We can't afford to be a Championship club? (1 Viewer)

skybluebeduff · Aug 12, 2015

I believe Bristol City's chairman is spot on, players prices even in the Championship are ridiculous, and there is no way CCFC could compete in that market at all without the financial backing of SISU (yeah right).

Today Bristol City have had a £6mill bid accepted for Dwight Gayle.

If we went up, how could we even compete financially? considering Waggot and co want us fans to pay for it all...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33848322

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33873738

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

There's two issues. Firstly self sufficiency. Its hard to argue against clubs being run in this way but no club operates in isolation so when you have a club that is working on the basis of self sufficiency it is very hard for them to compete at Championship or PL level for the simple reason that others are prepared to gamble money.

The second issue relates more to our particular situation. We saw from our last period in the championship that even with good crowds we were not generating enough to be competitive without running at a huge loss. Unless someone will essentially gift the club a new ground this is an issue that is very hard to resolve.

We are basically looking at getting to the Championship and then doing our best to survive for as long as possible. While promotion would bring many fans back how long will they stick around for season after season of Championship relegation battles. I suspect there's a large chunk of our fanbase who would not accept that as our level and expect SISU, or any future owner, to pump millions in.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

Our problem when we were in the Championship was that we were paying top wages for poor players. If we got promoted this season we would have much higher attendances than we have now. And we would have a manager in TM that would spend wisely. I am not saying it would be easy. But it isn't all doom and gloom as some say. It isn't how much money you have. It is how wisely it is spent. We would be up against clubs burning through money not being earned. But a successful season should see us somewhere near the over 20k per game we had before SISU took over.

Shakeitup · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
Our problem when we were in the Championship was that we were paying top wages for poor players. If we got promoted this season we would have much higher attendances than we have now. And we would have a manager in TM that would spend wisely. I am not saying it would be easy. But it isn't all doom and gloom as some say. It isn't how much money you have. It is how wisely it is spent. We would be up against clubs burning through money not being earned. But a successful season should see us somewhere near the over 20k per game we had before SISU took over.

You hit the nail on the head. We over paid for lots of sub par players. We did buy a few decent young players who then could step up but previous managers rushed purchases filling the team with some players that I still puzzle over.

If we went up (miracle of miracles) with TM in charge, I'd trust him to work with the increased budget that playing in the Championship would afford him.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

I would also hope that with the extra income that we wouldn't cash in on any good players like we normally do but let TM put a squad together. And if SISU did sell any players that the money was reinvested in the squad.

To get back the money that they wasted SISU need us to reach the Prem. I wouldn't like to guess what they would do when we are back in the Prem. But at least this time we would have a manager that has been there and done it before. And he did it without a limitless pot.

Shakeitup · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
I would also hope that with the extra income that we wouldn't cash in on any good players like we normally do but let TM put a squad together. And if SISU did sell any players that the money was reinvested in the squad.

To get back the money that they wasted SISU need us to reach the Prem. I wouldn't like to guess what they would do when we are back in the Prem. But at least this time we would have a manager that has been there and done it before. And he did it without a limitless pot.

That's the big thing, any players that are good can be easily cherry picked. Fair play to Bournemouth for going up, but lots of people were saying how low we had fallen when they could come in and buy Callum. Now he and they went on to do extraordinarily well, but going forward we must hang on to this type of player. Easier said than done in the precarious financial situation we are in.

Huckerby · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
There's two issues. Firstly self sufficiency. Its hard to argue against clubs being run in this way but no club operates in isolation so when you have a club that is working on the basis of self sufficiency it is very hard for them to compete at Championship or PL level for the simple reason that others are prepared to gamble money.

The second issue relates more to our particular situation. We saw from our last period in the championship that even with good crowds we were not generating enough to be competitive without running at a huge loss. Unless someone will essentially gift the club a new ground this is an issue that is very hard to resolve.

We are basically looking at getting to the Championship and then doing our best to survive for as long as possible. While promotion would bring many fans back how long will they stick around for season after season of Championship relegation battles. I suspect there's a large chunk of our fanbase who would not accept that as our level and expect SISU, or any future owner, to pump millions in.

Stop talking sense you

Limey · Aug 12, 2015

If we got into the championship would we not become a lot more attractive to the owners of ACL to take over?

I'm still convinced we will be reunited with the ricoh.

In our present situation, then yes we couldn't compete barring some astonishing work in the transfer market by TM.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

Bournemouth have a ground that only holds 11.5k They did not have unlimited funds pumped in. They spent wisely. And they found a club to sell a good striker to them cheaply even if some of their supporters tried to say it was a good deal for the selling club. The selling club didn't even spend 1p of what they received to try and replace him. Now these same people will tell you that we would be in trouble if we reached the Championship. Not if we could find a club that would sell us a star striker for not a lot of money.

