Breaking news: Acl call off rent talks (5 Viewers)

[Grendel]

Crystal palace and derby are another two aren't they?

Palace had been in administration so cannot have had a big budget.

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Where's Peterborough? QPR were a premier league team last season and Preston and Sheffield were in division one weren't they?

I took information from the last year they were in the championship - as I explained above. The rest is on balance of probability

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Crystal palace and derby are another two aren't they?

Palace had been in administration so cannot have had a big budget.

Derby had ben cited in the link I'd already provided and you'd responded to. I didn't think you'd needing reminding so soon as it was only an hour ago. I over-estimated you. Here you go again:

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/15047-How-big-does-a-squad-need-to-be?highlight=wage+bill

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

Everyone makes mistakes, shall we judge everyone who makes a mistake?

"A mistake is always forgivable, rarely excusable and always unacceptable."

 

[lordsummerisle]

Accoring to Orange Ken, our wage bill heading into the 2011 to 12 season was circa. £5m:

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...y-s-darkest-hour-has-passed-92746-29752398/2/

Barnsley reduced theirs from £7.5m to £6.2m during the season:

http://www.insidermedia.com/insider...elp-barnsley-fc-score-small-profit/index.html

John Ryan bought in Willie McKay, to reduce their £8m bill:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15483154

I'm just looking for Millwall now, but given they had players such as Darius Henderson and could afford Keogh from Wolves; I think their structure would have been greater than ours.

Still, I don't need to bother do I? Point proven, eh?

Do you actually read your links? Suspect not.

The first one where you state that Orange Ken says he has reduced the wage bill to £5million is nowhere in the article.

He said he'd cut it by a million from around £8million.

The rest of the article is nothing more than speculation and supposition.

Did you write it? It's your style of "research" after all.

 

[Grendel]

running out of arguments hay Grendel, you always have to resort to name calling when you have run out or people prove you wrong. Put little you away and debate like the adult you claim to be.

No because as usual nome of these facts are quite what they seem.

They are the previous years not the year we were relegated include 3 teams not even in our league. One if the lowest it seems is Barnsley who escaped relegation as of course did Peterborough who strangely appear to be missing altogether.

If as alleged our wage bill for the season in hand was £7 million that means the 9 players we list that summer saved the club only £2 million in wages. Given that some of them such as Marlon king and Kieran Westwood would have been big earners I find it difficult to accept the average wage the departed were on was around £4,000 a week.

This facts are mostly conjecture.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

"A mistake is always forgivable, rarely excusable and always unacceptable."

No one has accepted, nor made excuses for their mistakes, neither has SISU themselves.

If you mention rent, that's just to improve the situation, not excusing or accepting their mistakes.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Come on, that's impossible. To have information to hand that cites in real time what every club are paying? I took information from their last set of audited accounts, and assumed that if the clubs were stable, without changing league position or gates that they would be pretty stable with regads salary structure. Most players aren't on one year contracts, are they? Their contarcts would span a few year's accounts. meaning massive fluctuations would be improbable.

And I never stated THE lowest. I stated within the bottom three

You account hacked was it?

"Newcastle's position is a function of a friendly fixture list. See where they are at Christmas. Like it or not, a club's finances has the most profound effect upon the players they can attract, and the number they can sustain.

Allow me to turn this on it's head, I am telling you that we have signed fewer players than any other team, we have no loan players - unlike any other team in the league, our wage structure is the lowest in the league and we have sold or failed to retain our most high profile quartet of players from last season.

What did you expect? "

 

[Grendel]

Derby had ben cited in the link I'd already provided and you'd responded to. I didn't think you'd needing reminding so soon as it was only an hour ago. I over-estimated you. Here you go again:

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/15047-How-big-does-a-squad-need-to-be?highlight=wage+bill

Where's Peterborough? This isn't last season at all - you didn't look as they weren't in the league then. This is all just made up from the prior year. Tut tut.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Like the famous statement that you made about "Undisclosed Transfer Fees" being "ESTIMATED FACTS"!:facepalm:

.., Much like your 'general understandings'', where you made a whole thread devoted to your 'general understandings', passing it off as fact, but it wasn't. Hypocrite.

 

[Grendel]

You account hacked was it?

"Newcastle's position is a function of a friendly fixture list. See where they are at Christmas. Like it or not, a club's finances has the most profound effect upon the players they can attract, and the number they can sustain.

Allow me to turn this on it's head, I am telling you that we have signed fewer players than any other team, we have no loan players - unlike any other team in the league, our wage structure is the lowest in the league and we have sold or failed to retain our most high profile quartet of players from last season.

