Coronavirus

[Who Needs Mourinho]

Because all clubs voting one way or another as soon as possible brings certainty. Once we know what were doing either null and void or forced to play on we can make plans for it. Sitting on your hands hoping for something better is the worst of all situations. You might not like the result you get but atleast once you get it you can take the appropriate actions ASAP.

Again with this tin pot clubs bollocks. What is tin pot about a small community club wanting to survive? How tin pot are York losing millions for the last however many years and only going downwards. Stuck in this league for years with one of the biggest budgets and one of a select few with full time a side. You are sheltered from losses past and present by McGill And you'll hope when he moves on someone else will come in and spend their money so you don't have worry about cashflows or sustainability. I see Fylde are also singing a very different tune to the one they were supporting in April - AFC Fylde owner David Haythornthwaite calls for null and void season

And again you're gambling on 'ohh fans will be back in March or April or maybe May'. That gamble is what got us to this exact position. Why gamble again now many clubs are in an even worse position with no grants but loans instead? We were discussing Christmas with family in December then what happened. We were discussing the return of schools in January... then February half term, now it will be early March at best.

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it the loans are at a very favourable rate and can be paid off over a long period of time.

So if all the clubs that need the loans cut their playing budgets accordingly for the next few seasons it would be quite manageable to pay off.

Genuine question - am I missing something or is it just sheer selfishness?

 

[Gladders]

Doesn't matter what the rates are it's still a debt they shouldn't have to take.

As for selfishness, pretty much every club is being selfish. Those in the top half want to play on and those in the bottom half want to end, with the odd exception and who can blame them.

 

[JE93]

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it the loans are at a very favourable rate and can be paid off over a long period of time.

So if all the clubs that need the loans cut their playing budgets accordingly for the next few seasons it would be quite manageable to pay off.

Genuine question - am I missing something or is it just sheer selfishness?

Because the season began under the proviso that grants would be provided to replace lost gate revenue while fans were unable to attend. What is selfish about not wanting to take on debt that you have no idea when youd beable to pay it off? It is the definition of trading insolvent and has potential repercussions for directors of clubs who have interests in companies outside of football. If it was as simple as ohh you just take a low interest loan. Why did the national league withdraw their offer to take it out on behalf of clubs? Its because they, like All other clubs with no benefactor stood behind them willing to underwrite losses, have no idea on the timeline or ability to repay.

The only thing continuing does, is prove which owners are rich enough to shoulder losses until better times come along. Chester are a case in point for the NLN having a great season and sat in second. But no money man behind them, supporter owned and unwilling to risk the future of the club for 4 months of football.

 

[Blue Lion]

Another reason is that while the debt may seem easy to pay off when you're in the NL divisions, if a club drops down a couple of divisions where there is no longer any serious money coming in, they may struggle to pay it off.

 

[Bee sting]

Why should the less well off clubs take on a debt then have to reduce their budgets for x number of years making them less competitive.

 

[Darlofan97]

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it the loans are at a very favourable rate and can be paid off over a long period of time.

So if all the clubs that need the loans cut their playing budgets accordingly for the next few seasons it would be quite manageable to pay off.

Genuine question - am I missing something or is it just sheer selfishness?

Yes, you’re missing quite a bit.

As well as clubs (most not as well-supported as Stockport County) having to cut their budgets year-on-year, loans also have a significant impact on the balance sheet, club’s ability to lend in the future, liabilities, cash-flow etc.

The greater picture is loans will have a significant negative impact on the National League, whether it’s less wages being paid to players or redundancies in the backroom staff. What good ever comes from clubs being loaded with debt?

 

[Kenneth Dodd]

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it the loans are at a very favourable rate and can be paid off over a long period of time.

So if all the clubs that need the loans cut their playing budgets accordingly for the next few seasons it would be quite manageable to pay off.

Genuine question - am I missing something or is it just sheer selfishness?

How many people when they take out a mortgage think this loan is at a very favourable rate it’s more likely to be god I’ve got to pay this for the next 30 years.

 

[#Beebot]

With no relegation from step 2 this year, there's surely no obligation to take out loans unless you want to chase promotion.

If you believe the government owe you grants there's nothing stopping you taking one through the furlough scheme.

 

[#Beebot]

How many people when they take out a mortgage think this loan is at a very favourable rate it’s more likely to be god I’ve got to pay this for the next 30 years.

These loans are on much more favourable terms than a mortgage, and in terms of repayments relative to income they are also much less costly.

 

[Who Needs Mourinho]

Yes, you’re missing quite a bit.

As well as clubs (most not as well-supported as Stockport County) having to cut their budgets year-on-year, loans also have a significant impact on the balance sheet, club’s ability to lend in the future, liabilities, cash-flow etc.

The greater picture is loans will have a significant negative impact on the National League, whether it’s less wages being paid to players or redundancies in the backroom staff. What good ever comes from clubs being loaded with debt?

So you might want to lend in the future but you refuse to take the these loans now when they are at a favourable rate - that makes no sense.

So more sustainable wages are paid to part time footballers with other jobs for a few seasons - I’m sure they will survive. They’ve been lucky enough to be getting regular full pay throughout this crisis as millions have lost their jobs.

What good comes from taking 11m of people’s money and not completing a season?

How many of these clubs that want the season voided have added players with the initial grant money rather than keeping that all important balance sheet as much in the green as possible?

 

[JE93]

So you might want to lend in the future but you refuse to take the these loans now when they are at a favourable rate - that makes no sense.

So more sustainable wages are paid to part time footballers with other jobs for a few seasons - I’m sure they will survive. They’ve been lucky enough to be getting regular full pay throughout this crisis as millions have lost their jobs.

What good comes from taking 11m of people’s money and not completing a season?

How many of these clubs that want the season voided have added players with the initial grant money rather than keeping that all important balance sheet as much in the green as possible?

Loaning money for trading costs isn't comparable to loaning money to invest in revenue generating assets. For example ground improvements. Not all of us were so lucky as to have our councils step in and pay £2million to keep the vultures away from our ground before leasing it back at a favourable rate. Our fans have spent hundreds of thousands to get our ground to the level required and getting it to the next level will cost the same again if not more. That will be financed by fans, FISF grants and quite possibly loans. But the loans would be improving an asset of the club and hopefully helping us generate more revenue though larger capacities and improved spectator viewing and experience. When that time comes we should be allowed to be in the best possible position to support our club. The season was not started on the proviso grants would then become loans.

What good comes from the debt to complete a season helping to kill off football clubs that have been part of their communities for 100 years?

How many of the clubs who want to continue have rich backers who sign cheques when their trading income doesn't cover their cost base anymore?

If you don't think your wish to continue is atleast as self interested as our wish to stop then you need to take your blinkers off. If the NL want to continue and saddle themselves with debt as I've said before let them get on with it. But you can have no complaints if / when those loans are called in and teams struggle to pay.

 

[Swedes]

These loans are on much more favourable terms than a mortgage, and in terms of repayments relative to income they are also much less costly.

Given what happened with the grants and the outcome being the current chaotic situation we're in, why should any club trust the terms of these loans? Have any supporters actually seen the T&C's of the loans, or are they just spouting off what has been put out by other sources?

 

[Darlofan97]

So you might want to lend in the future but you refuse to take the these loans now when they are at a favourable rate - that makes no sense.

So more sustainable wages are paid to part time footballers with other jobs for a few seasons - I’m sure they will survive. They’ve been lucky enough to be getting regular full pay throughout this crisis as millions have lost their jobs.

What good comes from taking 11m of people’s money and not completing a season?

How many of these clubs that want the season voided have added players with the initial grant money rather than keeping that all important balance sheet as much in the green as possible?

I’ll just make a few points for you here:

•Clubs will be lending money to pay off for the next 10-20 years for, at the time of writing, another 16 weeks of football.

•All the money borrowed now will be spent within the next 16 weeks, and not spent on long-term projects etc that clubs tend to borrow for, or to dig them out of a financial hole during normal seasons. In the real world, cash-flow problems do occur.

•The original income distributed as grants was not “people’s money”; it was not tax-payers’ money. It came from a privately arranged commercial deal.

•All clubs taking on debt will impact future seasons, players getting paid less, backroom staff cut (redundancies) and all in all in a collective weaker position. If you seriously think that is acceptable collateral for the next 16 weeks of football then I cannot help you.

•If some clubs get relegated from Step 2 (which they will) they are carrying on more sizeable debt in to the lower-leagues where revenue is harder to come by (lower gate income/league distribution/sponsorship etc). There are barely any clubs the size of York, Darlington, Boston, Kidderminster, Chester etc in the lower leagues. It will hit the clubs very hard.

 

[doveranddover]

pick what you want from that !

Chairman resigns from League Board – DOVER ATHLETIC FC

www.doverathletic.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1358428499745374208

 

[#Beebot]

Given what happened with the grants and the outcome being the current chaotic situation we're in, why should any club trust the terms of these loans? Have any supporters actually seen the T&C's of the loans, or are they just spouting off what has been put out by other sources?

There is no way loan terms can be reneged on.

 

[#Beebot]

All clubs taking on debt will impact future seasons, players getting paid less, backroom staff cut (redundancies) and all in all in a collective weaker position. If you seriously think that is acceptable collateral for the next 16 weeks of football then I cannot help you.

This is precisely the point I've been making - null and voiders genuinely think it is unacceptable to accept any financial hit greater than zero.

Lower pay and reduced staff numbers? What do you think almost every part of the global economy has had to put up with for 11 months?

This is before we even get onto the fact that you probably won't need a loan anyway because you don't need to shell out to avoid a relegation that's already been ruled out.

 

[Darlofan97]

This is precisely the point I've been making - null and voiders genuinely think it is unacceptable to accept any financial hit greater than zero.

Lower pay and reduced staff numbers? What do you think almost every part of the global economy has had to put up with for 11 months?

This is before we even get onto the fact that you probably won't need a loan anyway because you don't need to shell out to avoid a relegation that's already been ruled out.

You've picked up on this point, but ignored the others I made, convenient.

Clubs have been led up the garden path by the National League - why should they take on loans?

Also, a lot of businesses without paying customers have stopped functioning and furloughed their staff (not a loan!). Not being open for business also results in reduced overheads (gas, water, heating, electric etc).

There has - obviously - been hardship suffered but when the economy bounces back all of the National League will still be left with tens/hundreds of thousands of pounds left in debt. The impact will be much, much longer lasting.

"Clubs don't need to take out a loan anyway as their is no relegation". What planet are you on? How do you expect clubs to pay their players without cash at the end of February, March, April & May? Not to mention the upcoming tax bill due to HMRC shortly.

Christ.

 

[JE93]

This is precisely the point I've been making - null and voiders genuinely think it is unacceptable to accept any financial hit greater than zero.

Lower pay and reduced staff numbers? What do you think almost every part of the global economy has had to put up with for 11 months?

This is before we even get onto the fact that you probably won't need a loan anyway because you don't need to shell out to avoid a relegation that's already been ruled out.

Wont accept any loss. Ahhh yes I remember now. Pubs are currently forced to open arent they. Ohh nope they're shut, staff furloughed and hibernating their business in the hope that they survive as the conditions that exist at the moment do not allow them to trade sustainably.... it almost sounds familiar. So what is an acceptable loss? The £400k loss Barnet made in their 2019 accounts? Is that acceptable? We don't run our club to make losses. We run our club to break even.

'You won't need a loan anyway because you can't get relegated'. Then what the hell are we playing and incurring costs for? How does that support the 'integrity of the competition'. Ohhh they've got nothing to play for so they're just playing kids and reserves, sod the people you've already played and put out a competitive team against now youre just a gimme.

 

[CFC91]

Our next 3 games off thanks to a positive case in the camp. No way this season finishes in May at this rate, we’ll have played less than Dover soon

 

[High Peak Blue]

This is precisely the point I've been making - null and voiders genuinely think it is unacceptable to accept any financial hit greater than zero.

Lower pay and reduced staff numbers? What do you think almost every part of the global economy has had to put up with for 11 months?

This is before we even get onto the fact that you probably won't need a loan anyway because you don't need to shell out to avoid a relegation that's already been ruled out.

