Does the budget reflect our position? (1 Viewer)

[robbiekeane]

They've earned more money this year than they had last year, that's clear to see!

Are you going to answer my question?

 

---

[ccfcway]

We’ve got to forget about the the SISU thing.

Don't agree with that at all. We have owners who don't care about the club. This cant fail to filter down in some capacity...

 

[better days]

We’ve got to forget about the the SISU thing.

They’re not going to sell up and they’re not going to put money into the club, we are where we’re at with the money the club makes.

That being said, I’d hazard a bet in saying the likes of McNulty, Doyle, McDonald, Willis, Grimmer, JCH, Andreu and Jones are possibly amongst the highest paid players in the league. We should be doing much better then we are, with the budget we have

JJ definitely isn't
He joined as am 18 year old on an appropriate contract
Tony Mowbray initially said he would be part of the u21 squad

 

[skybluetony176]

I think a lot of people confuse turnover for budget. Yes it’s probably been a decent (for recent history anyway) twelve months of turnover when you consider Wembley windfall, incoming transfer fees, decent cup run etc. but don’t be suckered into thinking a linier amount of this translates into the playing budget.

 

[Legia Sky Blue]

We've spent £125k to loan JCH. How many other league 2 teams could afford to do that?

I'm still waiting for someone to quote this 8th highest budget thing.

I've seen this £125k figure on a few threads now' Has this figure been released officially, or is it just something someone has made up that people have decided to buy into? If there is anything to this I suspect it is more likely that this is his wages that we have taken over, rather than a fee to his club, but even then it would seem a little on the high side.

 

[Nick]

I think a lot of people confuse turnover for budget. Yes it’s probably been a decent (for recent history anyway) twelve months of turnover when you consider Wembley windfall, incoming transfer fees, decent cup run etc. but don’t be suckered into thinking a linier amount of this translates into the playing budget.

Who is?

 

[Londonccfcfan]

Don't forget the young lad to MU too.

There would also be triggers hit from James Maddison. he didn't have much of a look in last year. There would be trigger payments for First team appearances 10/20/30? Goals? England U-21 cap?
When he was sold he wasn't even close to getting in their team. When he was sold there was no guarantee he would even make an appearance in their first team if they remained in Premier League.

 

[Londonccfcfan]

I've seen this £125k figure on a few threads now' Has this figure been released officially, or is it just something someone has made up that people have decided to buy into? If there is anything to this I suspect it is more likely that this is his wages that we have taken over, rather than a fee to his club, but even then it would seem a little on the high side.

Theres no way we would have paid a loan fee of that significant proporsions just for a loan from a club (club has more sense than that). When we made reportedly derisory bid of 25k for Tom Pope before we signed JCH.

 

[skybluetony176]

Who is?

Lots of people. People I talk to at the game, people on the phone in and on here. This thread is coming from that angle. How many times have you heard it said that if X club only gets 3k gates why can’t we beat them. It’s all saying in one way or another that we sell 7k tickets for home games therefore we must have a budget bigger than club X as they only sell 3k. The assumption is it’s linier. It doesn’t have to be. Even if you take the SCMP calculation it still doesn’t mean that our budget is linier to that. For starters it’s just a calculation it’s not something that owners are contractually obligated to meat in the form of a playing budget. Some clubs will surpass their SCMP calculation because they have owners investing in the club to overcome it, others like us won’t. Then some clubs have additional costs that eat into the SCMP calculation, servicing debt for instance, someone has already pointed out that we have to put £600k into the academy every year which will eat into our budget. Then you have to factor in that we’re run at cost neutral. Wouldn’t be surprised if SISU hold a portion of our potentially available budget back as a contingency fund against unforeseen costs so the don’t have to invest to avoid penalties for surpassing the SCMP calculation. After all Cup runs, transfer fees and Wembley finals are by no means a given.

 

[Adge]

Lets fucking hope not eh......cos at this rate, my kids grandkids will still be protesting against sisu.....

