by Southbank Old Boy » 01 Oct 2009 21:37
by Victor Meldrew » 01 Oct 2009 21:38
The Quiet Man Well at least we now have an 'official' version of where the money has gone.
It makes me feel why the f**k are we as a club now bothered with the premier league - we can't afford it.
Also it was just as well SC didn't spend all that money that was supposed to be available to him.
by Dirk Gently » 01 Oct 2009 21:40
by Southbank Old Boy » 01 Oct 2009 21:42
The Quiet Man Well at least we now have an 'official' version of where the money has gone.
It makes me feel why the f**k are we as a club now bothered with the premier league - we can't afford it.
Also it was just as well SC didn't spend all that money that was supposed to be available to him.
by Dirk Gently » 01 Oct 2009 21:45
Southbank Old BoyThe Quiet Man Well at least we now have an 'official' version of where the money has gone.
It makes me feel why the f**k are we as a club now bothered with the premier league - we can't afford it.
Also it was just as well SC didn't spend all that money that was supposed to be available to him.
Did you not notice that the two years in the Prem were pretty much the only years we've made a profit?![]()
It might cost more to play at that table, but the vast sums of money you get rewarded with counter that outlay
Its harder to make money in the lower leagues, so can we afford NOT to be in the prem?
by strap » 01 Oct 2009 21:45
by Southbank Old Boy » 01 Oct 2009 21:47
by Man Friday » 01 Oct 2009 21:48
Sun TzuMan Friday :lol: at all of you who lap up this "information" without question. The most interesting financial information is always that which is not provided.
Um, LOL at those who think everyone takes it at face value !!
by Southbank Old Boy » 01 Oct 2009 21:48
Dirk GentlySouthbank Old BoyThe Quiet Man Well at least we now have an 'official' version of where the money has gone.
It makes me feel why the f**k are we as a club now bothered with the premier league - we can't afford it.
Also it was just as well SC didn't spend all that money that was supposed to be available to him.
Did you not notice that the two years in the Prem were pretty much the only years we've made a profit?![]()
It might cost more to play at that table, but the vast sums of money you get rewarded with counter that outlay
Its harder to make money in the lower leagues, so can we afford NOT to be in the prem?
The paradox is that to be sure of staying in the PL you need to pump lots of money in, and then you don't make a profit. No-one makes a profit from being in the PL.
by Dirk Gently » 01 Oct 2009 21:49
Southbank Old Boy The answer is they all have someone willing to pump money in and they dont worry about breaking even so much
by PEARCEY » 01 Oct 2009 21:52
Victor MeldrewThe Quiet Man Well at least we now have an 'official' version of where the money has gone.
It makes me feel why the f**k are we as a club now bothered with the premier league - we can't afford it.
Also it was just as well SC didn't spend all that money that was supposed to be available to him.
How do clubs such as
Wigan
Fulham
Bolton
Stoke
Blackburn
Hull
make ends meet especially with crowds generally lower than ours?
Are they possibly better run?
Wigan don't even charge for their car park whereas ours costs £5 ( or is it now an even more scandalous £6) for what is out-of-town parking for 3 hours?
For cost-cutting as we obviously make so little from the bar areas-scrap them and save on staff costs and let us have a bit more room in the downstairs.
Do we need the stewards checking bags etc at every turnstile?
Do we need the "back the boyz" cretin who presumably comes at a cost?
At our more lowly level do we need a nutritionist when players are known to eat fry-ups and Mac Donalds muck?
As our chairman is not egotisticalcan't we get a sponsor like Waitrose for the stadium itself?
We are lectured about "cutting cloth" but can't the club "practise what it preaches"
£7 million plus on infrastructure-the extension shouldn't have cost more than that or has it been paid for in advance?
by Ark Royal » 01 Oct 2009 21:59
by Victor Meldrew » 01 Oct 2009 21:59
Southbank Old Boy The answer is they all have someone willing to pump money in and they dont worry about breaking even so much
by Sun Tzu » 01 Oct 2009 22:00
Victor Meldrew
How do clubs such as
Wigan
Fulham
Bolton
Stoke
Blackburn
Hull
make ends meet especially with crowds generally lower than ours?
Are they possibly better run?
?
by Dirk Gently » 01 Oct 2009 22:01
Ark Royal ...... At some point down the line the game has to adopt salary caps at even the top tier.
by PEARCEY » 01 Oct 2009 22:02
Sun TzuVictor Meldrew
How do clubs such as
Wigan
Fulham
Bolton
Stoke
Blackburn
Hull
make ends meet especially with crowds generally lower than ours?
Are they possibly better run?
?
I guess question 1 is do they make ends meet or are the actually massively in debt ?
Most of them though have had an owner prepared to finance spending well in excess of income on a long term basis whilst our owner has consistently said for a long time that he would not work on that basis
Fulham haven't had a new ground to finance, nor have Blackburn.
Hull have a new ground which is owned by their local council
Blackburn have a large 'trust fund' provided by their erstwhile owner as a legacy
Blackburn have lots of years of Premiership earnings, European football etc
No two clubs are the same. They have different history, different assets, different income streams
And of course some of them may be better run.
I'm not sure where that gets us, whilst as I understand it within the football world we are considered a well run club that doesn't preclude other clubs being better run ....
by Victor Meldrew » 01 Oct 2009 22:03
Ark Royal Almost depressing reading this thread when you come to realise that the game nowadays is all about money and not the glory. To aspire to reach the very top level of the game - the Premiership - and to stay there is basically a death sentence for the club because financially it is virtually unsustainable. Leeds, Charlton, Southampton are prime examples and no doubt many more will follow - Hull? Pompey? At some point down the line the game has to adopt salary caps at even the top tier.
by Sun Tzu » 01 Oct 2009 22:03
Victor Meldrew With very astute operations in the transfer market these clubs do manage to survive
by Dirk Gently » 01 Oct 2009 22:05
Sun Tzu I'm not sure where that gets us, whilst as I understand it within the football world we are considered a well run club that doesn't preclude other clubs being better run ....
by Ian Royal » 01 Oct 2009 22:07
PEARCEYDirk GentlyPEARCEY Au contraire Dirk Dasterdly....Spend on playing staff in an attempt to get back into the Premiership. The club therefore becomes a more valuable commodity if Premiership status is gained (and more importantly retained longer term).
Fair enough - that's where the money's going. But does this investor of yours give us the money or lend us the money?
He gives us the money Dirk because he sees that money as an investment that he will more than recoup upon selling the club as a Premiership entity which will be worth a lot more than what he paid for Reading FC when the club was languishing near the bottom of the second tier.
Its a very simplistic way of looking at things I'll admit but clearly Mr Mad is no longer willing to be a benovolent benefactor and I'm afraid thats whats needed to move this club back to the lofty heights of two/three years ago.
PS How's Mutley?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests