admin looms? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter matesx
- Start date
Nick
Administrator
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
Well if they're selling off fringe players it means they're at least trying to keep the club a float.
SISU were always bad news, it makes me laugh at how many mugs stuck up for them through the years.
SISU were always bad news, it makes me laugh at how many mugs stuck up for them through the years.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
A terrible mess.... Hoffman was in the casino after Bristol and he reckons Sisu will not be here next season.
bamalamafizzfazz
New Member
I'm convinced that's why Boothroyd went. Basically another two members of staff off the wage budget. His poor results meant that anyone who steps in can't go wrong as they don't even have enough games left to have as bad a record as Aidy. That's why there will be nobody new in. Now another player off the books. Whose next for the chop? Staff in the shop? Sam? If John Dozzell gets paid I'd send him packing first.
We still have to pay the remaining 2 and a bit years of his contract up.
Things are looking pretty grim at the minute!!!
Sky Blue M
New Member
And we are still paying Coleman apparently. Next manager needs to have a one year rolling contract
bamalamafizzfazz
New Member
I wish I could get a job that when you get the sack for doing sh!t you still get paid. Whose bloody bright idea was that one? The sport in general is a mess and City are looking like one of the worst off.
There's no smoke whitout fire ... or is there?
All the rumors, threads on various forums, speculations in the papers about the club going into administration on Friday or next week or ... surely ... before new moon. All that smoke must come from a real fire.
Well, it may be true or it may be a simple matter of 'cultural differencies'.
In the old days - before SISU - (and present time for many other clubs) the club simply increased the loans. If the bank said 'no', they turned to the shareholders and said 'send more money'. And because the shareholders/owners had Sky Blue hearts they did in many cases really 'send more money'.
But SISU is a different kind of owners. They agree with the management on a budget and a cashflow plan. A good and well prepared budget will make sure everything runs smoothly. There will be a cercain amount available for spending on wages and on new players. With owners like SISU the wage budget and the transfer pot will not be something they are prepared to discuss extraordinay. SISU too have a budget that they are obliged to stick to.
So if the chairman and the manager uses up the transfer budget before christmas they will have to sell other players to get new faces in.
What have RR/AB done this season?
They tried to sign up Westwood and Gunnarsson on new contracts, which failed. Probably due to them demanding more money leaving less for wages on new players. And signing Westie and Gunnar on new contracts might also include sign-on fees and fees to agents leaving less money for new transfers.
Then RR/AB thought they could sell Westie/Gunnar in the early season or at least in the January window - but as we all know, they couldn't.
But still hoping to cash in on the two they probably went over the top when they signed King.
Add to that failing gates and you may see why the board desperately tries every trick in the book to get cash in. Selling a potential future star to Liverpool (getting little money immidiately, but most at the end of season - not ideal, but the best they could get). This deal may have been forced on RR, but it showed clearly that SISU is NOT accepting a 'send more money' plee.
Selling season tickets very early was also an attempt to get in cash now, but did it really do anything? I don't think so.
So now Platt is going out on loan. Makes sense. The budget is bust and RR will get cash in - or spend less - where he can.
All-in-all I am not too scared (a little nervous perhaps) that the club will go into administration. I think this whole financial mess is down to early overspending and lower income from both gates and outgoing transfers. And now the management is tought a lesson in business: When you agree to a budget, you are responsible and you better stick to your promisses.
SISU are not sugar daddys - they are a business run by hard core business men/women.
Going into administration will most likely mean that SISU will stand to lose most of their investment. They won't do that freely. But the question is - how much good money will they throw after bad? How much are they prepared to spend to safeguard their investment?
I can't say - but surely not a penny more than necessary!
When this season is done and dusted at least everybody will have learned a valuable lesson: When in business act like businessmen. Stick to the budgets! And when the budgets fail the mangement are responsible - not the shareholders. Cleaning up the mess is the responsibility of the management and it can't be done easily with a 'send more money' plee.
All the rumors, threads on various forums, speculations in the papers about the club going into administration on Friday or next week or ... surely ... before new moon. All that smoke must come from a real fire.
Well, it may be true or it may be a simple matter of 'cultural differencies'.
In the old days - before SISU - (and present time for many other clubs) the club simply increased the loans. If the bank said 'no', they turned to the shareholders and said 'send more money'. And because the shareholders/owners had Sky Blue hearts they did in many cases really 'send more money'.
