Coventry City 'can't survive in League One' and have their priorities wrong (9 Viewers)

[duffer]

Have we? When did we have a go at that then? I must have missed it!

Most notably when we first got relegated, when we were paying Bellamy £20,000 per week, and then again with 'Operation Premiership'. It didn't quite work out as planned.

If you remember Speedie, then you've lived through those times - and we're still paying the price for them now.

 

---

[duffer]

In this thread expertise is directly related to how closely someone's opinion matches your own.

Or you could align it with the possiblity that anyone who claims expertise, regardless of opinion, ought to be able to come out with a plan that stands up to more than a cursory glance to find its flaws.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Or you could align it with the possiblity that anyone who claims expertise, regardless of opinion, ought to be able to come out with a plan that stands up to more than a cursory glance to find its flaws.

Which is precisely why a new stadium isn't the answer. (I'm not suggesting throwing millions at promotion is either).

 

[duffer]

Who said anything about all the income? Who said anything about 365 day revenues?

If SISU wanted the 365 income they should not have pissed everyone off and tried properly to do a deal instead of using underhand tactics like forcing our club to Northampton. Wasps negotiated and then paid the going rate after SISU devalued it. Fisher even said he didn't really want the 50% as it wasn't worth it. What rights have SISU got to the 365 revenue when they didn't want to pay for it?

Where are you going with this? The point here is that the so-called expert that the CET have put forward hasn't actually troubled himself to comment on this aspect of the rental deal - the lack of revenue. Whether it's the council's fault, SISU's fault, or someone else's fault isn't relevant here but ignoring the problem does rather call into question of how expert the analysis is though, I'd say.

 

[duffer]

Which is precisely why a new stadium isn't the answer. (I'm not suggesting throwing millions at promotion is either).

Until we've some sort of figures for the new stadium, I'd agree it looks very unlikely. But staying at the Ricoh on a rental deal doesn't look good either. Maybe the best hope really is that Wasps fail.

 

[SimonGilbert]

The point here is that the so-called expert that the CET have put forward hasn't actually troubled himself to comment on this aspect of the rental deal - the lack of revenue.

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

 

[Astute]

Where are you going with this? The point here is that the so-called expert that the CET have put forward hasn't actually troubled himself to comment on this aspect of the rental deal - the lack of revenue. Whether it's the council's fault, SISU's fault, or someone else's fault isn't relevant here but ignoring the problem does rather call into question of how expert the analysis is though, I'd say.

Not going anywhere. Just pointing out errors in posts. A slight difference in wording makes a massive difference sometimes.

And the article was aimed differently to where some have taken it. But yes someone is at fault for the lack of income. We lost a lot more by going to Northampton than any other by anyone. The article said about us relying on selling the young players coming through. Why have certain people on here not mentioned that instead of revenues lost by SISU's stupidity?

 

[Grendel]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

Clearly he isn't either.

Our income in the championship in the last season was one of the worst but attendances were in the top 10

 

[Astute]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

But don't you know that we will forever be a Division 3 club or lower because of the reduced pie money?

 

[Astute]

Clearly he isn't either.

Our income in the championship in the last season was one of the worst but attendances were in the top 10

OK expert why was this?

 

[Grendel]

But don't you know that we will forever be a Division 3 club or lower because of the reduced pie money?

Correct you are starting to catch up at last - well done.

 

[duffer]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

Forgive me Simon, but that's not really clear in the article - he mentions rent, which he doesn't see as an issue - but not the lack of revenue. If he's suggesting we should focus on promotion, where's he saying the money should come from?

 

[stupot07]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

The fact is in our final season in the championship our turnover was in the bottom 3-4 in the league despite having attendances higher than 9-10 over teams.

Our turnover was approx £10.8m so above only barnsley, doncaster and peterborough -which league are we all in?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Astute]

Correct you are starting to catch up at last - well done.

And here was me thinking that we needed to put a half decent team together to put bums on seats would bring in more income than trying to sell millions of pies and pints to people that don't go anymore :thinking about:

 

[Grendel]

And here was me thinking that we needed to put a half decent team together to put bums on seats would bring in more income than trying to sell millions of pies and pints to people that don't go anymore :thinking about:

So you think a successful football club is built on revenues gained from 23 days a year?

 

[Bill Glazier]

What an odd article. Basically PL or bust, couldn't that apply to any club outside the PL?

What we do know is that FFP rules limit you to spending 60% of your turnover on wages in league one.

In the championship FFP rules allows you to lose £13m pa (not sure of that include transfers) So from the point of view that our turnover (£10.5m) is one of the lowest 3-4 in the championship it would mean stretching that entire £13m (c£23.5m pa inc turnover)which in all likelihood wouldn't be enough as there are already a large number of clubs with turnovers of £20m+ before they even stretch their losses with the allowable £13m, plus the parachute payment clubs.

What happens in 3-4 seasons and we've wasted £39-52m and we've still not been promoted. There are no guarantees of promotion.

Sounds like boom and bust to me.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

But our turnover would have risen massively after asuccessful promotion campaign.

 

[Astute]

So you think a successful football club is built on revenues gained from 23 days a year?

So you think a successful club is built on selling any player that we get a bid on?

 

[stupot07]

Our turnover would increase by about £5-6m on a successful promotion, but then you have to balance the increase in wage bill, increased agents fees, signing on fees, loan fees, % of wages for loan players, actually having to spend a transfer fee, etc, to try and survive in the championship - we were pissing away £6-7m per annum just treading water 18-19th in the championship for years.

The season we got relegated, the three teams promoted all had wage bills circa x3 of our entire turnover.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Grendel]

So you think a successful club is built on selling any player that we get a bid on?

