End of season clear-out required ?

[villager]

ealing said:

Do people in Kings Lynn know the difference between north and south?

Yes, of course they do ... it's Norfolk and Suffolk.

We definately need two centrebacks and a midfielder ... IMHO.

Strikers? With Webby at full fitness, Danks and Wildthing we do seem a little short of cover ... please don't mention AP!

[alwaysnextyear]

Always nice to start a healthy debate ! We all have differing opinions, but judging by the majority of the views so far, it appears that most fans appear content with a squad that struggled into 9th in what this year was a poor division with no outstanding side. This view is summed up by WH's assertion that " we have a good squad who most teams will have been looking at with envious eyes ". Not envious enough to pay serious money for any of them I suspect ? Good enough to finish 9th that is , and who according to AP in tonight's paper " over- achieved " ! Finishing 9th ! What was his target position if 9th is over-achieving ? I don't see why the same set of players will be any better next year in what will only be a stronger division ? Obviously I have greater ambition for more than a mid table position.
AP in tonight's also paper mentioned the usual budget limitations excuse, but as the third highest supported team in the division ( I stand to be corrected ) , how do all the other teams manage to recruit and pay players the going rate ? Sounded an easy cop out to me . Time for tough decisions not excuses ?
Having watched the City for 30 years plus, I chose " alwaysnextyear " based on experience !

[andy]

Reading the above, I dont draw the same conclusion that that most fans appear content to keep things as they are. General agreement seems to be about bringing in three or four new blood.

Preecey himself said a month back that he may be looking at about five changes within the squad.

To clarify, we are the second highest supported Club in the division (average 932).

The interest repayments on a debt of (for simplicity) a million would be around 50,000-60,000 a year. It takes about 7,000 people to pay off that debt (average of 8 pounds entrance fee).

That is equivalent to about 350 fans at each of every one of the 21 home game just paying the debt.

So, it makes our gate equivalent to about 580 compared to a Club with zero debt. PLus there are the costs of maintaining a big and ageing stadium, which must be equivalent to about 50 fans a game compared with a club with a modern stadium.

An effective average of 530 fans would put us below the following (in terms of average gate)

Droylsden
Kettering (with debt and an ageing stadium, but Imraan Ladak)
Workington
Hinckley
Blyth
Harrogate

(look familiar?)

Nuneaton (also hit by an ageing stadium)
Barrow (also hit by an ageing stadium)
Scarborough (hit by lots of things)

[tim]

Needed saying, I think Andy. Most people don't appreciate that aspect of costs etc. Puts it all in a much more realistic perspective.

[andy]

There are a couple more dimensions to this, which work different ways.

The constitution of the Club is set up to deliberately avoid asset strippers. However, this also has the effect of making the Club unattractive to investors.

Irrespective of the debt/gate money discussion, City still have nearly 1,000 core supporters, several hundreds more than most other Clubs. Those 1,000 supporters could make a big difference to the finances of the Club (relative to other Clubs, because there are more of them) in terms of money into the Club in addition to entrance fees. However, I have the sense that the majority of fans are happy to pay entrance fees, but money is otherwise tight. Having a core of 100-200 or so who support the Clubs fund-raising on a regular basis does not distinguish Worcester City from other Clubs where 100-200 supporters among 200-300 could provide the same (or perhaps more?) additional funds. I'm not talking about money spent on programmes, burgers and beer as the margins on those are very small.

For example, an additional 200 fans putting 5 quid a week into the Club's fund-raising schemes is equivalent to an average league gate increase of 350. Getting that kind of buy-in by supporters is really what is needed to give the Club the boost it needs.

[DrAgony]

Andy, that seems a fair assessment of the situation. But what about a solution?

If there isn't money to buy a quick solution then a slower but cheaper track must be to scout good, young players that will drag us up in their slipstream - and hopefully we'll get a fee for them when they move on up.

But it sounds to me like AP is expecting, possibly because he has been told to expect, a quicker solution in the shape of the ground move. The playing budget would immediately be increased, I guess.

As the ground move is 'imminent' (just quoting various public hints from the club) it might be sensible to wait a bit longer before writing a player wish list. Who knows what the budget might stretch to!

And just a point about the 'clear-out' lists - some of the people that write them seem very clever about consigning individual players to the transfer list but a bit short on suggesting individuals to replace them - which is the really clever part.

