Frequently asked
questions
What were the factors that led to the cash crisis at the Club and the need for the Trust to provide loans of £400k and £200k?
The main aspects of the crisis are well understood and are substantially rehearsed within the Trust’s own review which provides a detailed timeline of events. The Club has also summarised these events through several means, including the previous Chairman’s address to the Trust AGM and the Fans Forum, statements on the website, and the narrative for the Club’s published accounts.
In essence, the two years leading up to June 2025 was a period of Club stewardship in which cost growth outpaced income and revenue expectations were not realised. This coincided with a period in which governance arrangements in the Club and Trust did not operate effectively.
A thorough and detailed review was undertaken immediately these issues came to light, which identified an exaggeration of the Club’s immediate financial position. A series of corrective measures have been put in place, with a substantially new Board of Directors, and strengthened governance arrangements between the Club and Trust.
Those involved in financial management at the Club up to and including the 2024/25 season have all left their positions. The Club’s new Financial Controller – supported by two new appointees – has since been instrumental in re-establishing strong fiscal discipline. Meanwhile, the Trust’s Finance Group and the new group established to strengthen governance - the Club/Trust Working group - are both staffed by new Trustees.
Was the £200K loan in November 2025 approved by the Trust Board in a vote adhering to established governance?
Yes. The Trust Board met on 17th November 2025 to consider the Club’s request for a loan of £200k and it was approved unanimously in a vote at the meeting. Two trustees were unable to attend due to prior commitments, but were aware of the purpose of the meeting and raised no objection to it proceeding. The meeting was therefore fully quorate and adhered to established governance arrangements.
Is there a signed agreement in place for the £200k loan?
Yes. However, the Trust Board has received legal advice to the effect that the standard loan agreements used by the Trust could be strengthened, consequently the loans are being “repapered” into a new consolidated agreement. A draft has recently been received from the Trust’s solicitor, and we expect this to be put in place soon.
Why did the Trust not receive security for the £200K loan?
The Club was under significant scrutiny from the EFL in late 2025, and needed to show how it would be able to complete the season. Given the cashflow forecast at that time, one of the requirements was to include the option to take loans against assets, which would not have been feasible if another charge had been made against them.
Were the Trust’s governance procedures followed in the appointments of senior roles including Clive Harrison and Richard Pym?
Yes. All Trust procedures were followed for these senior appointments
How will the board avoid a repeat of these issues? Why should supporters believe the current leadership can deliver a recovery?
Those involved in financial management at the Club up to and including the 2024/25 season have all left their positions. The Club’s new Financial Controller – supported by two new appointees – has since been instrumental in re-establishing strong fiscal discipline. Meanwhile, the Trust’s Finance Group and the new group established to strengthen governance - the Club/Trust Working group - are both staffed by new Trustees. We expect these measures to provide a significant safeguard against a repetition of unexpected financial shocks.
Have all trustees been provided with full and accurate financial information about the Club? Are all trustees satisfied they fully understand the current financial position?
Yes. For example, all Trustees saw highly detailed financial information at the last joint Club/Trust board meeting and receive updates from the Trust Finance Group and the Club/Trust Working Group.
When will the Club be able to restore the three-month “reserve” to cover the cost of the wage bill?
The Trust has historically required the Club to retain a reserve of capital to cover the cost of the wage bill; this was reduced from a three-month reserve to a two-month reserve through a decision taken by the Trust Board in 2024.
The definition of this reserve is generally regarded by members as being the cash held in the Club’s bank accounts. The Board has reviewed prior Trust and Club documents, and found that some years ago the Club held a £500k cash reserve which was temporarily increased through the Covid pandemic to three-months of staff wages.
However, by the time the Trust Board agreed in March 2024 that the reserve could be reduced to two-months of staff wages, the Trust Board minutes show that the reserve was referenced to the “working capital” held by the Club – which is entirely different to a cash reserve.
To compound matters, the Trust has no mechanism to mandate that the Club reinstates any working capital or cash reserve, as it is not captured within the Club/Trust Agreement.
Given this background, it was a procedural error to allow a vote to occur on the motion at the 2025 AGM in relation to the reserve, as quite apart from the lack of precision on the definition of the reserve, the Trust Board has no powers to action it.
Separate to this, the Trust is developing a solvency proposal that would introduce a measurable test that would provide the Trust with comfort over the financial resilience of the Club: a rolling 13-week cash-flow solvency test, supported by an 18-month sustainability test. With the establishment of the Independent Football Regulator, it has become more important than ever to put in place robust measures of solvency to demonstrate the on-going viability of the Football Club. We will provide a further update on the position at the next AGM.
Why has the Club entered into a loan agreement with a private company?
