Re: Off Field Management

by Marc Monitor Thu Aug 21, 2014 11:58 am

Quite simply, the subsidies will carry on for as long as the SC/coach travellers are happy to do it.

While you say the club isn't a "community-owned club", the Supporters Society are the largest share-holder, aren't they?

by Beau Nash Thu Aug 21, 2014 12:19 pm

Bath City Football Club Limited Company Number 176565
Major shareholders: Bath City Supporters Society Ltd 16.76%, A Pierce 12%, J Reynolds 12%, G Todd 12%, P Williams 12%

Going from memory the authorised share capital is £500,000 and is fully subscribed but I haven't seen the accounts since those on 31 May 2010.

by Ashley Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:13 pm

The supporters society need 51% for us to meet the definition of a community owned club.

The accounts can be downloaded from Companies House for the monumental sum of £1.

by comrade powell Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:55 pm

Beau Nash wrote:
Supporters Club / Coach Travellers have subsidised Bath City Football Club Ltd, a shareholder owned company NOT a community owned club, for far too long; if the company's trading cannot generate its own revenues then how long can that subsidy continue?

For as long as the SC wishes to do so. You could contact the committee if you think that is a mistaken policy - but you're more likely to be listened to if you're a member.

And how's the seeking of quotes from local coach companies coming along?

Oh, and as you can't afford to ring Bas's mobile, send me a pm and I'll give you his land line number.

by BenE Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:58 pm

At this years AGM the members of the SC agreed that this is what they wanted to do.

by Beau Nash Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:57 am

Which is why I am not a member of the Supporters Club.

Why should supporters pay half their coach travel costs to cover the privately owned Bath City Football Club Ltd team coach costs? Similarly with funding any other club activity such as costs associated with players?
I accept that the members voted for those policies.

I am not rising to comrade's trolling tongue

and has been wisely said "I would warn against people ringing round for quotes though as small businesses tend to detect unreal pricing requests and if the Time comes when we need to seriously get other quotes they may not between seriously"; there was one occasion last season, Havant away, when an alternative, a mini bus, was used and going from memory cost £12 a head; so there are cheaper alternatives including using a full car. I appreciate First Pink Bus, now First Bas Bus, offers a lot more, so each to their own choice.

If the Supporters Club funds were used to help supporters, some of whom can't afford to attend games, or buy shares then that I could support; this is where confusion starts as the Supporters Society is, as far as I understand, the vehicle for acquiring shares and the Foundation, another sub group, part of the Supporters Society?, does great work in the community but this is in part duplicated by the football club? Then there is another scheme where individuals can buy shares in the Supporters Society? scratch

For anyone who doesn't know I very much favour the community owned club model. However, I am extremely grateful to the board of directors for keeping the club solvent through their investments.

Over the years I have made various financial offers to and supported one off Football Club events; I am not someone who simply comments from the sidelines and those who have been involved for many years know I have travelled independently to many away games.

The Football Club accounts do not make good reading and the losses continue to increase the wolf is getting ever closer to the door... pale

by comrade powell Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:41 am

Beau Nash wrote:Which is why I am not a member of the Supporters Club. What BenE posted in the previous post? I very much doubt you knew beforehand what members had agreed to at the recent AGM, but I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong.

Why should supporters pay half their coach travel costs to cover the privately owned Bath City Football Club Ltd team coach costs? Similarly with funding any other club activity such as costs associated with players?
I accept that the members voted for those policies. You really don't understand the concept of a supporters club, do you?

I am not rising to comrade's trolling and has been wisely said "I would warn against people ringing round for quotes though as small businesses tend to detect unreal pricing requests and if the Time comes when we need to seriously get other quotes they may not between seriously"; there was one occasion last season, Havant away, when an alternative, a mini bus, was used and going from memory cost £12 a head; so there are cheaper alternatives including using a full car. I appreciate First Pink Bus, now First Bas Bus, offers a lot more, so each to their own choice. So having raised the question "are Berkeley Coach and Travel Ltd too expensive?", did you bother to read my reply? Presumably you ignored the challenge to find us a better deal, which doesn't surprise me in the least. I would suggest it's you doing the trolling and I'd advise anyone in future to ignore your frequent moans about how the club is run and the work done by volunteers.

If the Supporters Club funds were used to help supporters, some of whom can't afford to attend games, or buy shares then that I could support; this is where confusion starts as the Supporters Society is, as far as I understand, the vehicle for acquiring shares and the Foundation, another sub group, part of the Supporters Society?, does great work in the community but this is in part duplicated by the football club? Then there is another scheme where individuals can buy shares in the Supporters Society? Perhaps if you reworded that jumble of moans, someone could respond to it. But to clarify one thing, the vast majority of the club's community activities are carried out by the Foundation, they are not duplicated by the club.

