CCFC 2018/2019 Accounts Thread! (1 Viewer)

mark82 · Mar 2, 2020

SkyBlueCRJ said:
Calm down Corbyn.

SkyBlueDom26 said:
Socialism has no place in football commie, we get you're still upset about the eleciton

The US is probably the most capitalist country in the world, yet they manage to have salary caps in all their major sports. I don't necessarily agree that a salary cap is the way to go (it'd have to be a global thing for it to work) but it's hardly communist thinking. For some reason in this country you can only be a far right racist, or a lefty loony commie. No place for it on a football thread.

mark82 · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
Exactly. There’s still an element of inequality as you get more for finishing higher up the league and it doesn’t stop you spending on academies or whatever perks you want to offer signings but the day to day costs would be covered for every club for the season. I just think you shouldn’t be too poor to be promoted.

The basic rate and the solidarity payment is fixed and is the same for every club (apart from those already receiving parachute payments). Works out at roughly 6.5 million. There's prize money and tv money on top of that.

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2020

mark82 said:
The basic rate and the solidarity payment is fixed and is the same for every club (apart from those already receiving parachute payments). Works out at roughly 6.5 million. There's prize money and tv money on top of that.

Im not too fussed on the details, but the idea we could go up and not earn enough for even half the lowest wage bill in the division is wrong IMO. The bar to entry should be no higher than the basic income floor of the division.

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
Im not too fussed on the details, but the idea we could go up and not earn enough for even half the lowest wage bill in the division is wrong IMO. The bar to entry should be no higher than the basic income floor of the division.

It’s why have to be so much better at everything else

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Mar 2, 2020

speedie87 said:
We’ve actually made a £2m profit if you ignore the interest on the loans which is more a of paper figure than anything else in the accounts

Accounts are full of paper figures. Amortisation is literally just a paper figure used to represent assets falling in value over time rather than it being one massive hit when they're sold.

TBH Profit/loss isn't an important figure in terms of performance - so many things you can change in terms of accounting policies it's almost meaningless. The figure to really look at is the cashflow - that's far more likely to see a business fail. Almost never shown outside of plc's though.

Although it's the parent company SBSL has its cashflow statement and cash has gone down by £600k. However there wasn't any cash injections during the year compared to previous years while some was repaid, probably due to the transfer fees received. This however doesn't cover the extra interest repayable.

Don't know if the sale of McCallum will have the same effect this year (unknown upfront payment + reduced ticket revenue and how much St Andrew's is costing us) but we're still likely to be heavily reliant on cash top ups from the owners.

Grendel · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
Why surely? This is a human invented sport with human invented rules. There’s no law of nature that says sport has to be determined by business success off the pitch.

Give everyone in the same league the same wage bill. Let teams have nice grounds and training facilities and the rest of they’ve got money to burn. I honestly don’t see the issue aside from some child like attachment to the current system which is clearly ruining the game.

The fact that oddly you are trying to rewind the clock by half a century which a certain pioneer of the game removed is probably somewhere to start

Grendel · Mar 2, 2020

Sky Blue Pete said:
It’s why have to be so much better at everything else

If our wage bill was as high as it seems in league two it would have been one if the largest - I didn’t see any complaints

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2020

Grendel said:
The fact that oddly you are trying to rewind the clock by half a century which a certain pioneer of the game removed is probably somewhere to start

We have a wage cap already. I’m simply talking about changing which income is counted in it. Unclutch your pearls.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Mar 2, 2020

Irish Sky Blue said:
Where does that money come from? Is it people that Sisu have convinced to ‘invest’ in the club. If I had money to invest I don’t think I would do it on a club like ours. Who is it who keeps putting in the money that keeps us afloat and why would they do it? If it is Sisu/ Seppala’s own money, why don’t they just sell ?

'SISU' are topping up the cash year on year as necessary. If they stop, we go pop and their investment is worth nothing.

When they've got investors on board, either in general or specifically for us, they'd have said a baseline RoI for them. So if they sell, they've got to meet those RoI's or take a hit to their credibility as a hedge fund.

So for them to sell it'd have to be for a significant amount to cover that but no-one would be made enough to pay it. So they'd take a hit to their own resources and they might struggle to do so without cashing in other investments as they don't tend to keep a great deal of liquidity as it has poor rates of return.