We have to sell players as we only have 23 days of revenue. We are disadvantaged massively and for that reason will never succeed.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

The fact is in our final season in the championship our turnover was in the bottom 3-4 in the league despite having attendances higher than 9-10 over teams.

Our turnover was approx £10.8m so above only barnsley, doncaster and peterborough -which league are we all in?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Right we've all seen this particular information loads of times, put our figures in the same format into the above just saying it was about 10.8million doesn't mean anything.

 

[Godiva]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

Yes, but the catch is that getting promoted isn't just going to happen by adding another £2m-£3m. There's no guarantee. Look at how long it took Leicester to buy their way out of the Championship. So, say it takes three seasons with increased funding, is that really worth it? Especially as when we are finally promoted, our revenue will still not be high enough, but our rent will probably increase and certainly the players wages will increase greatly.

It's so easy to 'waste' other peoples money. And can be fun too I admit.

 

[Moff]

That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

Thats rubbish Simon, I heard Alan Poole said you made a great cup of tea

 

[bigfatronssba]

We have to sell players as we only have 23 days of revenue. We are disadvantaged massively and for that reason will never succeed.

Its interesting that in that graph Peterborough had similar revenue to us, yet when we were after Mackail-Smith and Aaron McLean Barry Fry immediately rebuffed us saying we couldn't afford it.

How come could Peterborough do that but we cant?

 

[stupot07]

Right we've all seen this particular information loads of times, put our figures in the same format into the above just saying it was about 10.8million doesn't mean anything.

It's not my graph.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/championship-finances-201112-numbers.html?m=1

Our turnover was £10.8m according to OSB:

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/42971-Sky-Blue-Sports-amp-Leisure-2013-accounts

So only
Barnsley £8.6m
Doncaster £8.3m
Peterborough £10.1m

Had lower turnovers they also attendances c33% lower than ours

Here's the following years finances, £10.8m wouldn't have fared any better that season either

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/22/club-by-club-guide-championship-finances-2012-2013

Again only 3 teams with lower turnovers - bristol (£8m) , barnsley (£9.1m) and peterborough (£10m) - again which league are they all currently playing in?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Grendel]

Its interesting that in that graph Peterborough had similar revenue to us, yet when we were after Mackail-Smith and Aaron McLean Barry Fry immediately rebuffed us saying we couldn't afford it.

How come could Peterborough do that but we cant?

Barry Fry - must be true.

 

[dongonzalos]

The “I don’t think this club can survive in League One" comment was directly in response to a lack of revenue and turnover.
His point being that, in his opinion, income in a higher league would largely negate the impact of a loss of revenue caused by the existing rental agreement and therefore promotion should be a priority.
That's his opinion, not mine - I'm not an expert.

As in you have 100k rent so get your arse in the division above so you get given 5 million minimum in TV money? Also the back of a successful promotion crowds will naturally increase.

 

[dongonzalos]

Wasn't this the guy that the council wanted as the administrator?

Four...........

 

[dongonzalos]

Yes another Leeds based administrator - yes I remember him sniggering when Haskell was mentioned.

This is the guy then who almost put Bournemouth out of business isn't he? Guilfoyle almost did it at Plymouth.

What next from the CET? Ridsdale on creating a sustainable future and Ryan Giggs in the personal advice column.

Six............

 

[steveecov]

Thats rubbish Simon, I heard Alan Poole said you made a great cup of tea

Wish I could make his tea...

Baldrick...

 

[M&B Stand]

Something doesn't ring true with this bunch of shysters. For an expert to say what he has, it beggars belief that this scum are still trading. Some people say they are using CCFC as a dumping ground for debt. I've always thought that they were nothing but asset strippers, now I'm not so sure!

I've thought about this 'dumping ground for debt' from parts of the otium business.
That was the accusation levelled at David Sullivan when he and the Gold Brothers took over a Birmingham City on the bones of its arse, from the Kumar's in the early 90's.
They ended up with multiple trips to Wembley and Cardiff, promotions from the third tier to premier league, football league trophy finals, league cup finals and ultimately, into Europe (albeit after they'd sold up to Carson Yeùng).

Sullivan and the Golds are obviously better business people than Seppala....and dare I say Karen Brady a better chief exec than Fisher!

 

[duffer]

And here was me thinking that we needed to put a half decent team together to put bums on seats would bring in more income than trying to sell millions of pies and pints to people that don't go anymore :thinking about:

We probably need to do both mate - but it's not unreasonable to point out that the ability to be able to pay half-decent players has to be impacted by our lack of revenue from elsewhere. I bridle slightly when an expert is put forth who seems to disregard this, especially when it's one who seems to admit himself that he had to sacrifice success on the pitch to resolve the debt problems off it.

I thought the one thing that pretty much everyone agreed on was that paying rent without access to the other revenue streams wasn't likely to lead to success.

 

[duffer]

As in you have 100k rent so get your arse in the division above so you get given 5 million minimum in TV money? Also the back of a successful promotion crowds will naturally increase.

Regardless of the wages we'd then have to pay to stay in the division, how do we pay for the team to get us there? Or are you saying, as the expert seems to be, that we just take a punt and hope it all works out.

I'm going to use my favourite (non-Simpsons) quote here. "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

 

[fernandopartridge]

Regardless of the wages we'd then have to pay to stay in the division, how do we pay for the team to get us there? Or are you saying, as the expert seems to be, that we just take a punt and hope it all works out.

I'm going to use my favourite (non-Simpsons) quote here. "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Being an expert in football finance is a bizarre title. What with football being a game built on debt.

 

[Limey]

2 options to re-unite club and stadium: 1. Wasps go bust 2. Wasps buy us out. Either way Wasps are an additional, unwanted party in this mess as far as I'm concerned.