Club Statement - Pettit named new Chairman

Quoted from ska face

Don’t think anyone mentioned infrastructure. Pettit said new capital would be used to build on the sustainable model - so that could mean anything.

True, but assuming it will be spent somewhere so if it’s not going on the playing budget not much else to spend it on other than the infrastructure. Pleased to hear that the money invested in the club to date will be transferred from loans to equity presumably ensuring we have no ongoing debts. Very positive news.

Any possibility Mike Parker could be getting back involved? Genuinely seemed interested first time around.

I see he's a Trustee of Horizon Youth Zone, so will know Jason Stockwood through that at the very least (unless it's a different Mike Parker).

I certainly hope some of the new investment will be going towards the playing budget. After this season's disappointments and the frustrations of watching so many games where we couldn't hold the lead or score that second goal, I doubt any of us are anxious to find ourselves supporting the club with the best infrastructure in the National League!

Quoted from Lincoln Mariner 56

True, but assuming it will be spent somewhere so if it’s not going on the playing budget not much else to spend it on other than the infrastructure.

Maybe so but worthwhile trying to avoid the typical scenario we see on here where the board get battered for not delivering something they’ve never said.

I know the inks not dry on it but raising the investment will be a big tick in the box for me . Maybe incorrectly I was skeptical it would be possible to get others on board willing to donate /meet their criteria as individuals but it looks like they  have now done that .

I think we can look forward to 'continuous improvement ' off the pitch and it will be interesting where a 'mid range budget  ' and data led model takes us .

Quoted from TonySmith

I certainly hope some of the new investment will be going towards the playing budget. After this season's disappointments and the frustrations of watching so many games where we couldn't hold the lead or score that second goal, I doubt any of us are anxious to find ourselves supporting the club with the best infrastructure in the National League!

Problem is if you chuck funds you've raised at it on wages then you either need to continue that, once you've spent the original investment - which creates debt. Or you have to cut your budget, neither is sustainable. You're either creating unsustainable debt or creating the conditions to yoyo up and down leagues as your budget goes up and down. There's no guarantee it even works, so you could just end up wasting the money. Like Colchester who i think are now around 19million in debt and struggling in L2..

Now where that could be different is player acquisitions, so for example Conteh was an investment which we've seen a return on. Doesn't take a genius to work out if you can keep spending £100k and selling for £300k you can keep reinvesting that 'new' money.

Personally think it's far better getting more people involved and more expertise and support at board level, coupled with improving the club off the pitch and with facilities that improve us on it - training ground etc. It's about giving a Manager the tools to attract players and make them successful rather than just chucking money at players that have only come for money etc.

There are two types of successful clubs - debt ridden one's which ultimately can lead to issues further down the road when the music stops. Or well run, financially viable that have built up over a period of time to a specific model  (comparing your Chelsea's to your Brightons/Brentfords) I much prefer the latter way. Not only is it just wise business sense it means you can absorb any downturns or shocks better (i.e another ITV Digital).

Crawley have shown this season that you don't need to throw stupid money at it to have a chance of succeeding.  You can spend little money well or you can spend a lot of money badly.

Just on Mappers' point about Conteh, that model worked purely in terms of us getting a return on our investment (with potential for more to come). Probably lends itself more into the transfer window thread but wouldn't at all be surprised if we see another mini-coup type signing of that ilk this summer, buying a young player with a good pedigree who is probably just a bit impatient to get going at a higher level.  Happy to be corrected but I don't think there's too many clubs who are doing that or have done it previously. certainly creates a little niche in the market for us moving forward and the more and better we do it, the higher calibre of player we'll be able to attract.  

Quoted from Mikey_345

Problem is if you chuck funds you've raised at it on wages then you either need to continue that, once you've spent the original investment - which creates debt. Or you have to cut your budget, neither is sustainable. You're either creating unsustainable debt or creating the conditions to yoyo up and down leagues as your budget goes up and down. There's no guarantee it even works, so you could just end up wasting the money. Like Colchester who i think are now around 19million in debt and struggling in L2..

Now where that could be different is player acquisitions, so for example Conteh was an investment which we've seen a return on. Doesn't take a genius to work out if you can keep spending £100k and selling for £300k you can keep reinvesting that 'new' money.

Personally think it's far better getting more people involved and more expertise and support at board level, coupled with improving the club off the pitch and with facilities that improve us on it - training ground etc. It's about giving a Manager the tools to attract players and make them successful rather than just chucking money at players that have only come for money etc.

There are two types of successful clubs - debt ridden one's which ultimately can lead to issues further down the road when the music stops. Or well run, financially viable that have built up over a period of time to a specific model  (comparing your Chelsea's to your Brightons/Brentfords) I much prefer the latter way. Not only is it just wise business sense it means you can absorb any downturns or shocks better (i.e another ITV Digital).

I'm sure we can all see your points and agree to a large extent, but Brentford and Brighton have had many millions pumped into them and they needed kick starts to start their journey from the lower leagues. Let's not kid ourselves that a model (that so many other clubs also say they are following) will work without being able to have the money to attract the right players in the first place.

It's not just a case of wasting the money as unless you make a complete horlicks of it as players can be sold on.

There is no danger whatever these owners will put us in any financial danger, but that doesn't mean every signing will have to be under the radar, an unknown that ticks the sustainability model.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I'm sure we can all see your points and agree to a large extent, but Brentford and Brighton have had many millions pumped into them and they needed kick starts to start their journey from the lower leagues. Let's not kid ourselves that a model (that so many other clubs also say they are following) will work without being able to have the money to attract the right players in the first place.

It's not just a case of wasting the money as unless you make a complete horlicks of it as players can be sold on.

There is no danger whatever these owners will put us in any financial danger, but that doesn't mean every signing will have to be under the radar, an unknown that ticks the sustainability model.

I would argue we have injected monies already into the playing budget. Look at how much Jason and Andrew have put in over three years. Fees paid for players (Conteh just one example) and budgets seen to be more competitive than before and not scared of longer contracts to attract players. I think the notion (from some) that we haven't invested on the playing squad is just wrong. The level of how much of that you do is my argument.

Quoted from Mikey_345

I would argue we have injected monies already into the playing budget. Look at how much Jason and Andrew have put in over three years. Fees paid for players (Conteh just one example) and budgets seen to be more competitive than before and not scared of longer contracts to attract players. I think the notion (from some) that we haven't invested on the playing squad is just wrong. The level of how much of that you do is my argument.

But you have also got to remember what we've spent so far enabled us to finish 4th bottom of the 4th tier.

Most of us are delighted to have these owners on board including me but it is an interesting discussion as personally I think players hold all the aces and it is a fact of life that they do cost a lot of money regardless of any model of sustainability.

It's not a criticism just an observation.