Gills in 1995 - financial issues | Page 2 | Vital Football

Gills in 1995 - financial issues

Captainreblue

Vital Squad Member
#21
Tony Smith put cash into Gills to keep it afloat, as a fan and if you speak to him the money he put in was heart ruling head and he's still a STH to this day. The club was in a financial mess when he took over and his money kept it afloat.

Just as people say we'd have no club without Scally, without Tony Smith Scally wouldn't have had a club to buy, so for very differing reasons they're both important.
 

Trev_GFC

Vital Squad Member
#22
I used to sit behind Tony in the Rainham End when it was first built 👍

Tony Smith invested money as a loan which the club (eventually) paid back. Did he invest any other amount before this loan?

Scaly has also invested money this way.
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#23
A few older Gills fans i know say that Tony Smith doesn't get the credit he deserves regarding the club being saved. They are not anti Scally by any means but feel that Smith is very much the unsung hero.
Absolutely spot on! Tony Smith was a fucking hero and will always be a hero. Without him the club would have folded well before Scally showed up with his quid.

Not Scally bashing, he deserves credit for many things.

But Tony Smith, well maybe he deserves a statue on Redfearn Avenue?!
 

MedwayModernist

Vital Squad Member
#25
Tony Smith put cash into Gills to keep it afloat, as a fan and if you speak to him the money he put in was heart ruling head and he's still a STH to this day. The club was in a financial mess when he took over and his money kept it afloat.

Just as people say we'd have no club without Scally, without Tony Smith Scally wouldn't have had a club to buy, so for very differing reasons they're both important.
Ok, so the pertinent question for me, is who had run the club in to a mess that required Tony to put his own cash up to keep us going?

Was it actually a case of poor financial management? Or was it something of a case of a drip drip drip effect where our revenues just dried up over the years following relegation to D4 and shrinking attendances?
 

shotshy

Vital 1st Team Regular
#26
Ok, so the pertinent question for me, is who had run the club in to a mess that required Tony to put his own cash up to keep us going?

Was it actually a case of poor financial management? Or was it something of a case of a drip drip drip effect where our revenues just dried up over the years following relegation to D4 and shrinking attendances?
I think it was a bit of all that MM.
A general run down of lower league clubs.
Loads are still in that position now.
 

markinkent

Vital 1st Team Regular
#27
I think it was a bit of all that MM.
A general run down of lower league clubs.
Loads are still in that position now.
Agree it was just the running costs were not covered by the income from tickets sales.we certainly didn't splash out on stadium investment or players !

We didn't have any other income then e.g. conference facilities ot TV money. At a guess I reckon the factory takes more in a month than the social club did in a year.
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#28
Agree it was just the running costs were not covered by the income from tickets sales.we certainly didn't splash out on stadium investment or players !

We didn't have any other income then e.g. conference facilities ot TV money. At a guess I reckon the factory takes more in a month than the social club did in a year.
Another thing that I seem to remember (but might have this wrong) is that after our relegation to Div 4 in 1988 we didn't, for the next few years or so, have any players who we could sell for big(ish) transfer fees. The only one I can remember is Nicky Forster, and although we got a bit for him, it was a lot less than he was worth.

The crowds were down, the stadium was falling apart and the team was made up of young players with only moderate potential and older players on their way down and out of the game. It was worse than a vicious circle, it was an ever decreasing spiral.
 

Captainreblue

Vital Squad Member
#29
Ok, so the pertinent question for me, is who had run the club in to a mess that required Tony to put his own cash up to keep us going?

Was it actually a case of poor financial management? Or was it something of a case of a drip drip drip effect where our revenues just dried up over the years following relegation to D4 and shrinking attendances?
As other have said I don't think it was so much as one individual being reckless or irresponsible with finances it was the drip drip effect of what was coming in not covering what was going out. Gates of 4k plus were fairly rare in the early 90's.

Buddha- The only player that springs to mind that we sold for a fee back then was Beadle to Spurs for about 300k.
 

mick745

Vital Youth Team
#30
On the second clip from the supporters meeting in the main stand, the guy who asked how much was the cost of the floodlights and handed over £50 was myself!
Just goes to show who are proper supporters. A club is on its knees, struggling with dwindling crowds, averaging around 3,000, serving up dire football, on the brink of going out of the league, or out of business yet people still willing to hand over £50 to help with running costs.

Thank you to you and all the others that helped.

The premier league never will understand what is a proper fan will they?
 

SE1_Gills

Vital Squad Member
#31
In one of the news reports Geoff Clark lamented how we were losing £3k a week and at the same time Manchester United had just weighed out £7m and £8k a week to sign Andy Cole.

He went on to comment about the gap in finance between the leagues.

I'd love to hear what he thinks now.
 
#32
In one of the news reports Geoff Clark lamented how we were losing £3k a week and at the same time Manchester United had just weighed out £7m and £8k a week to sign Andy Cole.

He went on to comment about the gap in finance between the leagues.

