GCFC rent update, etc Cheltenham, Council, Loans, GCFC etc

[The Horse]

Hi,

Just a question and not a dig at anyone......

The loan that was given to Cheltenham to help out after the Martin Allen debacle, where did this come from?

I understand it was from the council, which presumably came from council tax etc from people who have no interest in football etc?

These people may have been as unhappy to see money being spent to help what is a business and should be responsible for its own finances.....personally im glad to see councils helping out local football clubs as i never want to see any club,no matter how small die.

Also, at the time were the club 100% up to date with rent payments to the council for the ground?

The reason i ask is that the constant slagging off of GCFC for not having the funds to pay the rent at the moment is a little hypocritical if CTFC wasnt completely upto date at the time of the loan.....

Perhaps GCFC should have lived within their means a little more and played at a level which some may say is more sustainable meaning they didnt need the WR groundshare but they didnt win promotion through spending out big money in the same way that Truro City did from the same division.

What im saying , i guess, is that all clubs go through lean times, whether that is through their own doing by spending silly money on wages or through external factors such as flooding...maybe even a combination of both of these, but the fact is, Cheltenham were lucky that the council was willing to help out.without that help they would have been on trouble, so maybe its time to stop the constant stuff about GCFC having no money etc, as you should all know what it felt like to be worried about the future of your club......

As it stands, GCFC are unable to play at Whaddon Road until the money is paid, so there are 2 outcomes...

1. it gets paid, it suits everyones best interests (maybe not as profitable as it once was) but your chairman clearly believes its still a good idea to have signed upto it once again.

2. it doesnt get paid, and then GCFC dont "ruin" the pitch...so again, you are happy, either outcome has a positive for CTFC

[mattyboi]

Answer to this is easy, we never got the loan on the end, we sold a player to arsenal which raised the required revenue!!

[The Horse]

It doesnt answer the other question though, was the rent 100% upto date at the time?
And if it was, were all other bills paid or were there outstanding monies owing to other bsuinesses?

And it does still stand that all clubs can have lean times.....and not perhaps have the cashflow to meet all their obligations....

CTFC have been in this position before, as have most clubs.

Again, not looking to cause trouble.....just looking to put a bit of perspective on the whole situation....as understandably, you are looking at it through CTFC coloured glasses......

[Taz1985]

We do not rent,. We are the leaseholder.

So to answer your question, as there was no rent to pay, yes we are up to date and always are.

[The Horse]

and again, were there any outstanding monies owed to any local or non local businesses?
were they more than 20k?

it might be argued that getting into the situation that CTFC did without the need for rent to be paid is even worse than the one GCFC have managed to work their way into.......

Theres no need to be so defensive, the questions are being asked as much for my own interest as to provide some perspective.....

[Taz1985]

No, unless you count the chairman in this.

[The Horse]

No, unless you count the chairman in this.

Under normal corcumstances, i wouldnt count the chairman to be fair......but.........if it was only money owed to the chairman, why was a loan required to cover it?

[Pie]

Ah a topic started to stir things up and say "look, Gloucester aren't as bad as Cheltenham. Gloucester only owe £20k to ONE BUSINESS, Cheltenham owed more than £20k to more than one business".

These topics are becoming a bore.

[Circa 1887]

The proposed loan was to cover liquidity issues around operating costs - players wages, etc, due to unforseen overspends in the playing budget - like hotel bills for players that did not live locally. So, the club identified that it was going to be short of money....rather than wait until it had none and not pay people. (note: We now have property arrangements locally , to negate the costs of putting players in local hotels).

As mentioned though, the loan wasn't required as we sold Jamie Edge plus two young lads to Everton.

The proposed loan was not to pay back the chairman's loan. We've had numerous directors loans in the past, with some being written off by the board and others being build in to the budget through small monthly repayments.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

and again, were there any outstanding monies owed to any local or non local businesses?
were they more than 20k?

it might be argued that getting into the situation that CTFC did without the need for rent to be paid is even worse than the one GCFC have managed to work their way into.......

Theres no need to be so defensive, the questions are being asked as much for my own interest as to provide some perspective.....

