Is our budget any bigger than last year?

[Sparkle]

On 26/07/2023 at 08:58, Gerry Daly said:

I wouldn’t want to comment on the figures you use - for example I have never seen the figure of 17K attendances anywhere before - but I agree with the logic of your argument. We must surely have more money than we thought we would have or might have based on a worst case estimate that would have been used for the business plan. Nobody would have planned on the basis of 27,295 average gates for last season and every likelihood of the same if not even better this season. 

Our owner sets the budget for all aspects of the club and hopefully we are determined to be self sufficient and not a debt ridden football club which means lower wages and hardly any transfer fees and selling when decent offers come in. 

[MadAmster]

16 hours ago, sage said:

Which is it? 1. Have we got more money (than say £200k plus wages) and 2. we are being coy or 3. do we have money we can't spend?

your previous answer didn't wash

You just don't get that we could well have the money, and I've explained why I think we do have it on several occasions, but PW is conning other clubs to get round the Derby County surcharge? That's on you.

I've also said previously that it could be that DC isn't allowing PW a huge amount to spend, possibly not even as much as the EFL have agreed we can spend. Grey areas where people's thoughts will differ. I'm not necessarily right. You're not necessarily wrong.

1. IMO, yes we do have more money

2. IMO, PW is playing kidology when he says there isn't enough in the pot to pay £200K plus wages as that would mean us only bringing in one player. He's telling clubs he won't pay inflated fees just because we're DCFC.

3. IMO, we do have the money but are limited by the "moderate" fee (whatever that amounts to) mentioned in the business plan. It could also be that DC is keeping spending low this season but, hopefully, enough now and again in January, to see the club promoted and then have a very good wedge to spend in the SBC.

All my opinion. As it has been in every post. I've explained WHY I think we have a lot of money we aren't spending (yet). Why do you think the money ISN'T there?

[sage]

21 minutes ago, MadAmster said:

You just don't get that we could well have the money, and I've explained why I think we do have it on several occasions, but PW is conning other clubs to get round the Derby County surcharge? That's on you.

I've also said previously that it could be that DC isn't allowing PW a huge amount to spend, possibly not even as much as the EFL have agreed we can spend. Grey areas where people's thoughts will differ. I'm not necessarily right. You're not necessarily wrong.

1. IMO, yes we do have more money

2. IMO, PW is playing kidology when he says there isn't enough in the pot to pay £200K plus wages as that would mean us only bringing in one player. He's telling clubs he won't pay inflated fees just because we're DCFC.

3. IMO, we do have the money but are limited by the "moderate" fee (whatever that amounts to) mentioned in the business plan. It could also be that DC is keeping spending low this season but, hopefully, enough now and again in January, to see the club promoted and then have a very good wedge to spend in the SBC.

All my opinion. As it has been in every post. I've explained WHY I think we have a lot of money we aren't spending (yet). Why do you think the money ISN'T there?

Last comment on this. I never said we haven't increased our income. I have consistently said there is no clear evidence that our player budget is higher than last year, after inferring it would be.  

Once again you have offered 'kidology' AND 'tight budget', which was the whole point of my 3 replies to you, which is it?

I'll leave it there.  

[MadAmster]

55 minutes ago, sage said:

Last comment on this. I never said we haven't increased our income. I have consistently said there is no clear evidence that our player budget is higher than last year, after inferring it would be.  

Once again you have offered 'kidology' AND 'tight budget', which was the whole point of my 3 replies to you, which is it?

I'll leave it there.  

Both, as explained in my previous reply to you. I even put forward 3 opinions, all numbered. It's not all or nothing. Could be all 3 or none of the above. You seem to miss the point that 99% of what gets posted on a forum is opinion. I try to back mine up with reasoned thought trails. You appear to skip those bits. I have no idea why. Cherry picking words doesn't help comprehension. 

[Jayram]

3 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Our owner sets the budget for all aspects of the club and hopefully we are determined to be self sufficient and not a debt ridden football club which means lower wages and hardly any transfer fees and selling when decent offers come in. 

Well our owner will need to understand that if that is his philosophy going forward, however laudable, it will probably lead to a certain level of pitch mediocrity, fans becoming disillusioned and a subsequent fall in attendances, revenue and interest. Sadly there doesn't appear to be such a thing in modern football (especially at this level) as a self sufficient club or at least a successful one. We will need occasionally to push the boat out to sign the kind of players that will get us out of the division otherwise we will end up being stuck here for years. 

[Simmo’s left foot]

25 minutes ago, Jayram said:

Well our owner will need to understand that if that is his philosophy going forward, however laudable, it will probably lead to a certain level of pitch mediocrity, fans becoming disillusioned and a subsequent fall in attendances, revenue and interest. Sadly there doesn't appear to be such a thing in modern football (especially at this level) as a self sufficient club or at least a successful one. We will need occasionally to push the boat out to sign the kind of players that will get us out of the division otherwise we will end up being stuck here for years. 

Which is what Mel Morris did...

[MadAmster]

39 minutes ago, Simmo’s left foot said:

Which is what Mel Morris did...

