• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Player Budget

Rosencrantz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,121
Location
Tiverton
Not sure that’s right Rosey, where’s Chris O’Donnell? I thought Bally signed a load of shiite but then improved it later and this photo is the later version?
O'Donnell was a TC signing along with Steve O'Shaughnessy and David Coles. Bally immediately brought in Scott Daniels, Steve Williams and Steve Moran. O'Donnell lasted about four games before being binned and replaced by on loan Ken O'Doherty who immediately got sent off on his debut at Shrewsbury. O'Shaughnessy and Coles featured a few times up to Christmas, Coles as an emergency striker at one point.

Although we followed that 6-1 hammering at Shrewsbury with a streaky last minute 1-0 win over Torquay, that was when Bally really got going and started really changing the squad. By the 14th September against Hartlepool we had Andy Cook, Pete Whiston, Paul Wimbleton, Gary Chapman and Eamonn Dolan all in the side. Darran Rowbotham and Mark Cooper obviously leaving in swap deals for Whiston and Eamo. Eamo quickly got injured which is probably why he isn't in that photo. Hilaire and Harris joined subsequently. The photo certainly has an autumnal look to it so it might be a bit later in the autumn, November time?
 

fred binneys head

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
22,055
Location
Loving the boy Stanno
You are my leader.
 

grecian-near-hell

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
6,351
Location
Cornwood
If you think we have a small squad now...

View attachment 9244
But that was in the days prior to transfer windows
 

WXF

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
1,282
The untraceable number is now much smaller as the Trust found the owners of 3,300 of them. Also the Trust's shareholding is now 57.25%

ECFC Completes Successful Search For Missing Shareholders (weownexetercityfc.co.uk)
Other share holders deserve credit, but the Trust has been by far the best share holder the club has had in terms overall impact, providing it with a steady stream of investment and ensuring it focuses on sustainable long term growth, the fruits of which we continue to enjoy. That the club has managed track down many more of its shareholders thanks to help from the Trust, and had previously lost track of so many of its owners, should be another stark reminder of how much better affairs are conducted these days. Perhaps many who would like to change the ownership of the club are being fickle or impatient but, as they never seem to criticise the other private shareholders, I find it hard not to hold a nagging suspicion some are motivated by ideology.
 
Last edited:

SaintJames

Active member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
4,875
Other share holders deserve credit, but the Trust has been the best share holder the club has had in terms overall impact, providing it with a steady stream of investment and ensuring it focuses on sustainable long term growth, the fruits of which we continue to enjoy. That the club has managed track down many more of its shareholders thanks to help from the Trust, and had previously lost track of so many of its owners, should be another stark reminder of how much better affairs are conducted these days. Perhaps many who would like to change the ownership of the club are being fickle or impatient but, as they never seem to criticise the other private shareholders, I find it hard not to hold a nagging suspicion some are motivated by ideology.
Im unclear why anyone would criticise the other 'private shareholders' as you put it? Why would a private shareholder in Exeter City having say a 2% stake make any investment into a company they hold no say in? Am I missing your point?
 

WXF

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
1,282
Im unclear why anyone would criticise the other 'private shareholders' as you put it? Why would a private shareholder in Exeter City having say a 2% stake make any investment into a company they hold no say in? Am I missing your point?
And I don't understand why anyone would oppose the most positively impactful share holder the club had and give all the others a free pass. The other shareholders are also owners, the ordinary shareholders do have a say, and I'm sure if they placed sufficient money where their mouth was, they could have an even greater one.
 

SaintJames

Active member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
4,875
Most private shareholders (generally individual fans with one share passed down from grandad) in Exeter City own one nominal share and lets give this some context the highest minority stake is iirc 5%. The only say they have in Exeter City or any other private business is to speak at the Club's AGM. This carries less weight than you or I attending the Trust AGM and making a proposal to the AGM which could lead to meaninful change for our £24 a year. The only way a minority shareholder in Exeter City at this present time could put his money where his or her mouth was would be to make the Trust an offer to purchase a % shareholding which reduces the Trust shareholding to under 50%. Company law precludes those individuals from otherwise haveing any more say than as I say attending the Club AGM.
 

ExmouthMart

Active member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,486
Location
Bristol
Most private shareholders (generally individual fans with one share passed down from grandad) in Exeter City own one nominal share and lets give this some context the highest minority stake is iirc 5%. The only say they have in Exeter City or any other private business is to speak at the Club's AGM. This carries less weight than you or I attending the Trust AGM and making a proposal to the AGM which could lead to meaninful change for our £24 a year. The only way a minority shareholder in Exeter City at this present time could put his money where his or her mouth was would be to make the Trust an offer to purchase a % shareholding which reduces the Trust shareholding to under 50%. Company law precludes those individuals from otherwise haveing any more say than as I say attending the Club AGM.
As you say having one share is not worth anything but on the other hand going to The Trust AGM and making a proposal that could lead to meaningful change, does that really give you more of a say?! Do you think that really is taken on by The Club Board?! They are the ones that run the club. We don’t seem to able to control the number of directors appointed to the club board and how do we really know they are doing a good job. The issue would appear to be everyone in the trust at board level only has a finite amount of time at this level and then has to stand down but I believe the directors of the club are permanent (I may be wrong!). Is that something that needs to change?! Sometimes I feel the trust is a little bit left behind, as I say I may be wrong. An example would be OTR. Is it now completely part of the club?! If not, why not. Surely there is no need for it to be kept separate against unscrupulous third parties.
 

grecian-near-hell

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
6,351
Location
Cornwood
As you say having one share is not worth anything but on the other hand going to The Trust AGM and making a proposal that could lead to meaningful change, does that really give you more of a say?! Do you think that really is taken on by The Club Board?! They are the ones that run the club. We don’t seem to able to control the number of directors appointed to the club board and how do we really know they are doing a good job. The issue would appear to be everyone in the trust at board level only has a finite amount of time at this level and then has to stand down but I believe the directors of the club are permanent (I may be wrong!). Is that something that needs to change?! Sometimes I feel the trust is a little bit left behind, as I say I may be wrong. An example would be OTR. Is it now completely part of the club?! If not, why not. Surely there is no need for it to be kept separate against unscrupulous third parties.
I may have missed the point here but as far as I know OTR is a separate legal entity to either the club or Trust and a quick search on companies house will tell you that there are no share holders as it is a Private Limited Co, limited by guarantee. There are four Officers Richard Knight, David Newberry, Julian Tagg and Michael Vandale. So unless there is another OTR related to our football club I don't see that the club do own it I also don't know what it would entail for the club to own it either as it is limited by Guarantee https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03567252
 

SaintJames

Active member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
4,875
As you say having one share is not worth anything but on the other hand going to The Trust AGM and making a proposal that could lead to meaningful change, does that really give you more of a say?! Do you think that really is taken on by The Club Board?! They are the ones that run the club. We don’t seem to able to control the number of directors appointed to the club board and how do we really know they are doing a good job. The issue would appear to be everyone in the trust at board level only has a finite amount of time at this level and then has to stand down but I believe the directors of the club are permanent (I may be wrong!). Is that something that needs to change?! Sometimes I feel the trust is a little bit left behind, as I say I may be wrong. An example would be OTR. Is it now completely part of the club?! If not, why not. Surely there is no need for it to be kept separate against unscrupulous third parties.
Mart, a Trust member carries far more weight than an individual holding one share in Exeter City AFC Ltd. I point you to the prime example of ending Tisdale's contract initiated by a Trust member and leading to significant change something that NO individual shareholder could ever do
 
Top