Barrow AFC.net

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:55 pm

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:19 pm
But the OP claimed we are "...smothered in debt". We are not. To say so is wholly inaccurate but some people might go away believing it. It's important to correct it.

Yes it is not “smothered in debt”, but the facts are we are reporting year on year losses and these are picked up by the owners injecting capital through allotment of shares. Not sure if this will stay allowable if new football finance regulations come out, which could end how this is done. Double edged sword for clubs because it effectively limits the on field spending of smaller clubs (ie us) in putting together a competitive playing budget. Which brings us around to debt…. There is beneficial debt, whereby taking it on is needed to increase revenue streams. If the club entered a partnership with a private investment company to build a new grandstand on the pop side, with all the hospitality, event holding, workshops, rent space etc, and that becomes a 52 week income stream for the club, then that would be a beneficial debt to take on.

Can't say I've ever seen 'beneficial debt' listed on a balance sheet; debt is debt and we don't have anything that isn't covered - it's important people understand that. We are not like Manchester United whose owners have laden them with huge borrowings that must be serviced. Trading losses are completely different and, as you say, the shareholders - which includes the Supporters Trust, let's remember - are very generously picking up the tab. I sincerely hope it will continue.

JohnE wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:56 am OK, time to get realistic about the club and the ground.
Absolutely smothered in debt and no sign of any new investment, so what does the future really hold for a club whos support base isnt that good with a ground that realistically isnt fit for purpose.
I for one honest feel that to go forward there needs to be a new community based stadium in Barrow that should be in use 7 days a week making an income with 21st century facilities to encourage the Furness public to engage with the club ,not just on match days or nights.
The team should IMO have FURNESS based players who would have a proper connection with the supporters.
If that means Barrow playing in the lower leagues, so be it .
It's time to get real as to where Barrow and Holker St are in football terms.
Sticking heads in the sand or elsewhere is not going to fix an obvious problem.

What planet is this person on? We have two dedicated owners and no we are not smothered in debt.Is this a genuine supporter or just somebody who likes to stir things up.If you are that critical of the current owners, put your hand in your pocket and help the club out.
The things you have mentioned have already been explored.Paul Hornby gave a full explanation as to the financial state of the club and it is nowhere near as bad a picture as you are painting.A lot of clubs in our league and above are massively in debt.
The Sky Deal for Barrow was a massive mistake, the owners have said as much.Soon after it happened the crowds reduced It only benefits the bigger clubs.When the games are rearranged Sky do not show them Before this we used to get paid for tv coverage.Ironically with that in place and I Follow the club made more money.Factors like that have had a detrimental effect on the finances of the club.

Methuselah wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:25 pm

JohnE wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:56 am OK, time to get realistic about the club and the ground.
Absolutely smothered in debt and no sign of any new investment, so what does the future really hold for a club whos support base isnt that good with a ground that realistically isnt fit for purpose.
I for one honest feel that to go forward there needs to be a new community based stadium in Barrow that should be in use 7 days a week making an income with 21st century facilities to encourage the Furness public to engage with the club ,not just on match days or nights.
The team should IMO have FURNESS based players who would have a proper connection with the supporters.
If that means Barrow playing in the lower leagues, so be it .
It's time to get real as to where Barrow and Holker St are in football terms.
Sticking heads in the sand or elsewhere is not going to fix an obvious problem.

What planet is this person on? We have two dedicated owners and no we are not smothered in debt.Is this a genuine supporter or just somebody who likes to stir things up.If you are that critical of the current owners, put your hand in your pocket and help the club out.
The things you have mentioned have already been explored.Paul Hornby gave a full explanation as to the financial state of the club and it is nowhere near as bad a picture as you are painting.A lot of clubs in our league and above are massively in debt.
The Sky Deal for Barrow was a massive mistake, the owners have said as much.Soon after it happened the crowds reduced It only benefits the bigger clubs.When the games are rearranged Sky do not show them Before this we used to get paid for tv coverage.Ironically with that in place and I Follow the club made more money.Factors like that have had a detrimental effect on the finances of the club.

Sorry, you are massively mistken. The SKY tv deal basic award is worth circa £1m each EFL 2 club. In other words- This is 30-50 % of each clubs playing budget. Do you know how much National League club gets? Unlike the EFL’s guaranteed SKY millions, the National League deal relies on a revenue-sharing model driven by DAZN subscriptions. Long term National League clubs will be getting £100k tops from this.

Relegated clubs still benefit for the first two years after relegation as follows:

Parachute payments in the National League

Clubs relegated from the EFL to the National League receive parachute payments funded by the EFL (not the PL) to prevent immediate insolvency.

Year 1: 100% of the League Two Basic Award (~£472,000).
Year 2: 50% of the League Two Basic Award (~£236,000).

This creates a soft landing but also gives relegated EFL clubs a significant budget advantage over organic National League sides (who receive ~£58k in central distribution + DAZN share).

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:14 pm

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:55 pm

Yes it is not “smothered in debt”, but the facts are we are reporting year on year losses and these are picked up by the owners injecting capital through allotment of shares. Not sure if this will stay allowable if new football finance regulations come out, which could end how this is done. Double edged sword for clubs because it effectively limits the on field spending of smaller clubs (ie us) in putting together a competitive playing budget. Which brings us around to debt…. There is beneficial debt, whereby taking it on is needed to increase revenue streams. If the club entered a partnership with a private investment company to build a new grandstand on the pop side, with all the hospitality, event holding, workshops, rent space etc, and that becomes a 52 week income stream for the club, then that would be a beneficial debt to take on.