... and why DC won't do it. Self sufficiency and sustainability are the key words going forward. We were on the brink a year ago. More recently Southend United and Scunny are in the mire. Bury went tits up. Brum were in the deep and sticky. Unless clubs realise they can't keep throwing money they don't have at the hope of getting promoted, more will either escape by the skin of their teeth as we did or go under a la Bury and others. The game cannot be run along those lines. 

[Kernow]

5 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Our owner sets the budget for all aspects of the club and hopefully we are determined to be self sufficient and not a debt ridden football club which means lower wages and hardly any transfer fees and selling when decent offers come in. 

Not paying transfer fees doesn’t necessarily help you to be self-sufficient though, if anything it can stunt things because generally if a player is free, there’s a reason for that. I understand why we can’t/won’t pay fees right now following admin, but if we got promoted and still wouldn’t spend then I’d be a little concerned.

What we should be doing going forward is focusing on a good recruitment strategy. Coventry as an example signed Gyokeres for £1mil and sold him for about 20x that. They also got Hamer for a similar fee, and if sold then would generate a similar profit. 

Nowadays, £2mil would be a big outlay for us, but if it’s a calculated risk then it’s not a bad thing. We could’ve bought Watkins instead of Nugent and made a massive profit, instead it went towards our losses and was part of the chain of expensive decisions that lead to us going into administration.

[Sparkle]

52 minutes ago, Kernow said:

Not paying transfer fees doesn’t necessarily help you to be self-sufficient though, if anything it can stunt things because generally if a player is free, there’s a reason for that. I understand why we can’t/won’t pay fees right now following admin, but if we got promoted and still wouldn’t spend then I’d be a little concerned.

What we should be doing going forward is focusing on a good recruitment strategy. Coventry as an example signed Gyokeres for £1mil and sold him for about 20x that. They also got Hamer for a similar fee, and if sold then would generate a similar profit. 

Nowadays, £2mil would be a big outlay for us, but if it’s a calculated risk then it’s not a bad thing. We could’ve bought Watkins instead of Nugent and made a massive profit, instead it went towards our losses and was part of the chain of expensive decisions that lead to us going into administration.

I am sure we would spend within what we receive and whilst we are within the third division it will seem a smaller outlay but when we get promoted it would increase in line with the extra money we would have in income whilst appearing a similar situation 

[Sparkle]

2 hours ago, Jayram said:

Well our owner will need to understand that if that is his philosophy going forward, however laudable, it will probably lead to a certain level of pitch mediocrity, fans becoming disillusioned and a subsequent fall in attendances, revenue and interest. Sadly there doesn't appear to be such a thing in modern football (especially at this level) as a self sufficient club or at least a successful one. We will need occasionally to push the boat out to sign the kind of players that will get us out of the division otherwise we will end up being stuck here for years. 

The football world of finances in England has changed outside of the premiership money.

[Raich Carter]

56 minutes ago, Kernow said:

Not paying transfer fees doesn’t necessarily help you to be self-sufficient though, if anything it can stunt things because generally if a player is free, there’s a reason for that. I understand why we can’t/won’t pay fees right now following admin, but if we got promoted and still wouldn’t spend then I’d be a little concerned.

What we should be doing going forward is focusing on a good recruitment strategy. Coventry as an example signed Gyokeres for £1mil and sold him for about 20x that. They also got Hamer for a similar fee, and if sold then would generate a similar profit. 

Nowadays, £2mil would be a big outlay for us, but if it’s a calculated risk then it’s not a bad thing. We could’ve bought Watkins instead of Nugent and made a massive profit, instead it went towards our losses and was part of the chain of expensive decisions that lead to us going into administration.

If a player is free, there's a reason for it - yep, often that they've got the confidence in their ability that being a free agent means there's no transfer fee so they get increased wages. As opposed to some being a) crap b) don't fit the system anymore. But it's definitely not true that free transfer = damaged goods if that's what you meant. There are many, many examples of great players going on a free (Messi for example).

Of course we're focused on a 'good' recruitment strategy but that depends on your definition of 'good'. For every Gyokeres there are 100 Tommy Lawrence's. There are so, so many players that we might have signed, nearly signed, could have signed, etc that it's waaaay too simplistic to say 'let's take a calculated risk'. In MM's world, he was doing exactly that - spend £100m to get £500m. Look where that calculated risk got us.

As I said on another thread, we are simply not in that world anymore. We're in the business of signing players of known ability and personality to get us out of the league and that's pretty much it. Given where we've been, we can't argue with that boring but safe strategy.

[Jayram]

20 hours ago, MadAmster said:

... and why DC won't do it. Self sufficiency and sustainability are the key words going forward. We were on the brink a year ago. More recently Southend United and Scunny are in the mire. Bury went tits up. Brum were in the deep and sticky. Unless clubs realise they can't keep throwing money they don't have at the hope of getting promoted, more will either escape by the skin of their teeth as we did or go under a la Bury and others. The game cannot be run along those lines. 

