For most of last season the Board of Directors have been telling us that if we could get through this season we would have a stable financial position and the opportunity for Gudjon to build a squad to challenge for promotion in 2006-07. So after recovering from the the nerve jangling finale of narrowly avoiding relegation to the Conference I renewed my season ticket and started to look forward to a more promising season ahead. AFTER THE LAST WEEK I NOW FEEL THOROUGHLY LET DOWN! First we scrap the Centre of Excellence leaving many kids in tears and excellent sevents to the club like John Gaunt out of a job. A great advertisement for a community club! Even if this was a financial necessity the way it has been communicated by the Club is appalling. Then we part company with our manager and his backroom staff leaving plans for next season in complete turmoil. Even if we appoint a replacement within the 3-4 week timetable set by the club we are going to be struggling to attract players to the club to add to our existing squad of 6 and face a situation similar to last year when Gudjon was forced to sign whoever he could find. We all know were that is likely to lead - another long hard season struggling against relegation. To be honest things look to be a complete shambles again and very little communication is coming out of Meadow Lane to convince me otherwise. Jeff Moore may have brought with him an ability to make quick business decisions during his couple of weeks at the Club but to date there is little evidence of any improvement in communication with the our long suffering supporters. Has anyone on the Trust Board got anything to say about what is going on and was there any consultation over these important matters or is our stake in the Club meaningless?

Paul.

This is a very difficult period I agree. To a certain extent, events have conspired to give the impression that there are major problems at the Club.
Without wanting to sound complacent and also understanding how some fans are feeling, I don't think this is entirely the case.

At the start of the year, the Trust Board and quite a few members have been calling for strengthened leadership of the Club Board. That's now in place and they are making some tough decisions.

The Centre of Excellence is one such decision. Previously, this was brought to the attention of the Trust Board by our then Supporter Director. The view of the Trust Board at that time was that the Club must make every effort to confirm that the funding was definite with the relevant authorities and explore whatever options they could to keep the Centre open. But, if come deadline time, the Club are telling us that this funding is not in place we saw little alternative but to agree with the decision. We knew that this would be a difficult and emotive issue. We are very sad that it has occurred but we are also assured that the Club has tried very hard to resolve it.

The position as related to us by the Club and our SD is:

Overall, the costs for the C of E and current youth set up are around £250,000 per year.

A significant amount of the cost comes from a payment from the Football League and from sponsorship.

The payments from the Football League (roughly £130K last year) were due to end this year as the scheme was coming to an end. There was however talk about them putting some finance in place for the coming season.

The information from the Club is that, despite repeated attempts to get the FL to confirm that they will give money for next season and how much, there has been no confirmation.

Also, the information from the Club is that, again despite repeated attempts, the sponsorship deal has not been agreed and confirmed for next season.

The Football in the Community scheme is not affected.

The Youth system will be restructured to have a kind of apprenticeship scheme with a number of 16 -18 year olds working alongside the first team.
An example of this is at Grimsby where it seems to have been quite successful.

We also understand that all the contracts for the coaching staff etc. were up for renewal this month. Signing new contracts would have committed the Club to honouring these without certainty that the finance is in place to cover them

So, the Club were faced with a position where financial commitments would have to be made without firm and binding commitments that the FL payments and sponsorship would be forthcoming to cover a significant part of these costs. After the disaster of last season, the Club has tried to set the highest player budget it can to try to make the Club competitive next season with the aim of getting out of this division as soon as possible.
Ultimately, the Club had to make the decision to either hope that the finance would eventually come along to cover the C of E costs (but the danger of going down that route would be that any shortfall would probably have to come out of the budget for first team players) or take the decision they have which of course has proved to be very unpopular indeed with many fans.

The Trust also raised the issue about the C of E providing players who have come up through the ranks and provided consistent first team players and transfer income. The Club responded by citing Kelvin Wilson as the only recent example of this. By their estimates, the C of E has not really covered its costs over the 8 -9 years. Another point was made that probably the best prospect this year has been picked off and gone to another Club.
The Club received a small fee for this but nowhere near the costs of running the scheme. The recent pattern has been that the better players are snapped up by bigger Clubs before they get anywhere near the Notts first team. It's all very sad but parents are in the driving seat and usually want the very best for their kids.

That said, the Trust will look at seeing if there are any ways of having some kind of C of E in the future even if it is in a different form and will ensure this remains on the Club's agenda. It is possible we can include this in the priorities of the need Trust Director when he is elected.

Of course, coming hot on the heels of the C of E decision, the Club announced that Gudjon and the Club has parted company. The Trust knows that the new Chairman and Board are keen to put in place strong governance of the Club. Indeed, the Trust has pressed for this for months and played an active role in achieving it. The announcement on Thursday night came as a surprise to the Trust Board. It was also leaked to the media very shortly after the Trust Board were informed which allowed rumours to run amongst fans. Gudjon was not sacked. He seems to have decided that his future does not lie at the Club.