Can't say I've ever seen 'beneficial debt' listed on a balance sheet; debt is debt and we don't have anything that isn't covered - it's important people understand that. We are not like Manchester United whose owners have laden them with huge borrowings that must be serviced. Trading losses are completely different and, as you say, the shareholders - which includes the Supporters Trust, let's remember - are very generously picking up the tab. I sincerely hope it will continue.

There’s good debt and there’s bad debt. If the club took on £10m debt to build a stand that would return improved commercial and match day revenue streams and pay for itself then that is beneficial debt. Business do it all the time, its how they grow.

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 8:32 pm

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:14 pm
Can't say I've ever seen 'beneficial debt' listed on a balance sheet; debt is debt and we don't have anything that isn't covered - it's important people understand that. We are not like Manchester United whose owners have laden them with huge borrowings that must be serviced. Trading losses are completely different and, as you say, the shareholders - which includes the Supporters Trust, let's remember - are very generously picking up the tab. I sincerely hope it will continue.

There’s good debt and there’s bad debt. If the club took on £10m debt to build a stand that would return improved commercial and match day revenue streams and pay for itself then that is beneficial debt. Business do it all the time, its how they grow.

Jonty are you for real????? Hospitality even in London is taking a hammering you and main stand keep banging on about this ,they're talking to the bid people wait and see what happens but if I'm honest this is a non starter I'm not a luddite just a realist enjoy pre season and recharge your batteries for the National League

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:55 pm

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:19 pm
But the OP claimed we are "...smothered in debt". We are not. To say so is wholly inaccurate but some people might go away believing it. It's important to correct it.

Yes it is not “smothered in debt”, but the facts are we are reporting year on year losses and these are picked up by the owners injecting capital through allotment of shares. Not sure if this will stay allowable if new football finance regulations come out, which could end how this is done. Double edged sword for clubs because it effectively limits the on field spending of smaller clubs (ie us) in putting together a competitive playing budget. Which brings us around to debt…. There is beneficial debt, whereby taking it on is needed to increase revenue streams. If the club entered a partnership with a private investment company to build a new grandstand on the pop side, with all the hospitality, event holding, workshops, rent space etc, and that becomes a 52 week income stream for the club, then that would be a beneficial debt to take on.

Oldham have a decent ground etc yet they lost over £3 million last season and expect the same this season think you're dreaming mate sorry

blue nige wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 9:19 pm

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 8:32 pm

There’s good debt and there’s bad debt. If the club took on £10m debt to build a stand that would return improved commercial and match day revenue streams and pay for itself then that is beneficial debt. Business do it all the time, its how they grow.

Jonty are you for real????? Hospitality even in London is taking a hammering you and main stand keep banging on about this ,they're talking to the bid people wait and see what happens but if I'm honest this is a non starter I'm not a luddite just a realist enjoy pre season and recharge your batteries for the National League

Nigel you are for real???? Then share your realist view on where you envisage the club to be in 3-5-10 years. We have very little commercial revenue streams generated outside of match day. The club needs to generate income outside of match day 52 weeks a year.

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 8:32 pm

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 7:14 pm
Can't say I've ever seen 'beneficial debt' listed on a balance sheet; debt is debt and we don't have anything that isn't covered - it's important people understand that. We are not like Manchester United whose owners have laden them with huge borrowings that must be serviced. Trading losses are completely different and, as you say, the shareholders - which includes the Supporters Trust, let's remember - are very generously picking up the tab. I sincerely hope it will continue.

There’s good debt and there’s bad debt. If the club took on £10m debt to build a stand that would return improved commercial and match day revenue streams and pay for itself then that is beneficial debt. Business do it all the time, its how they grow.

Sorry, Jonty, I really don't need a lesson in business finance. You have complicated the simple point I wanted to make in response to the OP and that is that we are not "smothered in debt".

MisterPleasant wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 10:00 pm

Jonty wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 8:32 pm

There’s good debt and there’s bad debt. If the club took on £10m debt to build a stand that would return improved commercial and match day revenue streams and pay for itself then that is beneficial debt. Business do it all the time, its how they grow.

Sorry, Jonty, I really don't need a lesson in business finance. You have complicated the simple point I wanted to make in response to the OP and that is that we are not "smothered in debt".

Point taken MP

Tranmere currently 2-1 up.

Nice second goal, was John Rooney esq over the keeper, new ground and shirt sponsorship are the least of our concerns as it stands.

But Cambridge are not invincible.

As huge as it will be to get relegated IF it happens Barrow AFC and Holker Street has faced far greater adversity over the years and pulled through and will continue to do just that!

McMark wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 10:47 pm As huge as it will be to get relegated IF it happens Barrow AFC and Holker Street has faced far greater adversity over the years and pulled through and will continue to do just that!

this 100 per cent

Be very careful what you wish for.
I attended a council meeting at Vickerstown school in the l990’s where the Soccer and Rugby tried to get a joint stadium on the old Rezza site. The Labour council knocked it back and nothing solid has ever been proposed again.
York City and York Knights share a stadium with each club getting 17% of the match day food and drinks income, does anyone really think we could survive off that?
Other clubs are trying to get a joint venture but unless you own your own stadium,like us, then you’re just giving money away