We did have some overdue bills I believe for utilities and services (someone found 50p for the meter), but contingency was in place and we paid in full shortly after the news broke, without months of spin and tokenistic statements.

The main way we raised revenue:

- selling a good player to The Arsenal
- a number of home games in a row following a number of postponements
- extra-early bird season ticket deal and 5-year season ticket deals to speed up short-term cash flow

That is this the main difference - CTFC had a clear and obvious asset and revenue base. It was a cash-flow problem, not a solvency problem and even though cash flow was touch and go it was clear we'd have enough income in due course to remain a going concern.

At GCAFC
- no good players to sell as far as I know
- they rarely break-even at home games
- not enough supporters to draw upon with season ticket or similar deals

There seems to be no solution or chance of GCAFC generating enough income to meet their obligations - definitely a solvency problem and not just cash-flow.

We just want closure and honesty now. As you say, there are two options (pay and stay with a clear plan to pay for the rest of the season, or default and go) that work for CTFC. The issue is the side-tracking, delaying tactics and unprofessionalism. There must be a deadline date where-after one of the two options occurs rather than being in perpetual limbo and excuse making.

[Circa 1887]

Equally - whilst I would not want CTFC to rely on a council loan, it's worth noting that local tax payers subsidise events like Cheltenham arts festivals and the Everyman Theatre by funding a proportion of the annual operating costs....which may/or may not be to everyone's taste. Im sure that funding our local football team would have people up in arms though...maybe there's a degree of snobbery towards the game in that respect.

[leohoenig]

We do not rent,. We are the leaseholder.

So to answer your question, as there was no rent to pay, yes we are up to date and always are.

Rent is payable on leasehold property, and of course the club also pays rates to the council.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Equally - whilst I would not want CTFC to rely on a council loan, it's worth noting that local tax payers subsidise events like Cheltenham arts festivals and the Everyman Theatre by funding a proportion of the annual operating costs....which may/or may not be to everyone's taste. Im sure that funding our local football team would have people up in arms though...maybe there's a degree of snobbery towards the game in that respect.

Festivals bring in a huge level of visitors and income from outside the region - the funding for those is basically a job creation programme for all our hotels, restaurants etc with a very large multiplier effect.

CTFC don't provide the same benefit to the town.

[Circa 1887]

But those jobs are temporary/short term. I doubt that the council would subsidise GE Aviation or Zurich/Capita for example, yet their job creation capabilities are vast by comparison....even attracting people to move/live in the local area.

That's another debate for another day though.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

But those jobs are temporary/short term. I doubt that the council would subsidie GE Aviation or Zurich/Capita for example, yet their job creation capabilities are vast by comparison....even attracting people to move/live in the local area.

That's another debate for another day though.

It is, but I would argue that the fact that hotels and restaurants are blatantly open all year round and festivals are on throughout the year means it's not just short-term or temporary employment.

[Robin]

Equally - whilst I would not want CTFC to rely on a council loan, it's worth noting that local tax payers subsidise events like Cheltenham arts festivals and the Everyman Theatre by funding a proportion of the annual operating costs....which may/or may not be to everyone's taste. Im sure that funding our local football team would have people up in arms though...maybe there's a degree of snobbery towards the game in that respect.

Festivals bring in a huge level of visitors and income from outside the region - the funding for those is basically a job creation programme for all our hotels, restaurants etc with a very large multiplier effect.

CTFC don't provide the same benefit to the town.

I seriously doubt either the Everyman or the poncey art/literature festival bring in anywhere near the revenue that CTFC does to the town.

[The Horse]

I happen to agree, that the council should subsidise a club if required in the same way that they do with other events.

I have a lot more knowledge on the situation in Truro.

For those that dont know Truro City FC and the Cornish Pirates Rugby were both looking to build a new stadium, the stadium for cornwall was to be paid for in part by the Council down there but this was met with anger from anyone not connected with either of the two clubs. These people had no issue with the council subsidising the Hall for Cornwall theatre in Truro, which i believe was recieving millions a year to help keep it running.

It does seem that people want to be able to pick and choose what is classed as a business and what isnt to suit themselves, to my mind the clubs in both instances and the hall for cornwall and all the festivals in cheltenham are businesses, but im happy for them both to recieve some handouts if required as they both add to the town and what its about.

