Re: Green light for Community Ownership!

[BenE]

I'm sure that the current board's intention was to only run at a short term loss.

[OliverH]

Yes we are obviously not looking to repeat that approach. I am simply pointing out that, legally speaking, community benefit societies are permitted to borrow and therefore run at a loss. This is in response to the earlier question.

[2weirdtown]

Does the 1.4 million contain an amount for installation of a 3G pitch? If not where is a loss making business going to raise the required money?

I'm sure there was a piece in Saturday's Western Daily Press about how 1 billion pounds would be spent on 'grass roots football.' Apparently the Premiership, FA and Barclays have agreed to set this aside from TV money. it will be mainly for 3G pitches through the creation of 30 'sports hubs'. Maybe there will be grant money available from this?

[Marc Monitor]

Given that is quite possible that next season four clubs will have 3G pitches

I didn't realise that. Who is that, yuffie? I assume that they will be the highest placed teams to have them?

[BenE]

Oliver - I'm sure that you would not want to hamper yourself as a business by saying you can never be overdrawn.

However in my view borrowing is not the same as running at a loss. Running at a loss would mean that your outgoings are greater than your income over the financial year. If say, you borrow to install a 3G pitch and income improves as a consequence, meaning that you can successfully pay the debt off, then that isn't running at a loss.

Borrowing to finance a shortfall in cashflow that is also likely to be paid off is also not running at a loss. Whereas borrowing to pay off liabilities that will never be made up is running at a loss.

Am I being too simplistic? I always think finance is made far too complicated. Especially by those who think they understand it.

[Ashley]

We're going to have a few games on a 3G next season - surely those will be ideal for seeing if it's for us?

[Ashley]

Given that is quite possible that next season four clubs will have 3G pitches

I didn't realise that. Who is that, yuffie? I assume that they will be the highest placed teams to have them?

And I didn't realise there was another page when I posted!

Sutton are getting one, as are Hayes/Maidenhead I believe. Plus Maidstone look pretty good for promotion and they've got one.

[yuffie]

Given that is quite possible that next season four clubs will have 3G pitches

I didn't realise that. Who is that, yuffie? I assume that they will be the highest placed teams to have them?

Maidstone already have one and looked fairly nailed on for the Ryman title.
Maidenhead, Sutton and Eastbourne have all announced they hope to install them this summer.

We were discussing this on Saturday and wondered about how slopes on pitch affect 3G. If Maidenhead get one it will be interesting to see if they have to level out their pitch.

[OliverH]

BenE - can I clarify the question? By "not allowed", are you asking whether a community benefit society (i.e. community club) is legally/constitutionally unable to run indefinitely at a loss? My understanding is that it probably could in theory, but it would be virtually impossible in practice - no-one would lend and the members wouldn't vote for it.

I can research this more if you like.

[BenE]

I am sure Steve Bradley intimated in the presentation that it wouldn't happen. I presume because, as you say, in practice the shareholders wouldn't allow it. And nor should they.

We don't want to be in the same situation in a few years as then there would be no last chance saloon.

But we're getting ahead of ourselves. We need to raise the money first.

[OliverH]

Yes it's a largely academic question - no one, myself included, is going to invest in community shares if the plan is to run the club at a loss!

[Eddie Hitler]

Does the 1.4 million contain an amount for installation of a 3G pitch? If not where is a loss making business going to raise the required money?

I'm sure there was a piece in Saturday's Western Daily Press about how 1 billion pounds would be spent on 'grass roots football.'  Apparently the Premiership, FA and Barclays have agreed to set this aside from TV money.  it will be mainly for 3G pitches through the creation of 30 'sports hubs'.  Maybe there will be grant money available from this?

Bath already has a sports 'hub'. I can't imagine another would be justifiable in terms of getting a grant.

[SteveBradley]

Does the 1.4 million contain an amount for installation of a 3G pitch? If not where is a loss making business going to raise the required money?

I'm sure there was a piece in Saturday's Western Daily Press about how 1 billion pounds would be spent on 'grass roots football.'  Apparently the Premiership, FA and Barclays have agreed to set this aside from TV money.  it will be mainly for 3G pitches through the creation of 30 'sports hubs'.  Maybe there will be grant money available from this?

That £1bn announcement was a bit of a charade to take some heat off of the Premier League clubs, to be honest.

It bundled together various sums of money which are already being redistributed anyway e.g. increased parachute payments, FA Foundation sums etc. There was relatively little new money in there.

30 sports hubs would cost nowhere near £1bn. Probably not even £30m.

[Marc Monitor]

The Odd Down one was £3.2million, Steve and I would have thought most wouldn't be far off that. Nowhere near £1 billion still though.

[OliverH]

The community ownership bid has a new identity - the "Big Bath City Bid" - and a new chair, Jon Bickley, MD of Bath-based Anthem Publishing.

Nick Thompson, CEO of Gradwell Communications and former MD of Hull City, has also joined the executive team, along with Jamie Malley, director at Frome-based Sandstone Media and a qualified coach who is heavily involved in youth and community coaching initiatives in Somerset, and Simon Tapscott, head of DoGoodThings, a marketing and fundraising consultancy for good causes.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/Business-bosses-Bath-City-fans-aim-owners/story-26268552-detail/story.html

As we've said from the start, community ownership is much more than a Society initiative - it's about attracting new ideas and fresh enthusiasm into the club and getting more people invested and involved.

