Next season.......

[markypoos77]

I haven't looked it up, but in my memory we were away to Bristol City and we won 1-0 with a goal from Joe Kuffour.

Pretty sure this isnt right - our first home game was against Sheffield Wednesday - think we lost 4-2. we played bristol city away on the first game which finished 1-1 (Lita and Steve Woods peno). Pretty sure Bristol City destroyed us in the reverse fixture around Christmas time with Lita scoring at least 3 goals.

[Jeff]

Pretty sure this isnt right - our first home game was against Sheffield Wednesday - think we lost 4-2. we played bristol city away on the first game which finished 1-1 (Lita and Steve Woods peno). Pretty sure Bristol City destroyed us in the reverse fixture around Christmas time with Lita scoring at least 3 goals.

Bristol City away was definitely the first game of that season. 1-1 draw, Steve Woods penalty.

First home game was a 0-3 defeat to Hull on the following Tuesday. The Sheffield Wednesday game was on the following Saturday and was indeed a 2-4 defeat.

The home game against Bristol City was much later in the season, 0-4 defeat and I'm also pretty sure it was a Lita hat-trick, including one absolute worldie from a mile out

[wivelgull]

Jeff is right, as tomogull, stefano, gatelan, samuel (brucie? where is he?) and co will agree, one's memory gets a little treacherous at this stage of proceedings.

[kevgull]

It was a misty afternoon, the game was touch and go as to whether it would go ahead, I think.
He scored a cracker and then came over to the Popside to celebrate!

Lovely chap!

[leetufc]

It was a misty afternoon, the game was touch and go as to whether it would go ahead, I think.
He scored a cracker and then came over to the Popside to celebrate!

Lovely chap!

I remember this game - I was sat in the family stand and it was so misty I could barely see the away end goal.

Lita had a great game but let himself down by his needless celebrations in front of the pop side.

From memory I am also sure Darren Garner put in an awful tackle on Lita which forced him off at half time and somehow escaped a booking let alone a red card, and I vaguely remember a pasty being hurled towards Lita when he celebrated. The details on those are foggier than the weather that day though.

[Gulliball]

He later said that a fan shouted 'Chelsea Reject' at him, so he celebrated the goals in front of the pop.

[Oh Fer Christ Sake]

Coventry don't do especially well out of playing at the Ricoh.

Anyway, I am talking about the additional revenue streams that could be tapped if Torquay United OWNED the stadium themselves and the profits of holding conferences/events were ploughed back into the club (as is the way of Exeter Chiefs) - but instead these profits will probably go to GI? Anyone who builds a stadium these days is mad if they build it simply for football. The associated facilities, linked to leisure and business, make enormous amounts of money, none of which could go to TUFC but instead all go to GI, with TUFC only getting their gate receipts.

Coventry at the Ricoh didn't even get the profits on portions of chips sold at the ground for their home games, until they moved to Northampton to make a point.

As it stands, TUFC get only the gate receipts, sponsorship and advertising revenue and we play in a 5/10 stadium. Our options are as follows:

Stay precisely as we are, with the tiny budget we have and in a 5/10 ground.
Take out some massive loan with Barclays, build a load of new facilities and, if it all goes tits up, approach Argyle for some advice in avoiding paying what we owe.
Get in bed with GI and let them build us a 9/10 ground and continue to take the same income streams that we already do, and make GI a truck-load of cash in the process with the bowling alley and 25 Hook-a-Duck carousels.

The worst option is clearly the second. The best of the lot seems to be the third, we end up precisely where we are now, except we get a shiny new ground which might just attract a couple of hundred extra fans and allow us to raise a few grand a year in extra sponsorship.

I keep coming back to the idea that whatever GI do, it's only ever positively in their interest to grow the football club and attract large numbers of visitors every week or so.

[Neal]

Eastliegh have a wealthy benefactor!

Our ground is not 5/10 in this league, have you been to other grounds? try Eastleigh

No they probably wont make TUFC the football club go bust, but they can increase the rent every year to eat into the playing budget.

"I keep coming back to the idea that whatever GI do, it's only ever positively in their interest to grow the football club and attract large numbers of visitors every week or so." No it isn't, grow the rent yes. As long as the club survives somehow, even Conf south it doesn't matter to them.

ok, I do agree that IF the club was to get into L1 AND get attendances of 10,000 every home game those people would spend money on other things in around the stadium. BUT... to get to that level would mean millions and millions over years and years, do you really think that on going spend would be worth it. Has no one learnt from history that clubs at this level don't make money they lose it.

