[dim view]

Stockholm Spireite, on 05 March 2017 - 09:10 AM, said:

There's so many empty vessels that make a lot of noise, whilst the hard-working just go about their job in a quiet, dignified manner. For example, the coaches who left the DS/IA after being treated so badly have handled their business magnificently.

Exactly. These are the people that should be given first dabs on effecting any change, if any change is required.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on 05 March 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

I wish your club continued success, but players can't progress to the CFC Academy 'cos there won't be one.

I find it very disconcerting that you are entering into secret negotiations with Ashley about an intrinsic part of the CFC structure. The fact that you seem confident that nowt can stop them is even more sinister. There are other Directors for instance, who might respond to lobbying. Who are you to say that 'the loss making of it has to stop'? No it doesn't - not necessarily. Meanwhile, you are conducting business with a man that knows three fifths of bugggger all about either Academies or IT.

I would advise Chris to do just as you say, get the facts from Mark Smith. Meanwhile others might be conducting research into why Highlander lost it's IT contract.

Fact is there're a number of successful youth set-ups in the area, populated by highly qualified coaches, with whom CFC could easily associate should they choose to go down that path.

Steve seems to be denying any underhand, as you so rightly put it 'sinister' deal to somehow usurp Mark Smith. So whilst offering a little friendly advice that he perhaps tone down his lounge room boasting, and acknowledging his trouble establishing facts, I'm happy to take him at face value.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 05 March 2017 - 09:22 AM

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

freelander2, on 05 March 2017 - 07:24 AM, said:

Steve,

In the director's report, Sutcliffe claims that he had difficulty collecting payments from parents resulting in him writing off circa £100K. In the meeting, the liquidator asked him to quantify over what period, it was confirmed over 24 months.

Now if you or I were writing off £1K in fees every week for 2 years, this would be priority number one in our businesses. Meetings, telephone calls, letters, emails, etc until the problem was rectified.

Given that Sutcliffe's was using a CFC email address up until recently, I am assuming all emails sent & received are sat on a server somewhere making it easy to establish how much of an issue these unpaid fees were impacting on his business?

If required, can the data be extracted for the liquidator?

Well here's the thing.

Former employees have told us how intimidating Sutcliffe tried to be towards them to get what he wanted.

We also know he contacted at least one 'Bob's Board' member threatening legal action.

Yet that same Liam Sutcliffe claims he simply shrugged his shoulders and wrote of hundreds of thousands that might've saved his business?

Hmmm...

[Benno Spire]

Just a hypothetical thought, was the £100,000 claimed as being written off a similar figure to alledged cash collected from people and all recordings of this on the lost computer
Just a crazy thought

[dim view]

Benno Spire, on 05 March 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

Just a hypothetical thought, was the £100,000 claimed as being written off a similar figure to alledged cash collected from people and all recordings of this on the lost computer
Just a crazy thought

Sutcliffe admitted that there were no records. He said it all went into petty cash.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Benno Spire, on 05 March 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

Just a hypothetical thought, was the £100,000 claimed as being written off a similar figure to alledged cash collected from people and all recordings of this on the lost computer
Just a crazy thought

We bank with RBS and every quarter they send me a statement detailing the value of cash & cheques paid in.

As you know, we have also been provided with projections covering cash receipts for the period December 2012 to June 2015.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

dim view, on 05 March 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

Sutcliffe admitted that there were no records. He said it all went into petty cash.

Cash receipts and payments should still be documented.

[Eastander]

freelander2, on 05 March 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Cash receipts and payments should still be documented.

Your message box is full !

[DIFH]

freelander2, on 05 March 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Cash receipts and payments should still be documented.

Is this enterprise liable for vat do you think.... be interesting if so.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Dave In Footie Heaven, on 05 March 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

Is this enterprise liable for vat do you think.... be interesting if so.

The director's report which was published on the thread earlier confirmed the business was not VAT registered.

[DIFH]

freelander2, on 05 March 2017 - 07:05 PM, said:

The director's report which was published on the thread earlier confirmed the business was not VAT registered.

