Major ownership development

[Robin]

Not qualified to comment upon the above chicken first or egg first argument, but as regards Mr. Garlick, I've taken a look at a Burnley fans website and opinion on him is divided:
https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboa ... it=Garlick

All agree that the first few years of his stewardship were excellent, even outstanding, managing to keep them in the Prem, on the tightest of budgets, whilst not going heavily into debt etc.

Then it started to go wrong around 2020. Some people put this down to Covid, affecting both BFC and Garlick's own company, meaning he had no choice but to squeeze the budget at Burnley very hard. Others reckon that that is just making excuses, so that he didn't permit Dyche to spend even moderate money (any?) on a much-needed squad rebuild, which in turn led to a severe breakdown in the relationship between the two. (Can't comment which is valid myself, mind).

Anyhow, it all came to a head over his sale of the club to a US investment firm, ALK. This lot, controlled by Alan Pace (now also Burnley Chairman), effectively did a mini-Glazer job i.e. loading their purchase money onto the club itself as debt.

Which raises a question over Garlick: did he do due diligence over these new buyers, and if he did, did he know or even care what he found? Or did he just think: "I'm getting my £100m, so I'm not really bothered where it's coming from"? For if it's the latter, that's pretty poor from a self-proclaimed Clarets fan, and might cause issues if/when he ever decided to sell Cheltenham.

Honestly, who cares about his due diligence with ALK or what Burnley fans think. I'm just excited that soon after supporting this club for 45 years, we might for the first time have an owner who will have the funds so that we can get some decent players and not be looking for cheap or free players year after year. Yes Paul spent money when SC was here but this could be so much more now.

I really don't expect our playing budget to change to top ten in league two, Garlick comes across as an owner that knows the limits of the club and would much prefer the stadium, training ground and behind the scenes of the club to get most attention tbh.

I am with you I'm expecting a boost to the playing budget but everything suggests he will want to make it more sustainable so we perhaps end up with a mid-table budget whilst he builds the revenue generators like a new main stand, improved training ground to fund the budget. I've said for a while but an extra 500 fans and non match day revenue feels very attainable and could mean an extra £250k in the playing budget each year which would make a real difference.

[Robin]

Want to support a club that punches above its weight and spends far more than it should on wages, plans a new stadium and hires high profile head coaches?

Well there's one not too far from here that fits the bill nicely.

One thing that should be noted is despite getting crowds less than half the size of ours FGR actually bring in more revenue than we do. Yes Stale Mince plugs a huge hole but they are clearly doing better commercially than we are with a ground that's much smaller and certainly no better.

[paperboy]

Want to support a club that punches above its weight and spends far more than it should on wages, plans a new stadium and hires high profile head coaches?

Well there's one not too far from here that fits the bill nicely.

Having read through this thread, there is nobody here asking for any of those. So as this appears to be fgr related, maybe other footie ?

Nice try.

[Ralph]

Not qualified to comment upon the above chicken first or egg first argument, but as regards Mr. Garlick, I've taken a look at a Burnley fans website and opinion on him is divided:
https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboa ... it=Garlick

All agree that the first few years of his stewardship were excellent, even outstanding, managing to keep them in the Prem, on the tightest of budgets, whilst not going heavily into debt etc.

Then it started to go wrong around 2020. Some people put this down to Covid, affecting both BFC and Garlick's own company, meaning he had no choice but to squeeze the budget at Burnley very hard. Others reckon that that is just making excuses, so that he didn't permit Dyche to spend even moderate money (any?) on a much-needed squad rebuild, which in turn led to a severe breakdown in the relationship between the two. (Can't comment which is valid myself, mind).

Anyhow, it all came to a head over his sale of the club to a US investment firm, ALK. This lot, controlled by Alan Pace (now also Burnley Chairman), effectively did a mini-Glazer job i.e. loading their purchase money onto the club itself as debt.

Which raises a question over Garlick: did he do due diligence over these new buyers, and if he did, did he know or even care what he found? Or did he just think: "I'm getting my £100m, so I'm not really bothered where it's coming from"? For if it's the latter, that's pretty poor from a self-proclaimed Clarets fan, and might cause issues if/when he ever decided to sell Cheltenham.

Honestly, who cares about his due diligence with ALK or what Burnley fans think. I'm just excited that soon after supporting this club for 45 years, we might for the first time have an owner who will have the funds so that we can get some decent players and not be looking for cheap or free players year after year. Yes Paul spent money when SC was here but this could be so much more now.

A sentiment shared by many fans of clubs with new owners instantly splash the cash on new players, get promoted and everything in the garden is rosy.
Then things start to go sour, owner who has loaded the club up with loads of debt, walks away and it dawns on fans that short term gain can lead to long term pain.
Not suggesting that will happen at Ctfc or that you would condone that Ralph.

