Mr Chairman

[MCHammer]

What a load of bollox spouted on this thread already.  I can guarantee a couple of the louder voices on here wanting more investment were some of those that slaughtered DC for running up so much debt when he did "speculate to accumulate".  Won't matter though as you've no concept of not being able to have it both ways.

Several points to balance some of what's been said as they are factually incorrect:

The £900k debt DC took over was just the tip of the iceberg.

Half of the Bunn transfer money was made available to the manager but unfortunately Gray spunked it up the wall on admittedly quality loan signings wages which provided very limited short term success at the long term detriment of the playing staff and club.

Fans that agree with a break even strategy do not "have their heads in the sand".  It's also frankly ridiculous to suggest they have a short term view.  What can be longer term than wanting your club to be run on a sound financial basis and actually be in existence in ten/twenty/fifty years time.

It's the way you all get yourself wrapped up in budgets etc when the playing staff aren't performing that's so ridiculous.  Are we seriously saying that the only route to success is to spend more than anyone else?   

I know I'm in the minority here but I'm glad DC is in charge if our club.  In the 26 years I've supported the club this has, despite the reported debt, the most stable the club has been financially in those 26 years.  That doesn't excuse everything that's happened but I've got a good enough memory to know that what went before wasn't exactly great.  Realistically on the playing side I've seen some good sides and a little bit of success but I wonder how many of those years have been spent in League Two where we are now.

Like Drilling said elsewhere I think peoples expectations were lifted and some haven't been able to come back down to reality.  I'm not enjoying the football played at the moment but I'm also able to acknowledge that it's the 2nd September for f*cks sake and there is still plenty of time for Sammo to get it right if we just give him a chance.

 

[Insider]

Several points to balance some of what's been said as they are factually incorrect:

The £900k debt DC took over was just the tip of the iceberg.

Really?  That's not what he was happy to report in The Independent at the time. Debt of £900k and a total investment of £1.7m "paid for players to come in".  Happy to boast of £3000 a week wages.  And happy to have TCexMP be quoted as "Clarke points as evidence for his confidence to the reorganised club structure. Rather than put their money in as loans, which would hobble the club and provoke a crisis if the Cardozas ever left, the investment has been converted to shares. The Cardozas own 80 per cent of the club and if they leave, they lose their money". 

So guess what?  They've out the money in as loans and hobbled the club.   

I see what was meant by not having it both ways....

[MCHammer]

Really?  That's not what he was happy to report in The Independent at the time. Debt of £900k and a total investment of £1.7m "paid for players to come in".  Happy to boast of £3000 a week wages.  And happy to have TCexMP be quoted as "Clarke points as evidence for his confidence to the reorganised club structure. Rather than put their money in as loans, which would hobble the club and provoke a crisis if the Cardozas ever left, the investment has been converted to shares. The Cardozas own 80 per cent of the club and if they leave, they lose their money". 

So guess what?  They've out the money in as loans and hobbled the club.   

I see what was meant by not having it both ways....

There was a hefty unpaid Inland Revenue bill to settle as well plus he was taking over a club making a substantial loss each year.  But apart from that you are right. 

[NTFC Nut]

It would appear that Sammo is to be given some extra funds now to spend on wages which is pleasing.

On wider issue given that we broke even last year is why the playing budget is that much less than last season?

I dare say the extra tv revenue this season and the liverpool money will eclipse what we recieved for Jackman last year. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Yeah you are. Reduced ticket prices, dropping attendances and so forth. Gate receipts represent a big chunk of the income at any League Two club. It's a chicken and egg situation though. Does a good team attract big crowds or do big crowds finance a good team? When gates are low do you go out and spend a load of money on players to try and bring the fans back in, covering the costs of the spending spree, or do you cut back spending to ensure the budget matches the number of fans that are coming through the turnstile every week, leading to the kind of spiral effect we've seen in the past few seasons?

We don't necessarily need a big injection of cash, just something to get the club going again and attain some kind of direction as it seems the people running the club are happy to sit still for the time being and wait for redevelopment, but as fans we want to see some kind of progression on the pitch or else we're not happy. A football club is an investment for the fans as well as the shareholders and directors and if fans feel they aren't getting enough in return they'll stop investing. They already are- the drop in attendances is visible.

[Mark-JB]

I just wish sometimes we'd speculate to accumulate.

I can understand us being careful and am happy with that, at the end of the day i'd rather have a club to support, but sometimes the odd risk might just be worth it!