Grendel · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
We have a wage cap already. I’m simply talking about changing which income is counted in it. Unclutch your pearls.

No you are trying to cap it regardless of an individual businesses income and make it equal which is flat earth thinking

oldfiver · Mar 2, 2020

oldskyblue58 said:
but they were taken out in july and form part of the assessment of going concern for accounts dated feb 2020. not unreasonable to expect disclosure

The assessment may have included various scenarios not just the rent. As, presumably the rent agreement was not entered into until after year end the liability is £nil
There is no requirement to publicly present the financial forecast nor any assumptions

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2020

Grendel said:
No you are trying to cap it regardless of an individual businesses income and make it equal which is flat earth thinking

Right. Except I’m not. And the fact you’ve already resorted to insult rather than argument suggests you’re just being the usual awkward fuck for the sake of it. It’s hardly a revolutionary concept, it exists in sports all over the world, calm down dear.

SlowerThanPlatt · Mar 2, 2020

Giving everyone the same wage bill is just never going to happen. Why should we only be allowed to spend as much on wages as Accrington when we have significantly higher crowds and sell players on for more than they do?

Football isn’t supposed to be fair

SkyBlueDom26 · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
Right. Except I’m not. And the fact you’ve already resorted to insult rather than argument suggests you’re just being the usual awkward fuck for the sake of it. It’s hardly a revolutionary concept, it exists in sports all over the world, calm down dear.

explain why teams such as Accrington or Wimbledon who get like 2/3k a game should have the same wage bill as say us or Sunderland?

chiefdave · Mar 2, 2020

Nick said:
The telegraph are now spinning it as that we are in negotiations to return to the Ricoh and they can't see why that is misleading.

Based on what???

fernandopartridge · Mar 2, 2020

A salary cap is just dealing with a symptom of the problem, it's similar to FFP really in that it's an 'after the event' reform.

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 2, 2020

chiefdave said:
Based on what???

Tim fishers conmenta mainly

Greggs · Mar 2, 2020

fernandopartridge said:
The increase in turnover we need to even begin to compete in the Championship is huge, well over 100%, where is that coming from?

The price of young talented Championship players sold is well over 100% more than league 1/2

Grendel · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
Right. Except I’m not. And the fact you’ve already resorted to insult rather than argument suggests you’re just being the usual awkward fuck for the sake of it. It’s hardly a revolutionary concept, it exists in sports all over the world, calm down dear.

how on earth is that an insult?

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
I’m starting to think each league should set a wage cap of whatever the TV settlement is. The idea we could go up and not be able to compete financially is ridiculous. Why even have promotion and relegation?

Grendel said:
A wage cap on what though? If a club has 10 times our turnover it should surely have 10 times the cap?

One of my long term proposals is that you set your percentage of income that you can spend on wages etc so that larger teams with bigger revenues can spend more heavily and thus afford 'better' players on higher wages).

Every player on a pro contract gets a basic wage based around 'fixed' income like the TV deals or sponsorships etc. So players in higher leagues will have a higher basic income (you could also split this further so U23 players get a lower percentage if desired)

Variable income like gate receipts, prize money etc is then divided out like a bonus at the end of the season, based upon time spent on the pitch. So those players that have contributed most to this money get the most of it. If the players don't perform then their own pay packets will be hit so it keeps them on their toes.

(Obviously the idea is more complex and I've planned it out in a bit more detail (i.e how to deal with transfer fees etc)

Bigger teams can still spend more than smaller teams due to higher revenues
Star players will still earn a great deal more than others due to more time on the pitch
Clubs are more secure as they can't spend beyond their means, safeguarding fan interests, and aren't left with expensive contracts if they get relegated resulting in a need for a firesale to get the wages off the books. If a club gets relegated and gets less TV money etc the following year then the players earnings will instantly reflect that and as they were part of the team that got relegated they can hardly complain.

Plus it'd likely help spread the talent around more as a player sitting on the bench at a CL club could potentially earn more as a first teamer elsewhere due to playing more minutes, so it stops talent hoarding and should, in theory, result in a better overall standard throughout the leagues.

Of course the problem with it is greed and unless it was brought in universally players and their agents would just got to clubs/leagues that didn't operate the system so they could sit back secure in the knowledge of a big fat wage packet regardless.

SkyBlueDom26 · Mar 2, 2020

Grendel said:
how on earth is that an insult?