I understand that principle but if we extrapolate that over the next few years are you prepared to pay £28-£33 for a match ticket to watch us spend season after season in this division, selling our best youngsters, paying nominal fees  and hoping for the best? If you are then that’s fine but I imagine a large chunk of the fan base are not and interest will fade rapidly. There has to be a balance between sustainability and ambition; no one is wanting a return to MM days but equally if we want to get out of this league anytime soon we will need to be competitive in the transfer market and that means occasionally having to pay the going rate. 

[angieram]

2 hours ago, Jayram said:

I understand that principle but if we extrapolate that over the next few years are you prepared to pay £28-£33 for a match ticket to watch us spend season after season in this division, selling our best youngsters, paying nominal fees  and hoping for the best? If you are then that’s fine but I imagine a large chunk of the fan base are not and interest will fade rapidly. There has to be a balance between sustainability and ambition; no one is wanting a return to MM days but equally if we want to get out of this league anytime soon we will need to be competitive in the transfer market and that means occasionally having to pay the going rate. 

I'm prepared to spend £13.40 a game to watch a strong, competitive team that contains a mix of talented young players who have come through our academy and good pros who have been brought in for their ability to get us out of this division and at least give them a chance to do so  before I throw my toys out of the pram.

I saw no chunk of the fanbase missing last season and the attendances at this season's friendlies and early demand for tickets suggests there won't be much change this season.

If some of the occasional big game only fans stay away because we haven'tgot a star striker in yet, then I think we'll barely notice  tbh.

If and when Clowes and Warne's approach doesn't work, I will say so, but can we give the season a chance first? 

 

[MadAmster]

3 hours ago, Jayram said:

I understand that principle but if we extrapolate that over the next few years are you prepared to pay £28-£33 for a match ticket to watch us spend season after season in this division, selling our best youngsters, paying nominal fees  and hoping for the best? If you are then that’s fine but I imagine a large chunk of the fan base are not and interest will fade rapidly. There has to be a balance between sustainability and ambition; no one is wanting a return to MM days but equally if we want to get out of this league anytime soon we will need to be competitive in the transfer market and that means occasionally having to pay the going rate. 

The point being we couldn't spend on fees last season. We had a wages cap. We had a maximum spend limit. A budget based on 17K gates. We averaged 10259 more than that per game. That's a good few million we should have in the bank.

This season we may pay "moderate" fees. We haven't paid one so far. A decent season on the pitch will see us make a fair few quid this season as well. DC seems to be banking on PWs penchant for promotion from this division. Going into next season we should have a decent warchest we can use to get the players we need in without going into debt.

Transparency in my thoughts demands that I add that ticket prices don't put me off as I live in the Netherlands and a trip home for a game cost me getting on for £500 last season. A few quid here or there on the price of a match ticket isn't going to put me off. First trip this season will be sometime in September.

[Eddie]

Having seen this club very close to extinction on several occasions, I find it quite incredible that certain individuals are advocating spending large amounts on transfer fees, wages etc just because sanctions may or may not have been relaxed a little, or that we might have a little spare cash.

[sage]

23 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Having seen this club very close to extinction on several occasions, I find it quite incredible that certain individuals are advocating spending large amounts on transfer fees, wages etc just because sanctions may or may not have been relaxed a little, or that we might have a little spare cash.

Who has said that?

[Eddie]

23 minutes ago, sage said:

Who has said that?

This thread's full of how we have a (supposedly) bigger income than others, and that we may or might not be a more attractive enticement for certain players.

In truth, we have been a basket-case of a club for the best part of 45 years, with the odd ray of sunshine poking through.

[sage]

7 minutes ago, Eddie said:

This thread's full of how we have a (supposedly) bigger income than others, and that we may or might not be a more attractive enticement for certain players.

In truth, we have been a basket-case of a club for the best part of 45 years, with the odd ray of sunshine poking through.

We have got the most income in this division, but no one has espoused reckless spending.

[Jayram]

5 hours ago, angieram said:

I'm prepared to spend £13.40 a game to watch a strong, competitive team that contains a mix of talented young players who have come through our academy and good pros who have been brought in for their ability to get us out of this division and at least give them a chance to do so  before I throw my toys out of the pram.

I saw no chunk of the fanbase missing last season and the attendances at this season's friendlies and early demand for tickets suggests there won't be much change this season.

If some of the occasional big game only fans stay away because we haven'tgot a star striker in yet, then I think we'll barely notice  tbh.

If and when Clowes and Warne's approach doesn't work, I will say so, but can we give the season a chance first? 

 

Of course we’ll give the season a chance first, that’s why people like me and my mate have renewed our ST’s again and are preparing for a 230 mile round trips every couple of weeks for the next 9 months!
However I think that the failure (so far) to bring in a decent young forward in the age range we were told we’d be looking for is a worry, so it’s fair to question why that is the case.

[Caerphilly Ram]

Didn’t want to resurrect the admin thread for fear of giving everyone PTSD and not sure it deserves it’s own thread or not, but apparently we’ve come to some sort of settlement with Lech Poznan over what was owed for Jozwiak;

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Caerphilly Ram
Added additional tweet pic with figures