As I've already said, its easy to **** with someone else's money. As much as I'd love to see us signing amazing players and rising up the leagues it simply isn't going to happen with Cardoza in charge and there's no-one else with either deep enough pockets (i.e. £100m+ fortune) to take us on. If anyone else bought us out we'd be in exactly the same position.

We're stuck with what we've got - that means a break even club. Like it or lump it I'm afraid

[DrillingCobbler]

The thing is Mark is thus...

You are running a business. The business manufacturers bearings. Its turnover last year was £2million and you employ 40 people. It makes a small loss of 40k. Its machines are old and need replacing. The staff are overworked and more people need adding to the work force. Yet the economic outlook is gloomy and demand from customers is dwindling. You have two choices:

(1) Make redundancies and keep the same machines. Spend nothing/very little.

(2) Replace the machines, employ more people (and better) and market your business actively in an attempt to win more business.

Net result of option 1 would be a smaller turnover/less sales. That is pretty obvious. Whilst the net result of option 2 is very much dependent on how it is implemented. It would be a **** at the end of the day.

What would you do? Personally, I would probably do a bit of both. I would cut costs elsewhere, saving as much money as possible. I would probably not invest in extra staff at this time but I would definitely go down the quality route first and buy better kit and try and run the business more efficiently.

DC, to his credit in many ways is not taking any financial risks. We are financially totally stable as things stand other than historical money owed to him. But the problem is is that our competitors are still taking risks and are growing their businesses whilst we are shrinking. The harsh reality of this current approach is that the team will get worse and we will slip down the leagues, a positive though is that we will still be here. Many businesses try to grow too quickly and go bust yet small family firms trading for decades keep going but never grow.

It really is a balancing act. But my stance is simple. There is no balancing act. Its cut cut cut and as a result turnover is coming down down down. Net result = no loss but a **** team. Steve Riches for me made the best post today and truly hit the nail on the head, I cant remember if it was on this thread or another. But there has been no real investment in the strike force now since the waste of money that Andy Kirk was. Either free transfers or loanees. And other than Bayo and Hubertz we have not had a decent one tied to the club on a contract. Its not rocket science. But with an half decent goalscorer we would not still be looking for our first win this season and we would probably not be in this division. We would have more income coming in and more fans coming through the turn styles. And perhaps more pressure being put onto the council to assist us. And with regards to the Saints, I truly believe they are not getting what they want because of the politics involved. Its either both clubs or neither, simples.

[Insider]

there's no-one else with either deep enough pockets (i.e. £100m+ fortune) to take us on. If anyone else bought us out we'd be in exactly the same position.

Ah, you mean like those blokes who invested £100m + in Rochdale, Dagenham and Torquay?

[County Cobbler]

I am glad I do not work for a company run by Insider or Grangeparkcobbler because with their ignorance of finance I would be on the dole!
It was Wilkinson and Gray who wasted the investment put in by DC and still people like Dustcobb find it easy spending somebody elses money. Whilst DC has made errors of judgement (like all of us) he has been open and listened to fans better than any other Chairman we have had in my 45 years supporting the club.
Our frustration should be aimed totally at the incompitant Council, because nobody will invest extra funds into NTFC until the Sixfields expansion is resolved.

[Grove]

I am glad I do not work for a company run by Insider or Grangeparkcobbler because with their ignorance of finance I would be on the dole!
It was Wilkinson and Gray who wasted the investment put in by DC and still people like Dustcobb find it easy spending somebody elses money. Whilst DC has made errors of judgement (like all of us) he has been open and listened to fans better than any other Chairman we have had in my 45 years supporting the club.
Our frustration should be aimed totally at the incompitant Council, because nobody will invest extra funds into NTFC until the Sixfields expansion is resolved.

I happen to know that Insider is a very succeseful man, and Grange Park ..lives in Grange Park 
I  wonder how many other clubs constantly blame the council, Cardoza wants money from the sale of Northamptons land, not his., Im going to apply to build a hotel on the strip of grass outside my house near the road, its not my land but who knows !!

[Insider]

It was Wilkinson and Gray who wasted the investment put in by DC and still people like Dustcobb find it easy spending somebody elses money.  resolved.

Classic.  Who said of Wilkinson ""knowledge, experience, drive and ambition...a vital part of taking the club forward"?  None other than David Cardoza.  Who appointed Stuart Gray?  David Cardoza. 