He called you dear mate, thats the worst insult ever

clint van damme · Mar 2, 2020

SlowerThanPlatt said:
Giving everyone the same wage bill is just never going to happen. Why should we only be allowed to spend as much on wages as Accrington when we have significantly higher crowds and sell players on for more than they do?

Football isn’t supposed to be fair

I agree. Though I would also ask why man city are allowed to massively outspent Newcastle when they get similar gates?

SlowerThanPlatt · Mar 2, 2020

Greggs said:
The price of young talented Championship players sold is well over 100% more than league 1/2

But the team would most likely be towards the bottom unlike the last few years in League 1 and 2 and unless they’re massively outperforming the teams position, like a Jarrod Bowen or James Maddison, we’d struggle to get much of a fee.

fernandopartridge · Mar 2, 2020

chiefdave said:
Based on what???

To be fair to the Telegraph it is the club's published accounts which imply there are ongoing negotiations, they are entitled to print that verbatim if they want to. I'd suggest that the question really isn't "why are the Telegraph saying that?" but "Why is the club saying that?"

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2020

SlowerThanPlatt said:
Giving everyone the same wage bill is just never going to happen. Why should we only be allowed to spend as much on wages as Accrington when we have significantly higher crowds and sell players on for more than they do?

Football isn’t supposed to be fair

So we should scrap SCMP and FFP then?

SlowerThanPlatt · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
So we should scrap SCMP and FFP then?

No I agree with FFP but I don’t agree with saying teams with larger revenue should only be allowed to spend as much on wages as teams with significantly less

Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems to have been suggested on the basis on that if we get promoted it’d be unfair that we have a small budget and wouldn’t be able to compete?

Would you still be in favour of it should we not get promoted and the promoted teams from League 2 can attract the same level of player as us?

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2020

SlowerThanPlatt said:
No I agree with FFP but I don’t agree with saying teams with larger revenue should only be allowed to spend as much on wages as teams with significantly less

Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems to have been suggested on the basis on that if we get promoted it’d be unfair that we have a small budget and wouldn’t be able to compete?

It’s suggested on the basis that football is a sport not a way of distributing scarce resources or a moral ideology. A system that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer isn’t a sustainable one. If you want that just do what the yanks do and nuke everything below the Prem, but even they have a wage cap because they realise it isn’t entertaining to watch one super rich club dominate year after year.

There should be upper bounds to each league that ensures everyone can compete without having to bet the farm.

And I’ve not said “everyone should get the same” I’ve said there should be a cap based on the base income that ensures those at the bottom can still compete. Anything else is stuff you’ve invented to support your argument.

Also how can you support FFP? It disallows some income, which is all I’m saying should happen. Surely you want all income counted as football should be about business acumen not tactical or managerial talent.

fernandopartridge · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
So we should scrap SCMP and FFP then?

Yep, both utterly pointless and toothless as Wolves, Bournemouth, Man City, Leicester show. They do not fix the fundamental flaws in the game.

stupot07 · Mar 2, 2020

shmmeee said:
I’m starting to think each league should set a wage cap of whatever the TV settlement is. The idea we could go up and not be able to compete financially is ridiculous. Why even have promotion and relegation?

I completely agree, it's the only way. We have no chance of competing medium to long term in the championship without new owners and limitless bucket of cash.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Halftime Orange · Mar 2, 2020

The club may have turned a profit but don't we still owe Arvo Masterfund via SISU over 40 million and still getting charged interest on it?

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Mar 2, 2020

Halftime Orange said:
The club may have turned a profit but don't we still owe Arvo Masterfund via SISU over 40 million and still getting charged interest on it?

Yes, but a lot of that is in interest and accounting smoke and mirrors. What they're owed as actual cash they've put in is a lot less than that.

CanadianCCFC · Mar 2, 2020

Player sales don’t count as revenue, cup goals don’t count for Biamou, Bakas goals at Charlton don’t count, Goddens back to back hat tricks don’t count...

skybluetony176 · Mar 2, 2020

Well. This thread is going...

...as expected.

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 2, 2020

I still think the detail although not overwhelming adds detail that we don’t normally get from ccfc so I think it’s interesting

Skyblueweeman · Mar 2, 2020

Still, top of the league though eh?!

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

CCFC 2018/2019 Accounts Thread! (1 Viewer)

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency