culmstockgull wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 13:57
I apologise if my comments are deemed inacurate, the figures suggested by Nick are three years old based on company filings for 2022 so actually for the season 2021, so must be considered totally irrelevant today, as an aside, look at one recent statement, the TUST say that they deem the only way forward in the short term is part time football obviously based on three year old figures, unless the tust has access to current information that you havent shared, who exactly took this strategic decision for part time working and what alternatives were explored. and why were your views but not necessarily the views of the membership at large not shared before making this decision..
Culmstockgull, the latest figures are to June-22 so around 18 months out of date and what really do you think will have changed? Maintaining a full time squad in National League south is not going to substantially cheaper than in the National League and any savings will just offset reductions in revenues. Surely everyone knows that the club has survived via injections of around £1million per year for the last 5 years.
Given TUST know they don’t have access to £1million per year, what other alternative do you think they were supposed to explore?
I find it staggering that anybody is critical or suspicious of the TUST consortium and proposed dual fan owned approach.
People keep referring to the 'ideal' of a mega rich owner to pump money into the club. My view is that in the modern era that's the last thing a ckub like Torquay need. Even if we assume that such a person would do so for no commercial or ulterior personal gain purpose, at some stage the tap would run dry and we'd be back to square one.
It is essential now to.take the opportunity to completely refresh the ownership of the club, involving as much of the fam base as possible and accepting a few steps back to create a sustainable model for the future. If that means part time football at regional level for a while then so be it.
I disagree that lower attendances would result. The fan base is there as long as the team are doing well. Macclesfield are just one recent example of this (albeit not as a result of fan ownership in their case).
If you are of a negative mindset please try and contain yourself and give those involved affair chance. If you choose to get on board and offer what skills/ funds you can then even better!
TommyGunn wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 14:22
I would have thought it possible to have a mixture of full and part time players.
Good luck taking training when half your players are only available on a Tuesday and Thursday night!! Not sure a club has ever existed where there was such a mixture.
knightmaregull wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 19:34
I find it staggering that anybody is critical or suspicious of the TUST consortium and proposed dual fan owned approach.
People keep referring to the 'ideal' of a mega rich owner to pump money into the club. My view is that in the modern era that's the last thing a ckub like Torquay need. Even if we assume that such a person would do so for no commercial or ulterior personal gain purpose, at some stage the tap would run dry and we'd be back to square one.
It is essential now to.take the opportunity to completely refresh the ownership of the club, involving as much of the fam base as possible and accepting a few steps back to create a sustainable model for the future. If that means part time football at regional level for a while then so be it.
I disagree that lower attendances would result. The fan base is there as long as the team are doing well. Macclesfield are just one recent example of this (albeit not as a result of fan ownership in their case).
If you are of a negative mindset please try and contain yourself and give those involved affair chance. If you choose to get on board and offer what skills/ funds you can then even better!
wbw wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 20:53
Good luck taking training when half your players are only available on a Tuesday and Thursday night!! Not sure a club has ever existed where there was such a mixture.
It would, of course, not be ideal. However, as per my earlier post, we need to shift our mindsets and realise that even in the best case now, some significant sacrifices are going to be required, as a means to an ultimate end. We will have to take steps back to lay the foundations to step forward again.
If we manage to get the takeover completed then it will be a plan for 'success' over the next decade, not the next season and we all need to get comfortable with that and then enjoy the journey!
If that's a mix of full and part time then so be it. It would be a strategic stepping stone.
knightmaregull wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 22:06
It would, of course, not be ideal. However, as per my earlier post, we need to shift our mindsets and realise that even in the best case now, some significant sacrifices are going to be required, as a means to an ultimate end. We will have to take steps back to lay the foundations to step forward again.
If we manage to get the takeover completed then it will be a plan for 'success' over the next decade, not the next season and we all need to get comfortable with that and then enjoy the journey!
If that's a mix of full and part time then so be it. It would be a strategic stepping stone.
If you have full time players then you need also to pay for some kind of full time coaching staff, physio as well as paying for the training ground - and with only 6-10 players, training is hardly like to be productive. So which half respecting professional footballer is going to want to join that set up? You’d end up with a group of washed up has beend trying to eke out a last season or two on a full time salary. Just seems like throwing good money after bad.
Dave, I put this on BTPIR. I wonder what the views are on this forum.