You and others miss the point.  I'm not asking the Cardozas to invest a single brass razoo more in NTFC, but to write off the loan he publicly promised not to saddle this club with.  And go.  If the club is indeed operating close to break even as many on here are saying, then the Trust can once again take over its running, and windfalls from cup ties and player sales can be reinvested.  Just like they are at Rochdale.

[MCHammer]

You and others miss the point.  I'm not asking the Cardozas to invest a single brass razoo more in NTFC, but to write off the loan he publicly promised not to saddle this club with.  And go.  If the club is indeed operating close to break even as many on here are saying, then the Trust can once again take over its running, and windfalls from cup ties and player sales can be reinvested.  Just like they are at Rochdale.

You live in an absolute dream world.  Who covers the losses if the trust run the club?  You talk of reinvestment as if any windfalls from cup ties or player sales aren't currently invested in the club which is a falsehood that people seem to like repeating as if it is fact.  If they aren't going back into the club where are they going and what is your actual evdience?  You think the playing budget would be any bigger if we were run by the Trust?  Finally you keep using the example of Rochdale.  A club that spent decades in the bottom division before finally achieving promotion and one that will probably end up back where it started within the next two years.

Let's face it you're just another one of the miserable f*ckers on here that spend their ENTIRE time moaning thinking they know best while offering only fantasy solutions for very difficult problems.

[DrillingCobbler]

Two sides to this. And I can see both. The Trust running the club could work, but only IF there was a money man/woman involved at senior level (preferably chairman) which there currently isn't. The Trust would have to run it even more cautiously than what DC does, that to be fair is a fact.

HOWEVER, I would be in favour of a clean slate unless Mr C does not start to 'swing the bat' a little. His current Geoff Boycott batting is costing us dearly and this is something I've been banging on for 3 years now. Since the Bunn money wasn't re-invested. I think it only right that he is held to account for our clubs fortunes because ultimately it is his responsibility to look after it for all of us. And healthy clean debate on this site is a positive thing.

At the moment we are in free fall. This could however very quickly change. A win on Saturday and a win versus Southend followed by the Liverpool game and the short term outlook will be much rosier. Perhaps we should all take a chill pill for a few games more and see where we stand after 10 games because lets face it, we could have nicked 2 of the 4 games and be sat on 7 points and in a play off position. I know we are where we probably deserve to be BUT its a very thin line and 4 games is no where near enough to be able to give a real informed view of where we will finish.

The next month is a massive one. DC has some serious decisions to make - it really could go one way or the other.

[Insider]

You live in an absolute dream world.  Who covers the losses if the trust run the club?  You talk of reinvestment as if any windfalls from cup ties or player sales aren't currently invested in the club which is a falsehood that people seem to like repeating as if it is fact.  If they aren't going back into the club where are they going and what is your actual evdience?  You think the playing budget would be any bigger if we were run by the Trust?  Finally you keep using the example of Rochdale.  A club that spent decades in the bottom division before finally achieving promotion and one that will probably end up back where it started within the next two years.

Let's face it you're just another one of the miserable f*ckers on here that spend their ENTIRE time moaning thinking they know best while offering only fantasy solutions for very difficult problems.

That says it all really, MC.  Resort to insult when you've run out of argument.  As I have repeatedly said, you cannot have it both ways: on the one hand you applaud Cardoza for running the club on financially sound, break even principles, now all of a sudden you change tack and start arguing that DC is covering losses.  What's it to be?  Are we breaking even (or even making a small profit) or are we losing money?  I suspect in a perverse way you're right: the **** we're in is deeper than being admitted to, season ticket sales and commercial income lower than anticipated, a core support of 3500 rather than 4000 (per budget), and QED the club is losing money.  I did not anywhere say that the playing budget would be bigger if the club was run by the Trust.  Let me repeat, if DC's position and those who defend him is correct, i.e. that the club is on an ordinary operating basis running at break even and in accordance with budget, then cup runs are windfalls and exactly that; IF the Trust or anyone else for that matter was running the club, those windfall funds might be invested in a new player, a new chip fryer for the West Stand or a new disabled lift, but reinvested they would be, or used to cover a deeper than expected shortfall.  The limited disclosure rules that govern a company like NTFC make it difficult to get a clear picture of the accounts, but you ask the actual evidence of where it (the windfall) is going.  I suggest you pose that as an open question, which can only really be revealed by understanding the balance sheet; or more specifically, what has been the DC loan at the end of each accounting period?  I rather suspect that therein lies the answer.

[bungle]

I'm with MC Hammer on this.