The private loan facility provides a degree of flexibility for the Club not typically available through commercial lenders. The Club will only draw down sums that are needed to retain positive cash flow. The Club has not needed to access it.
Now the financial picture is clearer, with a playing squad in place for the 2026/27 season, the Trust will work with the club to establish what further long-term support might be needed.
Did the Trust Board formally approve the private loan facility to the Club? What are the key terms, including interest rate and repayment structure?
The Trust Board approved the private loan facility secured against the Cliff Hill training ground. The mortgage agreement is available to view on the Companies House website. If the loan facility is accessed the interest rate would be 10%. Under the terms of the agreement, any money borrowed would be paid back by the end of September 2026.
Why is this loan secured against the Cliff Hill Training Ground?
It is standard practice for a third-party lender to seek security for a loan. The value of the property exceeds the value of the full private loan facility and offered the best option at the time the loan facility was put in place.
The Club received forward financing of nearly £1million in December 2025, why is the loan facility needed now?
The Club has made operating losses in most years under Trust ownership. Until now these losses have often been largely offset by funds from the sales of players who came through our Academy, and from other players we have developed and improved through excellent recruitment and coaching.
This approach has been undermined in recent seasons by a two-year period in which cost growth outpaced income and revenue expectations were not realised. This coincided with a period in which governance arrangements in the Club and Trust did not operate effectively.
Consequently, a set of complementary measures were needed to stabilise finances. The Club completed a redundancy programme in January to reduce costs in off-field operations and in the Academy.
However, most of the salary costs at the Club sit within the men’s first-team football side of the business and this was challenging to restructure in the middle of the 2025/26 season. As a result, several financial measures were required to maintain stability until a more affordable budget could be put in place for 2026/27.
How did the Club lose £25k raised for the Recovery Room? Who were the company responsible for providing the equipment?
The Club Chairman explained at the January Fans Forum that during the 2024/2025 season the Football Club advanced £25k to the proposed supplier of this equipment, against the advice of the Operations Manager in post at that time. A request for a further payment was refused. The proposed supplier failed to provide the equipment, or return the original instalment, and ceased trading.
The Trust does not consider the matter closed and the Club has now written formally to the supplier to pursue the return of this money. Until these efforts have been exhausted it would not be appropriate to comment on the identity of the supplier. Speculation on their identity by others is also not advised.
The Trust is very grateful to the supporters who raised money towards this facility and is making every effort possible to remedy matters.
What contributions are the Trust making to the Club next season, now that the membership fees have increased?
The increase in fees is allowing the Trust to more than double its monthly contributions to the Club – annually this will represent a loan of £240k to the Club, which includes a £24k contribution to the women’s team.
The Trust recognises that while this is a positive step forward, more needs to be done to increase investment in the Club to boost the playing budget. Our new strategy will set out how the Trust propose to increase its own revenue and attract investment into the Club.
Why was there no fan vote on the kit for 2026/27? How was it approved?
The use of fan votes on the selection of new kits varies season-by-season. This season, the kit was chosen by the Club and subsequently approved by the Trust Board.
There were a number of challenges with the kit selection this year that precluded a fan vote being held. This is something that the Trust Board will be reviewing as we work on revising the governance arrangements with the Club, including ensuring that there is fan engagement in the process.
The first day sales were extremely strong, exceeding those of last season’s kit.
What is the current position on the insurance claim for the fire?
The Club needed to undertake some further remedial work that could only be done during the summer. Now that is completed, a final claim will be submitted soon. The Club anticipates that all the repair work required will be covered by the insurance.
The Trust’s advance of donations of £50k from the fundraiser is now likely to be surplus to the Club’s requirements. We anticipated this scenario at the time the fundraiser was launched and explained that any funds raised that were not required to meet the repair costs would be earmarked for future infrastructure improvements at St James Park. This has already enabled the purchase of the “Grecian Grill” facility in Red Square.
The money donated through the Trust’s fundraiser, has provided a vital bridging facility while the insurance claim was settled and the Trust and Club are immensely grateful for the generosity of supporters.
Is the Trust consulting fans on what to spend the money on?
In the GoFundMe fundraiser it was explained that "any funds raised that exceed the repair costs will be earmarked for future infrastructure improvements at St James Park". And that "at the point of the insurance decision, the Supporters' Trust will make a further decision on what to do with the monies raised".
Consequently, the Trust Board concluded that the Grecians Grill proposal from the Club was an appropriate use of a portion of these funds against the commitment made in the GoFundMe fundraiser - not least because the Trust will share in the first year of profits from the facility.
If there were more marginal investment decisions in relation to the use of these funds, which did not meet the original commitment, the Trust Board would consider members' views.
