Donny Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Given all the talk of transfer activity this article makes interesting reading. It suggests some £550m of debt is owed by Championship clubs. I personally believe that it shows GSE took a sensible stance in their transfer policy approach and hopefully we can now push on and reap the benefits of this now our finances are in order. What do others think? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2011/06/football_league_agm.html#291907 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Moderators can you please alter my incorrect spelling in the title, you would have thought I could have spelled Football:oops: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SillyBilly Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Not until an example is made of a badly run club. Portsmouth finished above us last year, there is no benefit from financial prudence on the football field when a number of teams in the division go through a process of running huge losses for years followed by takeover then repeat. I can't see it changing and unfortunately with increased parachute payments unless more gambles are made then promotion is increasingly harder, though that isn't to say its impossible with examples to prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 I am led to believe that the majority of Chairman (or chairperson to be PC) are in support of restrictions and governance being put in place, so it will be interesting to see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think it was in the docu that Sir Alan Sugar did the other month where he said that in any other line of business 90% of football clubs would be out of business by now. I agree with the sentiment above that until an example is made of a poorly run club not much will change. Look at clubs like Portsmouth, Leicester, Leeds etc who use administration as a strategy for avoiding the bust part of 'boom-bust'. The penalties for administration should be much more severe IMO - instant relegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 the key is though football isn't like any other business though, football clubs will generally make a loss, our club does and so do most. I think it will take a big club to go bust until something happens but then again i am not sure a big club will go bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think that was the point that SAL was making, that football clubs are unique in being able to be run so poorly, yet remain in business. At the moment, clubs find it far too easy to gamble for success as the consequences for failure are nowhere near as harsh as they need to be to deter such behaviour. Look at Portsmouth - spend a load of £££ to effectively buy the FA Cup, and then when it all eventually went pear-shaped, they duck into administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 football clubs aren't like businesses though, football clubs well a good few will always have a big consumer base unlike companies. I wouldn't like it if football clubs could go bust that easily as it would be a loss, i don't think anyone wanted Portsmouth to go bust did they? There should be harsher regulations to make sure things like this don't happen but i think football clubs are special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I wanted Pompey to go the same way as Ilkeston did. Not because I don't like Ilson, but they'll take a little club under for 60k, but let off a big club for mi££ions. not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 i can understand that and even small clubs i think should be given financial support within reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnram Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think that was the point that SAL was making, that football clubs are unique in being able to be run so poorly, yet remain in business. At the moment, clubs find it far too easy to gamble for success as the consequences for failure are nowhere near as harsh as they need to be to deter such behaviour. Look at Portsmouth - spend a load of £££ to effectively buy the FA Cup, and then when it all eventually went pear-shaped, they duck into administration. They should not allow promotion until all debts are paid if a club goes into administration. The losers if a club goes bust or is forced into relegation are the fans. Doing a Pompey/Leicester/Cardiff is just trying to cheat their way through the league and more importantly, potentially put small suppliers out of business. The people responsible should be suspended from football as not 'fit and proper' to hold their posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramjam Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 football clubs aren't like businesses though, football clubs well a good few will always have a big consumer base unlike companies. I wouldn't like it if football clubs could go bust that easily as it would be a loss, i don't think anyone wanted Portsmouth to go bust did they? There should be harsher regulations to make sure things like this don't happen but i think football clubs are special. Sorry, I think the whole crux of the arguement is that football clubs ARE like any other business and should be ran and treated as such. With the figures involved with clubs and other issues around commercial issues, sponsorship etc. they are a business and should be run just like any other business...e.g. managing costs within boundaries of turnover. Indeed like any other business they should be run with their consumer base and possible turnover in mind as opposed to being debt ridden Again, this is why although not good on the playing side I can see the value of how the club had been stabilised financially over the last few seasons. This will hopefully allow for sustainable growth and competitive spending in