Hired Mercs.

[manc_red]

A couple of Mercs costing a few thousand a year is not going to really affect the playing budget. Besides, things like mileage allowance (at HMRC approved rates) can cost just as much.

A wider issue is whether the directors are working full time, taking a commercial salary/remuneration package and how much consultancy fees they’re taking.

This.

It's a very good deal if it's £370 per month each and of course 2 company cars on their own isn't going to send us spiralling into admin; the concern is that they are the thin end of the wedge. The real issue is that 5 Directors have been appointed with no clear roles, little relevant business or football experience and, apparently, not a pot to piss in between them (dependent on whether you accept a letter from Jedders Mum as proof of funds!). They are all taking out and surely it's understandable and perfectly reasonable to question what exactly they are putting in in return for their remuneration packages.

A lot has been made about what their 'intentions' are. I'm still undecided on that and my views change almost by the day. But regardless of their intentions you can be sure that whether they succeed or fuck it up they'll eventually walk away having done quite well out of it.

[Ardiles]

This.

It's a very good deal if it's £370 per month each and of course 2 company cars on their own isn't going to send us spiralling into admin; the concern is that they are the thin end of the wedge. The real issue is that 5 Directors have been appointed with no clear roles, little relevant business or football experience and, apparently, not a pot to piss in between them (dependent on whether you accept a letter from Jedders Mum as proof of funds!). They are all taking out and surely it's understandable and perfectly reasonable to question what exactly they are putting in in return for their remuneration packages.

A lot has been made about what their 'intentions' are. I'm still undecided on that and my views change almost by the day. But regardless of their intentions you can be sure that whether they succeed or fuck it up they'll eventually walk away having done quite well out of it.

Yep.  Five directors who, between them, seem to be doing the job that Nick Watkins used to do on his own.  Do each of these guys have their own office, and how much time do they spend at their desks?

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Exactly and I think that is really what needs to be addressed. They are all taking a wage too I understand whereas only Nick Watkins took a wage previous. Where the mercs things come from is people are concerned that while they are rightfully making the club sustainable on a player budget front, they're taking the piss with what they're taking out of it.

[sonicyouth]

but two Mercs on a cheap lease is hardly taking the piss, is it? The real issue is consultancy fees, salaries and such.

[dalumpimunki]

Exactly and I think that is really what needs to be addressed. They are all taking a wage too I understand whereas only Nick Watkins took a wage previous. Where the mercs things come from is people are concerned that while they are rightfully making the club sustainable on a player budget front, they're taking the piss with what they're taking out of it.

Fuck me.

Read the thread.
- We're leasing considerably fewer cars now than we did under the last board
- We're paying less for them
- Mercs are probably the most financially efficient lease cars available, and we get a deal on them as the dealer is a club sponsor

As for who's taking salary out of the club - well what do you understand, and what do you base that understanding on? Internet rumour / slander / libel?

The only firm information we have on this is the response to the question asked at the meeting with the Trust and SC, which was that "those directors with executive roles  were paid a salary".

When I look at the clubs site there seem to be two directors with named executive functions:
- Steve Murrell is the General Manager
- Gary Hooper is Commercial Director

To me that looks like we've gone from one CE to having two posts. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps not if you want to actually focus on developing other income streams for the club.

And can we not get all worked up because "5 Directors have been appointed with no clear roles" because it makes us look like twats. Being a director doesn't mean you're an exec director and draw a salary, so you really don't need a "clear role".

The last board had, guess what, 5 directors  - Russell Backhouse, Andrew Black, Andrew Fitton, Nicholas Watkins, and Jeremy Wray. Only two of them, the Chairman and CE, had "clear roles". The new board are up to 3 with "clear roles", Chairman, GM and CD.

All of this bollocks comes back to a few anonymous posters stirring up shit about money being taken out of the club and offering no fucking evidence for it.

All the board draw salaries do they? Really? Well the person that's been telling us all that also told us all that EVERYONE was swanning around in brand new Merc's a few weeks ago, and it we've seen the truth of that haven't we.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Fuck me.

Read the thread.
- We're leasing considerably fewer cars now than we did under the last board
- We're paying less for them
- Mercs are probably the most financially efficient lease cars available, and we get a deal on them as the dealer is a club sponsor

As for who's taking salary out of the club - well what do you understand, and what do you base that understanding on? Internet rumour / slander / libel?

The only firm information we have on this is the response to the question asked at the meeting with the Trust and SC, which was that "those directors with executive roles  were paid a salary".

When I look at the clubs site there seem to be two directors with named executive functions:
- Steve Murrell is the General Manager
- Gary Hooper is Commercial Director

To me that looks like we've gone from one CE to having two posts. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps not if you want to actually focus on developing other income streams for the club.

And can we not get all worked up because "5 Directors have been appointed with no clear roles" because it makes us look like twats. Being a director doesn't mean you're an exec director and draw a salary, so you really don't need a "clear role".

The last board had, guess what, 5 directors  - Russell Backhouse, Andrew Black, Andrew Fitton, Nicholas Watkins, and Jeremy Wray. Only two of them, the Chairman and CE, had "clear roles". The new board are up to 3 with "clear roles", Chairman, GM and CD.

All of this bollocks comes back to a few anonymous posters stirring up shit about money being taken out of the club and offering no fucking evidence for it.