Tell them not too please. Might put the team off in 20 years time!

 

[Adge]

We've spent £125k to loan JCH. How many other league 2 teams could afford to do that?

I'm still waiting for someone to quote this 8th highest budget thing.

Really? Is there any concrete proof to that “fact”?

 

[wingy]

Lots of people. People I talk to at the game, people on the phone in and on here. This thread is coming from that angle. How many times have you heard it said that if X club only gets 3k gates why can’t we beat them. It’s all saying in one way or another that we sell 7k tickets for home games therefore we must have a budget bigger than club X as they only sell 3k. The assumption is it’s linier. It doesn’t have to be. Even if you take the SCMP calculation it still doesn’t mean that our budget is linier to that. For starters it’s just a calculation it’s not something that owners are contractually obligated to meat in the form of a playing budget. Some clubs will surpass their SCMP calculation because they have owners investing in the club to overcome it, others like us won’t. Then some clubs have additional costs that eat into the SCMP calculation, servicing debt for instance, someone has already pointed out that we have to put £600k into the academy every year which will eat into our budget. Then you have to factor in that we’re run at cost neutral. Wouldn’t be surprised if SISU hold a portion of our potentially available budget back as a contingency fund against unforeseen costs so the don’t have to invest to avoid penalties for surpassing the SCMP calculation. After all Cup runs, transfer fees and Wembley finals are by no means a given.

Don't quote me on this but I had a look at the last 2-3 seasons and posted on here that we appeared to be running at 50%.
However I may have been doing something wrong.

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

Don't agree with that at all. We have owners who don't care about the club. This cant fail to filter down in some capacity...

That’s my point. They don’t care, they’re not investing and the club is sensibly operating on a break even budget.

We need the fans to return and provide a bigger budget if we want better. But it’s chicken and egg. The team need to perform and entertain, whilst the club need better players.

 

[Captain Dart]

That’s my point. They don’t care, they’re not investing and the club is sensibly operating on a break even budget.

We need the fans to return and provide a bigger budget if we want better. But it’s chicken and egg. The team need to perform and entertain, whilst the club need better players.

No if the club is at an impasse then the owners have to prime the pump, I know its ancient history now but isn't that what Derek Robins did to start the 'Sky Blue revolution' under Jimmy Hill, the principles still apply do they not.

 

[skybluetony176]

Don't quote me on this but I had a look at the last 2-3 seasons and posted on here that we appeared to be running at 50%.
However I may have been doing something wrong.

If it is 50% I wonder how that compares to other clubs in league 2?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

No if the club is at an impasse then the owners have to prime the pump, I know its ancient history now but isn't that what Derek Robins did to start the 'Sky Blue revolution' under Jimmy Hill, the principles still apply do they not.

They do.

You could of course argue that they primed the pump when they first came in... and gates still kept going down!

But that was so 2008.

 

[stupot07]

If it is 50% I wonder how that compares to other clubs in league 2?

Doesn't really matter, our turnover is much higher, probably double most clubs, so even if for example Accrington Stanley had a turnover of £2.5m (I think that's what OSB quoted earlier), than if they use 60% (£1.5m) that's still dwarfed by 50% of our £4.5-5.5m turn over (£2.25-2.75m).

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[wingy]

If it is 50% I wonder how that compares to other clubs in league 2?

There were a couple of quotes from TF
Maybe Mowbrays first season where it was said to be around £2-8M.
Following season around £2-3M.
Without digging it out it may have equated to around 45% of turover ,there may have been good reason ie ;- running the academy for example.

 

[skybluetony176]

There were a couple of quotes from TF
Maybe Mowbrays first season where it was said to be around £2-8M.
Following season around £2-3M.
Without digging it out it may have equated to around 45% of turover ,there may have been good reason ie ;- running the academy for example.

