I don’t see how you can give zero credit
Never actually said that, but my professional & business knowledge means i keep a healthy scepticism
I was being quite specific Pete about the fans perception that SISU had backed the manager with funds to purchase players. I don't see any evidence of it. Where they have fully backed him is in trusting MR & his team and saying get on with it, its passive not active. That is not a bad thing though and for now it is working.
I have given them credit for things in the past. Including their very clever plan around the administration which very nearly worked. However in terms of finance i like to see the evidence not simply credit them because the team is performing brilliantly
1)Do they manage the club finances well? it is hard to argue otherwise. That for me is the biggest tick positive. They make sure the club can pay its way from the means it has. They run it like any normal business not like the usual football plaything. If things get sticky they act as bank of last resort then take the money back at the first opportunity.
2)Have they put in extra funds for player purchases? Since MR became manager SISU have, according to the financials we have access to, put £2.135m in to the club but extracted in the same period £2.109m. No great financial backing of MR that i can see coming directly from the owners. Thats up to 30/06/2020 of course. No one yet knows what has happened in 14 months since. I don't see why they would change the way they operate, it would go against the first comment but we will see next February
3) Are SISU funding the club? Not really it is funded by day to day operations and Player sales income of £9.659m and paid out player purchases £2.267m to purchase new players during MR's time here. Are SISU buying and selling the players? The owners set MR a budget within which he operates buying and selling player he wants to, the owners trust his judgement and sign it off. Other than trusting and letting MR get on with the job what was this great backing that SISU have provided?
4) Did SISU agree the return to Coventry? Yes after Wasps approached them and yes it is apparently a better deal than St Andrews with lower rent and better F&B share. So good well done them but from a business perspective and the reluctance to fund further did they have any choice? The owners must have been aware of the ground problems at St Andrews, Crowds were not massive there. Had we stayed then attendances would have been what ? half of current levels? Couldn't be more than 12000 at St Andrews on the best day because of the BCFC ground problems. The return has added i would guess £100k income to each matchday or 2.3m over the year. Thats before the associated other commercial incomes brought by a return. No brainer really, We were in deep trouble if we didn't return and the budget would have had to be lower than it is now to survive - think what that would have meant on the pitch.
5) the business lives within its means. In a day to day sense i guess you can say that to some degree (ie the footballing function pays its way) and it is something positive. However the club since 30/06/2020 will have increased debt by two items at least. Firstly a short term loan of £3.2m from the EFL (the club has to finance the repayments over 3 years that means less funds in the budget for the playing side). Secondly it is unlikely that the loans from ARVO have decreased so there is a £2m interest charge being rolled up as a liability which is suffering compound interest so grows annually some at 15%. in the last year we have added £5m in debt, given the pandemic not sure i see there being profits or even breakeven after interest. Any loans from ARVO could have been put in to the club differently, less expensively, the owners for reasons of their investors best interest chose and continue to choose not to.
6) the club is self sufficient. Nope it still makes losses and debt is rising
7) We are going to build our own stadium. Well there are press releases, again, but where is the detail. Nothing tangible. It may happen and if it does then i will give them credit, so long as it does what it says on the can they keep putting out.
8) the really good uptake of season tickets pre season helped finance player dealing. What is it 11000? at £10 per match average thats £2.5m
Player trading is from within the budget set based on the operational income, not from the owners from everything we know so far
Look i actually dont have a problem with how they are running the club but people need to see it for what it is not gloss it up because the team on the pitch is out performing the sum of its parts, and the manager & his staff are achieving massively.
There is a massive feel good factor about the club. That is great to see, but it is driven by events on the pitch.
Ask yourselves if CCFC were in the position of Notts Forest and not performing would the fans reactions be the same as now? I am pretty certain that the way that SISU manage the finances would not change, it hasnt changed for last 5 years why would it change now
one final point on a different topic - over the years people have said how poor the Arena was in atmosphere. Was it the Arena because the matches this season have been cracking atmospheres
That would be a sight to see!