The club board and supporters' trust at Exeter City have come in for heavy criticism following the news that the Grecians have taken out £100,000 loan from the Professional Footballers' Association.
The club issued a statement on Monday saying it had taken out the short-term loan because it had been adversely affected by falling match attendances and a lower than anticipated uptake of season ticket renewals.
City's chief executive Guy Wolfenden told Echo Sport that the loan had been given to the club to help them with their running costs and it was their intention to pay it back as soon as possible.
"The size of the loan was £100,000," he said. "That loan was to help with the running costs of the club through the summer months.
"It will help in June, July and through into August. There isn't necessarily a time limit on it, it is just paid back as we go.
"However, it is our intention is to pay it back as soon as possible."
Wolfenden also confirmed that the loan did come with a transfer embargo.
The loan from the PFA comes after the supporters' trust, the club's majority shareholder, lent the St James's Park outfit £30,000 at the end of January, which is due to be repaid this summer.
And manager Paul Tisdale has already revealed he will have a 'considerably' smaller playing budget next season than he had in the 2013/14 campaign.
The latest news of the club's financial plight has been greeted with anger by the majority of Grecians supporters, who blame the club's board for allowing City's bank balance get into such a poor state.
They have also heavily criticised the supporters' trust, which owns a 53 per cent stake of the club and has a representative on the club board.
Fans say the trust have not been monitoring the club well or reporting back to its members.
Pete Martin, chairman of Exeter City Supporters' Club, was a member of the supporters' trust board in the 2004/05 season and again for a 12-month period starting 2010.
However, he says the trust has lost its way.
"The supporters' trust seems to have lost all direction and I think that is part of the problem," he said.
"I was on the trust board in 2004 and again for about 12 months from 2010 to 2011, but I resigned because I didn't think we were actually doing what we should be doing in many ways. We just became a talking shop, with lots of meetings but no action.
"I still support the trust ownership model, but I think they need to be a lot more proactive in monitoring how the club board operate.
"I'm a complete outsider, so I haven't got any involvement with the board. However, if you have got a club, which is supposedly being monitored by the majority shareholder, and that business then gets to the point where it has to borrow money, you have to question if it is being run efficiently."
Sarah Willis, co-editor of fanzine Some Sunny Day and a supporter of the club for 25 years, said: "Many people have warned both the club and the trust about too-high expenditure on the non-footballing side of the club coupled with falling attendances.
"It makes me very concerned for the future of our club as we've been in administration before and, with little income over the close season, the situation is going to get worse over the coming months.
"The buck stops with the club board members, who oversee the day-to-day running of the club.
"They have been burying their heads in the sand, planning trips to Brazil, when they should have been drastically cutting costs in reaction to last season's falling attendances and poor results.
"The major shareholder, the supporters' trust, is in place to oversee the club board and, in an ideal world, should have known the full scale of the financial situation and forced the club to act."
Paul Sussex, a supporter for 40 years was also less than pleased with the club blaming falling attendances for the problem.
"Those excuses are not acceptable," he said. "The club has been doing this for the past year and a bit, blaming the fans. It seems to be an easy cop out for the club."
A statement from the supporters' trust said they would be meeting this week to discuss the situation. However, the trust board were unable to comment further.
