dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
The owners alone make the decisions when to keeping academies, giving up on an academy.
Attempting to upgrade or downgrade an academy.
How many league 1 clubs are Cat 2? I don't know actually. I doubt - but could be wrong - that burton were
The issue has to be cost to revenue.
If I was the manager and given a choice of reduction in first team budget to invest in an academy I know what I would say.
Were Bournemouth that status in this league? Were Rotherham? I don't know. The point is it requires expenditure and with is being forced away additional expenditure.
Is that cost beneficial to the club where it is now?
I would imagine that most league one clubs that don't have Cat 2 academies don't have the spare cash or backing to invest in the required facilities or as in our case a local charity who is willing to develop a site with the facilities to accommodate a Cat 2 academy. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't like one though.
Which brings us back to my second question. Why do all clubs that have Cat 2 status maintain that status if the "cost to revenue" isn't worth it? Why don't they just actively lose this status? Surely it would be easy enough to do? All they'd have to do is withdraw enough requirements to fail the audit.
The owners alone make the decisions when to keeping academies, giving up on an academy.
Attempting to upgrade or downgrade an academy.
But your first questions was;
Why are clubs trying to gain it if it's not worth it?
Which clubs are you referring to?
The second questions I have answered - all don't.
How do you know that out of interest? I would have thought the board of the club would make that decision
It's not integral to ambition but I would argue that with everything at the club being dismantled, farmed out etc it is integral to identity
I have a friend who works for QPR academy.
They said that Brentford closed their academy because the owners felt that over the years it wasn't producing enough players who were making it into their teams and squad.
Also they were not producing enough stars that were sold on for decent profits.
QPR hoovered up all their talent when Brentford closed.
The staff at QPR couldn't believe their luck. They felt Brentford were getting the right players in but the coaching staff and the set up was poor. Hence the end product wasn't great.
They were gob smacked it was closed down as oppose to made to work.
They told me that they felt we were very lucky to have the standard of academy we have at Cov.
They also said we have a very good reputation throughout game at this level.
Yes simplified it as owners. However each time I mentioned it before I said Joy Sepalla, Tim Fisher and Chris Anderson.
Glad you agree it won't be Tony Mowbray
Yes of course they did
All don't what?
All don't retain the status - Brentford have not
Now please answer the first question Tony
Oh you got me, I just made that all up
So how many more haven't retained it? Have all the others got it wrong?
With respect Tony I really think you owe me the answer to question one do you not - I am genuinely interested which clubs you believe have upgraded.
Oh I can give you some more if you want
So how many clubs have relinquished their Cat 2 academy status then? How many clubs have ever had it?
Tony I will tell you when you answer the question I have asked - why are you refusing - let me remind you;
Why are clubs trying to gain it if it's not worth it?
Which clubs Tony - people may start to think you have made this up
Well I think you did. They only closed it it in May and you have just quoted something that I am sure by co-incidence you can find on Google in the London Standard. I don't believe a Brentford fan would say that our academy has a good standing in the game. Yes I believe that you made it up
Tony I will tell you when you answer the question I have asked - why are you refusing - let me remind you;
Why are clubs trying to gain it if it's not worth it?
Which clubs Tony - people may start to think you have made this up
Why do you make your answer dependant on Tony? There are other people who would like to know. Like me. Please answer the question.
I actually did - Tony said no clubs have downgraded the academy - that was the question - as I answered it Tony wants more named as that didn't go well.
Tony presented an argument that clubs having done financial analysis are striving to upgrade their academies. I cannot find any evidence to support this - therefore it is very reasonable to see who these clubs are so I can then respond by looking at those clubs circumstances. I would have assumed promoted clubs but the clubs promoted are still I believe Cat 3 status so I am unsure who they are
I have answered his question - when we see another club that has downgraded what then - sorry I cannot be bothered to keep researching when he will not provide one example. There will be one if he looks.
It seems that whatever it costs, the net cost ( savings if we lose it ) is not a game changer. We have a Source of squad players and occasional earners through it. We also seem to have a good reputation.
TM had Ryton decorated up to scratch to show everyone that the Club was being well run/ looked after. The academy shows a Professional attitude and even medium to long term ambition. I don't think TM would tart up Ryton on one hand and want to dump the academy on the other.
Apart from Ryton and the academy we don't have much ( other than the current Squad ) to present to anyone - new players, owners, advertisers - to show we are thinking medium to long term.
To save a net figure well under 1 million is short term with a view to legging it soon.
My question was based on what others have posted regarding Watford and Colchester. Watford having been upgraded last year and Colchester reapplied this year. They may be the only two clubs from premier league to league 2 who have tried to gain Cat 2 recently for all I know. It may be more, I don't know and its irrelevant to the question. You can take Colchester in isolation if you want, the point is exactly the same. If "cost to revenue" doesn't add up why are Colchester so keen to obtain it?
There you go. You can answer the point and then answer this. So how many clubs have relinquished their Cat 2 academy status then? How many clubs have ever had it?
That's two answers you owe me now.
It's not answering the question so I give up. Watford upgraded from 3 to 2 on promotion.
What did they do 3 years ago Tony as a financial and footballing decision?
Do you think Boltons owners will be legging it soon?
I think they have huge debt... We are supposed to be running as self sufficient ( debt on a back boiler ). Different scenario.
We are not self sufficient and are operating at a low income level. We would be spending around 20% of income at least to sustain this status and probably be spending the equivalent of half the first team wage bill on it.
'supposed to be' as opposed to 'are'. 'probably' as opposed to you 'know this for a fact'.
OSB I think thats why TM had to clear out so many players to bring the salary down to an optimum operating level within the budget and hence the reason why we could not get any more players in as their salary expectations could'nt be met. Be interesting to see next years balances31 May 2015 accounts for the SBS&L group
Turnover 4.8m
Operating loss 4.6m
Profit on Player sales 2.7m
Interest payable 1.37m
Loss for financial year 3.3m
Going to be interesting to see how they save 3.3m to make the group self financing, even if they managed a profit of 2.5m on Maddison
I think what TF is referring to is that the cash flows of the Group approximately balanced ......... in 2015 a deficit of £128k and in 2014 deficit £92k ........ so actually got worse, and were only that good because payment of interest was not demanded but added to debt
They were not self sufficient to 31/05/15 and to have achieved it since is I feel a tall ask. Its possible but there are serious implications and decisions in achieving it
work it back the other way for the year to 31/05/2016 - what turnover do we need to break even given what we know from 2015 accounts & other snippets
Interest cost 1.3m
Administrative expenses 2.8m
Player budget £2m
Other wages (manager, Coaches, Staff, directors) £1m
Direct costs £1m (reduced compared to 2015 because we no longer run the shop)
That's a total cost of £8.1m (including a saving on total wages of £2m compared to 2015)
Turnover will be reduced because no longer run shop but say 4.5m (2015 was 4.8m)
Maddison profit on sale - optimistic - £2.5m
By my reckoning that's still £1.1m short.
Cash flow wise then they could roll up the interest again but did we receive 2.5m in cash for Maddison - I very much doubt given how we are scrambling to pay for players.
the claims of self sufficiency don't appear to stack up to me, but the above is all guesswork of course
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?