Grendel · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
Bournemouth have a ground that only holds 11.5k They did not have unlimited funds pumped in. They spent wisely. And they found a club to sell a good striker to them cheaply even if some of their supporters tried to say it was a good deal for the selling club. The selling club didn't even spend 1p of what they received to try and replace him. Now these same people will tell you that we would be in trouble if we reached the Championship. Not if we could find a club that would sell us a star striker for not a lot of money.

Bournemouth have had millions pumped in.

They spent £39,000 a week on one players wages in the championship.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

Grendel said:
Bournemouth have had millions pumped in.

They spent £39,000 a week on one players wages in the championship.

How much was pumped in then? What player was on 39k a week?

And have you changed your mind on Leon Clarke yet? 3 goals in 2 games. I suppose we didn't have that charity bet.

covmark · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
Bournemouth have a ground that only holds 11.5k They did not have unlimited funds pumped in. They spent wisely. And they found a club to sell a good striker to them cheaply even if some of their supporters tried to say it was a good deal for the selling club. The selling club didn't even spend 1p of what they received to try and replace him. Now these same people will tell you that we would be in trouble if we reached the Championship. Not if we could find a club that would sell us a star striker for not a lot of money.

This is bollocks, they're backed by a very wealthy Russian. They spent a lot to get where they are. Albeit they did it quicker than they thought they would.

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

covmark said:
This is bollocks, they're backed by a very wealthy Russian. They spent a lot to get where they are. Albeit they did it quicker than they thought they would.

Didn't the Russian buy a house near the chairman or something odd like that and it led to him pumping money in.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

Yes they have a Russian owner. But how much did he pump in?

They were not on massive wages. They got new contracts when they went up. Just like Wilson did.

covmark · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
Didn't the Russian buy a house near the chairman or something odd like that and it led to him pumping money in.

It was something odd like that. I know the Russian chap doesn't like the limelight. Stays in the background somewhat. His backing most definitely got them to where they are. They were close to going under a few years ago.

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
Yes they have a Russian owner. But how much did he pump in?

Wilson was £3m wasn't he, Rantie was about £2.5m, Tomlin £3.5m, Gradel, £7m and Mings £8m. Think the only player they've sold in the last few years for a fee was the £3m they got for Grabban.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32611521

covmark · Aug 12, 2015

They were also paying kenwyne Jones' 37 grand a week wages last season.

I_Saw_Shaw_Score · Aug 12, 2015

covmark said:
They were also paying kenwyne Jones' 37 grand a week wages last season.

And the 2 times i saw him play he came on as a 88th minute sub!

We missed the PL gravy train by a couple of years & it looks like the same for the Championship as well.

Go up we would come straight back down unless we are taken over by someone with silly money to throw around.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
Wilson was £3m wasn't he, Rantie was about £2.5m, Tomlin £3.5m, Gradel, £7m and Mings £8m. Think the only player they've sold in the last few years for a fee was the £3m they got for Grabban.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32611521

How about like for like. You say who they signed but only since they reached the Prem. And they will get multiples of what they have spent just for reaching the Prem. And the Russian will now still be in profit.

So for the proper figures. Last season they sold Grabban for 3m. They bought Wilson for 3m and Surman undisclosed. All the others were for free. Yet I am supposed to believe that they pumped unlimited millions in. Yes he made a loss until they made it. VBut the losses were less than SISU lost.

oldskyblue58 · Aug 12, 2015

Bournemouth 31 July 2014 financials show

turnover £10m

Staff costs £17m

Player sales £7m

other costs £10m (including £450k in rent & 673k paid to directors)

Overall loss £10.3m

Shares issued £15m
Accumulated losses £30m

Net liabilities £15m

Gross liabilities £34m including other loans from related entities £25m

I would think they are relieved to be in the Premiership even for 1 season because I doubt 2015 figures would show a massive improvement

Nick · Aug 12, 2015

Is shares issued them putting money in?

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

They had a £17m wage bill in the Championship on an average attendance of 9K, 2K less than we need this season to fund our L1 squad!

Those signings are from the last 3 seasons so include signings made in L1.

If they haven't had money pumped in how have they not gone bust when they've been running at a huge loss? Up to 2013 / 14 season their accounts show the Russian owner has put in £25m, in the form of loans to be repaid with interest, and that has likely increased with their spend last season.

oldskyblue58 · Aug 12, 2015

all companies must have share capital (unless limited by guarantee) it is the item that denotes ownership and yes is in effect money put in to the company if the company issues those shares. A sale between two shareholders in the company would not change the figure on the company balance sheet

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

Nick said:
Is shares issued them putting money in?

That's definitely someone putting money in! Share issues aren't really a problem, the loans would be of more concern. What happens if and when he gets bored and decides he wants his money back?

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
That's definitely someone putting money in! Share issues aren't really a problem, the loans would be of more concern. What happens if and when he gets bored and decides he wants his money back?