time As Sir Alan Sugar said in that documentary and that article states, Championship clubs are at most risk. Clubs should be encouraged to not chase short term gain and instead forced to make spending and debt managable. Any financial issues (e.g. Portsmouth) should be punished heavily and in line with all other businesses (e.g. pay creditors first, demotion/no promotion). IMO the problems stem from how the Premier League has been setup and allowed to grow unchecked. Really teams cant be blamed for behaving like they do. The FA have never addressed the issue or provided a structure that helps clubs behave in a responsbile way, such like has been employed in the Bundesliga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 All clubs should be treated the same. No matter how old. It's the owners who have been irresponsilbe. Let them be put in stocks in the town centre. Next to Tyson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 the key is though football isn't like any other business though, football clubs will generally make a loss, our club does and so do most. I think it will take a big club to go bust until something happens but then again i am not sure a big club will go bust. The issue is that this is only a modern trend, it never was like this, well not to the extent it is today where clubs seem to have a different law that they operate under compared to any other business, club or society. The total disregard for HMRC needs correcting, I have to pay my taxes and so should football clubs. Business creditors should receive exactly the same priority as football related creditors and clubs should be able to prove they can pay future instalments on transfers before being able to sign players. Irresponsible owners have caused this problem by paying exorbitant wages to players, it is obvious to me that a squad wage restriction would limit this ridiculous situation from continuing. This is no different to everyday business where overheads have to be trimmed to match turnover and this is independently audited. I think that if Sky reduce their funding we may well see a few clubs go belly up, economic circumstances may impact on the number of subscribers, but I'm not aware of if this is the case or not. I think this time the ball is in play on this one, a few chairman that I have personal dealings with think this will happen. Others that I don't have dealings with have also spoken out on this issue such as our very own Mr Glick and PNE's chairman, even Karen Brady acknowledges the situation is out of hand. The trouble is the stakes are so high for a relegated club that they almost have to get back in the Premier League at the first time of asking, otherwise they are on a downward spiral, this seems to replace common sense and leads to a spending spree that they simply cannot afford as a relegated club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotherhamRam Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Can I gently point out something which will be coming around the corner I think not to far in the future. I think it is 2012/13 Uefa are rolling out that clubs who play in Europe have to have a bank balance that supports the wages. Otherwords income covers outgoings. Now there has been rumblings in the Champ and below of wage caps but know this is impossible to manage. FIFA and UEFA could really stitch us up over the debarticle of abstaining from the vote the other week and as they are not happy with how successful the premier league is run and how the Championship is popular around the world. All they need to is implement this over the coming yrs and effectively clubs like Portsmouth would def be gone. Derby before Americans would have gone. I hate how we have had to trim the belt and go through hell but this hell started before they came. Further to this we know one thing the board had said they would not spend until they were financially stable to do so. We did not go down. We are now starting to invest on players and looking forward. I know it has been hell but lets hope we coming through the otherside. People said we were skint last yr etc. I think they took a gamble in hoping to stop up on a shoestring and it paid off just hope we get the balance right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Ram Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Can I gently point out something which will be coming around the corner I think not to far in the future. I think it is 2012/13 Uefa are rolling out that clubs who play in Europe have to have a bank balance that supports the wages. Otherwords income covers outgoings. Now there has been rumblings in the Champ and below of wage caps but know this is impossible to manage. FIFA and UEFA could really stitch us up over the debarticle of abstaining from the vote the other week and as they are not happy with how successful the premier league is run and how the Championship is popular around the world. All they need to is implement this over the coming yrs and effectively clubs like Portsmouth would def be gone. Derby before Americans would have gone. I hate how we have had to trim the belt and go through hell but this hell started before they came. Further to this we know one thing the board had said they would not spend until they were financially stable to do so. We did not go down. We are now starting to invest on players and looking forward. I know it has been hell but lets hope we coming through the otherside. People said we were skint last yr etc. I think they took a gamble in hoping to stop up on a shoestring and it paid off just hope we get the balance right now. One other thing is that TV revenue will be cut from 2012 onwards as the deal was far worse than the current one. I believe it will cost Derby approximate £600 to £750k per season ish from what I am aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.