I would take him as owner every time compared to the other characters that were mentioned as interested

[Ralph]

Not qualified to comment upon the above chicken first or egg first argument, but as regards Mr. Garlick, I've taken a look at a Burnley fans website and opinion on him is divided:
https://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboa ... it=Garlick

All agree that the first few years of his stewardship were excellent, even outstanding, managing to keep them in the Prem, on the tightest of budgets, whilst not going heavily into debt etc.

Then it started to go wrong around 2020. Some people put this down to Covid, affecting both BFC and Garlick's own company, meaning he had no choice but to squeeze the budget at Burnley very hard. Others reckon that that is just making excuses, so that he didn't permit Dyche to spend even moderate money (any?) on a much-needed squad rebuild, which in turn led to a severe breakdown in the relationship between the two. (Can't comment which is valid myself, mind).

Anyhow, it all came to a head over his sale of the club to a US investment firm, ALK. This lot, controlled by Alan Pace (now also Burnley Chairman), effectively did a mini-Glazer job i.e. loading their purchase money onto the club itself as debt.

Which raises a question over Garlick: did he do due diligence over these new buyers, and if he did, did he know or even care what he found? Or did he just think: "I'm getting my £100m, so I'm not really bothered where it's coming from"? For if it's the latter, that's pretty poor from a self-proclaimed Clarets fan, and might cause issues if/when he ever decided to sell Cheltenham.

Honestly, who cares about his due diligence with ALK or what Burnley fans think. I'm just excited that soon after supporting this club for 45 years, we might for the first time have an owner who will have the funds so that we can get some decent players and not be looking for cheap or free players year after year. Yes Paul spent money when SC was here but this could be so much more now.

A bit disrespectful to Simon Keswick who probably invested more in the football club than any other person. PB did a great job but didn't have the same level of funds. Agree on the overall sentiment though.

Yes he did but we got relegated back to the National and we have bounced around L2 for years with an occasional trip to L1 for a season or 2. I know he wasn't the manager but if the money was available, why did we not become a fixture in L1?

[Ralph]

Want to support a club that punches above its weight and spends far more than it should on wages, plans a new stadium and hires high profile head coaches?

Well there's one not too far from here that fits the bill nicely.

I really think if they start to build that thing, that really may start to cause FGR a few financial problems if they carry on with the losses they have currently. Yes Vince has money but that is an expensive project and If it gets built, his idea that 1000's of new fans will magically appear is laughable. And he still has to invest in Ecotricity

[Shade]

Want to support a club that punches above its weight and spends far more than it should on wages, plans a new stadium and hires high profile head coaches?

Well there's one not too far from here that fits the bill nicely.

I really think if they start to build that thing, that really may start to cause FGR a few financial problems if they carry on with the losses they have currently. Yes Vince has money but that is an expensive project and If it gets built, his idea that 1000's of new fans will magically appear is laughable. And he still has to invest in Ecotricity

We can only hope. Vince going back to where he started would be beautiful to watch. I'm happy for most who would start at the bottom and make their millions...but he's one of the exceptions

[ctfc-fan]

Want to support a club that punches above its weight and spends far more than it should on wages, plans a new stadium and hires high profile head coaches?

Well there's one not too far from here that fits the bill nicely.

One thing that should be noted is despite getting crowds less than half the size of ours FGR actually bring in more revenue than we do. Yes Stale Mince plugs a huge hole but they are clearly doing better commercially than we are with a ground that's much smaller and certainly no better.

And look at the type of advertisers, they’re all vegan/eco products. We’re in a different pool.

[Wellwisher]

MK were taken over by a middle eastern investment group that want to bring premier league football. Yes they spent a huge fee for Collins but they also offered offered Dan Crowley a rumoured £4k a week in wages in January to get him out of Notts County and offered £150k for an aged Crewe defender. Point is they have stupid financial resources for this level currently and no other team can come close.

But FFP should come into it too and the FA need to grow a pair.

It's the EFL responsible for financial governance in L2, not the FA, and there is no FFP. We have the Salary Cap Management Protocol (SCMP) in L2. That basically limits clubs from exceeding 50% of their turnover on player expenditure but only players over 21.

The catch is that "turnover" can include cash injections, so a sugar daddy owner can simply pump money in and that's absolutely fine. The rules are being tweaked this year to try and limit equity injections. Also, u21s who are considered established first team players will no longer be exempted. These are pretty minor tweaks though.

Basically, in the modern world of wealthy owners even in the basement division, the SCMP rules are pretty weak.

",,, even in the basement division, the SCMP rules are pretty weak"

The principle is that the EFL doesn't really want to discourage owners/investors from putting money into Lge One and Lge Two clubs, for if it was restricted, then they'd all go to the Championship, where they've a better/quicker chance of getting to the Promised Land.

