Negativity and our finances

[Sexy_Gulls]

So thats £3-400k for Bobby and £175k for Eunan (probably). The money for Eunan is a bit disappointing but I don't get the negativity, that is a very healthy profit for 2 players we got for nothing.
No it's not good to sell your best players all the time but lets be realistic, we can use this money to fund 4-5 players in positions that we desperately need (Striker, winger, replacements etc), as well as making sure we are firmly in the black.
Unless anyone's been living under a rock they will have noticed we have just built a new stand and are about to invest in a new training ground. Martin Ling came in with a brief of consolidation and has done a magnificent job in building a solid squad whilst not spending a penny in transfer fees.
Considering what he achieved last summer I have full confidence that Ling is able to find replacements for Eunan and Bobby with money to spare.

If we start next season with the same thin squad with mediocre replacements for the departed then we have reason to moan. But as it I see no reason to start slating the board, especially seeing the positive long term steps that they are taking.

[Dave]

Must admit got a bit annoyed yesterday for what i saw as totaly over the top negativity being displyed on this board over the last few days, and maybe went a tad over the top in my critism , of my fellow Gulls fans, never had a problem with fans being negative, however be negative because you have a solid good reason for it , not just either fo the sake of it, or it suits the mood of the forum.

No problem with fans discussing their concerns either, and many , rightly in my opinion have concerns over the possibility of Eunan going to Crawley for £175k and I share those concerns, however posting things along the lines of ..the club have not a clue what their doing , letting all our players go for peanuts.(that obviously is not a word for word post) Is not discussing concerns, it's chucking unfair, unfounded accusations, remember how we cheered when, when we all found out our so called incompetent board got £75 k for Buckle of Rovers..

I do not know who agreed to what over this release clause, why or when, the club have only confirmed their is such a clause, they have not confirmed the figure, it is only the press that have put £175k out as the figure, of course this maybe correct, it might not be, have the club made a mistake here, or was their another very good reason for it, don't know the answer to that.

It's also important to remember , untill our club confirm otherwise , Eunan and Bobby remain contracted TUFC players, the obviuos problem is our attendance figures they are so low, our board can not continue to dig deep, and as stated in the o/p, the board clealry still have plans to improve the club i.e new training ground and have to pay for the stand, and Martin Ling can not secure better replacments for McPhee/Atineo etc, with out some money behind him, if the fans wont come out and pay to watch the team, the money has to come from the only other place it can, as we all know attendances of 2500 aren't good enough.

My only hope is that if Eunan and Bobby do go, a reasonable amount of that money is re-invested in the team, it could give a bigger stronger all round squad, alltough finding a keeper as good as Bobby will be a tough one.

[Glostergull]

The way I see it. Yes we have to invest some of that money in new players but we have to be realistic in what we can get for the money.
If as is reported. One or two of the squad are on Just under 2k a week. Thats £100 grand per year. add to that insurance and Ni I suggest that you now looking at around £120 to £125k per yer per player. Now for all those who want to get on their high horses saying our players are on average wages compared to us. Just look at past posts on this forum to prove my point so far correct. I am not sure what Eunan was likely to be on but Bobby would more than likely be on just under that and Ellis on a little less possibly.
If we are to replace them by offering players more than those who are going what is it going to cost the club.
Fair enough if we add in the fact that those departing will release the salary for new players to take up, but then we need to factor in an increase of I reckon 15% if we want to entice players down here.
If you suggesting we get in 3 newer players with a minimum 2 year contract then we would have to put away a lot more. take the present cost of those players leaving which based on my calculation is £305 k per yer. add 15% which may entice a few to look at us a little more seriously then your now looking at £350k oer year. double it to make up the 2 years contract you would have to offer for their security and your now looking at £700k.
As we have been losing money on pathetic gates. I suggest that the £305 k was costing us and may have to be revised down to a level we could afford. so take £275k away per year x 2 year contract You will allow £550k from departing players. Are you all still able to follow me. Now Trojan Your not taking this seriously!
My main point is to replace the 3 being talking about we would need to invest an additional £150k over 2 years minimum. and thats assuming a 15% increase is enough. If we have lost money over the last year on poor gates then the budget for players set last year will be subsidising. Our turnover is reported to only be in the region of £2 million. so let's say it's around £100k to much, we then need to subsidise our budget by £200k over 2 years to stand still. Add in the £150 to add 3 players nearly as good was what we lose. we now have a figure of £350k
If we only lose Eunan then we will gain £175 or whatever the real figure is. Plus a sell on claus hopefully. Replacing him with a decent player will cost us.
If we lose 2 then we may possibly break even but it's doubtfull and that's if we get decent money. We would need quite a hatfull to replace 3 players and make up for the deficit on the budget and attract newer better players. If we don't get it we are possibly on a gentle but nethertheless downhill slope to possible trouble in the future if we maintain our present ambitions. I do so hope not but the way we are being screwed slowly but surely. I can't see how it can be any other way. Realistic rather than pessimistic. I will still support and come down as much as I can but I can't see how we can sustain the present success unless St Martin pulls wabbits out of his pie on a very regular basis for nowt. He is bound to make the odd mistake and it may cost us in the long run. And then what will the fans be calling for. That in many cases causes unrest in the club as they walk away and gates drop even lower.
Sorry if it's a bit difficult to follow. I can provide a translation for those who don't grasp the business side of it.
At least I hope I can