I'm not surprised with what's just been said.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on 05 March 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

Steve seems to be denying any underhand, as you so rightly put it 'sinister' deal to somehow usurp Mark Smith. So whilst offering a little friendly advice that he perhaps tone down his lounge room boasting, and acknowledging his trouble establishing facts, I'm happy to take him at face value.

The figures are these (supplied by Ashley)....

Academy income £386k. Academy expenditure £535k.

Now, if Mark Smith can't run his Academy with £386k then it's time he packed it in. So all Steve has to do is provide us with a breakdown of how £535k came to be spent and we might all back him. The figures should be on one of the computers he maintains.

[Bonnyman]

No club should run an academy if they have no facilities of their own , its not viable.

[calvin plummers socks]

vet45, on 05 March 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

No club should run an academy if they have no facilities of their own , its not viable.

No that's nonsense.
How many Cat 3 clubs have their own facilities?

[For your eyes only]

dim view, on 05 March 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

The figures are these (supplied by Ashley)....

Academy income £386k. Academy expenditure £535k.

Now, if Mark Smith can't run his Academy with £386k then it's time he packed it in. So all Steve has to do is provide us with a breakdown of how £535k came to be spent and we might all back him. The figures should be on one of the computers he maintains.

Actually that expenditure isn't far off what should be spent especially for a club that doesn't have its own facilities to use. Plus the FA give grants towards the Academy that should be put straight back into the system, tthere shouldn't be anywhere near the loss they've stated with the grant and money coming in that they have.

Just read somewhere that the recommended budget guidelines – which clubs do not have to follow – suggest a Category 1 Academy should spend £2.3m per year, while a Category 3 club’s recommended spending is only £500,000.
So CFC aren't really far off the mark are they.

And before anyone talks of replacing Mark Smith with a part time coach, according to FA guidelines each academy manager must hold:

An up to date UEFA A licence, An academy managers licence and an FA youth award or an FA Advanced youth award

A club MAY appoint an academy manager that doesn't hold all these qualifications, but only on the condition that the head of Academy coaching holds these qualifications, is overseeing the coaching programme, or is a member of the Academy management team and sits on the board.

Not a job for a vastly under qualified part time person, and I hope that when the day comes that Mark leaves his replacement will be decent. Not someone's mate of a mate of a mate through their sisters brother in laws footy team sponsors uncle.

[calvin plummers socks]

I imagine the Academy at Town will go within a couple of years

[Sammy Spireite]

calvin plummers socks, on 06 March 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:

I imagine the Academy at Town will go within a couple of years

"I imagine the Academy at Town will go within a couple of yearsmonths"

From reading this thread, that seems far more likely

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

calvin plummers socks, on 06 March 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:

I imagine the Academy at Town will go within a couple of years

I wonder if the knives are already being sharpened.

Not only did the 'top table' appear to pay inordinate attention to how much the CFC Academy's supposedly costing at November's 'fans' forum', but it seems to be an ongoing narrative. Whilst other areas of expenditure are off limits, or so we're led to believe.

Then a couple of mates frequenting the lounges report someone clearly positioning himself alongside Carson is boasting he's gonna be assuming some sort of role within the Town youth set-up. He's since stated 'I don't have the time or qualifications I guess to run the academy', however he also claimed 'expertise of running a successful junior football club for 15 years' which is simply untrue. To be fair to Steve Coe he became 'Junior Blues' secretary around ten years ago, a necessary job few can be bothered to perform. However it's also a job done by many ordinary people at many other youth clubs just as many ordinary people obtain coaching qualifications. In short, and with no disrespect to those taking the time and trouble to do so, they're no guarantee of competency.

What we do know is that academies at Town's level (Cat 3) receive a significant six figure sum from the FA/FL in grants, with Ashley Carson telling us income was £386K in the last accounts. That's a 'ball park' figure I've had confirmed by someone with huge knowledge in this area. However what we don't know is how much of that was actually allocated to Mark Smith. Indeed I'm led to believe the issue of separate, perhaps 'ring fenced' accounts specifically for academies is an issue currently being examined by the football authorities. I'm making no specific accusation against Chesterfield FC; but what's stopping clubs in general using those funds for other expenses unless they are?

