't feel inclined to do the same again. Especially when all it might do is fund free entry to some of the people who have ruined WCFC in the first place. I should be gagging to get to the Lane tomorrow, but the passion has been killed.

[Deleted]

Jim Panters statement is honest, open and transparent........and is exactly the same things that we said at the cricket ground in July 2008, only to be told by Dave Boddy when he took the mike (in mor ways than one) that it was all lies!!
Jim is wrong though on a couple of points, firstly the club is NOT a community club, it never has been. The constitution may have been put together to ensure that no one or two large share holders could not have majority share, however, theoretically, the club could be owned by no more than 100 people in the present constitution. So theoretically, the Supporters Trust members could individually be assigned 3,000 shares each, and take full ownership of the club, or as there are around 170,000 shares unallocated, 100 Supporters Trust members could own just 1700 shares each and have a very larger majority shareholding. Of course, this won't happen, not because it can't, but becuase there is little will in the people of Worcester, even at the best of times, to invest in WCFC shares. Which kind of goes onto point 2. It is nice to think that former supporters will read this, change all their plans and feel the urge to want to come down to football matches again and "support the lads" but many of them have other interests now, and don't feel any urge to go (in the case of the two posters above, you're talking about more than a few hours down the Lane, you're talking sacrificing a full day of a valuable weekend.
And unfortunately, whether we like it or not, it is not just about politics, its personal too. As BDS says the situation the club is in has been brought about using the money of loyal supporters, and yet again its the loyal supporters who are being asked to bail the club out. This former loyal supporter was called a "troublemaker" and "not welcome at SGL" by former Directors for publicly stating all the things that Jim is saying now, does that brand Jim Panter a "troublemaker" too?? And now this same "troublemaker" is one of those being asked to give more money, but with no assurances.
For these reasons alone, option number two has to be taken. And whats more, what Jim has not grasped, but I hope he will, is that it is possible for option 2 to be taken , with a constitutional change, and STILL allow the club to be a community club. An example is AFC Wimbledon, where a consortia of investors (aka the Supporters Trust) have ownership of the club, however, other investors can invest individual money into the club too.
It is good to see this statement, and good to see Carley covering it, but considering he had this very same story handed to him two years ago, it is a pity it hadnt been published then.
I am very glad to see that Jim and Anthony are listening, and are considering change, and are presenting the reality of the situation to the supporters and shareholders, but there is one very disturbing bit in the statement which signals the impossible plight of the club - the Carey situation. How can it be that the biggest investor, biggest sponsor is able to exert such a stranglehold over the club, when their intentions are nothing more than to fleece the club for every asset that it has, or every penny that it hasnt got! Advanced payments for a sale that hasnt happened? at a price that hasnt been agreed?? Think hard about this one, as I don't think Jim or Anthony are in a position to really tell it as it is, so I'll just suppose it! If we don't run with Careys, they will be able to seek repayment of £500,000+ (and who knows what the + is?) and probably force the club out of business. If we do run with Careys, we will firslt be groundless, and secondly not have the capital available to build a new stadium, assuming we will be able to get PC for a stadium anyway! and will probably be forced out of business. Careys aren't sponsoring the club, they're simply propping up their own interests, its a terrible situation!

[B*ue dragonstander]

I owuld happily give my shares to the Supporters Trust if the ownership "cap" were lifted

[Deleted]

Me too, and purchase more as well. If a consortia like the Supporters Trust could work in partnership with external investment from maybe one or two individual benefactors, then I believe a model like AFC Wimbledon could be adapted to work for WCFC.
Without that, then there is little hope.

[Deleted]

I took this from Jims statement to outline the problem

An analysis of a 600 gate suggests we get about 200 people paying £11, about 250 people paying the concession rate of £5 and the balance season ticket holders or player passes etc. The resulting gross cash generated is about £3000. Our player wage bill is roughly £3500 a week. We need to get more people in. We are changing the policy on complimentary tickets. Unfortunately we are also need to increase the concession price to the level of other clubs in our league. This policy will start in February.