[AustrianAndyGull]

I like to keep things simple and for me the negativity is about Torquay United FC never being paid enough for the players that leave us. It always seems that whenever another small club like ourselves gets a half decent player to sell they always seem to do ok out of it whereas we don't. Sure ANY money we get for players that cost nowt is a bonus and good for the club but that's not the point. The point is they are always worth more than we actually end up getting and it does piss me off. £175,000 for Eunan is a lot of money for Torquay but he is worth a lot, lot more than this and we should be getting closer to a players true valuation more often than not. No need for me to go on about what wages they are on and so on and so forth because to me its irrelavant. All i want is a fair price for our players.

[stratfordgull]

In Eunan O'Kane we signed a player on a free, and had a contract with a release clause agreed of a very reasonable value for a League 2 player. Take most League 2 squads, slap £175k transfer fee on each of them and work out how many that would represent good value for and it will be a short list.

Had we signed him for Crawley type fees, then that ight be a different matter, but zero to £175k to my (tiny) mind looks decent. Don't forget that it would have been a clause that the player himself (or agent) would have needed to be in agreement with in order to actually sign a contract with us, so anyone thinking that he would have a agreed to a £1m sell on clause would likely as not have lost the player at that stage.

[Gullscorer]

So by your reasoning, Crewe should only have been looking for £60,000-160,000 for Nick Powell. I think you miss the point of Andy's post. Every player whose contract is up for renewal could ask for a release clause. It's irrelevant. What's important is that a club receives a player's proper market value when he moves. The figure's being quoted in respect of our players suggest that the club's negotiating skills and business acumen need to be substantially improved. Otherwise it will be thought to be lacking any kind of ambition. And if these are the public perceptions of Torquay United, it cannot be too surprising that their gates are so low..

[usagullmichigan]

Why are we always comparing EOK to Nick Powell when it comes to value.. Powell is way better than EOK and he is younger.

[gullintwoplaces]

So by your reasoning, Crewe should only have been looking for £60,000-160,000 for Nick Powell. I think you miss the point of Andy's post. Every player whose contract is up for renewal could ask for a release clause. It's irrelevant. What's important is that a club receives a player's proper market value when he moves. The figure's being quoted in respect of our players suggest that the club's negotiating skills and business acumen need to be substantially improved. Otherwise it will be thought to be lacking any kind of ambition. And if these are the public perceptions of Torquay United, it cannot be too surprising that their gates are so low..

I really don't understand how you can say that the club is "lacking any kind of ambition". We have been in the League 2 playoffs for two years running. With regard to gates you are putting two and two together and making two thousand nine hundred. The gates last season could and should have been higher, but this is not due to a public perception of the club "lacking any kind of ambition". It is due to the age structure of the local population, the fact that ambitious locals have to move elsewhere to progress their careers (replaced by imported folk who support other teams), the fact that Torbay has very low average income (just check the stats, Torbay has high unemployment, low average income), the lack of a grandstand for a season, too much football on TV (resulting in local kids supporting the successful Premiership team of the day) etc etc.

Yes of course the fans want the club to keep its best players and only to sell them for high transfer fees, yes maybe the club could have negotiated a better deal for EOK (but we don't have all the facts available!), but you can't use the exceptional case of Powell (a likely future star in the Premiership) and Tubbs (a deal negotiated by that honest broker Steve Evans) as a comparison to argue that the club lacks business acumen. Crikey, we all want the best for the Gulls (except Brucie, I don't know what he wants), and I really don't think the current finger pointing helps the club at all. I thank God that we have not gone the way of Darlington, Halifax, Chester etc. and that our team has a bright future.

[northyorkshiregull]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is the Powell is going Man U and Euan is going Crawley.If the fee we are accepting is so low then surely there will be a dozen club banging the clubs door down to get such a prize asset so cheaply.Although there have been a lot of lookers and EOK agent is touting him to a lot of clubs Crawley are the only ones coming up with a offer

[Plymouth Gull]

I've thought about it a while now, and looking at it from the clubs perspective, these are two (3 including Ellis) we've brought in for £0. Now we're looking at around £600k+ for the 3 of them (£175k for Eunan, £300k for Bobby and I'd imagine we'd fetch a six-figure fee for Ellis in a tribunal, if it comes to that). Plus any future fees through sell on clauses and so on, and it's not actually bad business. For a start, anyway. We will always be a selling club, but we can use this to our advantage. I'm sure Nathan Craig is looking at O'Kane and hoping he'll follow a similar pattern, a couple of years to nurture and improve his ability down here before moving on for a fee.