For anyone who doesn't know I very much favour the community owned club model. Excellent, so we can expect you to become a Society member shortly? You've explained why you won't honour the SC with your membership, but you clearly have sympathies with what the Society are pushing for. However, I am extremely grateful to the board of directors for keeping the club solvent through their investments.

Over the years I have made various financial offers to and supported one off Football Club events; I am not someone who simply comments from the sidelines and those who have been involved for many years know I have travelled independently to many away games. But these days prefer to sit at home, even during home matches, and comment on Kerslake's matchchat! Sorry, but to me that sounds like commenting from the sidelines....

The Football Club accounts do not make good reading and the losses continue to increase the wolf is getting ever closer to the door...

by Dodgycarpet Fri Aug 22, 2014 3:57 pm

Without getting embroiled in the debate between beau and comrade, the comment about the accounts resonates with me and was an area I sympathised and tried to help manda with. The terrible issue for the club is that without some huge turnaround in income unrelated to attendance etc, promotion to conf premier guarantees a massive loss. If I was a director I would have slepess nights over the P and L and I don't envy the board; so thanks to all of them from me too .

by comrade powell Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:21 pm

a message for Beau Nash from Dan Tanner....

Rob I am very disappointed to read your comments about the Supporters Club. The Supporters Club is set up to help the club where ever it can. Whether this be financially such as paying for the players away travel or their wages. Also the money raised by the Supporters Club has helped the Club pay bills, all of which follows our Constitution. Or by other means for example there is a hard working bunch of supporters who every Friday work on ground maintenance; of which almost all are Supporters Club members. Also a number of our members help out on a match day. Without their voluntary work the club would struggle to hold a game. The role that Supporters Club members play for our club is outstanding. And it is a privilege for me to say that I am their chairman.

The Supporters Club is extremely proud of what is does. We recently carried out some research on what other Supporters Clubs do at our level and I would confidently say we are the best. From the money we raise, to the support we offer, to the strong relations we have with the Board of Bath City FC, with who we can raise issues that have arisen. All these characteristics highlight a supporters club that is doing well.

Yes we probably could offer our members more and we have tried to look at ways to achieve this; at the moment we have not been that successful. However, we always open for new ideas from our members.

I would love for our away travel to be cheaper. The relationship we have with Berkeleys is brilliant. The quotes they give us along with everything that goes with hiring a coach from them can not be beaten. As long as I have an association with the Supporters Club, Berkeleys Coaches will remain our coach company. As stated by Martin, the coach prices have gone up - this is not due to Berekleys but due to the number of people travelling on the coach. If the coach was full each week, we could deliver coach travel for around £10 to £20. However this is not the case. Yet the Supporters Club does think it is important for supporters to go to games and we give them the best possible deal we can to enable them to do this.

I agree it would be good for there to be an organisation that could help supporters attend more games or buy shares. If the Supporters Club was 100x bigger this might be a possibility. But as a small organisation we can’t achieve this. If you could find a model or research about this I would be more than happy to read it.

I hope you appreciate the time I have given in responding to you even though you are not a member. If you would like to make any response please do by emailing bathcitysupportersclub@hotmail.co.uk

Regards

Daniel Tanner

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:10 am

Dan - Where have I given adverse criticism about the voluntary effort of Supporters Club members? To the contrary..."I hope everyone understands that this topic is NOT adverse criticism of individuals, especially volunteers, but an attempt to get US to question how we do things and look for alternatives to improve"...many people, me included, have given their time voluntarily to help the Club.

There was a time when the supporters coach was full, or almost full, so with it only being half full now would it not be prudent to examine the cost structure, if that involves withdrawing the subsidy to the Football Club for the team coach...

The main problem is the every dwindling number of people attending games home or away and I believe the primary reason for this is the financial cost.

I have said before how I feel admission costs are at least twice what they should be and there have been many suggestions for revised prices. This is not to say that Bath City is more expensive than any other club at our level but is, I feel, the main reason attendances are falling. The team performances currently are adding to that but even when we were performing well on the field attendances were well below what is desired.

The economics are simple, if customers aren't prepared to pay the price being asked the price has to be reduced.

I remember the days when we used to have attendances of 2500 but the changing habits of people show that the leisure pound is not interested in what we have on offer and it goes elsewhere.

I remember when, in the Conference Premier, using just Charlies, we had rows of tables, all full, and most having lunch. Now it is not unusual for supporters to be told no food and no beer although the demand is sadly a lot lower, so the loss of revenue there is not as great as it would have been.