First of all, FINALLY, someone has done some analysis of the make up of a typical crowd.

But are there really more under 16s and pensioners going to games than people aged between 17 and 64? Looking around the ground, ok there are a few oldies, and a few kids, but the majority appear to be in the middle bracket, probably 25 to 55. Something is therefore amiss at the turnstiles, and I think the Board can see this.

[georgethebassett]

I welcome the statement - can't see it getting the club out of the hot water it's in, but it's informative and honest.

I will travel 70 miles from Staffordshire to attend the game tomorrow. And I have persuaded a Worcester based friend who hasn't attended recently (nothing to do with politics) to come along.

[alwaysnextyear]

jcp is spot on. The ground deal ( whatever that consists of, as most of us can only speculate ) with Carey's and SMD is what will kill the club off. An advance of a sale that hasn't happened yet ?
Nunnery Way has been a non starter for so long now, and always will be. The business plan for Nunnery Way was pure and total fiction, based on optimism beyond belief. The bit about new directors just makes me laugh, as the hijacked AGM ( let's block vote 12, and then there were 4 ) demonstrated.
One day the truth will come out of SGL.

[city4evaa]

if u read some comments on worcester news some are shocking!

[DazaB]

I think the playing budget going forward should be £0 - once all outstanding contracts have been paid up.

[Deleted]

Well I hope everyone attending has a great afternoon out, I wish I could raise myself from my sloth. I know we're all supposed to be "looking to the future and forgetting the past", but it does seem to be ironic that Hampson, Panter and Stokes-Thingy were part of the sham board that Hallmark and Boddy used to block new blood at the shameful AGM. They had little, if any, involvement with WCFC prior to this yet helped prevent people with the club at heart, and with a lot of experience, getting a seat. Now they want exactly the type of candidate who were standing against them to come forward and contribute. Too late.

[Deleted]

In defence of Hampson and Panter, they were also sold a pup! THey were told a very different picture to the real picture, and sadly did not do the sort of due dilligence on the club that they should have. Remember that they will have been told that we were just a small minority of troublemakers, like every club has, blah blah!!
I think both of them have had "oh f**k!!!" moments since then, and realise what the previous lot had dropped them into. Once they'd read the various agreements between WCFC and SMD, they realised that things were not as Boddy and Co. had told them, and now we get statements echoing us troublemakers concerns from two years ago. I still have the spreadsheets we put together presented by Darrell showing income against expenditure, forecasting £100k losses per annum.
The heart says go forward and help them, the head says that this is a defunct business unable to show any kind of sustainability. This is going to be their problem approaching businesses who will ask the very reasonable questions like "How secure is my invesntment?" and of course "whats in it for me?"

[Deleted]

I think some comment from the board to the effect they were tricked would help build a few bridges.

[Deleted]

I know where you're coming from Ealing, its not that easy, but I'm sure in time something along those lines will be forthcoming. If ever you get the chance for a one-to-one talk with Jim Panter, take it, he talks a lot of sense, and is probably one of the least bullshitting person I know. I don't agree with all he says, but I can at least see his point of view.

[jimbo]

Well I hope everyone attending has a great afternoon out, I wish I could raise myself from my sloth. I know we're all supposed to be "looking to the future and forgetting the past", but it does seem to be ironic that Hampson, Panter and Stokes-Thingy were part of the sham board that Hallmark and Boddy used to block new blood at the shameful AGM. [glow=red,2,300]They had little, if any, involvement with WCFC prior to this[/glow] yet helped prevent people with the club at heart, and with a lot of experience, getting a seat. Now they want exactly the type of candidate who were standing against them to come forward and contribute. Too late.

Wasn't Keith Stokes Smith a director previously, I believe he relinquished his position because of the shenanigins & came back to try to help put it right.

[jimbo]

I think some comment from the board to the effect they were tricked would help build a few bridges.

