cropped
Vital Squad Member
STOCKPORT COUNTY SUPPORTERS’ CO-OPERATIVE
AND STOCKPORT COUNTY FOOTBALL CLUB
Meeting Notes
ATTENDANCE
Present (SCSC): Pete Towey (Chair), Ian Brown, Andy Burt, Caroline Burt (Independent Secretary), John Giles, Ed Keane, Steve Murray, Matthew White
Present (SCFC): Steve Bellis, Jon Keighren, Richard Park
A message from the SCSC Board:
Prior to this meeting, questions were invited from both members and non-members alike. Over 50+ questions were submitted. As you may expect, there was some duplication of subject matter so in this case, the questions were combined. All topics that were raised by concerned fans were brought to the meeting.
The owners are actively seeking additional investment (which could take many forms including full ownership).
There are currently 3 interested parties, but there are no “offers on the table” as there have not been any hard detailed plans submitted to the club. There are no delays as the timescales are being driven by the potential investors.
It is important to note, though, that they are all viable offers. The Club regards them all as serious propositions who might benefit County going forward.
The Club aren’t actively approaching agents / advertising the club is for sale as this smacks of desperation, plus the club is attracting offers without going down that path.
The Co-op Board expressed a concern about the rumours circulating that the deal could be done by Christmas and that this might raise expectations unrealistically. It was reiterated by the club that there was not a firm timetable to any potential deal going through and that the “by Christmas” rumour had not come from anyone on the Club Board.
The current SCFC board regard themselves as being custodians of the Club and its future, and will happily handover the reins in due course to the right new investor providing they are deemed good for County.
2. Should the owners express a desire to remain and not sell, can they provide the commitment to being a truly full-time professional football club for the season 2019/20 funded with a full-time professional playing budget where outline plans can be seen from them that they really mean business to begin structuring our pathway out of League 6 football.
The playing budget for the 2018/19 has been increased and the board believe this to be within the top 3 in the division. The shareholders and directors have committed to underwriting any losses, which are caused by the increased budget.
If new investment isn't secured, the intention is for the Club to transition to full time status next season, with the full agreement of the team manager. Additional funding will be made available to support a full time playing structure.
3. Can they confirm how many of our players this season are solely employed by County and are therefore genuine full time players?
We are currently operating as a hybrid structure. There are four players this season with full time jobs. Some players do have other roles though - it used to be the case that players had full time jobs and playing for County was their part time job. It tends to be the other way around now and playing for County is their main priority and they fit in other work around that.
All players who signed for us over the summer can go full time next season and the aim is to be as close to full time as possible next season. This is very much driven by the manager though as Jim wants us to transfer back into full time organically. He has no desire for us to get promoted only to get relegated again the next season. Plus, we would hate to lose Ben Hinchliffe, for example, as he is arguably the best keeper in non-league.
We have full confidence in the Manager and it follows that we do not feel that appointing a Director of Football would achieve anything of value for the Club. In fact, Directors of Football often seem to end up acting as a scout and we already have one of those. It would be an additional expense for no real return.
5. Bearing in mind the talk of a boycott, what immediate steps/actions are the Board planning on taking to avoid an escalation of fans dissatisfaction and to ensure this team becomes a real promotion contender this season?
Talk of boycotts are not helpful when we are trying to make progress gaining promotion from division 6. The Club Board are just as disappointed as the fans with the start of this season - the manager has been given a very competitive budget.
The Club board do acknowledge the need for improved communications between supporters and Club, and undertake to firm up the relationship with the Supporters’ Co-operative and ensure that suitably regular meetings take place going forward.
6. Who holds the football management team to account for a) transfers and, b) performance?
Following on from above, what are the targets in terms of league position and other performance indicators that have been set for Jim Gannon and his team?
Ultimately the Board hold the football management team to account. Both the manager and players have targets, the latter set by the manager.
The accounts will be available at the end of this current year.
8. Can the Co-op board be allowed to see the full set of accounts?
Richard Park agreed to provide Steve Murray (the Co-op’s financial advisor) with access to the full accounts at a separate time in the near future.
9. What is the profit / loss to 30th June 2018?
The anticipated loss is circa £50k – this is despite reaching the play offs and a decent cup run as the money raised from that was ploughed back into the playing budget.
This will be underwritten by the current board who will cover the shortfall as in previous years.
10. Will there be a write down in shareholder debt in the accounts to 30th June 2018 – circa £800k - that we have been led to believe they intend to do? Are there any conditions attached to waiving this debt?
The shareholder debt has seemingly increased back towards if not above what it was prior to Sea Of Blue.
Why? When we are told we are running at break-even?
Who are the newest debts to?
Are they loans to be leveraged against any incoming investor or are they being placed into capital to re-strengthen the balance sheet?
There has been no reduction in the level of shareholder debt for the year to June 2018, in fact it has increased by £80,000 due to the requirement to support the short term working capital position following the delayed receipt of season ticket revenue.
In the period June 2015 to June 2017 the level of shareholder debt has reduced not increased.
The 'newest' debt in the year to June 2018 was advanced by the current shareholders.
Until the exact terms offered by the potential acquirer are agreed, the club are not in a position to comment on the future treatment of the shareholder loans.
