First point I have consistently for years said clubs need to live within their means. To me that is spending only the cash that is available. I accept the obvious consequences of that on overhead and squad spend. That doesn't mean continually adding to debt that is (a) unsecured (b) unsustainable because the interest can not be paid let alone capital repayments. Cash available will be the operating income but also monies that the owners provide via sustainable loans, equity introductions or gifts. If interest can not be repaid, if charged, then a clubs cash pot should be reduced accordingly. It will include player sales. Continually racking up unrealistic debt with no hope of repayment is ridiculous and ultimately often means the UK tax payer missing out when administration hits. Might bring clubs in to line regarding the football debt rule in insolvency
But what is break even as questioned in the OP
operating break even ?
after interest charges ?
after player sales ?
net profit of 0 ?
cashflow surplus/deficit at 0?
As off 31/05/15 we were not at breakeven on any of those measures. A budget is for the season not just the transfer windows and heavily dependent on attendances which is dependent on the success of the squad we have. But again we are we talking FL SCMP Budget, total wages budget, the football budget, the company budget, the Group budget, the investment budget etc. A budget isn't just about promotion it is about stability, it is about staying in the division at least not dropping out of it, it is about maximising income and minimising costs.
Taking a punt at success? Basically means adding to the unsustainable debt levels we already have. Yes it might be investors who are comfortable with high risk but extra funds doesn't guarantee promotion to the Championship and once there how do they get repaid considering operating rocket (mainly on wages). It is no good saying SISU should have invested last year - its gone its irrelevant other than if you consider that CCFC bad run of form started in November and would colour investment decisions. TM might prove to be a success but so far he has been in terms of results in poor L1 divisions pretty average (kept us in L1 by skin of teeth and had a dismal run last season, not got off to a great start this). Punt = more debt that cant be repaid except by selling star players or reducing overheads
The situation we are in is that we must balance the cash each season, because that is the greatest risk to the club's survival. The club presently owes its owners £36m (plus other operating creditors)with total assets of £1m plus any saleable players (what £3m tops?) Are we seriously saying that in the best interests of the clubs future the solution is to increase debt still and add to the annual finance costs so making breakeven harder still? Is that what fans really want owners to do, to risk it all, on a chance of promotion? Right now taking risks with our finances could be catastrophic, all business includes risk but I think too many fail to recognise the nature of the risk when calling for "taking a punt on promotion" in our current circumstances.
Not convinced at all that as we stand a promotion would solve more than it risked - adding further debt to that adds greater risk. That is not to say that I do not want us to push for promotion but it has to be based on sound finances