Hence we were bailed out by the cup runs i,e. that is how the structural deficit was filled.Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 2:38 pmWhich it was via the cup money, but that doesn't last forever, and with no recent cup run or player sales, the future structural deficit has to be met by the then, or future owners, or decide not to run with one.Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 2:28 pmIt doesn't mater what the structural deficit was about. If it existed, it would eventually need filling.Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 10:22 amThe structural deficit was about spending money to have more cup/league success. But as time goes on the opposition financial status changes, and it becomes increasingly difficult to put out a competitive side.Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:52 amI guess that all comes back to whether or not you believe the line about a structural deficit. If you do then it clearly needed to be bailed out in some form, if you don;t then it didn't.rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 amIf you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pmTo bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pmOf course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pmWe weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pmNot really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm
Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.
But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.
All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.
Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....
Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?
Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.
8 years ago, financially most teams were middle of the road. As GC said this season, there are 15 teams that are financially aloof from the rest. That affects availability of L2 players for us, and thus players who have baggage of some sort become those in our price range. We have always had to give opportunity to younger players from higher status teams, to see if they sink or swim, or sometimes shine. That's nothing new, but the experienced players alongside them should help them. If those experienced players are also finding their feet, it is more of a problem. We simply don't have the money to secure the experienced players that can provide a backbone of consistency.
I don't remember a single person indicating that their preferred option would be for the trust not to run with a structural deficit by seasons end...........