Given the current financial position at the Club, can it afford to run a women’s team?
Yes. The Trust Board is proud of the way that Exeter City Women have responded to difficult challenges during the last year and secured their position in the Women’s National League Southern Premier Division for another season.
The financial difficulties of the last two seasons were largely driven by other areas of the business. However, work is currently ongoing to manage costs incurred by the Women’s team whilst further growing commercial and matchday income for next season, to work towards long-term financial sustainability. Examples include the production of a bespoke away kit for the women’s team in 2026/27, as well as playing more matches at St James Park.
Where did the money come from for the women’s changing rooms?
The Trust has underwritten the cost of the conversion of space at the training ground into changing rooms for the women’s team in case the cost is not met through other fundraising.
What is the organisational structure of the Women’s team? How many people are employed by it?
The Women's team (ECWFC Ltd) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the football club. It has its own separate board, with a representative from the main club board currently as its chair and an elected Trustee appointed as one of its directors. There are four employees whose work relates to the Women's team: the Women's First Team Manager, the Women's Operations Manager, the Women's Football Supporter Experience Assistant and the Women's Club Secretary.
What is happening with identifying a permanent home ground in Exeter for the Women’s team?
It is now difficult to get an Exeter venue signed off as Tier 3-ready in time for any part of the 2026/27 season. We remain in talks with the FAWNL about potential special dispensation to utilise Exwick without meeting the Tier 3 criteria.
Some of the works needed to get Exwick to Tier 3 level will require planning permission, which we had previously hoped would not be necessary. The Cliff Hill Training Ground also remains a potential option for the 2027/28 season.
The Women’s team will play six home league matches at St James Park this season, compared to three last season.
Is the Trust going to participate in the Rights Issue being proposed by the Football Club?
A Rights Issue would offer the opportunity for the Trust to increase its shareholding in the Club, which may unlock a range of financial and strategic possibilities. The Trust could choose to swap some, none or all its loans for shares.
At this stage no decisions have, or can, be taken by the Trust. This would be a very significant investment and strategic decision.
Matters such as the proposed price of the shares would be key, together with legal and tax advice on the merits, or otherwise, of reducing or removing the loans from the Club’s balance sheet. Only once this advice is in place will we seek members’ approval to the proposed way forward.
Before loans or property-related rights are exchanged for shares, will the Trust obtain independent legal advice and an independent valuation of both what it is giving up and what it is receiving?
The Trust is already engaging independent legal advice for the proposed rights issue as explained at recent Trust Board meetings.
In a rights issue, the shares are offered in an equitable way to all shareholders, so that each party knows how much they would need to contribute if they wished to subscribe. For the Trust, this would be an exchange of loans.
The approach taken to setting the share price will be explained as and when the rights issue proceeds. Most rights issues are typically performed at a discounted share price, in which case the true value of the shares received will be greater than the loan used.
Why is the Trust removing the requirement for the club to pay interest to the Trust on its loans?
When the decision was made to change the monthly payment to the club from a donation to a loan with interest, that immediately triggered a corporation tax charge. All interest earned is liable to corporation tax. The Trust, at that stage, always intended that the interest charged would help towards the intention of increasing the shares the Trust could obtain in a rights issue. When the Trust Board looked at this at the June meeting it was obvious that whilst still true, the level of additional equity benefit was not overwhelming in value for money terms, given the tax bill that would result.
Alternatively, if the Club’s financial circumstances changed and allowed it to repay the loan and interest, it is questionable whether the additional sum in interest paid by the Club would be beneficial. The main purpose of the Trust is to support the Club, and the funds would eventually go back to them in some form – but would have been reduced by the tax levied in the process. In essence, only HMRC would benefit from the arrangement. Hence the proposal to stop charging interest and back date that change.
When the new loan agreements are put in place, we will explain the strengthened protections for the Trust compared to previous agreements, and alongside this we will publish the interest loans paper considered at the Part B meeting, which explains in more depth the rationale for the position taken on interest.
Will the Trust seek the advice of the FCA and FSA?
The Trust has contacted both organisations and neither have raised concerns with the Club’s proposals. They have emphasised that the Trust will need to proceed in line with the Objects and Powers set out in the Trust’s Rules. Any decisions that the Trust Board makes in regard to this matter will be in full accordance with the Rules under which it governs.
What would the Trust give up by converting its loans into Club shares, what would it receive in return, and how would that leave supporter ownership/protection stronger than it is today?
No final decision has been taken on converting Trust loans into shares. The strategic case being explored is that converting some, or all, of the loans could strengthen the Club’s balance sheet, reduce liabilities owed to the Trust and increase the Trust’s equity ownership of the Club.