They have said this in public several times already

[thegeezerishone]

we must all get behind them or there will be no team, i will be there monday

[Deleted]

No, we must all get behind the club, the business!
Here's an idea - most of those who go to games and want to support the team would be going anyway, so their £11 is not extra money, just the norm. Well how about providing supporters with a way to really support the business with hard cash at the gate? What about if there was a donation box at each turnstile? And regular supporters could pay an additional £5 or £10 into the box, maybe have their name jotted down and get a mention in the next programme? It wouldnt be obligatory, but would serve two purposes, firstly it would allow supporters to show how much they really want to support the club, and secondly, it would allow the Board to see the level of support that supporters are prepared to go to for the sake of saving the club.
If for instance, on a crowd of 600, only an extra £20 was raised, it would show that supporters really just want to pay their bit and watch football, no more. If £1,000 or more could be raised, it would show that on average the paying supporter is prepared to help the club out to the tune of an additional £1-50 per game. If however £5,000 extra could be raised it would show that on average, supporters consider the football club to be worthy of an extra £5-£10 per game, and help the Board decide just how much the club is worth saving.
Just a thought.

[suv]

Jan 30, 2010 21:28:28 GMT Down The Pan said:

No, we must all get behind the club, the business!
Here's an idea - most of those who go to games and want to support the team would be going anyway, so their £11 is not extra money, just the norm. Well how about providing supporters with a way to really support the business with hard cash at the gate? What about if there was a donation box at each turnstile? And regular supporters could pay an additional £5 or £10 into the box, maybe have their name jotted down and get a mention in the next programme? It wouldnt be obligatory, but would serve two purposes, firstly it would allow supporters to show how much they really want to support the club, and secondly, it would allow the Board to see the level of support that supporters are prepared to go to for the sake of saving the club.
If for instance, on a crowd of 600, only an extra £20 was raised, it would show that supporters really just want to pay their bit and watch football, no more. If £1,000 or more could be raised, it would show that on average the paying supporter is prepared to help the club out to the tune of an additional £1-50 per game. If however £5,000 extra could be raised it would show that on average, supporters consider the football club to be worthy of an extra £5-£10 per game, and help the Board decide just how much the club is worth saving.
Just a thought.

Here's another couple of thoughts

1 Nobody could be bothered to organise such a scheme.

2. Why not make all the people getting in for free "pay", that should put a couple of grand in the bank every match.

[city4evaa]

Jan 31, 2010 9:55:57 GMT suv said:

Jan 30, 2010 21:28:28 GMT Down The Pan said:

No, we must all get behind the club, the business!
Here's an idea - most of those who go to games and want to support the team would be going anyway, so their £11 is not extra money, just the norm. Well how about providing supporters with a way to really support the business with hard cash at the gate? What about if there was a donation box at each turnstile? And regular supporters could pay an additional £5 or £10 into the box, maybe have their name jotted down and get a mention in the next programme? It wouldnt be obligatory, but would serve two purposes, firstly it would allow supporters to show how much they really want to support the club, and secondly, it would allow the Board to see the level of support that supporters are prepared to go to for the sake of saving the club.
If for instance, on a crowd of 600, only an extra £20 was raised, it would show that supporters really just want to pay their bit and watch football, no more. If £1,000 or more could be raised, it would show that on average the paying supporter is prepared to help the club out to the tune of an additional £1-50 per game. If however £5,000 extra could be raised it would show that on average, supporters consider the football club to be worthy of an extra £5-£10 per game, and help the Board decide just how much the club is worth saving.
Just a thought.

Here's another couple of thoughts

1 Nobody could be bothered to organise such a scheme.

2. Why not make all the people getting in for free "pay", that should put a couple of grand in the bank every match.

they wouldnt do it anyway, they do the talk but they wont do it,jcp has a good idea but will they do it, NO

[skippy]

Jan 30, 2010 11:13:04 GMT jimbo said:

I think some comment from the board to the effect they were tricked would help build a few bridges.

They have said this in public several times already

When? name once and state what they said...