This 1 million a year loss. How about this. Has Clarke Osborne has walked away from TUAFC without losing a penny. It has been suggested to me (not corroborated) Osborne was bankrolled by one of the 6 big national developers to take over Torquay United with the aim of development or leverage with the council. This to secure a deal that would be financially beneficial to Osborne and the national developer. The council apparently never trusted the Osborne regime and recently made it clear there was no place within the Torbay Council area anyway. This info was imparted to the national developer who then pulled up stumps and consequently administration followed. When one looks at the profits of the big developers, such a speculative venture which lost 6 million is pocket money/small change.
This would perhaps explain the disdain shown towards fans, putting them off rather than encouraging them. The retention of a failing manager. The motive being to show there was no need for a club, thereby adding credence to relocation to some glorified park area with nowhere near the facilities at Plainmoor. The trouble was the fans kept on turning up and this confirmed to decision makers like the council there was still a love and need for the club. Thank goodness the boycotters were ignored. I could never make sense of Osbornes motives but this hypothesis seems to fit.
Also, could this explain why so much was lost during Osbornes rule. He didn't have to count the pennies. How much was Johnson on, I have heard £100,00 (again not corroborated), how much were the directors on? If the above is correct I bet money was leaking out of the club.
There may have been a 5 year plan but it changed after Ashton Gate. I just don't know. I do know it was a very strange relationship between the owners and the fans. I don't think I have known a business almost deliberately putting off the customers to buy into their product. None of the above is confirmed but it would not surprise me. Perhaps others can put flesh on the bones.
Reply
Quick Reply
The Great Muta! wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 11:22
Great post Samuel, on point and fact laden .No doubt about it, how on earth got his mitts on the club in the first place is a mystery to me.
Fact laden - you can't say this
And it's not a mystery how CO got control of the club at all, well known he provided a loan when the David Roberts led group needed money, we defaulted on it and he took control
But of course we were in that position because of a stupid ST deal which caused cash flow issues, wonder who's idea that was....
The Great Muta! wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 11:22
Great post Samuel, on point and fact laden .No doubt about it, how on earth got his mitts on the club in the first place is a mystery to me.
Great post and fact laden, are you kidding, this is drivel , where are the facts, I heard somewhere, someone told me, it was very clear how he got his hands on the club and probably the clear thing in our recent history, Phillips and co didnt have two farthings between them, and if Osborne hadn't put in his cash we would have gone out of business within the month, you can rightly argue osborne smelt blood in the water got ithe club on the cheap, you can argue phillips and co should never have been allowed near the cookie jar, but no matter what people tell you to the contrary , back then and even today there is no queue of people willing to invest big money in the club.
UnitedinDevon wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 11:46
Fact laden - you can't say this
And it's not a mystery how CO got control of the club at all, well known he provided a loan when the David Roberts led group needed money, we defaulted on it and he took control
But of course we were in that position because of a stupid ST deal which caused cash flow issues, wonder who's idea that was....
I can’t believe anyone has the nerve to even post this drivel.
A national property developer helped a businessman to buy Torquay to put pressure on the council. How could Torquay put pressure on the council, the threat of administration? What land did the expressly wish to get their hands on to make profit over the £6 million they spent plus the building costs?
The only remotely feasible part is Johnson’s salary, signing a new contract on the eve of the play off final, he would have expected the salary of a League 2 manager. We know he didn’t have a pay cut with relegation to NLS, so no matter his actual salary, he is a money grabbing weasel who’ll hopefully never manage again.
I know how CO got hold of TUFC, what I'm saying is, with his track record, how in the blue hell did it all get rubber stamped and signed off?, as for GJ wages, that's taking the p*ss beyond taking the p*ss to be blunt,
The Great Muta! wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 11:22
Great post Samuel, on point and fact laden .No doubt about it, how on earth got his mitts on the club in the first place is a mystery to me.
What absolute drivel!! Not a single fact in the whole post. And if you don't know how CO obtained ownership of the club, then I'm not sure you should be contributing to this discussion
wbw wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 17:46
What absolute drivel!! Not a single fact in the whole post. And if you don't know how CO obtained ownership of the club, then I'm not sure you should be contributing to this discussion
I said I know, what I cannot figure out is why it's been allowed to happen, as for posting on this forum, as a fan who's followed Gulls for over 40years home and away, I feel I'm in a position to talk on these matters...after all the troubles we've had over the years on and off the park, how CO was ALLOWED to get control, that's the issue that pissed me off.
.No doubt about it, how on earth got his mitts on the club in the first place is a mystery to me.