[Deleted]

Andy's assessment of the financial income/outgoings is very astute. It points to the necessity of the ground move. However, even if this were to be green lit today it'll surely take years for the cash to materialise?

[andy]

Thanks, TtK - its how I see it. But I'm not sure that there is any quick solution. But you pose some interesting questions, and I'll tell you how I see them - although they are only my opinions.

On players, there is the issue of the cost of acquiring players (transfer fees, signing on fees) and the players wages, travel costs etc. When a player is replaced, if the negotiated settlement is the same as an existing player, then wages etc should be a like-for-like replacement. But you dont get an experienced player on the same salary as a player with a couple of years experience who came through the Academy. I dont know, but I would expect factors between 2-4 to apply.

Preecey has done well in bringing in players from non-contract situations (Ward, Danks, Smith etc), but that doesnt mean there arent signing on fees etc. The Teambuilder is set up to give the Club funds for this explicit purpose, and probably brings in around 4K a year.

It needs a long-term approach to build up a fan base that supports the Clubs in ways other than gate money alone.

Personally, I dont think the ground move presents anything of an immediate increase to the playing budget. I would imagine that once the move 'goes ahead', it will still take a couple of years to construct the new stadium, with City continuing to play at SGL in the meantime. I dont know, but one alternative is that funds are only released from the sale of SGL once it becomes available to the developers. In which case, in a couple of years time? The finances of the Club could worsen in the short-term, running SGL, maintaining the debt and paying the upfront costs on land, services and stadium construction.

I agree about transfer fees from young players, but that system doesnt seem to work like it used to, Sam Wedgbury being an exception.

I also agree about a tendency on here to consign individual players to the transfer list. I dont know what precise changes I would make, I just have a sense of the general changes that I feel are needed. Personally, I think we suffered in releasing Rob Warner over the close season and not securing a permanent replacement until about November. I'm also of the opinion that players should only be released when there is a sure-fire replacement who adds value to the squad. But the transfer market doesnt work that way, and some gambles will undoubtedly be taken.

[B*ue dragonstander]

Andy you make important points and express them with great clarity.

As far as the squad is concerned the Warner / right back point is well made. In addition I think Preecey was being fair and honest with the player in allowing him the chance to move to a new club for the start of a new season. It was far from ideal not having a ready made replacement but I think RW deserved to be treated decently. I suppose it also reduced the wage bill over the Summer!

On balace I think it was well the 3 month wait for Wardy.

[andy]

Well, it was decent in one way allowing him the chance to find a new Club. But not so decent in saying to him that you can go because we can fill your place with a succession of temporary triallists for a third of the season. I know that wasnt what would have been intended at the time, but it is how it ended up working out.

Dont think there is a wage bill over the summer !

[tim]

Managers don't make these sorts of decisions lightly - Preece must have had a replacement planned, who fell through once the Warner decision had been made. Wasn't Ryan Clarke of Alfreton top of the wanted list? There was enough noise about him pre-season.

[andy]

Indeed, Tim.

I think that arrangements had been almost concluded with Alfreton which didnt progress to the conclusion City had hoped for. It even continued and a second bid was turned down around September, so the Sztybel situation was a holding position.

[jp]

ealing said:

Andy's assessment of the financial income/outgoings is very astute. It points to the necessity of the ground move. However, even if this were to be green lit today it'll surely take years for the cash to materialise?

it does, although there is another scenario. many people have mentioned that you can borrow against assets, and that ground ownership provides that benefit. In which case, why not have SGL revalued, as it hasn't been revalued since 1991 at which point it was valued at c. £1m. If it was revalued at £5m then we could extend the debt to maybe £2m or £3m and still retain a high level of liquidity.
Use this capital to fund a team to take us to the next level at which point we would benefit from TV money yes? Then consider the gorund move whilst in the Conference or higher, with bigger crowds and bigger TV revenues, bigger than the amount required to service a £3m debt??
Sure its simplistic and there would be tax issues to consider, but just an idea to utilise the massive amount of cash tied up in the existing ground for short term gain.

[jp]

andy said:

Well, it was decent in one way allowing him the chance to find a new Club. But not so decent in saying to him that you can go because we can fill your place with a succession of temporary triallists for a third of the season. I know that wasnt what would have been intended at the time, but it is how it ended up working out.

Dont think there is a wage bill over the summer !

That last points is interesting andy, I have no idea whether players are contracted for 10 months of the year, per year, I wouldn't have thought so. Season ends beginning of May, starts again in terms of pre-season training in July, so only two pay packets in between.