Yeah. The academy takes £600k out the club every season, yes some of that investment comes back in transfer fees but we aren’t the only club who sell players and other clubs sell players without the same initial investment. You then have to factor in outside investment from owners. The thinking of some on here seems to be that because we get 7k gates every game we must have a bigger budget than someone who only get 3k gates. Not as straight forward as that. Higher running costs and less to no investment by owners can soon swing the pendulum the other way.

 

[Captain Dart]

They do.

You could of course argue that they primed the pump when they first came in... and gates still kept going down!

But that was so 2008.

What I would argue is that at that time they were in partnership with an expert who did not have a good strategy, result expensive failed venture which the club is still trying to recover from. I think most people on this forum are coming to the opinion that a slow build strategy is probably more sustainable in the long run. It took Hill about 5 1/2 years to get to D1 from D3 didn't it?

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

No if the club is at an impasse then the owners have to prime the pump, I know its ancient history now but isn't that what Derek Robins did to start the 'Sky Blue revolution' under Jimmy Hill, the principles still apply do they not.

The owners don’t have to do anything, they don’t care - we’re seen as a business and we’ll run at break even.

Derek Robins probably lost millions. But it was different then. The game has changed, football clubs are businesses first and foremost now

What’s the incentive to prime the pump given that our fan base is apathetic and hostile towards them?

As I said we can spend what we make, they couldn’t care less what we as a football club do as long as it doesn’t lose money.

Our budget is bigger than most clubs in this league, it’s how it’s been spent is the biggest issue here

 

[Generally Midfield]

The owners don’t have to do anything, they don’t care - we’re seen as a business and we’ll run at break even.

Derek Robins probably lost millions. But it was different then. The game has changed, football clubs are businesses first and foremost now

What’s the incentive to prime the pump given that our fan base is apathetic and hostile towards them?

As I said we can spend what we make, they couldn’t care less what we as a football club do as long as it doesn’t lose money.

Our budget is bigger than most clubs in this league, it’s how it’s been spent is the biggest issue here

This always seems to come back to the basic question of how our budget compares with the rest of the division but no one seems to know the answer!

 

[Captain Dart]

The owners don’t have to do anything, they don’t care - we’re seen as a business and we’ll run at break even.

Derek Robins probably lost millions. But it was different then. The game has changed, football clubs are businesses first and foremost now

What’s the incentive to prime the pump given that our fan base is apathetic and hostile towards them?

As I said we can spend what we make, they couldn’t care less what we as a football club do as long as it doesn’t lose money.

Our budget is bigger than most clubs in this league, it’s how it’s been spent is the biggest issue here

Football clubs are not businesses, most of them lose money and are financed by wealthy individuals.

Look at the figures here, there are as many clubs losing money than making it.. lower divisions are similar with smaller numbers.
Premier League finances: the full club-by-club breakdown and verdict

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

This always seems to come back to the basic question of how our budget compares with the rest of the division but no one seems to know the answer!

We’ve signed 15 players, 11 on permanent contracts, and most of which experienced professionals in this league and/or the league above. The budget can’t be that small!

 

[Generally Midfield]

We’ve signed 15 players, 11 on permanent contracts, and most of which experienced professionals in this league and/or the league above. The budget can’t be that small!

Agreed, but is it in the top half of budgets in this division, top 8, top 3? If it's a top 3 budget then we're definitely underperforming but if it's top half/top 8 then maybe it's a bit less clear?

 

[skybluetony176]

Doesn't really matter, our turnover is much higher, probably double most clubs, so even if for example Accrington Stanley had a turnover of £2.5m (I think that's what OSB quoted earlier), than if they use 60% (£1.5m) that's still dwarfed by 50% of our £4.5-5.5m turn over (£2.25-2.75m).

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Get that. But it still works on the presumption that Accrington’s owners aren’t pumping money in to increase their playing budget. Or any other club in the league for that matter with lower gates. Maybe all clubs in this league are operating at cost neutral same as us but I doubt it.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Agreed, but is it in the top half of budgets in this division, top 8, top 3? If it's a top 3 budget then we're definitely underperforming but if it's top half/top 8 then maybe it's a bit less clear?