What's changed? Nothing in terms of the overall purpose of the bid or the proposed route to community ownership that we've discussed in this forum up until now. But we now have more 'football business' expertise to feed into our business plan and prospectus, more fundraising experience behind the bid, and a more professional approach to project management to drive the bid forward.

Let me know if you have any questions about this and I'll do my best to respond, Easter weekend permitting.

[Steve Whites Missus]

So where is the prospectus? Will this delay, or speed up the publishing of this?

[OliverH]

Speed it up.

[Steve Whites Missus]

Speed it up.

Good work

[2weirdtown]

Today's announcement looks like a positive development.  Perhaps broadens the appeal of this initiative.  Less parochial looking now.

[London Town]

Agreed, very positive move. My first reaction was that this immediately seems more professional and broadens the scope/appeal. Looks like some good experience on board too. Felt quite positive reading this and for the first time thought it might actually be possible. Watching from an exiled distance, but well done all for all the hard work put in already.

[Marc Monitor]

This not only widens the experience and expertise some more - essential to the community ownership bid - but also takes the weight off the shoulders and lightens the load on the existing players. This is, of course, welcome but it must be remembered that it isn't just Jon's , Shane's, Oliver's, Martin's baby, we all must get involved and play our part even before we buy our shares. Everyone has something they can bring to the bid.

[Marc Monitor]

A guide to community shares that will be integral to the community bid.

[Marc Monitor]

Special General Meeting called for 1.45pm, Saturday 18 April
4/4/2015 0 Comments

A special general meeting of the Bath City Supporters Society will take place at 1:45pm on Saturday 18 April, in the Moore Stephens Lounge at Twerton Park.

The purpose of the meeting is to vote on changes to the Supporters Society constitution that will help the Society to pursue a successful community ownership bid.

Specifically, the Society Board seeks members’ approval for an extraordinary resolution to insert an “asset lock” provision into the Society constitution that would allow loans to the Society to qualify for Social Investment Tax Relief (SITR). This is a crucial step: please see our full guidance and recommendations below.

An extraordinary resolution requires 75% approval of those present. Members who cannot attend the meeting can return the attached Proxy Voting form to the Chair and their vote will be duly registered.

It is possible that additional motions related to community ownership may be added to the agenda ahead of the meeting – the Society Board will communicate these at least one week in advance.

Please note that an EGM of the Supporters Club has been called for 1pm the same day – we have co-ordinated the timing of our EGMs for the convenience of members.

EXTRAORDINARY RESOLUTION

The Supporters Society resolves to add the following clause to its constitution:

“Restriction on use

Pursuant to regulations made under section 1 of the Co-operatives and Community Benefit Societies Act 2003:

(1) All of the society’s assets are subject to a restriction on their use.

(2) The society must not use or deal with its assets except—

(a) where the use or dealing is, directly or indirectly, for a purpose that is for the benefit of the community;

(b) to pay a member of the society the value of his withdrawable share capital or interest on such capital;

(c) to make a payment pursuant to section 24 (proceedings on death of nominator), 25 (provision for intestacy) or 26 (payments in respect of mentally incapable persons) of the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965;

(d) to make a payment in accordance with the rules of the society to trustees of the property of bankrupt members or, in Scotland, members whose estate has been sequestrated;

(e) where the society is to be dissolved or wound up, to pay its creditors; or

(f) to transfer its assets to one or more of the following—

(i) a prescribed community benefit society whose assets have been made subject to a restriction on use and which will apply that restriction to any assets so transferred;

(ii) a community interest company;

(iii) a registered social landlord which has a restriction on the use of its assets which is equivalent to a restriction on use and which will apply that restriction to any assets so transferred;

(iv) a charity (including a community benefit society that is a charity); or

(v) a body, established in Northern Ireland or a State other than the United Kingdom, that is equivalent to any of those persons.

(3) Any expression used in this rule which is defined for the purposes of regulations made under section 1 of the 2003 Act shall have the meaning given by those regulations.”

GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATION FROM SOCIETY BOARD

The resolution above seeks to add an “asset lock” provision to the Society constitution, which legally prevents the assets of the Society from being used for private gain, rather than the stated aims of the Society. The wording of the resolution is compliant with relevant legislation.
By adding an asset lock to the constitution, the Society will be eligible to offer lenders Social Investment Tax Relief of up to 30%.
The Society seeks to raise £1.4m primarily through a community share offer, rather than loans. However, in order to assist Bath City FC Ltd in meeting pressing debt obligations due in April, the Supporters Society is seeking to attract short-term “bridge loans” from major investors that will refinance the pressing debts and give the community share offer time to succeed.
The Society Board strongly urges members to support this resolution. It is essential to the success of the community ownership bid.

http://www.bathcitysociety.org/news/special-general-meeting-called-for-145pm-saturday-18-april

[Major Icewater]

Perhaps I have missed something in the last few weeks but it does seem that  the agreement to a switch to a community  club is now a done deal ( assuming the cash can be raised ).
As far as I am aware the Board has not been given formal approval to go ahead by the shareholders  so it does seem somewhat confusing.
The Community club objective seems to be the raising of £1.4M to take control of the existing club but what if someone came in with an offer to buy at £1.5m would the directors then have to take that offer instea.?

[OliverH]

Major icewater - I think all the information you need is in the statements made by the club and the society on March 9.

[Sponsored content]