[Wellwisher]

[quote=Robin post_id=372553 time=1750975881 user_id=71]
I'm confused by the point here, a new stand a) will bring in revenue on non-match days and b) increased attendances. This will make us more competitive. You can spend a few million on players but if the ground stays as it is it's unsustainable. Bottom line we need to generate more revenue and it's obvious crowds won't grow as we do not have enough seats and our ground is one of the poorest in league two facilities wise.
[/quote]
"... a new stand a) will bring in revenue on non-match days"

In what way? (Genuine question). I often hear this suggested, but don't know of many new stands or stadia which actually do. A common suggestion is Conferencing. Yet with part of that market having been replaced by Zoom etc, already existing conference facilities are competing ever harder for what remains, while in Cheltenham's case, I suspect that the Racecourse has already cornered the best part of the market.

Which reminds me of Brentford when the ybuilt their new stadium. Originally they had plans for Conferencing and a hotel, but after thinking about it some more, they realised: (a they didn't actually have any expertise in that field, and (b even if they had, the competition locally from established, specialised firms was fierce.

And for offices or retail etc, no harm, but Whaddon isn't exactly the most enticing area, at least compared with many of the more salubrious parts of the town.

"a new stand... will bring... b) increased attendances"

You'd certainly hope so, but it cannot be guaranteed. But even if the crowds do come, there remains a problem. Namely, suppose a new stand costs (a low-ball) £10m and expands capacity by 2k. That works out at £5k per seat = 200 games at £25 each = 10 years (minimum) of sold-out games. (Which excludes interest payments over 10 years and also the fact that the new stand may be at least partly occupied by fans migrating from other parts of the ground.)

Will s.o. like Garlick even be thinking in such terms? Or might he be hoping to put some money into the team, get promotion, boost crowds in WR as is, then sell for a profit to s.o. else after 5 or 6 years?

[Robin]

I'm confused by the point here, a new stand a) will bring in revenue on non-match days and b) increased attendances. This will make us more competitive. You can spend a few million on players but if the ground stays as it is it's unsustainable. Bottom line we need to generate more revenue and it's obvious crowds won't grow as we do not have enough seats and our ground is one of the poorest in league two facilities wise.

"... a new stand a) will bring in revenue on non-match days"

In what way? (Genuine question). I often hear this suggested, but don't know of many new stands or stadia which actually do. A common suggestion is Conferencing. Yet with part of that market having been replaced by Zoom etc, already existing conference facilities are competing ever harder for what remains, while in Cheltenham's case, I suspect that the Racecourse has already cornered the best part of the market.

Which reminds me of Brentford when the ybuilt their new stadium. Originally they had plans for Conferencing and a hotel, but after thinking about it some more, they realised: (a they didn't actually have any expertise in that field, and (b even if they had, the competition locally from established, specialised firms was fierce.

And for offices or retail etc, no harm, but Whaddon isn't exactly the most enticing area, at least compared with many of the more salubrious parts of the town.

"a new stand... will bring... b) increased attendances"

You'd certainly hope so, but it cannot be guaranteed. But even if the crowds do come, there remains a problem. Namely, suppose a new stand costs (a low-ball) £10m and expands capacity by 2k. That works out at £5k per seat = 200 games at £25 each = 10 years (minimum) of sold-out games. (Which excludes interest payments over 10 years and also the fact that the new stand may be at least partly occupied by fans migrating from other parts of the ground.)

Will s.o. like Garlick even be thinking in such terms? Or might he be hoping to put some money into the team, get promotion, boost crowds in WR as is, then sell for a profit to s.o. else after 5 or 6 years?

Any new stand will be designed to have non-match day revenue so likely office space with some conferencing I would imagine. It's well known we lack this vs other clubs. We could also do with a proper bar because the Robins Nest is far too small.

As for match day revenue we don't have enough seats and we know once seats are sold demand for terrace tickets drops off. It also allows us to then give more of the Colin Farmer to away fans when a bigger following comes along. We can also get the electronic advertising boards too - another thing we lack vs other clubs.

Ultimately you can have a successful team but when the ground is ramshackled and barely up to stand people are unlikely to come, You need facilities and a decent team and you get it right.

[Ihearye]

Was just having a look at the Cliftonville site for any info on their match this week against st Joseph's. From looking at a picture of the ground, you would have to travel a very long way to get a more picturesque ground.
And I don't mean solitude, many things I could say about the Cliftonville road but picturesque is not one of them:)

[plymrob]

It is not all about empty seats - and confrencing. We've surely prooved that in the past...?
As for any confrencing... Whaddon Road as a desirable Cheltenham venue anyone? As for a 'proper' ground to support you team, Whaddon Road anyone?

I'll still want to stand up for the latter. It can still be done.