[Circa 1887]

In truth, the array of arts/literature/food/comedy festivals in Cheltenham add up to about 2-3 months per year of events, combined. More than the football club in terms of days, but hardly an open all year revenue stream.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and visit many events - but I do not think the funding is justified and would prefer to see the events stand on their own two feet.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

If there is no room or desire for a new GCAFC stadium amongst all this (link below) then the writing is on the wall I fear

http://www.gloucester.gov.uk/Documents/ ... pectus.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Though given the track record of all good planning and development in Gloucester happening 5-10 years too late maybe the council will be pining for a stadium and football team once they've been bust for a few years.

[Circa 1887]

I just cannot see GCFC surviving. The fanbase, whilst passionate/loyal, is too small and the problems are too big. I don't think Gloucester has the appetite to save the club - they don't seem to matter to the city or its inhabitants, in general.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

I just cannot see GCFC surviving. The fanbase, whilst passionate/loyal, is too small and the problems are too big. I don't think Gloucester has the appetite to save the club - they don't seem to matter to the city or its inhabitants, in general.

There is no evidence they can pay rent or operating costs for the next season - as Mr C Peake admitted himself - that is the crux of the matter.

[Shade]

In truth, the array of arts/literature/food/comedy festivals in Cheltenham add up to about 2-3 months per year of events, combined. More than the football club in terms of days, but hardly an open all year revenue stream.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and visit many events - but I do not think the funding is justified and would prefer to see the events stand on their own two feet.

Do the council not get any of the money back through ticket sales?

[Circa 1887]

Not to my knowledge, unless anyone knows otherwise

[asl]

I seriously doubt either the Everyman or the poncey art/literature festival bring in anywhere near the revenue that CTFC does to the town.

Actually, I'd be willing to bet you're wrong on that score. I'd love to see some figures that show it - but I bet the local Chamber of Commerce would say that net revenue from the various art/jazz/literature festivals provide a massive boost for the town in ways that football can only dream of.

[Circa 1887]

Apparently in 2010, the festivals bought an estimated £5.3m revenue to the local economy.

I believe they are funded by both the local council and Government initiatives that support performing arts and local businesses. Essentially though, it's tax money whichever way you look at it.

Again, could be wrong, but my understanding is that they received around £1m over 5 years in tax funding plus additional building maintainance grants.

Over a four year period they paid around £760k in rent to the council - which is the only direct revenue stream received by the council from the events. Obviously, there is car parking meters, employment etc - but that's not easy to quantify.

[asl]

Apparently in 2010, the festivals bought an estimated £5.3m revenue to the local economy.

Cheers, Circa - that's interesting. With all the income for shops, restaurants and hotels, I don't think the football crowds can compete. I bet the vast majority of people come to CTFC and, at the very best, you'll squeeze the price of a couple of pints and portion of fish and chips out of, say, half of them.

[Circa 1887]

Another fact to note is that the council has sought to withdraw their funding responsibility from the arrangement on a couple of occassions in recent years, due to budget cuts. In the spirit of compromise, they've reduced the funding instead.

I can't imagine they would withdraw funding from something that generates net profit for them....so I can only conclude that the benefit to them is quite marginal.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

In truth, the array of arts/literature/food/comedy festivals in Cheltenham add up to about 2-3 months per year of events, combined. More than the football club in terms of days, but hardly an open all year revenue stream.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and visit many events - but I do not think the funding is justified and would prefer to see the events stand on their own two feet.

Do the council not get any of the money back through ticket sales?

Town Hall is council run so they probably get a little back - plus bar and drinks sales at the Town Hall is all revenue for the council.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Equally - whilst I would not want CTFC to rely on a council loan, it's worth noting that local tax payers subsidise events like Cheltenham arts festivals and the Everyman Theatre by funding a proportion of the annual operating costs....which may/or may not be to everyone's taste. Im sure that funding our local football team would have people up in arms though...maybe there's a degree of snobbery towards the game in that respect.

Festivals bring in a huge level of visitors and income from outside the region - the funding for those is basically a job creation programme for all our hotels, restaurants etc with a very large multiplier effect.

