Cov 4 Prem
New Member
Saying they aren't going to pay the wages requested from the likes of clingan to stay because they "want to reduce the loss by 40%".
Don't know if this has been posted yet?
Don't know if this has been posted yet?
Anyone else here the statements from Ken on mercia? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Cov 4 Prem
- Start date
Lord_Nampil
Well-Known Member
It's fair enough if that's there aim, what I want to know is why isn't the whole team up for sale if that is the case!!! It's not a good fair enough btw
Otis
Well-Known Member
The more we reduce the wage bill of the players, the weaker the squad becomes. The weaker the squad becomes. the worse the results will be. The worse the results will be, the smaller the crowds become. The smaller the crowds become, the less the gate revenue is to be. :facepalm:
skyblueinBaku
Well-Known Member
It seems that our new Director of Football doesn't understand the dynamics of a football club.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
But if we ain't got the money to pay him then we ain't got the money. No point moaning about it. If we had a full-house every week then maybe we'd have better players. Blame can be apportioned easily at SISU - which I don't disagree with - but stay-aways have to shoulder some responsibility too.
I dont think anyone can argue with the club trying to become a bit more self sufficent but this can only happen if we are replacing the likes of Clingan with young, hungry, quality, cheaper alternatives from the lower leagues (which hasnt really happened since dann, fox, hussey, westwood signings).
Unfortunately just shoving another inexperienced academy player in the first team in their place will only work so long (however good they are). Actually, maybe we should just get rid of all the pros and play our U17s !!!
What they never appear to grasp is the fact that certain quality players being put on better contracts turns them into a higher value asset. Give Cligan a new deal at £6-7k per week, sell him in the summer for a million or two for all care, but that type of investment ensures a return to the club. If players are offered good deals at the right time ie with 18 months left they may well sign, going into the last 12-14 months they will always have an eye on a Bosman. Surely theyve learned their lessons from Westwood, King, Gunna etc etc, I even understand Dann and Fox were moving into the last 18 months of deals which meant a weaker bargaining position for the club.
I have to admit when SISU first bought the club and we could all understand their aims and goals, even if the main one was likely to be getting rid at a profit, I thought we'd be in relaitvely safe hands. These types of companies hate making losses so I wouldve expected a well run club at the very least. What we are getting at the moment is an absolute shambles. I work with struggling businesses and this has all the hallmarks of an insolvency (high staff turnover, drop in revenue, lack of strategic direction), with the exception of the fact that the main creditor is SISU themselves and therefore they would be by far the biggest lossers by going intio administration so we have to keep treading water until someone else puts us out of our misery by taking a punt on the club.
Pretty depressing really
Unfortunately just shoving another inexperienced academy player in the first team in their place will only work so long (however good they are). Actually, maybe we should just get rid of all the pros and play our U17s !!!
What they never appear to grasp is the fact that certain quality players being put on better contracts turns them into a higher value asset. Give Cligan a new deal at £6-7k per week, sell him in the summer for a million or two for all care, but that type of investment ensures a return to the club. If players are offered good deals at the right time ie with 18 months left they may well sign, going into the last 12-14 months they will always have an eye on a Bosman. Surely theyve learned their lessons from Westwood, King, Gunna etc etc, I even understand Dann and Fox were moving into the last 18 months of deals which meant a weaker bargaining position for the club.
I have to admit when SISU first bought the club and we could all understand their aims and goals, even if the main one was likely to be getting rid at a profit, I thought we'd be in relaitvely safe hands. These types of companies hate making losses so I wouldve expected a well run club at the very least. What we are getting at the moment is an absolute shambles. I work with struggling businesses and this has all the hallmarks of an insolvency (high staff turnover, drop in revenue, lack of strategic direction), with the exception of the fact that the main creditor is SISU themselves and therefore they would be by far the biggest lossers by going intio administration so we have to keep treading water until someone else puts us out of our misery by taking a punt on the club.
Pretty depressing really
The ones that stay away do not trust Sisu with there hard earned cash and i for one dont blame them or question them as they dont lie they talk with actions by staying away...So while we are stuck with these people ill be staying away as i will not help Sisu carry on this terrible period in our history...
So thanks Sisu for saving admin but that does not give them the right to drive the club into league 1 or the right to blame anyone else apart from themselves in decisions they have made....I also think they are making moves to put the club into admin come the new year as by then we will be that far away from safety it will make no difference if we take the points penalty... So dont blame the stay aways look closer to the club and the ones that lie and react when they fear protests, as it effects other business matters that they have......