But SISU is a different kind of owners. They agree with the management on a budget and a cashflow plan. A good and well prepared budget will make sure everything runs smoothly. There will be a cercain amount available for spending on wages and on new players. With owners like SISU the wage budget and the transfer pot will not be something they are prepared to discuss extraordinay. SISU too have a budget that they are obliged to stick to.
So if the chairman and the manager uses up the transfer budget before christmas they will have to sell other players to get new faces in.
What have RR/AB done this season?
They tried to sign up Westwood and Gunnarsson on new contracts, which failed. Probably due to them demanding more money leaving less for wages on new players. And signing Westie and Gunnar on new contracts might also include sign-on fees and fees to agents leaving less money for new transfers.
Then RR/AB thought they could sell Westie/Gunnar in the early season or at least in the January window - but as we all know, they couldn't.
But still hoping to cash in on the two they probably went over the top when they signed King.
Add to that failing gates and you may see why the board desperately tries every trick in the book to get cash in. Selling a potential future star to Liverpool (getting little money immidiately, but most at the end of season - not ideal, but the best they could get). This deal may have been forced on RR, but it showed clearly that SISU is NOT accepting a 'send more money' plee.
Selling season tickets very early was also an attempt to get in cash now, but did it really do anything? I don't think so.
So now Platt is going out on loan. Makes sense. The budget is bust and RR will get cash in - or spend less - where he can.
All-in-all I am not too scared (a little nervous perhaps) that the club will go into administration. I think this whole financial mess is down to early overspending and lower income from both gates and outgoing transfers. And now the management is tought a lesson in business: When you agree to a budget, you are responsible and you better stick to your promisses.
SISU are not sugar daddys - they are a business run by hard core business men/women.
Going into administration will most likely mean that SISU will stand to lose most of their investment. They won't do that freely. But the question is - how much good money will they throw after bad? How much are they prepared to spend to safeguard their investment?
I can't say - but surely not a penny more than necessary!
When this season is done and dusted at least everybody will have learned a valuable lesson: When in business act like businessmen. Stick to the budgets! And when the budgets fail the mangement are responsible - not the shareholders. Cleaning up the mess is the responsibility of the management and it can't be done easily with a 'send more money' plee.
To be fair it's to protect smaller clubs from bigger clubs coming in and stealing good managers.
It's the risk you take, give someone you believe will be good (or why appoint him?) a 3 year contract so that at the end of the first year a team have to pay compensation to take him off your hands.
It's the risk you take, give someone you believe will be good (or why appoint him?) a 3 year contract so that at the end of the first year a team have to pay compensation to take him off your hands.
CovLis86
Well-Known Member
So despite this odd rumour about Platt leaving being U-Turned, do the signs still indicate us heading towards administration?
Personally, i dont know what the repurcussions will be of this. But, im genuinly terrified about the future. I cant bare the day to day rumours flying about, its too stressful.
Personally, i dont know what the repurcussions will be of this. But, im genuinly terrified about the future. I cant bare the day to day rumours flying about, its too stressful.
Great_Expectations
Well-Known Member
There is definitely a sense of unease around the club, and the AB sacking was definitely due to off field issues with on field being used as a justification. Whether rightly/wrongly so is another discussion.
There is something happening at the top and even those who are close to it are not sure what is going on. There are three ways things can go;
1) Administration - We go bust
2) Investment - We can all hope
3) Nothing happens -Sisu sort out whatever the issue(s) is and we never know anything more.
There is something happening at the top and even those who are close to it are not sure what is going on. There are three ways things can go;
1) Administration - We go bust
2) Investment - We can all hope
3) Nothing happens -Sisu sort out whatever the issue(s) is and we never know anything more.
hackneyfox
Well-Known Member
Said it many times on GMK but I'll repeat it again.
You resemble us from the period just prior to when we got relegated.
We had numerous managers, and whatever their past history each one seemed unable to make a difference to the club or players.
Each season things got slowly worse, there was no connection between the club/players and fans.
When we hit the post against Stoke thus sending us down rather than you it was the lowest I've ever felt.
The following seson was the lowest league position in our history and yet it turned the club around.
I think there was a wholesale attitude of defeat about the club but a few wins, and more importantly, the expectation of further wins and a finish near the top changed things around completely.
Suddenly we felt reconnected with the club, it was 'us' against the other teams at last.
We had a great time in that division, thankfully it was short as it could be, and the following season we shocked a few in the championship, including ourselves, by making the play-offs. The team wasn't that good but the confidence instilled in the team made a huge difference.