Meanwhile the question of how much, if anything, the official academy paid to Turner and Sutcliffe's now defunct 'development school' for alleged use of facilities and equipment remains unanswered.

There's certainly a debate to be had in terms of what constitutes success for a youth system. Players produced? Players sold? At what cost? And is Mark's a valid enterprise in those contexts. I hope we can conduct that debate in an open, honest manner with no 'behind closed doors' deals based upon cronyism, though.

[brockwell-spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 06 March 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

I wonder if the knives are already being sharpened.

Not only did the 'top table' appear to pay inordinate attention to how much the CFC Academy's supposedly costing at November's 'fans' forum', but it seems to be an ongoing narrative. Whilst other areas of expenditure are off limits, or so we're led to believe.

Then a couple of mates frequenting the lounges report someone clearly positioning himself alongside Carson is boasting he's gonna be assuming some sort of role within the Town youth set-up. He's since stated 'I don't have the time or qualifications I guess to run the academy', however he also claimed 'expertise of running a successful junior football club for 15 years' which is simply untrue. To be fair to Steve Coe he became 'Junior Blues' secretary around ten years ago, a necessary job few can be bothered to perform. However it's also a job done by many ordinary people at many other youth clubs just as many ordinary people obtain coaching qualifications. In short, and with no disrespect to those taking the time and trouble to do so, they're no guarantee of competency.

What we do know is that academies at Town's level (Cat 3) receive a significant six figure sum from the FA/FL in grants, with Ashley Carson telling us income was £386K in the last accounts. That's a 'ball park' figure I've had confirmed by someone with huge knowledge in this area. However what we don't know is how much of that was actually allocated to Mark Smith. Indeed I'm led to believe the issue of separate, perhaps 'ring fenced' accounts specifically for academies is an issue currently being examined by the football authorities. I'm making no specific accusation against Chesterfield FC; but what's stopping clubs in general using those funds for other expenses unless they are?

Meanwhile the question of how much, if anything, the official academy paid to Turner and Sutcliffe's now defunct 'development school' for alleged use of facilities and equipment remains unanswered.

There's certainly a debate to be had in terms of what constitutes success for a youth system. Players produced? Players sold? At what cost? And is Mark's a valid enterprise in those contexts. I hope we can conduct that debate in an open, honest manner with no 'behind closed doors' deals based upon cronyism, though.

The question of what constitutes success for a youth team is an interesting debate. On one hand you have Chelsea who have been dominating the FA youth cup and won back to back Youth champions leagues without pushing through many youngsters to the 1st team... although they have 2/3 on the periphery and about 20 out on loan at various levels as compared to say Southampton who have churned out a number of high level youngsters for their own first team.

For town if we could produce 1/2 every year or so that made the step up to the first team and have an impact on improving the squad depth that would be success for me.

[For your eyes only]

MDCCCLXVI, on 06 March 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

Then a couple of mates frequenting the lounges report someone clearly positioning himself alongside Carson is boasting he's gonna be assuming some sort of role within the Town youth set-up. He's since stated 'I don't have the time or qualifications I guess to run the academy', however he also claimed 'expertise of running a successful junior football club for 15 years' which is simply untrue. To be fair to Steve Coe he became 'Junior Blues' secretary around ten years ago, a necessary job few can be bothered to perform. However it's also a job done by many ordinary people at many other youth clubs just as many ordinary people obtain coaching qualifications. In short, and with no disrespect to those taking the time and trouble to do so, they're no guarantee of competency.

Absolutely spot on.
It would be a massive mistake. And an insult to the players already there.
No one wants the Academy to be a laughing stock, it should hold a man in position who is qualified to produce and develop quality players, have a sense of a different professional level, not a man in charge who will massage ego's including his own.
Mark is abrupt, to the point, and honest. Three of the reasons I like him. He doesn't mess about and calls a spade a spade.
It would become a laughing stock if they appointed someone without the needed qualifications, same as another so called academy in a place I won't name nearby up the A617 that people avoided 1/2 years ago, due to a grassroots coach being put predominantly in charge, then proceeding to put many of his own team into that academy and not on merit!