So thanks Sisu for saving admin but that does not give them the right to drive the club into league 1 or the right to blame anyone else apart from themselves in decisions they have made....I also think they are making moves to put the club into admin come the new year as by then we will be that far away from safety it will make no difference if we take the points penalty... So dont blame the stay aways look closer to the club and the ones that lie and react when they fear protests, as it effects other business matters that they have......
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Your decision, which I respect. However, it doesn't help get us out of the mess we're in. No revenue/no income equals player sales and a decreasing squad.
Otis
Well-Known Member
But how on earth do you expect people to turn up every 2 weeks and fork out £20-24 every time to watch a team lose and struggle? Been here a thousand times. Fans will only come back if there is success on the field. They've had 12 years plus of complete shite. Don't know anyone can point the finger at the fans.
Its a fair argument but its a two way thing. One of the biggest mistakes was to go into the season with no momentum or optimism. SISU didnt need to spend a fortune but we all knew a decent striker to replace King was necessary. I believe by not buying someone pre season and giving the fans a lift and real hope they lost 5-6,000 on the Leicester gate. That wouldve brought in £100k+ which wouldve covered a few weeks wages for a decent free transfer striker brought in over the summer. They get a good result and all of a sudden momentum builds, fans come along to the next game (generating more revenue) etc etc. Its a lot of ifs and buts but first game of the season v your local rivals (bringing 5,000-6,000 fans) would nearly always guarantee significantly more than 21,000.
As I mention above, theres no issue with the club cutting their cloth accordingly, in fact it shouldve been done years ago, however, the haphazard way in which it has been done with a total lack of direction and forsight from the top, has screwed this season and possibly the short term future of the club.
Erm... id rather keep Craine and Clingan and fuck off the deadwood like McPake, McSheffrey and Bell.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Very good point. We are investing in the wrong members of the squad. We need to keep 2 or 3 of the very best players, fook the mediocre ones off and either bring lads through the academy or get up and coming lower league players here.
Investing in crocks and has been's is not the answer.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
Sounds like Tory economic policy.
That's the interesting conflict. Both sides are equally culpable in terms of revenue responsibility. But a bigger, far more important consideration is what it says about the state of football. Ticket prices are too high, clubs are in huge debt, the PL is setting up new exploitative initiatives to steal the best players, etc. Is it really a problem with CCFC, or with football itself? You look across the football league and it really is a house of cards.
Otis
Well-Known Member
If City had had one or two good seasons of promise then i think you could through a little mud at the City fans and give them stick, but it's been a perpetual struggle and downward spiral for over a decade. Now City fans who have been season ticket holders for 20 and 30 years or more are considering jacking it all in.
It's painful going up the Ricoh once a fortnight. You go up half expecting them to lose every game.
It's painful going up the Ricoh once a fortnight. You go up half expecting them to lose every game.
tis your right i just want to see the club achieve its potential it wont under sisu :blue::blue:
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Whilst I don't disagree in principle I think it's practice, and with our budget, that isn't going to happen. Would I rather keep Clingan than Bell? Yeah, probably. However, if Clingan's wage demands breakthrough our pay structure (however small WE think that may be) then fair enough. If signing Clingan though means we have to say get rid of three other players to afford his wages then I don't think we should. Our squad is too small.
Now me, I can just about to afford running my Fiat, what with tax, MOT, petrol, etc etc. It would be like me breaking my budget because I fancy a Range Rover. Nice at the time, but there'll come a time when it all goes tits up. This is where we are for signing players like Robbie Keane all those years ago. Nice at the time...
Playing a team of kids all because we bust the bank signing one player isn't the answer either.
Now me, I can just about to afford running my Fiat, what with tax, MOT, petrol, etc etc. It would be like me breaking my budget because I fancy a Range Rover. Nice at the time, but there'll come a time when it all goes tits up. This is where we are for signing players like Robbie Keane all those years ago. Nice at the time...
Playing a team of kids all because we bust the bank signing one player isn't the answer either.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
You know what, I totally 100% agree with you. If they'd done that then who knows where we would be .
However, the fans who deliberately stay away for whatever reason aren't helping. The good old vicious circle thing.
There are various types of fans:
1) Those who go regardless (probably me)
2) Those who go and moan
3) Those who withhold their support and moan.
If you're in the last category then, personally, I think you're helping SISU rather than hindering them.
However, the fans who deliberately stay away for whatever reason aren't helping. The good old vicious circle thing.
There are various types of fans:
1) Those who go regardless (probably me)
2) Those who go and moan
3) Those who withhold their support and moan.
If you're in the last category then, personally, I think you're helping SISU rather than hindering them.