We were never going to keep Eunan, I still believe he will reach the Championship at some stage. However what we have done is given him plenty of gametime, nurtured him, helped improve his game. Whether he does go to Crawley now or not, whoever gets him has bought an good young player, who can still improve. Obviously the fee of £175k isn't as much as we'd hoped, but I'm fairly confident the club didn't want it in (or at least that low). It was probably a case of inserting the clause or EoK not signing a new deal, then leaving now under a tribunal (where we wouldn't have got as much, I highly doubt). As long as we have negotiated a sell on clause of at least 20% then it isn't terribly bad. I was as frustrated as all of you when I saw about the fee, but the more I've thought about it the more I believe it was EoK or his agent who wanted that release fee written into the contract.

As for Bobby, we are in a strong position, but again, if the fee of £300k turns out to be true (and he does move on) I think that's a decent deal. I know goalies go on for longer, but he's 25, and having been released by Aston Villa a few years back, I think he deserves another crack at playing at the top of the game. He'll get a lot more attention if he keeps 20 clean sheets for Peterborough in the Championship. He deserves another crack at it too. Obviously I'd be delighted if he stayed though, as he's been the best keeper I've seen down here.

Ellis is another one. I've seen some talk of Northampton being his potential buyers, but if it goes to a tribunal you'd fancy a six-figure fee. After all, he's been here for five years, played over 100 games for us and improved to one of the best defenders in the division.

If we can build up a reputation as a club where released youngsters can come, play regularly, improve, gain experience and confidence, and then go on to better things, I think we'll see a healthy future.

To me, this could be the start of an 'era' if you like, because in my time following TUFC, I don't recall us having so many players we could sell on for fees. Nathan Craig will hopefully be the next to come through, but hopefully this is the start of it.

[Gullscorer]

I really don't understand how you can say that the club is "lacking any kind of ambition". We have been in the League 2 playoffs for two years running. With regard to gates you are putting two and two together and making two thousand nine hundred. The gates last season could and should have been higher, but this is not due to a public perception of the club "lacking any kind of ambition". It is due to the age structure of the local population, the fact that ambitious locals have to move elsewhere to progress their careers (replaced by imported folk who support other teams), the fact that Torbay has very low average income (just check the stats, Torbay has high unemployment, low average income), the lack of a grandstand for a season, too much football on TV (resulting in local kids supporting the successful Premiership team of the day) etc etc.

Yes of course the fans want the club to keep its best players and only to sell them for high transfer fees, yes maybe the club could have negotiated a better deal for EOK (but we don't have all the facts available!), but you can't use the exceptional case of Powell (a likely future star in the Premiership) and Tubbs (a deal negotiated by that honest broker Steve Evans) as a comparison to argue that the club lacks business acumen. Crikey, we all want the best for the Gulls (except Brucie, I don't know what he wants), and I really don't think the current finger pointing helps the club at all. I thank God that we have not gone the way of Darlington, Halifax, Chester etc. and that our team has a bright future.

I did not say the club is lacking ambition. I am saying that if the club lets its best players go for far less than other clubs could have got for them, then this would indicate something wrong which, if not improved, will cause such a public perception. This is not pointing fingers. It is a legitimate concern. And yes, this would be one element among others affecting the size of gates. The others - local economy, grandstand, etc., are well known, and have already been discussed in previous posts. As to the likes of Powell (didn't Crewe acquire him for £0 ?) and Tubbs, it would be futile to make comparisons in terms of value, and of course we may not yet know the full facts regarding sales of our own players, but it's perfectly understandable to be asking: if other clubs can get what their players are worth when they sell them, can we please be assured that Torquay United are doing the same? One more thought: if the club does have ambitions, should it not be making every effort to keep its best players?

[gullintwoplaces]

it's perfectly understandable to be asking: if other clubs can get what their players are worth when they sell them, can we please be assured that Torquay United are doing the same? One more thought: if the club does have ambitions, should it not be making every effort to keep its best players?

First point is fair, but I suspect the club is trying to do this. Second point, how do you know that the club is not making every such effort? I can't imagine that Lingy WANTS to lose Eunan or Bobby!! The Brucies of this world immediately assume the worst answer on both of these, without knowing the full facts.

[cambgull]

I highly doubt Lingy WANTS Eunan or Bobby to leave but he really isn't doing much to stop it and isn't showing any intention to stop it. Any manager who really wanted a player would reject a bid and then release a statement that the player isn't for sale in the media.

[Aussie]

I don`t suppose it has occured to anyone that maybe people are on holiday and it`s only requests that have come in, no-one has agreed to anything yet! There are players being questioned on here by people who know nothing for something that hasn`t even happened yet! The silly season it is!

[Scott Brehaut]

If a tribunal was needed for one of our players (say Ellis for eg) and they set a fee that the buying club couldn't afford, what happens?

Anybody know?