One of the difficulties of the past couple of days has been that too little information and communication has been forthcoming from the Club. This has meant that some people have looked to the Trust to provide the answers. We should not be in this position. While the Trust has a significant shareholding and a seat on the Board, as shareholders we have a Board of Directors to manage the operational side of the Club. The Trust has made the point strongly to the Club that communications need to improve and we will continue to do this.

You've sold your soul and by me being a member of the Trust you've sold mine too...thanks.

Is Notts County FC just a name, a brand? Does it not mean anything more? Do we not have a responsibility to our community that we reside?
Is money our only factor in deciding these decisions?

I feel like we've just alienated a whole generation of fans that could of been either 1st or 2nd supporters of Notts and thier the same age as the ones we are tring to target with the new season ticket deals

Thanks Nigel for the update.

Given the amount of speculation and misinformation circulating on the numerous messageboards it is refreshing to learn the reasons behind the decision to close the Centre of Excellence. Whilst it is saddening to disband the CoE the arguments (in the short-term at least) are understandable and demonstrate a commitment to providing the new manager with a playing budget that will hopefully see us challenging for promotion.

Giarc, with regards to your posts on this thread, I am not sure what you wanted the Trust to do. Had the Trust's representative on the Board voted against the closure this would have made no difference to the final outcome. Furthermore, I don't agree with the view that the playing budget should be substantially reduced to help fund a 'community' resource which has an uncertain financial future, not just for this coming season but for years to come. Nearly half of the Clubs in the Football League don't have a Centre of Excellence but (presumably) must still have scounting and coaching mechanisms in place to develop young talent. In addition, given the relatively few examples in recent years of young players progressing into the first team, one has to wonder whether running such an initiative was indeed cost effective/financially viable in the long-term.

As for the response about losing generations of supporters because of the loss of the CoE, floating supporters will be attracted back to the Lane to see a winning side that plays attractive, attacking football NOT if the Club has a strong CoE or not. I may be wrong but I think most supporters are concerned about what happens on the pitch on a Saturday afternoon.

Dave

Well we a have 30% share so howcome we have been so marginalised by these directors with no financial backing?
Are you saying our director was the only vote against the CoE closure?
Including Howard Wilkinson one of the architects of the CoE system nationwide?
Could we not of lobbyed the other members of the board?
Could we not looked into fund raising options?

WE could have publisized CoE the plight of the CoE much as we did for the club itself and organised fundraising matches, raffles etc...

Giarc,

I didn't state that the Trust representative voted against the closure - Nigel's statement makes it clear that the Trust supported the decision and the reasons why.

Following Jeff Moore's statement that he wanted a Club Board united with 'one voice' then I am assuming it wouldn't have made any difference had the Trust supported the continuation of the CoE. If hypothetically they had, it still doesn't answer the question as to how the Centre would be sustainable given the shortfall in central funding. Would you have rather the playing budget be reduced to enable to CoE to continue for another season?

As for looking to fundraising options, I am sure somewhere on the Trust Board will be able to respond.

One crucial issue is how quickly would the funds needed to have been in place? When I was on the Trust Board (I stood down at the last AGM) it was difficult to raise money following the initial impetus of facing extinction when the traget of £250,000 was reached. Even since the announcement of the 'double your money' initiative I don't think considerable sums of money have been raised (correct me if I am wrong).

I think one clear issue that the whole episode raises is that the new Directors haven't brought in substantial investment and that the financial situation at the Club is not as rosy as perhaps we had thought they would be. Perhaps someone from the Trust Board could give some clarity on this and to what extent the finances have been effected by Gudjon's departure?

Dave

Thankyou for the clarification that the Trust voted against maintaining our Center of Excelence I don't think it it was clear the post by Nigel.
I think that the SD misrepresented the majority of trust members in acting this way as a puppet of the club board. It was surely his/her duty to bring matters of importance like this to the membership for a democratic vote.
What worries me is in the future will we continue to have so little say in the running of the club?

Craig,

I don't think a vote of all Trust members was practical or the right thing to do. The choice boiled down to making people redundant or taking money from the first team budget. To have given members the information we would have required the club would have had to break the confidential relationship with its employees and publicise its playing budget for next season. After all this we would still only have a 30.2% share of the vote in the final decision, at best.

I look forward to the day when the club is run on a one member one vote system, but not over issues like this.