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/bournemouth/english-football-teams/bournemouth-transfers

Specs WT-R75 · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
That's definitely someone putting money in! Share issues aren't really a problem, the loans would be of more concern. What happens if and when he gets bored and decides he wants his money back?

All players go up for sale. All assets go up for sale. Commercial rights go up for sale. If shortfall... does the remaining company shell (i.e. the "name", the golden share etc) have any value.

Basically the same as if Sisu decide to stop playing the game...

If somehow we fluked back to back promotions (long term Championship is not sustainable as we have seen) then I can tell you this, we would not be sticking around in the Prem for very long as Sisu would call in their loans and get the fk out of here. Either that or they would need to find some mug that wanted to buy some magic beans!

Specks

steveecov · Aug 12, 2015

Knowing our luck the TV money will be more fairly distributed (which I believe is the biggest problem going all the way down to grass-root level), just as we are due the benefits.

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/bournemouth/english-football-teams/bournemouth-transfers

Not sure what you're point is there unless you're agreeing that money is being put in as that shows a deficit of over £22m on transfers since the Russian turned up!

Specs WT-R75 said:
All players go up for sale. All assets go up for sale. Commercial rights go up for sale. If shortfall... does the remaining company shell (i.e. the "name", the golden share etc) have any value.

Exactly and then having sold everything the inevitable relegation follows unless someone else comes along who will pump millions in. Even spending the stupid amount you get for being in the PL isn't going to be enough as every other club has that.

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

steveecov said:
Knowing our luck the TV money will be more fairly distributed (which I believe is the biggest problem going all the way down to grass-root level), just as we are due the benefits.

The whole system needs a big shake up. I'd get rid of agents and have it all done by the PFA, fixed squad sizes, salary floor and cap, no fees for loans, greater revenue sharing.

Something has to give at some point. The tipping point will be when Sky start losing subscribers as they've pushed the price up to high.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
Not sure what you're point is there unless you're agreeing that money is being put in as that shows a deficit of over £22m on transfers since the Russian turned up!

Exactly and then having sold everything the inevitable relegation follows unless someone else comes along who will pump millions in. Even spending the stupid amount you get for being in the PL isn't going to be enough as every other club has that.

Here you go again. The vast majority of this has been spent since the end of last season. As in after they reached the Prem.

Season 14/15 level.

Season 13/14 3,350,000 spent.

Season 12/13 400k spent.

Season 11/12 100k spent.

Season 10/11 850k profit

Season 09/10 Level

Season 08/09 Level

Season 07/08 Level

Season 06/07 200k profit

Season 05/06 150k profit

Season 04/05 320k profit

So where is the 22m spent in transfers to get promoted as that is what we were talking about.

justvisiting · Aug 12, 2015

Some Championship clubs have gone a bit bananas but FFP and basic probability seems to have curbed some teams' spending. Fulham went crazy last season but seem a bit more circumspect this year. Birmingham have a restricted budget but a canny manager and look set to be comfortably mid-table. Most people seem to be getting the message that if 4 teams spend big then at least one of them's going to be disappointed. A balanced budget would make it tough for Coventry but a canny manager could probably get the breathing space required to stabilise as a Championship side.

chiefdave · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
So where is the 22m spent in transfers to get promoted as that is what we were talking about.

It's not just transfers its wages. Without even counting last season the Russian had put in £25m via 2 loans on which he is charging interest at 3%. He's done that to cover substantial losses and fund increased transfer expenditure. What was there record transfer prior to him taking and stake and now (even if you want to ignore this season).

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
It's not just transfers its wages. Without even counting last season the Russian had put in £25m via 2 loans on which he is charging interest at 3%. He's done that to cover substantial losses and fund increased transfer expenditure. What was there record transfer prior to him taking and stake and now (even if you want to ignore this season).

I don't disagree with this. But they only have an 11.5k ground. And not only this but they have to pay rent. Being in the Championship is said to be worth 5m a year. So we are in a better situation than they were financially. As I have been saying it isn't what money you have but how you spend it.

Astute · Aug 12, 2015

chiefdave said:
It's not just transfers its wages. Without even counting last season the Russian had put in £25m via 2 loans on which he is charging interest at 3%. He's done that to cover substantial losses and fund increased transfer expenditure. What was there record transfer prior to him taking and stake and now (even if you want to ignore this season).

Other than this season......which wasn't what got them promoted......was 3m and they sold a player for 3m at the same time.

Nick · Aug 12, 2015

Astute said:
I don't disagree with this. But they only have an 11.5k ground. And not only this but they have to pay rent. Being in the Championship is said to be worth 5m a year. So we are in a better situation than they were financially. As I have been saying it isn't what money you have but how you spend it.

Yes we would be if we both had owners who didn't put money in though and both clubs running within their means?

We can't afford to be a Championship club? (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Huckerby

Guest

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

CCFC Finance Director

Administrator

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency