The National League resolution vote

[Swedes]

How many of those 17 were better off as part of the funds distribution than they should have been?

Considering loss of bar / function / community income as well as that of paying fans, probably not a lot of them.

How many National League sides were better off considering the weighting of the funding towards them?

 

[Raymondo316]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357074874368479232

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357085184298991618

He needs to make his mind up what he actually wants to do......one minute hes refusing to play because they are skint and it will kill off the club if they play on. Next minute all is suddenly fine and he can afford to test all the players twice a week.

I'm expecting another change of mind in a couple of days....

 

[LongEatonPie]

So last night (Wednesday) I heard a little bit of gossip (rumour if you will) from someone whom works for the media in the Northern Premier Premier, you can probably guess.
Anyway its seems the some of the N/S premier want to "pause the season" until the 2021/22 period. I know this because it has thrown up conversation in the leagues below.
That isnt an option though and its definitely money the driving factor and its a shame its more to do with building a free budget for next season rather than appeasing fans.

The National League Premier clubs seems to be heavily in favour of continuing, with the prospect of the EFL "reprimanding" the NL being far too substandard a division to allow its member clubs to enter. Unthinkable! Imagine the EPL stopping promotion/relegation, thats about it.

With this in mind I am now reasonably confident at least the NL with continue at least to the same point as last season.

 

[#Beebot]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357074874368479232

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357085184298991618

He needs to make his mind up what he actually wants to do......one minute hes refusing to play because they are skint and it will kill off the club if they play on. Next minute all is suddenly fine and he can afford to test all the players twice a week.

I'm expecting another change of mind in a couple of days....

Is this the same guy who bankrolled Concord to the playoffs but didn't upgrade the stadium to NL standards so they were denied?

If so it's not the first time his decision making has been all over the place.

 

[CFC91]

Considering loss of bar / function / community income as well as that of paying fans, probably not a lot of them.

How many National League sides were better off considering the weighting of the funding towards them?

Quite a few - Annex A - NL subsidy (actual subsidy vs average attendance model).xlsx

 

[Aberstone]

Quite a few - Annex A - NL subsidy (actual subsidy vs average attendance model).xlsx

Just go back one page on this thread and you can see why that spreadsheet is flawed.

 

[jacobncfc]

Just go back one page on this thread and you can see why that spreadsheet is flawed.

It’s a bit crude, but not really flawed. The grant was specifically given to cover lost gate revenue, which, however accurate that spreadsheet might or might not be, it clearly didn’t do a very good job of.

 

[#Beebot]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357029839153340420

 

[BornUnderTheElmslie]

It’s a bit crude, but not really flawed. The grant was specifically given to cover lost gate revenue, which, however accurate that spreadsheet might or might not be, it clearly didn’t do a very good job of.

Gate revenue has been substituted for streaming revenue. How many clubs have declared how much revenue they have made by transferring their season tickets to streaming season tickets (so retaining that revenue rather than refunding it) and the number of streaming sales per home game? And then compared that against the budgets they submitted to the league before the start of the season?

That should be the baseline published month by month, to then determine the grants awarded to each club to top up their lost revenues.

 

[chipmunx]

Gate revenue has been substituted for streaming revenue. How many clubs have declared how much revenue they have made by transferring their season tickets to streaming season tickets (so retaining that revenue rather than refunding it) and the number of streaming sales per home game? And then compared that against the budgets they submitted to the league before the start of the season?

That should be the baseline published month by month, to then determine the grants awarded to each club to top up their lost revenues.

that's far too logical and well thought out for this forum - please stop it at once.....

 

[SuperHans]

We supposedly are.
& any teams who's directors don't want to put any more of their money into clubs?

Right.

So clubs like Chesterfield, Notts, Stockport, Wrexham etc. that are significantly out of pocket from the disgraceful distribution of the original £10M grant - can afford to play their games.

But a side like Dover - who I believe have a member on the NL Board - received a surplus of over £100k more than they should have - but can't afford to play on?

Do me a favour.

 

[jacobncfc]

Gate revenue has been substituted for streaming revenue. How many clubs have declared how much revenue they have made by transferring their season tickets to streaming season tickets (so retaining that revenue rather than refunding it) and the number of streaming sales per home game? And then compared that against the budgets they submitted to the league before the start of the season?

That should be the baseline published month by month, to then determine the grants awarded to each club to top up their lost revenues.

I wouldn’t entirely disagree with that, although I think you’re probably massively overestimating the money that streaming brings in, after costs, compared to gate money.

I also agree on the season tickets, but can only really talk about Notts, where we didn’t offer season tickets at all because it was clearly unreasonable to do so when there was no guarantee of people being able to use them.

 

[Stoney Ground]

Just go back one page on this thread and you can see why that spreadsheet is flawed.

No correction allowed for sides promoted or relegated, pretty sure our crowds would have gone up markedly.

Just on ours, you could safely project a fairly big increase, not sure our lowest would be similar to Eastbourne 676, Hungerford 771 and Concord 821. sure even the worst away following could increase those

Then our highest are 1350, I would expect 4 or 5 over 2,000.

 

[SuperHans]

I wouldn’t entirely disagree with that, although I think you’re probably massively overestimating the money that streaming brings in, after costs, compared to gate money.

I also agree on the season tickets, but can only really talk about Notts, where we didn’t offer season tickets at all because it was clearly unreasonable to do so when there was no guarantee of people being able to use them.

Likewise - we didn't sell season tickets due to the uncertainty over whether the season would start.

Also agree re. streaming - we are averaging somewhere between 1000-1500 streams per home game (Wrexham was the highest with circa 2500). 4 home games a month we are talking somewhere between 40k & 60k a month. This is a help but it is no where near to 4000 fans paying say an average of £15 a ticket 4 times a month - £240k.

 

[BornUnderTheElmslie]

Likewise - we didn't sell season tickets due to the uncertainty over whether the season would start.

Also agree re. streaming - we are averaging somewhere between 1000-1500 streams per home game (Wrexham was the highest with circa 2500). 4 home games a month we are talking somewhere between 40k & 60k a month. This is a help but it is no where near to 4000 fans paying say an average of £15 a ticket 4 times a month - £240k.

Just helps keep things objective. What did teams forecast, what did they budget, what were the assumptions behind their revenue streams and how have those revenue streams been affected by Covid? If a club submitted a £1m budget and the assumption was it would be largely funded by investors (for whatever reason), then how has Covid impacted that? If the assumption was the £1m was to be funded by season tickets (which you didn't sell), gate revenue (which is massively down compared to streaming revenue), matchday revenue streams (bar, food etc which are all closed), then suitable grants should be used to replace that.

 

[CFC91]

Just go back one page on this thread and you can see why that spreadsheet is flawed.

I can think of something that it is that rhymes with flawed, and beings with an 'f'

 

[SuperHans]

Just helps keep things objective. What did teams forecast, what did they budget, what were the assumptions behind their revenue streams and how have those revenue streams been affected by Covid? If a club submitted a £1m budget and the assumption was it would be largely funded by investors (for whatever reason), then how has Covid impacted that? If the assumption was the £1m was to be funded by season tickets (which you didn't sell), gate revenue (which is massively down compared to streaming revenue), matchday revenue streams (bar, food etc which are all closed), then suitable grants should be used to replace that.

I believe our budget is around £1M for playing staff - and we had done everything in preparation for having fans back in the stadium from the October start of the season.

Obviously I don't know the in's and out's of how the new ownership have worked out how this budget will be funded - but they're both astute business people and fans of the club - so I have confidence that it won't have been done on a hope and a prayer.

I think its safe to say they expected to have some gate revenue this year (even if lower than pre-Covid due to restrictions) plus the matchday revenue streams. The stadium also has excellent hospitality potential and I'm sure this will have also been something they were expecting to be able to sell over this season - which they haven't been able to.

 

[jacobncfc]

Just helps keep things objective. What did teams forecast, what did they budget, what were the assumptions behind their revenue streams and how have those revenue streams been affected by Covid? If a club submitted a £1m budget and the assumption was it would be largely funded by investors (for whatever reason), then how has Covid impacted that? If the assumption was the £1m was to be funded by season tickets (which you didn't sell), gate revenue (which is massively down compared to streaming revenue), matchday revenue streams (bar, food etc which are all closed), then suitable grants should be used to replace that.

I think we broadly agree here. The issue is that the National League asked for this, clubs submitted it, and then for the most part they just completely ignored it when issuing the grants.

 

[CFC91]

Just helps keep things objective. What did teams forecast, what did they budget, what were the assumptions behind their revenue streams and how have those revenue streams been affected by Covid? If a club submitted a £1m budget and the assumption was it would be largely funded by investors (for whatever reason), then how has Covid impacted that? If the assumption was the £1m was to be funded by season tickets (which you didn't sell), gate revenue (which is massively down compared to streaming revenue), matchday revenue streams (bar, food etc which are all closed), then suitable grants should be used to replace that.

A budget wouldn't have been forecasted on someone sticking £1m in would it, nobody forecasts or budgets to lose £1m surely?!

