Was told by one of the main men at the meeting yesterday that he is in daily contact with Boddy.
Apparently he has been told that the deal for Brum is 3 times more then the Ricoh but the 70% revenue stream means they only needed to sell 2500 st.
Find this hard to believe as everyone needs to spend quiet a few quid for this to be possible.
I'm sure someone better then me could work it out.
Doesn't make much sense to me. I suspect the comments are only half of the truth.
It is all very well having 70% of other revenue but what about the other associated costs. With crowds of 5000 the figures are not going to be large. If the average spend per head was £5 by the time you take out supply costs, Birmingham share, VAT etc it is going to leave 200k at best I would think. That covers the new rent I suppose
Over the years match day income has worked out at between £9 to £11 per head. Given the discount prices then income per head is not going at the high end of that range. Say it is £10 (which I think is probably still high) then we are looking at total matchday income for the season below 1.5m. That's probably less than half of last season
Commercial and other income will be hit by the lower numbers but things like efl distributions wont be.
The only way Boddy's comment makes sense is if the wage bill has been reduced by 40% or so, or that the sales of Chaplin and Bayliss were planned months ago. I am not sure I see such cuts in wages but I do think they have made some savings. That leaves the player sales. Yes we are a selling club we have to survive but if planned months ago then it could be said it doesn't sit well with comments about squad building and going for it
The sales allow us to have a player budget that matches the scmp rules. Without them we were in trouble. We would have needed a player budget similar to accrington
Couple of other thoughts. The sale of Chaplin and Bayliss could mean the club will show a near 3m player profit in the accounts to offset the football operational losses. The club could be somewhere between 1m loss to break even because of those two sales. But what happens next season, we wont make 3m profits on players every year.
Of course it will allow seppala boddy and fisher to say the club is doing fine without the ricoh. Hence the spin about 70% of revenue I suspect. Which if you think about it with no real hint of any movement on a new stadium could be worrying for the coming seasons regarding a return to Coventry..........
Please dont say the efl say we have to..... what are they going to do against their member club if nothing suitable to return to....... doubt the EC complaint will be settled one way or another by this time next year. Why would any of the parties change their stance.
Anyway that's my take on what boddy is supposed to have said