I don't think that you can claim that the SD misrepresented the majority of trust members as relatively few of them have access to all the necessary information to make a decision. To have voted on this, we'd need to have been balloted in early April when, presumably, there was still a chance that funding could be found. That would have made a difficult time for those involved with the CoE even worse, and required confidential personnel information to be shared with Trust membership - effectively making it public.

I'd suggest you think back before the Trust became involved in running the club when commenting about a lack of influence. In those days one man had a vote about anything of significance & need not consider any other viewpoint before taking decisions. Now we have a voice and influence over all strategic decisions & can hold the Chief Executive responsible for operational decisions. I think that is a great improvement.

& Giarc / Craig, where do you stand on priorities? Is it about making as much money available to fund the first team or are we running community activities? I'm with the first team option, with the proviso that the funding must be sustainable - that is we're not dependent on occasional handouts from wealthy individuals.

With all the criticism of the club / board / trust this season, I don't recall anyone saying "but the CoE is excellent". The harsh fact is that it didn't matter to the vast majority of active supporters.

& I'm afraid that the CoE as provider of future players argument doesn't stand-up. How many CoE graduates have had the impact on the first team of, say, Dan Martin (the type of player our new strategy is targetting)? Kelvin Wilson, .....? The best players go elsewhere at 16 because their parents judge that to be their best option.

I Do not subscribe to the opinion that taking money from the first team budget was the sole option versus the total destruction of our Center of Excelence.

Confidentiality agreements with who? The CoE is run by the Club, It was the Club decision that I've got say seems misguided? Are we not share holders in the club with say in how the club is run!

TRUST MEMBERS WEREN'T GIVEN ANY CHANCE TO VOICE THIER OPINIONS! No chance to offer alternatives, No chance to save the CoE! It's appaulling and a clear indication the Trust board want key decision separated from the average fan and general membership!
Will we wake one day and find that Meadow Lane has been sold based on "finacial restucturing" policy? Will we find the Iremonger Road Car Park being sold off and not being developed by our selfs to provide new revenue streams?

quote:

Originally posted by GiarcYekrub:
I Do not subscribe to the opinion that taking money from the first team budget was the sole option versus the total destruction of our Center of Excellence.

So where do you propose the shortfall in finance going to come from then? Even if the maximum grant of £138,000 was forthcoming that still leaves a big hole in the finances, which the Club needs to plug from somewhere.

quote:

TRUST MEMBERS WEREN'T GIVEN ANY CHANCE TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS! No chance to offer alternatives, No chance to save the CoE! It's appaulling and a clear indication the Trust board want key decision separated from the average fan and general membership!

There is nothing stopping a Trust member from contacting members of the Trust Board - all the contact details are on the Trust website and in my experience they are normally pretty efficient in providing a response.

I don't think I am breaching any confidentiality agreements if I say that since the days of administration the CoE has come under increasing scrutiny by the Blenheim 1862 consortiuum. When balancing the running costs of the CoE (several full-time and part-time staff, facilities etc) with the outcomes (at best a trickle of talent to the first-team squad) it is not difficult to understand why it was felt prudent to divert funds elsewhere.

The decision to close the CoE therefore is not one that has just been arrived at by the new Board. I would hope that the Board (both Club and Trust) will have considered other options.

Finally, with regards your accusation that the Trust Board want to keep key decisions seperated from the membership, the Board are 'elected' to represent us - the members - and the Supporter Director is there to ensure that the Trust has a voice at Boardroom level. Are you advocating a vote on decisions such as the closure of the CoE? Aside from the practical difficulties (see earlier postings) what would this have achieved? Would it not have been irresponsible for the Trust to vote in favour of something when the requisite funds are not there? I am all for members being empowered and involved in decision-making but feel such an exercise would have been futile unless the Trust could provide additional finance to sustain the CoE.

Dave

I'm saying the money could have possibly been raised from the local communtity in donations, sponsorship and other fund raising activities.

The club don't owe any money we have been told so we COULD feasibly borrow money to offset any uncertainty while more permenant funding is set up the borrowed money could be payed back via player sales eg. Kelvin Wilson.

I stand by my point that there was an appaulling lack of consultation with the general trust membership.

We seem to be following blindly the current club board.

This decision shows a lack of investment in the future and makes me wonder if the club expect to be in existance in it current form in the long term a complete lack of ambition

And what if we can't sell any players? We borrow more money?

Sorry, it's a stupid idea and nearly killed this football club.

This shows a complete lack of faith in a system that has proven it's worth in the past. The amount of money paid for new talent such as Kelvin Wilson shows that we do even need one player per season to come through but one every couple which from it's past record show.

To be so phobic at the thought of such speculative investment will only doom the club to die a slow withering undignified death, it's not me that is stupid IT'S YOU!!!

The club is supposed to be run like a business but it feel more like a charity, with no guts to spend money on revenue streams that will stregnth the club.