A budget would be built on anticipated turnover through tickets, season tickets, club shop, hospitality, corporate and banqueting, streaming or whatever. Nobody would have anticipated a full season BCD and nobody could have anticipated we'd come to January and have no support from National Lottery, government or whoever given the circumstances have changed so much since the season kicked off.

 

[BornUnderTheElmslie]

A budget wouldn't have been forecasted on someone sticking £1m in would it, nobody forecasts or budgets to lose £1m surely?!

A budget would be built on anticipated turnover through tickets, season tickets, club shop, hospitality, corporate and banqueting, streaming or whatever. Nobody would have anticipated a full season BCD and nobody could have anticipated we'd come to January and have no support from National Lottery, government or whoever given the circumstances have changed so much since the season kicked off.

How many NL clubs made a profit last season? How many are debt free? I'm almost certain many/most are budgeting to lose money, topped up by wealthy investors/benefactors.

 

[jacobncfc]

Anyway, there’s still very few NL clubs who have indicated which way they’re voting one way or the other. Which is quite surprising.

 

[SuperHans]

Anyway, there’s still very few NL clubs who have indicated which way they’re voting one way or the other. Which is quite surprising.

Yeah - I was expecting to have heard some public statements this week on how clubs have voted.

 

[jacobncfc]

Yeah - I was expecting to have heard some public statements this week on how clubs have voted.

Indeed. Even we’ve not made any kind of public statement, and our position is pretty obvious I think. Presumably there’s still a lot of negotiating going on.

 

[chipmunx]

my guess would be that more than people expect are thinking N+V - but are not committing in case grants get sorted out between now and the vote deadline.

 

[SuperHans]

my guess would be that more than people expect are thinking N+V - but are not committing in case grants get sorted out between now and the vote deadline.

Or - the NL is likely to go ahead, but clubs are biding their time with publicly announcing their votes - because this would weaken the NL bargaining position with the government to get the loans turned into Grants?

For example - as jacobncfc has said above, Notts are going to vote for the season to go ahead, as will Chesterfield - but it is in both club's best interests to delay making this public until the latest opportunity in case the NL somehow deliver a miracle and Grants appear on the table.

 

[Chief Rocka]

We've said nothing official but Challinor said in his press briefing today that they've had a board meeting on the matter and "our stance is pretty obvious"

 

[Aberstone]

It’s a bit crude, but not really flawed. The grant was specifically given to cover lost gate revenue, which, however accurate that spreadsheet might or might not be, it clearly didn’t do a very good job of.

Agreed that the grants were advantageous to certain clubs (of which we would have been one) but as I've stated before, that spreadsheet implies ourselves and Weymouth would have been averaging the same figures as in the league below when you can count on one hand how many teams would bring a 3 figure away following.

We're just in an unfortunate position whereby being supporter owned and having our main revenue stream taken away from us means that we're living hand to mouth on these grants and supporter donations to the playing budget.

 

[chipmunx]

Agreed that the grants were advantageous to certain clubs (of which we would have been one) but as I've stated before, that spreadsheet implies ourselves and Weymouth would have been averaging the same figures as in the league below when you can count on one hand how many teams would bring a 3 figure away following.

We're just in an unfortunate position whereby being supporter owned and having our main revenue stream taken away from us means that we're living hand to mouth on these grants and supporter donations to the playing budget.

in Weymouths case they would probably have got more away fans from just Torquay and Yeovil than they did in total last season.

 

[SuperHans]

Agreed that the grants were advantageous to certain clubs (of which we would have been one) but as I've stated before, that spreadsheet implies ourselves and Weymouth would have been averaging the same figures as in the league below when you can count on one hand how many teams would bring a 3 figure away following.

We're just in an unfortunate position whereby being supporter owned and having our main revenue stream taken away from us means that we're living hand to mouth on these grants and supporter donations to the playing budget.

Understand what you're saying.

But equally - our attendances last year were whilst the club was under the previous ownership who were hell bent on killing us. We had a significant number of fans staying away and refusing to attend games until this had passed.

So it's highly likely our average attendances this year would've been 1000 more than last season given we are now under new ownership - meaning lost gate revenue supposedly covered by the grant is even higher than that spreadsheet shows - it works both ways.

They couldn't do Grants based on what club's average attendances 'might've been' this year. It should have been based on the previous seasons attendances - it wasn't - and its a disgrace.

 

[DarkSithLord]

This is interesting from British Ice Hockey

Elite League chairman Smith 'aggrieved' by government cash snub | British Ice Hockey

Elite League chairman Tony Smith says he’s

www.britishicehockey.co.uk