There will come a time when the Football Club's asset, the ground, will be a forced sale to clear the debts. The directors have, in the past, increased the authorised share capital and turned their loans into shares but even they cannot have bottomless pockets; I am aware that at least one needs to realise his investment to settle his personal financial situation.

The abbreviated audited accounts available from Companies House are useful but are not a management tool; the board will (hopefully) be using a differently presented set of figures for that.

The non director creditors and the directors seem content that the value of the asset is adequate to cover their exposure so whilst there is no immediate threat to the Club's viability there will come a time when the continuing annual trading financial losses will be seen as untenable.

by City 'til we're relegated Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:07 am

Mr Nash seems an angry person. He does have a point that businesses should not expect to be supported by charity though, in the case of football this could have disastrous consequences. If we had no volunteers and the directors planned to make the club balance the books, or make a small profit each season, I wonder what standard of football we would be playing at. Western League I suppose. Players wages would be very much reduced. I should not like that myself so I thank all of the people who work so hard to ensure that we are playing at a good level of football. I feel that I should join the supporters club so that I can at least contribute my membership fee. I think we should remember the meaning of the word CLUB, as in football CLUB. It is not exactly a business to make money for investors, not at our level anyway.

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:25 am

For the record I am not "angry" nor do I have any axe to grind with anyone at or associated with Bath City. I love you

I liken the Club to a patient with a terminal illness, the only hope is a cure is found. The overuse of antibiotics to treat the patient eventually renders those antibiotics to have no effect; similarly the time, effort and financial resources will not be sufficient to sustain the Club AND we may very well find ourselves in the Western League and not playing at Twerton Park or any other stadium of our own. Crying or Very sad

by City 'til we're relegated Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:40 am

That sounds so pessimistic, I think I shall cut my losses and give up supporting from today, better than a slow death.

by comrade powell Sat Aug 23, 2014 1:18 pm

Mr Nash, perhaps as Dan's invitation to you stated, you have since contacted the SC directly to raise your concerns about its policies. But somehow I doubt it as you usually prefer to tell the whole world about the latest beef on your mind. Perhaps someone at the club will respond to the above rants, but again you might get more joy if you contacted the likes of Paul Williams.

Taking just about the only thing you wrote which is pertinent to the SC...

There was a time when the supporters coach was full, or almost full, so with it only being half full now would it not be prudent to examine the cost structure, if that involves withdrawing the subsidy to the Football Club for the team coach...

So having assumed that the problem lay with the coach company we use, you now appear to have accepted the reasons why we keep with them. Far easier, I agree, than taking up my challenge to contact a few local firms for quotes! But I wonder what all those supporters who help us in our fundraising - by buying Matchday Draw tickets and refreshments from the tea bar, through membership subscriptions, supporting SC events, taking part in or sponsoring the annual walk - would think if they learnt that their generosity was no longer going to help their football club but would instead enable up to 50 supporters to travel around the south of England at cheaper rates than at present. To be honest, a small number of them might agree with your selfish viewpoint, but I would guess the majority would be in favour of what the SC is trying to do. And that includes holding back around £1k to subsidise this season's supporters coaches. What I do know is that the majority of the coach regulars were happy with this policy.

Would you like to dig that hole for yourself any deeper?

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 1:48 pm

Comrade

What has the payment to the Football Club for the TEAM coach got to do with the subsidy of the supporters coach which I haven't commented about? Too many people on here are either not reading what I say correctly or making things up.

What the state of the finances for the Supporters Club or the Supporters Society Ltd are is a different matter entirely. What the relationship / ownership of Supporters Club assets as regards the Football Club Ltd are I have no idea; I assume, maybe wrongly, that it is a way many people make voluntary contributions to the Football Club Ltd costs with some of the revenues being used, like the supporters coach subsidy, to benefit supporters directly.

The bottom line is that the Football Club Ltd is in deep trouble and the only hole is where the whole mess will end up.

by comrade powell Sat Aug 23, 2014 1:58 pm

Beau Nash wrote:Comrade

What has the payment to the Football Club for the TEAM coach got to do with the subsidy of the supporters coach which I haven't commented about? Too many people on here are either not reading what I say correctly or making things up.

Well that's perhaps because you don't word things very well, as in your paragraph below! I can't possibly comment on that because I haven't a clue what you're on about. Re the above comment, do you not understand that the amounts which the SC can subsidise the 2 coaches must be linked? The more which is used for the supporters' coach, the less will be available for the team's.

What the state of the finances for the Supporters Club or the Supporters Society Ltd are is a different matter entirely. What the relationship / ownership of Supporters Club assets as regards the Football Club Ltd are I have no idea; I assume, maybe wrongly, that it is a way many people make voluntary contributions to the Football Club Ltd costs with some of the revenues being used, like the supporters coach subsidy, to benefit supporters directly.