What did you expect? "

Well done. I'd quit while your behind MMM

 

[Grendel]

running out of arguments hay Grendel, you always have to resort to name calling when you have run out or people prove you wrong. Put little you away and debate like the adult you claim to be.

Of delete this post if I was you. MMM has run into some difficulty with his facts that are now by his own admission balance if probability.

He's got less credibility than nick clegg,

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Do you actually read your links? Suspect not.

The first one where you state that Orange Ken says he has reduced the wage bill to £5million is nowhere in the article.

He said he'd cut it by a million from around £8million.

The rest of the article is nothing more than speculation and supposition.

Did you write it? It's your style of "research" after all.

Well, it's fairly easy to adopt your style of posting. To offer nothing, yet scoff and tear apart anything as conjecture. The fact is, none of us sit in any rooms or read contracts. We can use the best information available to us.

The Telegraph states that the wage structure was £8m, from which the board claims tha £1m has been saved; netting at £7m. It also talks in terms of pay-offs to Coleman and Bothroyd and then goes on to extrapolate the influence of these contracts, players coming and going and establishes the £5m figure.

In the ansence of anything else, or that being challenged - which it wasn't - that's fine science by me

 

[skybluehugh]

No because as usual nome of these facts are quite what they seem.

They are the previous years not the year we were relegated include 3 teams not even in our league. One if the lowest it seems is Barnsley who escaped relegation as of course did Peterborough who strangely appear to be missing altogether.

If as alleged our wage bill for the season in hand was £7 million that means the 9 players we list that summer saved the club only £2 million in wages. Given that some of them such as Marlon king and Kieran Westwood would have been big earners I find it difficult to accept the average wage the departed were on was around £4,000 a week.

This facts are mostly conjecture.

Arn't yours as well. And when prove is shown you it becomes erelvant

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

No one has accepted, nor made excuses for their mistakes, neither has SISU themselves.

If you mention rent, that's just to improve the situation, not excusing or accepting their mistakes.

"I never make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect".... Edward Gibbon

 

[Grendel]

Arn't yours as well. And when prove is shown you it becomes erelvant

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Oh yes my estimates are conjecture. MMM however tried to portray them as facts bit like the time he claimed Northampton had played a game at the Ricoh (they hadn't) and may take up residence on a more permenant basis overlooking the little fact they are extending their ground.

He accuses sisu of poor due dillegence but them does not even check some of the data he himself has previously produced.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

"I never make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect".... Edward Gibbon

"There are all kinds of stupid people that annoy me but what annoys me most is a lazy argument." (yours) - Christopher Hitchens

A few for SBK:

"Keep cool; anger is not an argument." - Daniel Webster

"When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

 

[grego_gee]

Of delete this post if I was you. MMM has run into some difficulty with his facts that are now by his own admission balance if probability.

He's got less credibility than nick clegg,

Wtf I was being polite!
I thought he was a she!

imp:

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

"There are all kinds of stupid people that annoy me but what annoys me most is a lazy argument." - Christopher Hitchens

Well you would certainly know about that wouldn't you!

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Oh yes my estimates are conjecture. MMM however tried to portray them as facts bit like the time he claimed Northampton had played a game at the Ricoh (they hadn't) and may take up residence on a more permenant basis overlooking the little fact they are extending their ground.

He accuses sisu of poor due dillegence but them does not even check some of the data he himself has previously produced.

I never made a claim that they had played a league game at the Ricoh. I stated cup. I also stated, by example, that they might wish to play some European games, or significant leagues games at a venue such as the Ricoh - these might include games such as Leicester. The New North Stand - when complete - at Franklin Gardens, will take capacity to 17,000; which is well below what might be secured for such rugby games, so may be of interest. It's not so preposterous. You only wish to change it's meaning and ambition to make it so - often to cover weak opinions and outmoded arguments

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Well you would certainly know about that wouldn't you!

Indeed I do, from numerous of people.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Well, it's fairly easy to adopt your style of posting. To offer nothing, yet scoff and tear apart anything as conjecture. The fact is, none of us sit in any rooms or read contracts. We can use the best information available to us.

The Telegraph states that the wage structure was £8m, from which the board claims tha £1m has been saved; netting at £7m. It also talks in terms of pay-offs to Coleman and Bothroyd and then goes on to extrapolate the influence of these contracts, players coming and going and establishes the £5m figure.

In the ansence of anything else, or that being challenged - which it wasn't - that's fine science by me

You offer nothing at all apart from speculation which you offer as facts.

I ask again, do you have proof that we had the "lowest wage bill in the league", or even in the lowest three for last season?

We may very well have had the "lowest" or even in the bottom three last season(I suspect not though), but wouldn't say that we have as fact, without, you know, actual facts, to back it up.