We can't take a loan, our constitution doesn't permit it. Given that are we expected to run for how ever many months the season lasts on thin air? We already have several players playing for nothing. Until there is an income stream then for most clubs there is only one sensible answer and that is to minimise outgoings.

 

[Master D]

pick what you want from that !

Chairman resigns from League Board – DOVER ATHLETIC FC

www.doverathletic.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1358428499745374208

i.e. my club has not been able to financially cope at this level for absolutely years now and the handouts have stopped.

 

[Luke Imp]

Should be the first resignation of many.

 

[Who Needs Mourinho]

All the clubs saying they aren’t getting any income - are you not charging for streaming?

 

[Minstermen central]

All the clubs saying they aren’t getting any income - are you not charging for streaming?

They are just dong want to play.
Listened to Hemel chairmen yesterday they aren’t doing very well but did budget for season and want to carry on,Darlo have made over 100k in cup runs but won’t carry on,happy to play in trophy Saturday though which is wrong in every way.Will be interesting to see if they furlough full team this week? What happens next round of trophy.

 

[Darlofan97]

All the clubs saying they aren’t getting any income - are you not charging for streaming?

Yes, of course we are, but at lost less cost than a match-day ticket.

We charge £7.99 which seems to be in-line with other clubs at this level.

There is also the cost of the platform to consider, staffing costs & equipment costs. Then you take off 20% VAT.

It’s nowhere near enough to replace a normal season.

 

[JE93]

All the clubs saying they aren’t getting any income - are you not charging for streaming?

We are charging for our streaming service. Its high quality and has been very successful. But it does not replace (in full) the matchday revenue we are currently missing out on. Which is why at the start of the season we were promised grants to replace this missing income, and on that basis we decided to start the season. Now the goal posts have been moved and we're being told loans are now required to fill those income gaps. And as clubs like Chester have informed you ot is against their constitution to take loans.

Let's go back to the pub analogy. Pubs are able to open for take away meals and alcohol at the moment, that is revenue. Yet many are shut. Why? Because they judge the level of income from doing so is not sustainable for their business and they have the best chance of survival by being closed, furloughing staff (grants) and waiting until trading conditions will be sustainable. Or should they be forced to be open and take losses as the carry on regardless brigade believe everyone should be forced to be open and shouldering loss.

 

[JE93]

They are just dong want to play.
Listened to Hemel chairmen yesterday they aren’t doing very well but did budget for season and want to carry on,Darlo have made over 100k in cup runs but won’t carry on,happy to play in trophy Saturday though which is wrong in every way.Will be interesting to see if they furlough full team this week? What happens next round of trophy.

And for the other teams who weren't so lucky as to have an FA Cup run? I assume its sod them right cause McGill will see you lot alright?

Sort out the grants that were the basis of agreeing to start the season and we'll happily play on.

 

[Minstermen central]

And for the other teams who weren't so lucky as to have an FA Cup run? I assume its sod them right cause McGill will see you lot alright?

Sort out the grants that were the basis of agreeing to start the season and we'll happily play on.

And for the other teams who weren't so lucky as to have an FA Cup run? I assume its sod them right cause McGill will see you lot alright?

Sort out the grants that were the basis of agreeing to start the season and we'll happily play on.

My point is again got no problem with clubs like Chester who are doing it for right reasons,but clubs who can play when they want is a joke.the simple fact that clubs think it’s ok to play in trophy but not league is fucking embarrassing and double standards.

 

[Darlofan97]

The club funded Covid-19 testing for players & management out of the guaranteed prize money for the tie.

Given the current uncertainty, we were well within our rights to play the tie until the results of the vote are known.

Continuing to play league fixtures from tomorrow onwards will have huge negative financial ramifications, far greater than playing on Saturday.

I am still yet to hear a strong & coherent argument that justifies the financial burden on clubs, that does not mention the red-herring of integrity, or the fallacy that the loan is over 20 years (which in some ways makes it worse).

 

[TheShayWay]

So without scrolling through 10 pages of York fans and Darlo fans arguing. Is this sort of heading in the way of the National League carrying on but the North and South stopping?