[andy]

That could have been an option, jp. I guess no-one was prepared to take such a gamble.

[andy]

BDS, I know there was an issue that if City had made the FAT final but not the play-offs, several players would have needed an extra one month on their contracts to cover just one match. So, I think they are (something like) ten month contracts, or end at the end of April if over-year contracts.

[tim]

jp said:

andy said:

Well, it was decent in one way allowing him the chance to find a new Club. But not so decent in saying to him that you can go because we can fill your place with a succession of temporary triallists for a third of the season. I know that wasnt what would have been intended at the time, but it is how it ended up working out.

Dont think there is a wage bill over the summer !

That last points is interesting andy, I have no idea whether players are contracted for 10 months of the year, per year, I wouldn't have thought so. Season ends beginning of May, starts again in terms of pre-season training in July, so only two pay packets in between.

Contracts are usually July-May yes, sometimes with a clause that subsequent July-May depends on the fitness/conduct between May and July. Many clubs run contracts as a twelve month deal though, paying the player in May and June as well.

[jp]

So anyone on a two year contract would not get paid for a couple of months during the summer? I'm not sure of this, as the Chairman has said before about cashflow issues over the summer, in so much as there is little revenue coming in but salaries still need to be paid. Maybe its just non playing staff.

[Tim Munslow]

It's highly unfair of us to speculate on who's going when no decisions have been made - but then, when was life ever fair?

For me the ones who should go are Troy (just too small at this level, and hasn't demonstrated outstanding skills), Little Tom (combative, but again very small) Nick (just doesn't win enough ball - not tough enough) and Shabir (too injury prone and looks like a rabbit caught in the headlights when under pressure). I think Des has another season in him too and has so much experience it shouldn't be wasted.

Webby never had a chance to shine this season after that beginning and must, surely, be given another season to show he can recover to the level he was at before. He wouldn't, however, be the first footballer to fail to really recover from a bad experience (Mark Owen and Andy Ellis were never the same after their broken legs for example).

I just hope that Jock, wherever he's gone/going, doesn't start to try to poach our best players.

[alwaysnextyear]

Interesting debate and views as always, but if no immediate funds are available from any SGL move, then other than letting ( some of the more highly paid ) players go to release funds, where is the money for additions to the playing budget coming from ? To just borrow more and more against the ground is merely continuing the folly of the past, which is why we are where we are with a 800k + deficit. Cut one's coat according to one's cloth !
Andy - I agree with the varied costs of running the Club, but surely having a manager based in Blackpool, and players based in Sheffield,Leicester, Manchester and all points north is hardly the best way of keeping a lid on travel expenses ! Are there no footballers in the Birmingham area any more or have we no scouting network ?

[jp]

Not necessarily, borrowing against the ground assets to free up working capital which could be put towards investment in a better team, promotion, and access to the bigger funds available in the Conference COULD be considered to be a worthwhile investment. A bit like using colateral in your house to fund a business venture.

[andy]

Its a gamble because putting working capital towards investment in a better team does not guarantee promotion.

[jp]

It certainly is a gamble, a "speculate to accumulate" situation. If it don't work out, you lose your house!!! However, with the constitution of the club as it stands, there is no other way of creating any kind of finance needed to go onwards and upwards. Just throwing an option in the ring really.

[andy]

Yeah, I realise that.

[alwaysnextyear]

So we're all agreed then - we've got to let some go to get some in. I rest my case.

[Tim Munslow]

Turning to replacements I see that Dave Gilroy of Chippenham, who I think was a City target at one time last season, has said publicly, given Chippenham's failure to make the plays-off, that he may not be there next season, as he is looking for a higher grade of football.

Don't want to start a rumour; just reporting the facts.

[tim]

Ian Herring was the real target from there, just the sort of midfield ballwinner we need.

But......with Bath City deservedly coming up into Conference South, he would have higher grade football right on his doorstep, and no need to travel way oop north every other week to get it!

[Tim Munslow]

You're right; as soon as I read your post I knew I'd got it wrong. Travelling certainly is a bug-bear for part-time players; you've got to be dedicated.

[B*ue dragonstander]

It would be interesting to know just how far our squad travelled during the season to attend training and matches. 5 times round the world in total?

[LeedsWCFC]

blue0dragonstander said:

5 times round the world in total?

That all?