javeajag

No I simply presented the facts that all three clubs had injections of £500k and we had the least cash in the bank to the extent we will lose £280k this year. You then speculate on what they might need it do but that’s speculation on your part.

Phew that’s a relief … we can go bust as well and be happy yay !

Jesus mate this isn’t succession it’s a very small football club

Yes ….we can’t afford to spend money we don’t have hoping somehow it will work out. That has led us to the current situation. if we have extra funds I would earmark that for our reserves, capital and infrastructure projects eg the stadium. Which leaves the bulk of revenue for the playing side. lots of clubs have tried the speculate to accumulate model and 9 times out of ten it doesn’t work. Under the previous ownership that was nearly a disaster. to be clear I’m not suggesting we reject then investment or do anything to the board simply that this £500k isn’t used to prop up the playing squad in a way that is unsustainable and the the Board are clear that we can only spend 95% of our revenue.

You don’t know then

For the record……no

When has the board of the club ever had vacancies that were hard to fill……never

My point is that we needed a £500k a cash injection to have less money in the bank than they have indeed to be £280k in the red and now we need another cash injection of £500k……

Man compares football club to jewellery store robbery in novel screenplay pitch

I’ve missed the part where anyone said these guys had an ulterior motive. Where the cash £500k ( the first £500k has gone. ) is going has already been outlined, how many more people are out there willing to donate substantial funds to the club ? Not many if any I suspect. Some of the original investment has indeed gone to cover losses on the playing squad. so if we keeping spending more than our revenue what do you think will happen ?

Accounts as of May 2023 : Raith had over £300k in cash in the Bank, Ayr increased theirs to over £200k……how much did we have ? Oh yes it goes negative this year.

Filling board positions never been an issue…..ever.

I assume it’s up to the trustees to be happy that the budget set by the Board is in line with the parameters set and is on a break even basis or what is the point. we can’t continue losing money each year that should be a simple directive to the Board. i can’t help thinking we are making this all too complicated.

I think this would helpful for this to be circulated to members - not necessarily in detail - but what the objectives are , how these are planned to be met, how they will be monitored and what happens if they are not met. What success looks like and the risks of bad things happening. we need to start living within our means.

Well that’s alright then …..so I guess your going to cover our losses

So what is the plan to achieve break even ? Have you seen one ?

We have lost money every year for five years at least …..if it’s not a cycle it’s a habit

So the Trustees have agreed that the Biard can operate at a loss ?

To be honest the question is why do our Boards not live within their means , run up losses and then expect someone to bail them out.

It is quite normal indeed essential for a board to have parameters and targets particularly when they are not the owners of the business. Better not to overspend than having to deal with it afterwards as we are now seeing. it’s neither disincentivising or being trigger happy…..it’s simply saying we want the club run without incurring any debt. Simple.

And that shouldn’t be too complicated …..the owners tell the board that if income is projected to £100 then expenditure should be £95. for a very small business we sure make it complicated.

Possibly but that would require the fans to agree and a change to the legal arrangements

This is a fair observation and should have been addressed directly in the statement. one assumes these are friends or acquaintances of Donald Mcclymont but that should be addressed along with why they are investing. pretty basic stuff not to address.

The fans share cannot go below 51%.

They are all on loan though obviously can be recalled