Alternatively of course you could just do a co* and spend the next 10 years stuck in the bottom half of that division as well, who knows, but it seems very unlikely that someone will come along, buy out Sisu, install a decent manager, buy decent players and most importantly, change the mindset of the club.
You resemble us from the period just prior to when we got relegated.
We had numerous managers, and whatever their past history each one seemed unable to make a difference to the club or players.
Each season things got slowly worse, there was no connection between the club/players and fans.
When we hit the post against Stoke thus sending us down rather than you it was the lowest I've ever felt.
The following seson was the lowest league position in our history and yet it turned the club around.
I think there was a wholesale attitude of defeat about the club but a few wins, and more importantly, the expectation of further wins and a finish near the top changed things around completely.
Suddenly we felt reconnected with the club, it was 'us' against the other teams at last.
We had a great time in that division, thankfully it was short as it could be, and the following season we shocked a few in the championship, including ourselves, by making the play-offs. The team wasn't that good but the confidence instilled in the team made a huge difference.
Alternatively of course you could just do a co* and spend the next 10 years stuck in the bottom half of that division as well, who knows, but it seems very unlikely that someone will come along, buy out Sisu, install a decent manager, buy decent players and most importantly, change the mindset of the club.
Think its the third Thursday in march so they are cutting it pretty fine!
Disorganised1
New Member
If they're trying to sell being in League 1 isn't a good option.
Depressing reading, I'd have to go along with Godiva's assessment of what goes on behind the scenes. It would seem we can't afford to keep Gunnar and Westwood. The frightening thing is that who can we afford - players who are probably bottom of Championship/league 1 level players.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Thing is, if you do the maths and work out that in most cases when a championship manager goes on to better things, the compo is hardly life changing. Lets say it was £250k -£500k, its hardly worth the contracts we have given menagers over the past 10 years.
12 months and go fro there, keep them on their toes...
A contract which runs the length of the season, to be reviewed at the end of the season..
If they are good and go, then the club are in a good position..
If they are poor, then they deserve to go with no money..
hackneyfox
Well-Known Member
Managers need more than that, and if the manager is what attracts players to the club they won't sign if he may be out in a few months.
skybluetom
New Member
The average life of a manager in this league is 9 months. It's not just us but football in general we need to get real, year by year rolling contracts are the way to go.
hackneyfox
Well-Known Member
Where did you get that from?
Clearly wrong, or based on a rather short time period.
Clearly wrong, or based on a rather short time period.
hackneyfox
Well-Known Member
Why not have rolling contracts for players then?
Small clubs will never improve, at the end of the season every decent manager will be off to improve their CV.
Small clubs will never improve, at the end of the season every decent manager will be off to improve their CV.
skybluetom
New Member
The average life of a Premier League manager is 1.4 months, given filtered into that would be Fergie and Wenger who are exceptional it's probably less in reality.
The average life a Championship or league one manager is 9 - 10 months, so basically a season. That came from reading a page on Eurosport who claimed that was based on stats from the LMA, perhaps they were wrong I don't know but given the amount of managerial comings and goings in a season I wouldn't at all be surprised.
The average life a Championship or league one manager is 9 - 10 months, so basically a season. That came from reading a page on Eurosport who claimed that was based on stats from the LMA, perhaps they were wrong I don't know but given the amount of managerial comings and goings in a season I wouldn't at all be surprised.
May include caretaker managers at a few weeks a pop?
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
Admin Looms..
Sounds like a fine wine.
Sounds like a fine wine.
skybluetom
New Member
Years 
apologies.
apologies.skybluetom
New Member
Yeah I suppose that could be true, not sure a caretaker manager would go down as being sacked though. A caretaker surely wouldn't go down a permanant appointment?
rob9872
Well-Known Member
It probably also factors in things like promotion and relegation. Eg Pardew has a 5.5 year contract but if Newcastle go down then Pardew and Hughton will have only survived 9 months in the PL between them even if he is allowed to carry on in the Championship. The thing with stats is they can twist them however they best fit the point they are trying to make. We saw good examples in today's budget of how one side points to what a great idea something is and the other finds a way of contradicting it completely by a differebt set of numbers
hackneyfox
Well-Known Member
You can twist the buggers whichever way you want, the avaerage for managers in this division is a lot more than 9 months.
And The Premier is clearly more than 1.4 years, Ferguson & Wenger would push it past that alone, especially if caretake managers don't count.
And The Premier is clearly more than 1.4 years, Ferguson & Wenger would push it past that alone, especially if caretake managers don't count.