Yes, we could 'swing the bat', as Drilling puts it, and try to speculate to accumulate but the spectre of Luton, Leeds, Southend and numerous other clubs who really have gone into 'free fall' after spending beyond their means suggests, to me at least, that Cardoza's prudence is sensible. Player assets are not analogous to 'ball bearing machines'. The problem is, as we've seen from the Purcell situation, is that one bad injury or run of poor form and suddenly you've got no return on your investment.

 

[Mark-JB]

The thing is Mark is thus...

You are running a business. The business manufacturers bearings. Its turnover last year was £2million and you employ 40 people. It makes a small loss of 40k. Its machines are old and need replacing. The staff are overworked and more people need adding to the work force. Yet the economic outlook is gloomy and demand from customers is dwindling. You have two choices:

(1) Make redundancies and keep the same machines. Spend nothing/very little.

(2) Replace the machines, employ more people (and better) and market your business actively in an attempt to win more business.

Net result of option 1 would be a smaller turnover/less sales. That is pretty obvious. Whilst the net result of option 2 is very much dependent on how it is implemented. It would be a **** at the end of the day.

What would you do? Personally, I would probably do a bit of both. I would cut costs elsewhere, saving as much money as possible. I would probably not invest in extra staff at this time but I would definitely go down the quality route first and buy better kit and try and run the business more efficiently.

DC, to his credit in many ways is not taking any financial risks. We are financially totally stable as things stand other than historical money owed to him. But the problem is is that our competitors are still taking risks and are growing their businesses whilst we are shrinking. The harsh reality of this current approach is that the team will get worse and we will slip down the leagues, a positive though is that we will still be here. Many businesses try to grow too quickly and go bust yet small family firms trading for decades keep going but never grow.

The major issue with this analogy is suggesting that you don't mention Mr Cardoza has already invested in the team to see if this option works. Unfortunately he has, he made a huge loss and we're back to square one. The attendances didn't increase in line with investment. If a normal business repeatedly attempted to invest in new machinery it would have some lovely assets but it would eventually end up working beyond its means and it would go bust. You can market the Cobblers as much as you want in town - the kids and most of the businesses aren't interested in a second rate club.

If we had a regular Championship side playing in front of 13,000 people every week then those kids at school we see in Chelsea and Man Utd shirts wouldn't all be wearing them. Then you would possibly have a chance of seeing your investment pay dividends. Even then the club would need sound financial management to ensure we don't overshoot and end up becoming a Watford, Barnsley, Bradford et al.

Unfortunately our stadium size precludes us from anything more than higher mid table League 1. Ultimately during the entire time I've been watching us play we've yo-yo'd from that position to the bottom of League 2. That is our status, and with non-league clubs getting bigger we are no longer too big to go down there either. As a result the key is to ensure that you pick the right manager and them pick the right players as money stops being a differentiator. Big question is, do we have the right manager and do we have the right players? Only time will tell but so far Mr Cardoza's choices as manager have been a curates egg at best, flaky at worst.

[Mark-JB]

Ah, you mean like those blokes who invested £100m + in Rochdale, Dagenham and Torquay?

Who are all well run clubs (i.e. breaking even - like ours) with managers who have pulled together decent teams on limited budgets (like ours). If that's all you want then whether we have DC here or not is only relevant from the point of view of choosing the right manager, giving him time and then watching the squad grow. A key constant is that Hill has been in charge of Rochdale for 4 years, Buckle has been in charge of Torquay for 3 and Still at D&R for 6. Ours is in his first management job (like Hill and Buckle are) but has been given just under 12 months before some people are slowly sharpening the knives as an abject failure.

Even with this continuity Rochdale are in the process of being asset stripped of their best players and it won't be long before Torquay (who are currently beginning their upward trajectory in league terms) and D&R have the same. They will have 2 or 3 years in League 1 and drop back, just like we have for years.

What I'm saying is that to break out of that crap cycle that most of us are apathetically bored of is that major investment is needed in both the clubs facilities and playing staff for us to get to a standard where any kind of investment pays off. You go big, or you don't go at all as it will make such a small difference you don't gain any benefit.

[Trotty]

I’m not going to criticise the chairman any further on this point. It would appear from the comments made yesterday by Sammo that money for additional players that wasn’t available, now is, which would suggest that there is room to increase the playing budget after all.

[bungle]

Even with this continuity Rochdale are in the process of being asset stripped of their best players and it won't be long before Torquay (who are currently beginning their upward trajectory in league terms) and D&R have the same. They will have 2 or 3 years in League 1 and drop back, just like we have for years.

What I'm saying is that to break out of that crap cycle that most of us are apathetically bored of is that major investment is needed in both the clubs facilities and playing staff for us to get to a standard where any kind of investment pays off. You go big, or you don't go at all as it will make such a small difference you don't gain any benefit.

I think S****horpe are the best example of a well-run club or about our size, if not smaller, who have enjoyed great success over the last few years. They haven't got a moneybags chairman, and most of the investement in the team has been funded by player sales. Their success has largely been due to their excellent manager, Nigel Adkins, and their canny dealings in the transfer market. Over the past five years they've bought players, particularly strikers, very cheaply and then sold them on for millions: Andy Keogh, Billy Sharp, Martin Paterson and Gary Hooper.

As previous posters have said, there was probably a window of time when we could have used the money from Bunn, Gypes and Johnson and emulated Scunny by signing players like Simeon Jackson, for example, when he was banging them in down the road at the Dims. Gray wasted the chance by singing short-term loanees and relegation meant we had to cut our cloth accordingly. It was poor management by Gray, not a lack of investment by Cardoza which crippled us. Of course Cardoza appointed Gray, so you could argue that he was ultimately responsible.  Unfortunately, the money isn't there anymore and unless we can sell someone like Jacobs for big money we'll have to make do with Bosman frees and loanees.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Who are all well run clubs (i.e. breaking even - like ours) with managers who have pulled together decent teams on limited budgets (like ours). If that's all you want then whether we have DC here or not is only relevant from the point of view of choosing the right manager, giving him time and then watching the squad grow. A key constant is that Hill has been in charge of Rochdale for 4 years, Buckle has been in charge of Torquay for 3 and Still at D&R for 6. Ours is in his first management job (like Hill and Buckle are) but has been given just under 12 months before some people are slowly sharpening the knives as an abject failure.

Even with this continuity Rochdale are in the process of being asset stripped of their best players and it won't be long before Torquay (who are currently beginning their upward trajectory in league terms) and D&R have the same. They will have 2 or 3 years in League 1 and drop back, just like we have for years.

What I'm saying is that to break out of that crap cycle that most of us are apathetically bored of is that major investment is needed in both the clubs facilities and playing staff for us to get to a standard where any kind of investment pays off. You go big, or you don't go at all as it will make such a small difference you don't gain any benefit.

I see our situation as similar to Lincoln City, a club who, after going into administration in 2002 had a complete rethink and ended up running the club along similar lines as DC is trying to with NTFC. Lincoln regularly turned in a small profit each year, indeed they were the only team in the Football League to do so a couple of seasons running.  They run a tight ship, havent made a cash player signing for over 2 years, used 17 different loan players last season, and have a rookie former player as a manager.
On the field they made the playoffs for 5 seasons running but never got promoted, indeed they've only been out of the bottom division for one season since returning from the Conference 23 years ago. Now they are bumping around midtable playing in front of 3000 crowds.

Stable......but boring!!!  Boring....but stable!!  You decide!!

[Mark-JB]

I think Sc***horpe are the best example of a well-run club or about our size, if not smaller, who have enjoyed great success over the last few years. They haven't got a moneybags chairman, and most of the investement in the team has been funded by player sales. Their success has largely been due to their excellent manager, Nigel Adkins, and their canny dealings in the transfer market. Over the past five years they've bought players, particularly strikers, very cheaply and then sold them on for millions: Andy Keogh, Billy Sharp, Martin Paterson and Gary Hooper.

As previous posters have said, there was probably a window of time when we could have used the money from Bunn, Gypes and Johnson and emulated Scunny by signing players like Simeon Jackson, for example, when he was banging them in down the road at the Dims. Gray wasted the chance by singing short-term loanees and relegation meant we had to cut our cloth accordingly. It was poor management by Gray, not a lack of investment by Cardoza which crippled us. Of course Cardoza appointed Gray, so you could argue that he was ultimately responsible.  Unfortunately, the money isn't there anymore and unless we can sell someone like Jacobs for big money we'll have to make do with Bosman frees and loanees.

Absolutely agree that Scunny are the best example, however they are a single club that has managed to stay in and around the lower reaches of the Championship over the past few years. Colchester have also achieved beyond their means in recent years but as stated it takes a good manager (in S****horpe's case - 2 good managers, as it was Brian Laws that actually kicked off the success) to do so.

We should definitely be aspiring to be a club like that, however there are about 48 other clubs trying to do exactly the same thing. A lot of luck and a lot of good judgement is required to get there.