Same as I wouldn't use a post by SkyBlue Taylor on here to assert that McGoldrick was offered £10,000 a week by us.

Rigorous fact checking not your forte is it?

Might interfere with what you think is so, rather than actually is so.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Two quotes for you Grendel. Jus tell me where I state that Northampton have ever played a league game at the Ricoh, or where I state that they might be interested in playing anything other than 'one offs'. These were just examples, I hasten to add, of potential additional income streams for the Ricoh. I equally wasn't staing that this was the answer:

'Let me expand on the above. We've seen matches at the Ricoh, such as Cardiff Blues against Northampton Saints, or Saracens against Munster that have drawn big crowds - the latter being over 28K for example. In fact so much hospitality was needed, the exhibition hall had to be opened to accommodate eaters/drinkers. Now look at what Harlequins are doing with their 'Big Games' Over Christmas, they moved to Twickers for the London Irish game, and sold out 82,000. Their 'normal' gates are closer to 14K as that's the stadium capacity.

Think about Northampton - just down the road. Still a top half Premiership rugby team. What if they played all of their Premiership games at Franklin Gardens, at 13.5K capacity, but played one or two 'big games' at a re-branded Ricoh a season? Let's say the Leicester Tigers game, as an example. And what if they played their Heineken Cup (European) games at the Ricoh?

I'm sorry old boy, I then see 6 to 8 gates of 25K+ a season at the 'Home of Northampton Rugby'. Doesn't sound nice, does it?'

Or again on 10th January:

'Rugby Union clubs often share. Saracens at Watford; Wasps at Loftus Road, etc. The MK stadium is being used - both by Saracens and Saints when it suits them. However, these are 'shares'.

If ACL's claims are correct, and they're either profitable, or borderline profitable without CCFC; then it takes precious few rugby games to give them the additional revenue to puish them into clear profitability. And given the uniqueness of their position, they could give exclusivity to a local club such at Northampton. That's obviously of interest as they wouldn't have to schedule their most high-profile league games, or European games around a football club's games.'

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

Indeed I do, from numerous of people.

Continue to cling to your imperfections, they are what make you unique!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Urhm. No. It was us looking to sign him on a permanent basis at the time he signed for Ipswich. A long term contract running for a few seasons - I presume - and therefore running into a term when FFP gets even more punitive.

He's out of contract with Forest in the summer, so I don't think they'd be iinclined to help us out moving forward; do you?

Yet on this basis, we can sign a player - or at least try to do so - on a salary level higher than anyone esle in the division but unless things change with regards revenue, we 'can't compete'?

With regards the £10K sum; widely discussed on here, and elsewhere, and at a time when you seemed to participate without quarrel:

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/26385-With-and-Without-DMC/page6

Bloody hell, I missed all this 'bitching'. I got that figure from someone on this very board, not a primary 'source',in fact, a 'source' that has been kicked around more times than a football, hence why I said 'apparently', whenever something starts with that, 8/10 it's BS in regards to transfers.

 

[ashbyjan]

Oh yes my estimates are conjecture. MMM however tried to portray them as facts bit like the time he claimed Northampton had played a game at the Ricoh (they hadn't) and may take up residence on a more permenant basis overlooking the little fact they are extending their ground.

He accuses sisu of poor due dillegence but them does not even check some of the data he himself has previously produced.

Seeing as everyone is getting their proverbial knickers in a twist over facts thought I should point out that Saints are not currently expanding their ground. There have been plenty of plans, talks, consultations, even a share issue to raise £500k but no actual building work is taking place - so to say they are extending is not actually factually correct.

Just didn't want to miss out on all the pedantic nonsense being spouted

 

[lordsummerisle]

Two quotes for you Grendel. Jus tell me where I state that Northampton have ever played a league game at the Ricoh, or where I state that they might be interested in playing anything other than 'one offs'. These were just examples, I hasten to add, of potential additional income streams for the Ricoh. I equally wasn't staing that this was the answer:

'Let me expand on the above. We've seen matches at the Ricoh, such as Cardiff Blues against Northampton Saints, or Saracens against Munster that have drawn big crowds - the latter being over 28K for example. In fact so much hospitality was needed, the exhibition hall had to be opened to accommodate eaters/drinkers. Now look at what Harlequins are doing with their 'Big Games' Over Christmas, they moved to Twickers for the London Irish game, and sold out 82,000. Their 'normal' gates are closer to 14K as that's the stadium capacity.

Think about Northampton - just down the road. Still a top half Premiership rugby team. What if they played all of their Premiership games at Franklin Gardens, at 13.5K capacity, but played one or two 'big games' at a re-branded Ricoh a season? Let's say the Leicester Tigers game, as an example. And what if they played their Heineken Cup (European) games at the Ricoh?