However, the Trust would also be giving something up: as a lender it has a contractual right to repayment. But, given that none of the loans issued carry any security, and we have no external debt, this “contractual right” has little to no additional value.
The Trust has consistently maintained a strategic objective to increase its shareholding in the Club. A rights issue would contribute to that objective. The reason this objective is in place is to strengthen our position as owner, giving the Trust greater control and optionality over any potential future investment.
What is the Trust’s position on the potential for external investment?
The Trust Board is ready to consider any viable approaches from third parties. There have been tentative approaches in the past, but these have either been unviable or not advanced to any detailed stage.
The Supporters’ Trust is committed to continue being the majority shareholder of the Football Club. One factor to bear in mind is that as the Trust has just under 58% of the issued shares in the Football Club, it would have limited flexibility to retain a controlling interest in the Club while offering a significant stake to a new minority investor. That is why a Rights Issue is being considered.
Will the club release shares for fans to buy?
It is one of a range of options under consideration, but it will be some time before decisions will be made on the way forward.
Why did the Trust’s loans for the Cliff Hill and the OTR building (the St James Centre) in 2024 not lead to these properties being transferred to the Trust?
The Trust did not obtain detailed legal or tax advice in advance of the member vote on the loan in respect of the OTR building, and only afterwards did several complexities emerge associated with the proposed transfer. This was then overtaken by the events in 2025 and the cash flow problems that summer.
Has the Trust Board given up on the idea of transferring the Cliff Hill freehold and/or the St James Centre from the Club to Trust ownership?
As part of its request for legal support on the proposed Rights Issue, the Trust is seeking advice on the feasibility of these asset transfers taking place.
Why did the Trust not seek security on the loans for the OTR building and the Cliff Hill training ground?
The Trust Board in 2024 accepted reassurances that the transfer of these assets would follow soon after the loans were made and did not seek security on these loans.
The Trust then received informal guidance in August 2024 from a tax specialist suggesting that security on the loans for the Cliff Hill and the OTR building ought to be sought pending resolution of a number of issues preventing asset transfer. This was not followed up by the Trust Board at that time.
It is important to stress that these loans have subsequently provided a financial lifeline for the Club. If these properties had been purchased by - or remained in the hands of - others, or had charges against them from the Trust, the temporary loan facility now in place would not have been available to the Club.
Members were previously told that the Cliff Hill and OTR arrangements could ultimately result in those properties coming under Trust ownership or control. Is that still the intention? If not, what has changed and what would the Trust receive instead?
At this stage, it should be made clear that the Trust has not abandoned that position. However, in the Summer of 2024, the Trust received external guidance after the loans in question were approved, which indicated that a transfer of assets could not proceed in the way originally envisaged.
Based on that earlier guidance from 2024, the expectation that these assets could transfer simply for the value of the outstanding loans seems unrealistic. However, we are seeking a clear legal view on this and will inform members when we have received definitive advice.
The Trust Board is still putting in substantial work to remedy the position of assets, loans and the rights issue, and we will continue to provide updates on this as an when we can.
The starting principle should be yes: where members have given a clear mandate on a material issue, the Trust should either implement that mandate or return to members if it believes there is a better way of achieving the intended outcome.
However, where a motion has been deemed impossible to implement, then we will explain that to members.
As of now, the Club still has not had any details of the Watkins transfer deal, so they do not yet know what the Club will be receiving, or when. Previous experience of transfers involving FIFA processes suggests that this may take more time to be concluded than entirely “domestic” transfers.
The Trust have asked the club for an update as soon as they have it, and we will inform members and supporters as soon as we have further information.
“Our City, Our Club, Our Way” is not intended to replace the principle that supporters own the football club. In fact, the vision materials explicitly retain “We Own Our Football Club” is an important expression of what makes Exeter City different and describes supporter ownership as something that needs to be made stronger, clearer and more meaningful.
The purpose of the new vision is to broaden the story: supporter ownership remains central, but it is placed alongside the Club’s role in the city and community, and the academy pathway that underpins the football model. The vision itself describes Exeter City as a supporter-owned club and says that supporter control should be protected unless members explicitly mandate otherwise.
The vision was developed through the Strategy Working Group, which included the results of the strategy survey, which over 25% of our membership engaged with. It was approved by the Trust Board, and subsequently by the Club board.
The more important test now is whether the strategy beneath the vision delivers what “Supporter First” promises: stronger member engagement, better explanations of major decisions, clearer governance and proper member approval where constitutional or structural changes are proposed.
Still need help?
Send us an e-mail to trust.secretary@ecfc.co.uk, tell us your problem, and as well as fixing it, we might add it to this document.