Oh Fer Christ Sake I don't know who you are, but you are arguing vehemently for this to go through and you joined this forum on the 2nd May, very very odd!

[Jeff]

We won't get the opportunity to give Dover's Stefan Payne a warm Plainmoor welcome next season - he has signed for Barnsley, so could yet end up playing in the Championship.

Personally I think Dover might slip away next season. Their chairman had already said that with the attendances they got, they were losing money hand over fist. And after a couple of good seasons, their better players will be in demand from clubs able to offer more.

Will also be interesting to see how Braintree get on, having lost another manager after a fantastic season. Will it be third time lucky with another appointment, or will they struggle this time around. I personally hope they stay in the division as long as we do - it's my local game!

[Plainmoor78]

I suspect that 'oh fer Christ sake' is an old member of this forum posting under a new name and not a representative of GI as has been suspected by some. Anyway he is correct in that GI need TUFC to be at least reasonably successful in order to make the stadium pay. There is simply no other alternative or suitable tenant in the area; the local rugby club is a basket case and Buckland Athletic need to go up a few divisions before they can attract reasonable crowds, although it has to be said that both aforementioned clubs have better car parking facilities than we have.

[Gulliball]

I suspect though that the definition of 'reasonable success' may differ. So far pretty much the only thing we have been told is that the new owners do not mind which division we play in, which is something I imagine our fan base does care about. Staying solvent in order to pay the rent every month is not what most fans would want to be primary objective of the club.

I think this is quite an important factor too. We were very close this season to playing regional football for the first time since 1927. If this happens again will the owners sanction some new blood, as Mike Bateson often did when we needed it, or pay off some players to bring in new signings, as we did this last January? Basically, will the on field results be of primary importance to them?

[Oh Fer Christ Sake]

So, this GI own the club and the ground. For some bizarre reason they charge the club £100,000/month in rent. When the club doesn't pay, the stadium owners (who, remember, are the same people as own the club and therefore owe the rent) sue the club owners for the outstanding. The Court finds in favour of the stadium owner and orders the club owner (same person) to pay the outstanding rent and the costs of the other side.

Who wins? The lawyers who represented one man suing himself for millions in rent he failed to pay from himself to himself.

Is Mr Bean buying the club?

[Gulliball]

In the above scenario, owning both sides, all they have to do is set an affordable rent figure and stick to it and the above would be avoided, with the rent paid every month.

That places us in the position of being entirely reliant on the new owners to set the figures. For the club, the lower the rent the more we have to spend on players. For the stadium owners, the lower the rent figure, the worse it is for them. Currently the land is owned by the council with a long term lease that they budget for - there are no investors to keep happy and we're safe with the security that the current arrangement has.

We've had our lowest point in our entire history this last season, but fans have stayed united because we knew the people owning the club had its best interest at heart. We're about to move away from that for the first time since we were founded 117 years ago, so of course fans are apprehensive, especially given the history of property developers in football and the experience with Chris Roberts 10 years ago. The only way that will change is with the actions of the owners when they take charge.

[Oh Fer Christ Sake]

But the rent is irrelevant, because it's one man paying himself. If I am a one-man-band and my business makes £50k/year, it doesn't matter whether I pay myself £10/year and keep £49990 in the business account or whether I pay myself £49000 and keep a grand for the business, I'm still only worth £50k.

The only reason for GI to charge themselves a rent which would be detrimental to the club is malice. They done earn out of it and, if anything, they'll harm the rest of their businesses (the cinema, bowling alley etc) by reducing the number of regular visitors coming along every Saturday (most of whom will come with kids in tow begging to go bowling/to the movies after the match).

Now imagine we're in the upper reaches of L1 and we get 5000 every week. The increase in revenue for the ancillaries (boxes, sponsorship etc) as well as the greater uptake of the non-football services. It's a licence to print money. **** it, if GI won't do if, I just might.

[Gulliball]

The club's main income is gate receipts. We also get sponsorship deals, TV revenues and other sources of income (currently none from owners but in the past Thea put in a lot. From all this revenue we have to meet all our costs, of which the main expense is wages to the playing squad and rent to the council is relatively small.

Say the rent doubles, and the owners pay for this by taking £100k off the wage bill, that's not them paying themselves. There is a huge opportunity to manipulate finances if you own both sides of a transaction. Again, nothing to worry about if you trust the owners or they invest more than they take out, but once they have control they have the freedom to do as they like, so motives are important. If the rent has to be paid and investors have to profit, then it's the footballing side that will miss out if things go wrong and revenues fall.