I'm sorry old boy, I then see 6 to 8 gates of 25K+ a season at the 'Home of Northampton Rugby'. Doesn't sound nice, does it?'

Or again on 10th January:

'Rugby Union clubs often share. Saracens at Watford; Wasps at Loftus Road, etc. The MK stadium is being used - both by Saracens and Saints when it suits them. However, these are 'shares'.

If ACL's claims are correct, and they're either profitable, or borderline profitable without CCFC; then it takes precious few rugby games to give them the additional revenue to puish them into clear profitability. And given the uniqueness of their position, they could give exclusivity to a local club such at Northampton. That's obviously of interest as they wouldn't have to schedule their most high-profile league games, or European games around a football club's games.'

Why on earth would Northampton want to come to The Ricoh to play games against Leicester?

Last season they played Leicester away in the play-off semi-final and there was only a 20,000 crowd in a ground with a 25,000 capacity.

Would stop clutching at those straws now, every assertion you make just shows you to be already drowned.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Continue to cling to your imperfections, they are what make you unique!

Will do pal...

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Why on earth would Northampton want to come to The Ricoh to play games against Leicester?

Last season they played Leicester away in the play-off semi-final and there was only a 20,000 crowd in a ground with a 25,000 capacity.

Would stop clutching at those straws now, every assertion you make just shows you to be already drowned.

Again, it's not an assertion. It was an example. An example of what might be possible. I'm not the Marketing Manager for ACL, but I was giving an example of something that may work.

As AJ cites above, the expansion is far from a done-deal; and just as Saracens have used the MK stadium; this could - just could - have been an option open to Saints. This was only within the context of discussing the ACL profitability issue.

Again, another example of at least throwing something out there for discussion and it being twisted ahead of being shot down by mis-representation

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Again, it's not an assertion. It was an example. An example of what might be possible. I'm not the Marketing Manager for ACL, but I was giving an example of something that may work.

As AJ cites above, the expansion is far from a done-deal; and just as Saracens have used the MK stadium; this could - just could - have been an option open to Saints. This was only within the context of discussing the ACL profitability issue.

Again, another example of at least throwing something out there for discussion and it being twisted ahead of being shot down by mis-representation

They had 1 game, I doubt 1 game would be a financially viable alternative to a long term tenant in CCFC.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Again, it's not an assertion. It was an example. An example of what might be possible. I'm not the Marketing Manager for ACL, but I was giving an example of something that may work.

As AJ cites above, the expansion is far from a done-deal; and just as Saracens have used the MK stadium; this could - just could - have been an option open to Saints. This was only within the context of discussing the ACL profitability issue.

Again, another example of at least throwing something out there for discussion and it being twisted ahead of being shot down by mis-representation

The whole crux of the matter is you stated that we had the lowest wage budget in the Championship last season and you have nothing even close to any proof that it is, in fact, the case.

Do you not agree?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

They had 1 game, I doubt 1 game would be a financially viable alternative to a long term tenant in CCFC.

Again - and I can't see what's so difficult to take in - it's an example.

In actuality, the additional income ACL need, if at all; above and beyond their current non-footballing fare, may be ooccasional events such as the Olympics or the Rugby World Cup, Davis Cup tennis, Heineken Cup rugby, Mystic Meg, dancing dogs or cup-cake making contests for all I care.

It's an example set about an irrelevance; as given ACL's accounts are being filed this week, their auditor must have faith in their ongoing lilivelihood and that'll do me over trying to persuade these who don't want to see reason

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Crystal palace and derby are another two aren't they?

Palace had been in administration so cannot have had a big budget.

So Palace are extinct then, surely?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The whole crux of the matter is you stated that we had the lowest wage budget in the Championship last season and you have nothing even close to any proof that it is, in fact, the case.

Do you not agree?

People constantly make claims based on what they believe, based on a defined criteria. We have the best ground in the division, we have the best keeper in the division. Such are always made on here and elsewhere.

I did sufficient research in most of our peers, using where possible published accounts which would remain largely unchanged by virtue of length of contract. I read articles and interviews with chairmen with regards their finances and came to the conclusions I have; and offered links or values to allow others to draw their own conclusions.

My science cannot be perfect, but it's there. And based on that which I have seen; I don't back down from claiming that we were waged within the bottom three of the division; and possibly the lowest.

Published accounts will in time prove this right or wrong; but in the interim I'm happy to evaluate anything you have from aby source

 

[Jack Griffin]

@MMM

If I were you I wouldn't bother continuing to present an argument based on facts & research against posters who simply ignore any reasonable statement.
In my opinion they're not trying to debate, they are just being contrary to wind you up.
Its up to them to prove you wrong.. lets face it they won't be able to nor will they even try to.