The bottom line is that the Football Club Ltd is in deep trouble and the only hole is where the whole mess will end up.

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 4:46 pm

comrade powell wrote:...Re the above comment, do you not understand that the amounts which the SC can subsidise the 2 coaches must be linked? The more which is used for the supporters' coach, the less will be available for the team's.

http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/campaigning/examples/government-jargon.html
One of my favourites - 'the hours of non-hours work worked by a worker in a pay reference period shall be the total of the number of hours spent by him during the pay reference period in carrying out the duties required of him under his contract to do non-hours work.'
(Department of Trade and Industry's draft law for the minimum wage) - Whitehall is full of it. lol!

by comrade powell Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:04 pm

good luck in that hole...

think I'll follow the lead of some other forum users and simply ignore your posts in future.

by BenE Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:32 pm

Reading through the thread I think the nub of the argument is that Mr Nash wants to be able to get in to the ground for £5 and travel on the coach for £10.

If someone won't pay £12 to get into a home game I'm not sure what they would do when they got off the coach at an away ground that charges a similar admission fee. Wander around the car park for two hours I guess happy in the knowledge they've had a cheap journey.

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:35 pm

comrade powell wrote:good luck in that hole...

think I'll follow the lead of some other forum users and simply ignore your posts in future.

To quote the great man - To a translator, when being surrounded by gesticulating Italian journalists:

"Just tell them I completely disagree with everything they say!" -

by Beau Nash Sat Aug 23, 2014 6:00 pm

BenE wrote:Reading through the thread I think the nub of the argument is that Mr Nash wants to be able to get in to the ground for £5 and travel on the coach for £10.

If someone won't pay £12 to get into a home game I'm not sure what they would do when they got off the coach at an away ground that charges a similar admission fee. Wander around the car park for two hours I guess happy in the knowledge they've had a cheap journey.

Close Ben but still some way off.

I could afford the £12 and / or the coach fare but football at this level doesn't represent value for money as regular entertainment.

To quote the great man again - "Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that." - no its not but...(not worthy emoticon from old forum)

I can live with or without Bath City FC, but rather with. I am not speaking just for myself but for the thousands who live locally, follow Bath City, but rarely attend a game home or away (bang head against a wall emoticon from old forum). Smile

by kermit Sat Aug 23, 2014 6:36 pm

BenE wrote:If someone won't pay £12 to get into a home game I'm not sure what they would do when they got off the coach at an away ground that charges a similar admission fee. Wander around the car park for two hours I guess happy in the knowledge they've had a cheap journey.

On a similar vein....I think the 3 of us who visited the cracking Lobster Smack pub before the Concord game may have wished they had stayed there Laughing

by Ashley Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:09 pm

BenE wrote:Reading through the thread I think the nub of the argument is that Mr Nash wants to be able to get in to the ground for £5 and travel on the coach for £10.

If someone won't pay £12 to get into a home game I'm not sure what they would do when they got off the coach at an away ground that charges a similar admission fee. Wander around the car park for two hours I guess happy in the knowledge they've had a cheap journey.

Probably just have a moan about some policy for two hours

by Marc Monitor Sun Aug 24, 2014 12:01 am

Beau Nash wrote:I could afford the £12 and / or the coach fare but football at this level doesn't represent value for money as regular entertainment.

Hardly any football, week in or week out, represents value for money as regular entertainment in itself. It isn't like going to see a band live or to the cinema. It is competitive sport and, as such, is completely different from most leisure activities. It is as much about what goes on in and around the match itself. Let's not forget that this is a game where a 0-0 draw can be the most exciting, absorbing and entertaining of results, dependent on the context.

Beau Nash wrote:I can live with or without Bath City FC, but rather with.

That seems to be the rub. Your posts on this thread have the air of someone who is on the fence and not sure which way you want to fall. If you don't want to attend Bath City then fine, if you do, then also fine. However...

Beau Nash wrote:I am not speaking just for myself but for the thousands who live locally, follow Bath City, but rarely attend a game home or away

…you really don't. For a start, I am not sure that there are thousands presently that follow Bath City but don't attend games. I think that, in the Conference Premier, they more attended games out of interest or were as interested in the opposition or, perhaps, preferred the atmosphere around the club at the time. Those people may have potentially been people who could have followed CIty but I would be surprised if they know the results or who is in the team from one week to the next. However, this is just conjecture as is yours. I have been on the case of the club as much as possible about marketing and publicising the club and am aware of the mistake and lost opportunities there have been. However, I wouldn't say that I speak for all those supporters that stay away. THere are a myriad of different reasons why people may stay away. You know why you aren't attending and you may know why they stay away but you can't claim to speak for thousands and some of your comments on here make clear that you don't

by Sponsored content