Tankie
New Member
"So whats the deal then torch"
They can't afford to keep the players we've have.
They can't afford any "John Doe"Whatsisname, Loans,
They probably will sell any player/players they get an offer for in the January sales.
Now! I'm no corporate Accountant, I only made Tractors, but, surely, I'm not the only one who is amazed, in the fact that SIsu Capital, are willing to carry the Financial loses, in such a laid back attitude.
my own theory, rightly or wrongly about thier seemingly unflustered position is that CCFC, come under the umbrella of the "Sisu brand"and is not really a seperate, stand alone lable, in which case, some kind of tax loophole, based offshore, could be used to offset the Debt, lets not forget, that Sisu are "Money Managers" and in no shape or form, sentimental, Coventry city Fans.
There has been Questions asked by front benchers, in the
Commons, about thier lack of transparacy, in their business dealings, with Mps wanting to Know "Who they are" and "what they are"
We know what they Are, but as to why they are still here, sure beats me.
My guess would be, they are going to sell all our rising stars, in the Jan Window, wind us up, and have an amazing jolly up in the Bahamas on the procedes.
Tankie...Bedworth on Thames.
Last edited:
Unfortunately for some bizarre reason Ive been up more this season than any other since I was a season ticket holder over 12 years ago. Maybe its because I feel the team deserately need the support, especially the young lads.
I wouldnt say the third category is helping SISU though. It might help their argument not to spend cash but it means they are losing even more which im sure theyd prefer not to
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Without wanting to get into politics, the Tory economic policy has been proven ineffective, if not downright dangerous, in numerous cases and by numerous studies. It's an ideological stance, not a economic one. But can we keep this on the football?
WRT SISU. I'd agree that we need to cut costs if it wasn't for the fact that the basic infrastructure of the club is set up for a club playing in the Prem/upper Championship. The Ricoh will cost what it costs regardless of where we are, the Academy and training facilities are the same. It's not as simple as lower the playing budget until it meets our income as we will always have higher costs than those around us.
We're not a small club growing, we're a big club declining. The only way we'll ever break even is by increasing revenue, which we'll only do with success on the pitch. It's a gamble sure, but it's our only option.
To pull some figures out of my ass, let's say it costs City £1m in rent at the Ricoh, £500k for run the academy and the same to run the training facilities. Now if it costs the average club in L1 half that then we're £1m down compared to other clubs with the same income. So we'll have a smaller playing budget and be uncompetitive, leading to lower gates and a reduced budget. Go down to L2 and maybe it's half as much again for similar teams to run the ground, etc. Then we're even less competitive, and so on and so on.
However, if we were to do what SISU and Ranson initially planned and put some cash in up front, then gates rise on expectation and hopefully the results follow to sustain the increased income. If that then leads to some level of success (promotion) then we start to get the big lump sums that pay down the debt and lead to a sustainable club.
It's basically a choice between risking dying quickly (if the investment doen't come off) or definitely dying slowly (through a drop down the leagues). Basic game theory suggests the sensible option is to invest as it's a chance of a big reward versus a much smaller chance of competing with a smaller budget.
WRT SISU. I'd agree that we need to cut costs if it wasn't for the fact that the basic infrastructure of the club is set up for a club playing in the Prem/upper Championship. The Ricoh will cost what it costs regardless of where we are, the Academy and training facilities are the same. It's not as simple as lower the playing budget until it meets our income as we will always have higher costs than those around us.
We're not a small club growing, we're a big club declining. The only way we'll ever break even is by increasing revenue, which we'll only do with success on the pitch. It's a gamble sure, but it's our only option.
To pull some figures out of my ass, let's say it costs City £1m in rent at the Ricoh, £500k for run the academy and the same to run the training facilities. Now if it costs the average club in L1 half that then we're £1m down compared to other clubs with the same income. So we'll have a smaller playing budget and be uncompetitive, leading to lower gates and a reduced budget. Go down to L2 and maybe it's half as much again for similar teams to run the ground, etc. Then we're even less competitive, and so on and so on.
However, if we were to do what SISU and Ranson initially planned and put some cash in up front, then gates rise on expectation and hopefully the results follow to sustain the increased income. If that then leads to some level of success (promotion) then we start to get the big lump sums that pay down the debt and lead to a sustainable club.
It's basically a choice between risking dying quickly (if the investment doen't come off) or definitely dying slowly (through a drop down the leagues). Basic game theory suggests the sensible option is to invest as it's a chance of a big reward versus a much smaller chance of competing with a smaller budget.
Disenchanted
New Member
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Fair point - it's just that the football's so bloody depressing at the moment!!!