AND STOCKPORT COUNTY FOOTBALL CLUB
Meeting Notes
Meeting held on Monday 3 September 2018 at The Fingerpost
commencing at 6:30pm
commencing at 6:30pm
ATTENDANCE
Present (SCSC): Pete Towey (Chair), Ian Brown, Andy Burt, Caroline Burt (Independent Secretary), John Giles, Ed Keane, Steve Murray, Matthew White
Present (SCFC): Steve Bellis, Jon Keighren, Richard Park
A message from the SCSC Board:
Prior to this meeting, questions were invited from both members and non-members alike. Over 50+ questions were submitted. As you may expect, there was some duplication of subject matter so in this case, the questions were combined. All topics that were raised by concerned fans were brought to the meeting.
Takeover Talks
1. Are there still two offers on the table and where are they up to? Also what if anything is causing the delay? Are the current negotiations about selling SCFC to completely new owners or about bringing in additional shareholders with additional funds?
The owners are actively seeking additional investment (which could take many forms including full ownership).
There are currently 3 interested parties, but there are no “offers on the table” as there have not been any hard detailed plans submitted to the club. There are no delays as the timescales are being driven by the potential investors.
It is important to note, though, that they are all viable offers. The Club regards them all as serious propositions who might benefit County going forward.
The Club aren’t actively approaching agents / advertising the club is for sale as this smacks of desperation, plus the club is attracting offers without going down that path.
The Co-op Board expressed a concern about the rumours circulating that the deal could be done by Christmas and that this might raise expectations unrealistically. It was reiterated by the club that there was not a firm timetable to any potential deal going through and that the “by Christmas” rumour had not come from anyone on the Club Board.
The current SCFC board regard themselves as being custodians of the Club and its future, and will happily handover the reins in due course to the right new investor providing they are deemed good for County.
Full Time / Part Time Status
2. Should the owners express a desire to remain and not sell, can they provide the commitment to being a truly full-time professional football club for the season 2019/20 funded with a full-time professional playing budget where outline plans can be seen from them that they really mean business to begin structuring our pathway out of League 6 football.
The playing budget for the 2018/19 has been increased and the board believe this to be within the top 3 in the division. The shareholders and directors have committed to underwriting any losses, which are caused by the increased budget.
If new investment isn't secured, the intention is for the Club to transition to full time status next season, with the full agreement of the team manager. Additional funding will be made available to support a full time playing structure.
3. Can they confirm how many of our players this season are solely employed by County and are therefore genuine full time players?
We are currently operating as a hybrid structure. There are four players this season with full time jobs. Some players do have other roles though - it used to be the case that players had full time jobs and playing for County was their part time job. It tends to be the other way around now and playing for County is their main priority and they fit in other work around that.
All players who signed for us over the summer can go full time next season and the aim is to be as close to full time as possible next season. This is very much driven by the manager though as Jim wants us to transfer back into full time organically. He has no desire for us to get promoted only to get relegated again the next season. Plus, we would hate to lose Ben Hinchliffe, for example, as he is arguably the best keeper in non-league.
The 2018/19 Season
4. What measures are being taken to ensure county can transition to a full time setup successfully under the current management team? Would there be scope for a Director of Football? We have full confidence in the Manager and it follows that we do not feel that appointing a Director of Football would achieve anything of value for the Club. In fact, Directors of Football often seem to end up acting as a scout and we already have one of those. It would be an additional expense for no real return.
5. Bearing in mind the talk of a boycott, what immediate steps/actions are the Board planning on taking to avoid an escalation of fans dissatisfaction and to ensure this team becomes a real promotion contender this season?
Talk of boycotts are not helpful when we are trying to make progress gaining promotion from division 6. The Club Board are just as disappointed as the fans with the start of this season - the manager has been given a very competitive budget.
The Club board do acknowledge the need for improved communications between supporters and Club, and undertake to firm up the relationship with the Supporters’ Co-operative and ensure that suitably regular meetings take place going forward.
6. Who holds the football management team to account for a) transfers and, b) performance?
Following on from above, what are the targets in terms of league position and other performance indicators that have been set for Jim Gannon and his team?
Ultimately the Board hold the football management team to account. Both the manager and players have targets, the latter set by the manager.
Finances
7. When will the accounts to 30th June 2018 be published?The accounts will be available at the end of this current year.
8. Can the Co-op board be allowed to see the full set of accounts?
Richard Park agreed to provide Steve Murray (the Co-op’s financial advisor) with access to the full accounts at a separate time in the near future.
9. What is the profit / loss to 30th June 2018?
The anticipated loss is circa £50k – this is despite reaching the play offs and a decent cup run as the money raised from that was ploughed back into the playing budget.
This will be underwritten by the current board who will cover the shortfall as in previous years.
10. Will there be a write down in shareholder debt in the accounts to 30th June 2018 – circa £800k - that we have been led to believe they intend to do? Are there any conditions attached to waiving this debt?
The shareholder debt has seemingly increased back towards if not above what it was prior to Sea Of Blue.
Why? When we are told we are running at break-even?
Who are the newest debts to?
Are they loans to be leveraged against any incoming investor or are they being placed into capital to re-strengthen the balance sheet?
There has been no reduction in the level of shareholder debt for the year to June 2018, in fact it has increased by £80,000 due to the requirement to support the short term working capital position following the delayed receipt of season ticket revenue.
In the period June 2015 to June 2017 the level of shareholder debt has reduced not increased.
The 'newest' debt in the year to June 2018 was advanced by the current shareholders.
Until the exact terms offered by the potential acquirer are agreed, the club are not in a position to comment on the future treatment of the shareholder loans.