I'd love to hear what he thinks now.
They must have had big scales at Old Trafford.
 

mick745

Vital Youth Team
#33
In one of the news reports Geoff Clark lamented how we were losing £3k a week and at the same time Manchester United had just weighed out £7m and £8k a week to sign Andy Cole.

He went on to comment about the gap in finance between the leagues.

I'd love to hear what he thinks now.
Imagine a top striker in the premier league earning "just" £8k a week - a mere £400k a year - now.
 

alphabet_king

Vital 1st Team Regular
#34
As other have said I don't think it was so much as one individual being reckless or irresponsible with finances it was the drip drip effect of what was coming in not covering what was going out. Gates of 4k plus were fairly rare in the early 90's.

Buddha- The only player that springs to mind that we sold for a fee back then was Beadle to Spurs for about 300k.
Not sure how anyone can say individuals arw not reckless or irresponsible with finances if 'what was coming in' didnt cover 'what was going out'.

As the head of a business, its their responsibility to cut the cloth accordingly. If the income reduces gradually over time, the outgoings must also be reduced. If you dont do this, then youre irresponsible or reckless IMO.

The fact some claim it was a slow gradual process makes it worse imo. That means they had more time to react. You could understand the mistake of the itv digital, a sudden drop in income, but if it's gradual drops in income its really something that they have plenty of time to react to, and should be managed.
 

shotshy

Vital 1st Team Regular
#35
Should have is the key phrase AK.
For some reason that I’m unable to get my head round, football clubs don’t seem to operate in what we would call a normal business world.
Example.
If your company had an operating loss and debt of £13 million , would you continue to take a six figure salary ?
 

alphabet_king

Vital 1st Team Regular
#36
Y
Should have is the key phrase AK.
For some reason that I’m unable to get my head round, football clubs don’t seem to operate in what we would call a normal business world.
Example.
If your company had an operating loss and debt of £13 million , would you continue to take a six figure salary ?
I take it you are talking about scally of the mid 00s though, as we do not have an operating loss or that debt now (glad wk is not here to argue the toss). But obviously back in the noughties we did have both of these, and scally still took a salary.

Plenty of companies that run much bigger losses than that pay their CEOs just as much if not more. The idea being that you want adequately experienced and qualified people to get you out of the mess.

I guess you are suggesting that this approach could also be taken on the playing side of things. Plenty of teams get into financial trouble and try to buy their way out of it. I.e. buy better players with money they cant really afford and try to ensure promotions and a return to the more financially beneficial leagues. Its a gamble, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesnt (bolton). The line between good business idea and irresponsible/wrecklessness is a thin one sometimes. But there is a line to be drawn nonetheless.

I just cant see how anyone running a gradual and long lasting loss (as is being claimed) is seen as anything but irresponsible financially.
 
#37
Should have is the key phrase AK.
For some reason that I’m unable to get my head round, football clubs don’t seem to operate in what we would call a normal business world.
Example.
If your company had an operating loss and debt of £13 million , would you continue to take a six figure salary ?
But it is a normal business world. Take Uber and Aston Martin as two examples of companies that operate at huge financial losses yet continue to trade.
 

Captainreblue

Vital Squad Member
#38
Not sure how anyone can say individuals arw not reckless or irresponsible with finances if 'what was coming in' didnt cover 'what was going out'.

As the head of a business, its their responsibility to cut the cloth accordingly. If the income reduces gradually over time, the outgoings must also be reduced. If you dont do this, then youre irresponsible or reckless IMO.

The fact some claim it was a slow gradual process makes it worse imo. That means they had more time to react. You could understand the mistake of the itv digital, a sudden drop in income, but if it's gradual drops in income its really something that they have plenty of time to react to, and should be managed.
Tony Smith only got involved financially with GFC in early 95 iirc. Before that it was Bernard Baker at the helm. Less said there the better. In the short time Tony Smith was in charge he put in a fair bit out of his own pocket to keep the club going. As I said earlier he was a fan who had a bit of money and didn't want to see the club dis appear.

For all the financial woes that we've had at various times over the years, IMO Tony Smith only tried to help solve them, he didn't create them. Our recent financial worries however have been created by our current leader, but that would be Scally bashing.
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#39
Tony Smith only got involved financially with GFC in early 95 iirc. Before that it was Bernard Baker at the helm. Less said there the better. In the short time Tony Smith was in charge he put in a fair bit out of his own pocket to keep the club going. As I said earlier he was a fan who had a bit of money and didn't want to see the club dis appear.

For all the financial woes that we've had at various times over the years, IMO Tony Smith only tried to help solve them, he didn't create them. Our recent financial worries however have been created by our current leader, but that would be Scally bashing.
Yes, yes, yes!

If there was mismanagement or financial irresponsibility that was down to the previous board. I was too young to properly understand what was going on but I remember older supporters speaking badly about Charlie Cox - so not really sure about any of that, though would be interested to hear from older supporters (this is a time I'd appreciate Wayne's input!!).

What I do know is that Tony Smith was just a hero. I wont hear a word said against him. When is he getting that statue??!!