I’d be much more inclined to agree with you had Jones and Andreu got season ending injuries. Whilst it’s true every team has to deal with injuries, two ACL’s to key players before Xmas? That’s very unlucky, and both are midfielders with goals in them, and coincidently, an area we’re struggling in atm.

There are shortcomings in other areas, but I think we’ve brought in the right personnel and we just need to refine the squad for next year, whether it’s a renewed promotion charge in L2, or consolidation in L1.

 

[skybluetony176]

We’ve signed 15 players, 11 on permanent contracts, and most of which experienced professionals in this league and/or the league above. The budget can’t be that small!

Did we? Thought it was more like 12? Which is about average for the league.

 

[Covstu]

This year I was more confident of success given that we had actually signed players rather than loaned. We have gone down the loan route for too many seasons which was an unrealistic reflection of the strength and depth of the squad. For me our club have in the main been positive about the manager with the likes of TM and Robins (twice) albeit some shite like Slade.
Signings this season have been not bad particularly Grimmer, McNulty but have had terrible luck in two season ending injuries to our creative midfielders in Jones and Andreu which for me has greatly impacted our ability to create and score goals.

I would have liked our club to maybe gamble in January to deal with the obvious frailties in the squad for a promotion push which seems to have slipped us by with the playoffs being the only realistic option. I think budget these days does influence final position but the biggest influence is buying right at the start which I think we have been guilty of buying or loaning poor players.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Football clubs are not businesses

Yes and no.

I agree with you philosophically! I also agree with you that mst lose money.

Unfortunately, the way the game's set up, it's set up to encourage people looking to make money out of it by seeing clubs as businesses, and be one of the few to turn said club around to sell at a profit. The problem is when they end of one of the majority who can't manage that... The sooner we change that mindset and encouragement, the better.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

This year I was more confident of success given that we had actually signed players rather than loaned.

I'd be more confident about next season than I have been for a while, as much because we either already have the players, or we'll get cash for them if they go.

Don't get me wrong, precedent says if we stay down we'll be shite, but precedent says we don't do promotions anyway!

 

[Nick]

I would be interested to see how we did with a fully fit squad that we had now with a year together playing.

 

[Generally Midfield]

I’d be much more inclined to agree with you had Jones and Andreu got season ending injuries. Whilst it’s true every team has to deal with injuries, two ACL’s to key players before Xmas? That’s very unlucky, and both are midfielders with goals in them, and coincidently, an area we’re struggling in atm.

There are shortcomings in other areas, but I think we’ve brought in the right personnel and we just need to refine the squad for next year, whether it’s a renewed promotion charge in L2, or consolidation in L1.

Agreed (again!) Injuries are one of those factors to throw into the mix and we've certainly been dead unlucky. I thought the title of this thread was interesting and in terms of whether we're underperforming it does seem like budget could be a useful benchmark

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I would be interested to see how we did with a fully fit squad that we had now with a year together playing.

Forgetting where we are in the league pyramid for a moment, and what the budget actually is as this cpounts for most clubs in existence really...

But a properly run club might well have to sell one or two players in the close season, and some of the cash might well have to go to running costs. But a properly run club would use *some* of that cash to replace what's gone, and strengthen one or two other positions. The core, then, remains in place, and players integrate gradually rather than playing like strangers and, we might not see instant improvements, but long term we'd progress.

If we ended up with that kind of club I'd be... content. Obviously I'd rather we spunked a load of cash, but at least the above approach would see us start to build a squad again.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Did we? Thought it was more like 12? Which is about average for the league.

16 if you want to include Pearson. 11 permanent signings (12 if JCH signs permanently), is certainly above average in the league. Most teams would be signing 10 including loans, we’ve only signed 4 loan players all year.