CTFC don't provide the same benefit to the town.

I seriously doubt either the Everyman or the poncey art/literature festival bring in anywhere near the revenue that CTFC does to the town.

This is perhaps your most deluded, wild and inaccuarte financial statement in your history of dodgy figures!

Music festival getting bigger each year, and the Jazz festival too has had highly reknowned international people playing - often people who rarely play the UK so people visit from all around.

As for the Science festival - look at the companies who sponsor that. People in my office in Newcastle were talking about the science festival thanks to the BBC coverage of it on the radio etc.

http://www.cheltenhamfestivals.com/science" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd imagine more people visit Cheltenham for just one of the numerous festival weeks or weekends than the total number of away fans who come to WR in a season - and most of them just come straight to the ground in car/bus and go home again.

You don't go into a packed shop, restaurant or pubs in Cheltenham on a Saturday lunch or evening and think "blimey town has been busy this weekend - Morecambe must have bought a lot".

[Circa 1887]

...I think I clarified the figures in this thread. Given how wildly popular the festivals are, can they not stand on their own two feet? The council think so...but haven't committed to removing the funding, just yet.

[Circa 1887]

...I think CTFC could do a lot more than it currently does for itself and the local economy with a £200k subsidy per year from the tax payer. But....that's not the way business should work.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

...I think CTFC could do a lot more than it currently does for itself and the local economy with a £200k subsidy per year from the tax payer. But....that's not the way business should work.

Tens of thousands of (and don't forget, usually middle class people with some cash to spend) people won't flock to Cheltenham and national media outlets won't devote coverage to the football events no matter how much money the council throws at the club.

In my Uncle's independent shop in Cheltenham, where I worked on and off a lot in the past, the order of 'best weeks' was invariably:

Race Week
Lit Fest
Christmas
Science Fest
Freshers week at uni

I used to go an open up two hours early during race week and would take more by 10am than we usually did in a day. Lit Fest was always a time to open later in the evening as people went for a post-event evening browse.

Almost all of that extra income came from outside of Gloucestershire and was spent in local pubs and restaurants so came so stayed the local economy.


I know it's just one business but it's a tale replicated across the town.

I don't see what CTFC could do (apart from a couple of promotions so teams bring more away fans) to attract visitors from outside Gloucestershire in the same volume and with the same spending power - and it's visitors from outside the area which councils care about as that brings in additional money.

[Circa 1887]

I was thinking more along the lines of using the cash on the playing buget, moving up the leagues and enticing more supporters - whether that's home fans, or bigger away followings visiting the town. All hypothetical anyway.

No doubt the various festivals attract people and are very well received, but my original point was - they should stand on their own two feet, particularly if they are a) as successfull as is being portrayed and b) the direct benefit to the council is so minimal, that on several occassions they've proposed not subsidising the events at all

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

I was thinking more along the lines of using the cash on the playing buget, moving up the leagues and enticing more supporters - whether that's home fans, or bigger away followings visiting the town. All hypothetical anyway.

No doubt the various festivals attract people and are very well received, but my original point was - they should stand on their own two feet, particularly if they are a) as successfull as is being portrayed and b) the direct benefit to the council is so minimal, that on several occassions they've proposed not subsidising the events at all

ah yes, sorry. A bit of cash for players would not go amiss.

Look at teams like Man City getting a free stadium from the council!

As for festivals or CTFC - I don't want the council to do stuff that directly benefits them. I want them to do stuff with impacts on the town economy.

[Circa 1887]

I was thinking more along the lines of using the cash on the playing buget, moving up the leagues and enticing more supporters - whether that's home fans, or bigger away followings visiting the town. All hypothetical anyway.

No doubt the various festivals attract people and are very well received, but my original point was - they should stand on their own two feet, particularly if they are a) as successfull as is being portrayed and b) the direct benefit to the council is so minimal, that on several occassions they've proposed not subsidising the events at all

ah yes, sorry. A bit of cash for players would not go amiss.

Look at teams like Man City getting a free stadium from the council!

As for festivals or CTFC - I don't want the council to do stuff that directly benefits them. I want them to do stuff with impacts on the town economy.

I want them to go back to emptying my bins on a weekly basis!