AGM Report

[John Very Little]

The AGM was well attended with around 100 people at the Cross Bar (Dave Bayliss was not in attendance). The evening was split into 2 parts with the first part being the main AGM and then a second part that involved a presentation from TK and a more general Q&A Session with many questions answered.
There were copies of the accounts and an agenda and on reading the accounts ending 30 June 2011 (the season we had after Wembley - 2 seasons ago) we lost a staggering £171,672 (more on this later). The agenda was followed with the various motions approved and passed and thanks given to some former directors (not all). Steve Leonard ran through the accounts and summary (it turns out we got 45K for the sale of Walker to Luton). The main reason for the loss was the fall in football income which was £350,000 down on the previous season as a result of no Cup/Trophy run or prize money, lower income from gate receipts etc etc. The wage bill was slightly lower than the previous season as were some other costs.
TK and BK were re-elected and SP & JM were also formally elected to the board. TK said that the board have been so busy fire-fighting that they haven't had time to get round to sorting the AGM, Accounts and Debentures as a result of all the meetings and juggling things that they've had to do to keep the club running. They are now in nowhere near as bad a situation as they were and hope to contact the debenture holders around late-March when they also hope to have the next AGM around that time.
There was a discussion about the constitution in that there is a large imbalance in that there are 7 board members who are responsible for a large undertaking many with their own money involved and its felt that they are so vulnerable with such a company - yet they could easily be voted off the board and demand their money so the board want members to think about amending the existing model in some way and Lancaster Branch from here has looked into how other similar clubs are run/organised. They didn't want to go to a PLC though but did want to reduce the burden and risk on the existing board members as they could also end up in situations where they're put in a compromising position.
A point was made about the shop being unmanned and why they couldn't have volunteers there. TK said that because of the poistion they are in people contact the club and whoever answers gets people talking about confidential information regarding finances and the like and the club only really want those involved at that level to deal with this information. TK did repeat that the club could do better with communication but issues with the finances and development (more on this later) and general running of the club have been bigger priorities.
Another question was about the pitch and why they don't get someone more local. The reason the club use Putt-it-Right is that they have all the equipment needed to work on the pitch whereas when local groundstaff worked on the pitch they didn't have the necessary equipment and the club would have to pay for the equipment and the club couldn't afford to pay for all the necessary equipment and other things that would be needed now.
Part 2
It was felt that after Wembley the club had improved and would continue to grow but sadly everything went wrong and they effectively fell off a cliff with the income and reasons for the drop were mentioned previously. However some high earning players getting injured and losing form exaserbated the situation along with early Cup/Trophy exits and lower gates.
TK presented a breakdown of costs to show how the club were struggling to afford Conference Premier football now. The average wage that we are paying is approx £475 gross but there are variations in the figure, multiply this by 42 weeks and 18 players = £359K. Projected current gates will generate an income of 223K and this is the shortfall the club have to make up this season but is manageable as there is also Cup and Trophy prize money as well as hospitality and other things. As mentioned earlier our debts have been reduced and the club aren't fire-fighting as much as they were.
In order to reduce outgoings the club have reduced the staff to the bare minimum (Martin Lewis had to be released) and they are being more strict about things like hospitality costs and not offering so many deals, as what they have at present is a very good deal for the money. TK also said about being mis-quoted in that he doesn't want us to go down as it would be better financially in League 2 or Conf North but there were other factors why we should stay in Conf Prem. Relegation could mean a slight impact on the development bid and they don't want to cut the budget any further and are trying to make it work as they are now but don't want to pay more wages to get into any more debt.

A major talking point was the development which was likened to a millstone round the clubs neck because of all the negativity its produced through no fault of the club. We are in the last 2 of what started as 32 bidders and there has been no timescale given for the development by the organisation who decide, its certainly taken longer than they were first led to believe. The final 2 bids are different and this is what is causing the delay. The Council bid is more straightforward than ours which is why they are the preferred bidder. However our bid is more complex because of the legalities involved but it offers many more things that the councils bid doesn't and this is where the issue is. The club have been trying to highlight the benefits of their bid and got some VIP's involved but again the decision about the development is out of their hands. If they are unsuccessful its not the end of the world as the club can use a similar model to bid for other developments as they now know what they can do and how it can be done, what's needed etc.

The main thing that would help the club is basically if some of those who went to Wembley went to get to a few games and they'd like us to try and persuade others to go to the games. On the point about the racism issues with Macclesfield it was mentioned that they have their own PR teams and we cannot compete with them, barely anyone has asked Barrow for a comment about it. The club don't want to re-raise this but they haven't received any information to say racist remarks were made in the home game. Following a long discussion about the floodlights and other things the top of the floodlights will be taken down for H&S reasons (someone who doesn't like the club may have tipped off the Council to try and cause trouble on that and other things). The club are getting some junior schools to adopt-a-player where that player will go to that junior school to give talks and the like to get more involved with the community side. Finally the club haven't heard anything about any points deduction after Bluesquare's Alan Algers tweets and believe this was to do with midfielder Danny Rowe playing at Luton which was within the rules.

[Jim]

Excellent report, John, your effort is much appreciated. Thanks.