All the board draw salaries do they? Really? Well the person that's been telling us all that also told us all that EVERYONE was swanning around in brand new Merc's a few weeks ago, and it we've seen the truth of that haven't we.

WOOOOOOSH!!!

The point I was making is the real issue is that people think they're taking the piss which is why they're so jumpy about a few Mercs despite when you dig a little deeper I realise that it's less than the previous board did.

The real accusation is the rumours of consultancy fees and 5 directors taking a wage (Do we know only 2 are? Again no clarification) when no one knows if they even do fuck all considering 5 people seem to be doing the job Nick Watkins managed on it's own. Jed has done nothing to deny any of this, only that there were no salaries of "that amount" that was rumoured, so it's reasonable to think until Jed actually comes out and says something with some substance instead of given a politicians answer, that there is some truth to it.

The way you've flown of the handle, got hugely defensive, ranted about slander and libel and generally acted like a bit of a cunt, I'm guessing you're Steve Murrell. Hi Steve.

[tans]

The way you've flown of the handle, got hugely defensive, ranted about slander and libel and generally acted like a bit of a cunt, I'm guessing you're Steve Murrell. Hi Steve.

[random_five]

The way you've flown of the handle, got hugely defensive, ranted about slander and libel and generally acted like a bit of a cunt, I'm guessing you're Steve Murrell. Hi Steve.

Superb put down!

[dalumpimunki]

WOOOOOOSH!!!

The point I was making is the real issue is that people think they're taking the piss which is why they're so jumpy about a few Mercs despite when you dig a little deeper I realise that it's less than the previous board did.

The real accusation is the rumours of consultancy fees and 5 directors taking a wage (Do we know only 2 are? Again no clarification) when no one knows if they even do fuck all considering 5 people seem to be doing the job Nick Watkins managed on it's own. Jed has done nothing to deny any of this, only that there were no salaries of "that amount" that was rumoured, so it's reasonable to think until Jed actually comes out and says something with some substance instead of given a politicians answer, that there is some truth to it.

The way you've flown of the handle, got hugely defensive, ranted about slander and libel and generally acted like a bit of a cunt, I'm guessing you're Steve Murrell. Hi Steve.

Is it reading or adding up you have problems with? How are five people doing Nick Watkins job?

There were five directors before the takeover - There are five directors now.
One director, Nick Watkins, had an Exec role (CE) before the takeover - Two,  Steve Murrell as General Manager, and  Gary Hooper as Commercial Director do now.

That's not five people doing one mans job is it. That's an identically sized board of directors as before deciding they need two exec roles at the club, one focused on maximising commercial income, and one focused on the day to day business of running the club and stadium. Not exactly excessive for a company with Swindon's turnover.

If you've got other information about directors taking salary, fees or any other income from the then lets hear it or see it. You haven't have you? All you've got is Fredi's bullshit. Who's so in the know that he's on the Adver forum today slagging off the Board for reneging on Rooney's "contract", despite it now being pretty clear that no such contract exists.

And grow the fuck up. Assuming everyone that says "hold on a lot of this is groundless bollocks" is a stooge of the board is fucking childish.

(Oh and you should know that people that post allegations on the internet of criminal activity when they have no evidence to back it up can and do get sued. Even when they're simply repeating, or hinting at, rumours previously circulated by others, as a certain stupid tart married to the speaker of the house of commons recently found out)

[Simon Pieman]

Saying that 2 directors have a full time role and could be drawing a salary is just as presumptuous as saying the same for all 5 directors.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

What the fuck are you talking about?

The whole point made was about the accusations that 5 people are taking a salary now when only Nick Watkins did previously and therefore the new board are taking the piss, which is why people have scrutinised then further with expenses despite the fact it appears to be fairly valid to lease a couple of cars.

I do not have proof that they're taking the piss but what I tried to explain was it's a rumour Jed and his band of merry men have had several chances to deny and have chosen not to. That would mean it's reasonable to believe the accusations......

Now if you don't understand the point being made after that second clarification and write back another senseless rant about legalities of slander and other nonsense about people being sued, I cannot help you further as you will clearly never understand.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Saying that 2 directors have a full time role and could be drawing a salary is just as presumptuous as saying the same for all 5 directors.

Exactly and Jed has had plenty of chances to clarify this but chose not to, which leads to further doubt and distrust from fans.

[dalumpimunki]

Saying that 2 directors have a full time role and could be drawing a salary is just as presumptuous as saying the same for all 5 directors.

I don't have the accounts in front of me to prove it. But I know that they will be published eventually and Director's remuneration will be in them.

So, when the Board say in response to a question "Directors with an exec role receive salary" and list two directors with exec roles on their website, I tend to believe them more than some bloke posting rumours on the internet.

They could be lying, but they know they'll have to publish evidence that will expose those lies eventually, so why would they?

Fredi on the other hand never has to back up his allegations with anything at all, and never has. But for some reason people seem to think he's an equally credible source of information.

Fuck knows why.

[Ardiles]

This time 20 years ago, we were about to settle down for the second half at Wembley.  Buzzing after Hoddle's goal.  Craig Maskell's glorious second was minutes away.  And 20 years on, there's an argument raging on the TEF about directors' salaries.  It's all going down hill.

[iffy]

I don't have the accounts in front of me to prove it. But I know that they will be published eventually and Director's remuneration will be in them.

Not necessarily. You often don't have to disclose this sort of detail if you don't want to.