[spongebobsquarepants]

There were copies of the accounts and an agenda and on reading the accounts ending 30 June 2011 (the season we had after Wembley - 2 seasons ago) we lost a staggering £171,672 (more on this later).....The main reason for the loss was the fall in football income which was £350,000 down on the previous season as a result of no Cup/Trophy run or prize money, lower income from gate receipts etc etc. The wage bill was slightly lower than the previous season as were some other costs.

In 2009/2010 the average league attendance was 1,253.

In 2010/2011 the average league attendance was 1,214.

Was this discussed any further? It would seem that the club is heavily reliant upon (unpredictable) cup income to survive.

[HenneysKnee]

Cheers John; everyone knew we'd lost money but I'm staggered that it was that much

[optomisticsupporter]

It was stated a further AGM will be held this March mainly to discuss the constitution of the club, as I read it it seems the board want to depart from a members club so they can protect their investment, this means I guess they would own the club and no further AGM's would be required and the present board would only depart if they decided they wanted to go and not be dependant on being re-elected by members, although no board members have ever been voted off at previous AGM's, needs a lot of discussion I think.

[Steelworks End]

Excellent report, John, your effort is much appreciated. Thanks.

Ditto.

[madplumpy]

It was stated a further AGM will be held this March mainly to discuss the constitution of the club, as I read it it seems the board want to depart from a members club so they can protect their investment, this means I guess they would own the club and no further AGM's would be required and the present board would only depart if they decided they wanted to go and not be dependant on being re-elected by members, although no board members have ever been voted off at previous AGM's, needs a lot of discussion I think.

Not true. It was stated that they dont want to become a private club again but because various board members now have pesonal money tied up in the club the constitution as a members club (as it stands) no longer seems to fit and needs to be looked at and discussed. TK had no idea what a new constitution would look like but was open to any ideas.

[Nigel Bamford]

Thanks for that, John, very much appreciated. I always acknowledge the efforts put in by the board but, boy, they really need to improve their communication skills.

[Richard Ingham]

A fact they acknowledged last night several times Nigel.

[Richard Ingham]

It was stated a further AGM will be held this March mainly to discuss the constitution of the club, as I read it it seems the board want to depart from a members club so they can protect their investment, this means I guess they would own the club and no further AGM's would be required and the present board would only depart if they decided they wanted to go and not be dependant on being re-elected by members, although no board members have ever been voted off at previous AGM's, needs a lot of discussion I think.

The AGM in March will actually be the AGM for the 2011-2012 season, with the constitution of the club to be debated afterwards.

[Kieran]

A fact they acknowledged last night several times Nigel.

And has been acknowledged at every AGM we've ever had, but has anything ever changed??

[barrowfan]

A fact they acknowledged last night several times Nigel.

And has been acknowledged at every AGM we've ever had, but has anything ever changed??

Thy did say last night that they are willing to talk to anyone with the necessary skills who could help out.

Form an orderly queue!

[barrowfan]

I found Tony Keen's presentation very interesting.

He was trying to give people an insight into what it was like to be a member of the board. From the picture he painted it's not the sort of job many would like to do.

The picture came across of a group of people who are dedicated to what they do - which is to keep the club afloat.

The point he made about looking at the current members' club was well made. Most of the board have lent money to the club. If they wanted that money out for whatever reason the club would be put under an extremely challenging position. And what if one of them was actually voted out? If they left their money in they would no longer have a say in how it was used. Catch 22 or what?

He also told of a night he and some friends went into a pub in Ulverston. As he walked past a table of young lads they started on him. 'There's that [SwearFilter] who's on the Barrow board. [SwearFilter]!'

His friends said 'what's all that about' He said both he and his dad have to endure this almost every time they go out.

This really is completely unacceptable.

Whatever anyone thinks of the efforts they are making nobody deserves that sort of treatment. It must make you just want to say 'I've had enough!' And if you do what happens to the club?

The message came across that the club is not in a good position but the debt is being managed and we are coming out of the other side.

[DaveP]

It was stated a further AGM will be held this March mainly to discuss the constitution of the club, as I read it it seems the board want to depart from a members club so they can protect their investment, this means I guess they would own the club and no further AGM's would be required and the present board would only depart if they decided they wanted to go and not be dependant on being re-elected by members, although no board members have ever been voted off at previous AGM's, needs a lot of discussion I think.

The AGM in March will actually be the AGM for the 2011-2012 season, with the constitution of the club to be debated afterwards.

I know I'm being pedantic but the main business should be to approve the accounts to 30/06/12 which are due for filing by 31 March otherwise more and larger penalties!!!!

[barrowfan]

The AGM in March will actually be the AGM for the 2011-2012 season, with the constitution of the club to be debated afterwards.

I know I'm being pedantic but the main business should be to approve the accounts to 30/06/12 which are due for filing by 31 March otherwise more and larger penalties!!!!

I'm sure that will happen. They want people to also have a debate on the future constitution of the club. Although it was on last night's agenda it was only there to ask people to come up with alternatives that could be fully discussed at the next AGM.

An AGM has certain set items and as one is approval of accounts I am sure this will happen, so we will get a more up to date position of the club finances.