Generic clubs in financial crisis Thread

[Hoop Blah]

That seems a really odd way of looking at it and I don't see the point. Placing a market value on it will be very hard to establish too. The value of a brand and it's association for various different industries would be hard to make stick in a court.

Football has always been funded by outside investment and as long as that investment is genuine and clubs aren't having to pay it back then I see no reason to stop it happening.

Anyway, I see that Wigan have announced a profit for the last 12 months. Their £4.3m profit being their first positive return for 6 years. As a club that Reading should be benchmarking themselves against it's interesting to note they've reduced their wage bill slightly to £38m which I think looks like their lowest wage bill since 06-07.

[Fluff]

Swindon in trouble again?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21047858

[Royal With Cheese]

Swindon in trouble again?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21047858

Oooh, let's hope so!

[Once were Biscuitmen]

Swindon in trouble again?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21047858

Sounds like they've been overly ambitious with signings, wages, and general "full-of-themselvesness", trying to play tippytappy football with Di Canio as manager and all that.
Now they will pay the price of their excessive ambitions.
They should have just been patient, built it up slowly and ran a respectable budget, but no - in the oxf*rd up world of football nobody has the patience to do that.

It all comes down to this retarded oxf*rd administration system you have in England. In other countries, if you go bankrupt, you go bankrupt, none of this getting an administration and paying debts at 1/10th the rate, and then running up to do another administration again.
I say this system must go, it must be abolished, and bankruptcy should mean exactly that - all the assets being sold off to cover the debts. That would teach all these scumbag teams to behave financially.

But the problem is with football clubs that means the loss of the league share, the loss of any further parachute payments, all players walking off on frees and a stadium with few alternative uses so little value. If you are a creditor or a judge overseeing the insolvency process you can see why administration is preferred as it gets at least some money back over time.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

There needs to be consequences in order to discourage scum from doing the cheating-through-administration over and over again.

There are consequences - the points deductions are meant to be a deterrent, but they patently aren't because of the number of times they've been used. And the massive, massive problem with them as a deterrent/punishment are twofold :

- they punish over-spending and failing. All the clubs who over-spend and get promoted as a result don't go bust and so don't get punished,
- they often punish people who are trying to rescue a club after the person who did the damage was long moved on.

Again, the only way forward is proper monitoring and checking - not punishment after teh crime has been done.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Just FTR, Derby lost £8M in achieving nothing last season.

I understand Morecambe may well be in real financial rouble very soon.

In their promotion year, York City made operating loss of £467k - on a playing budget of approx. £650k.

[Franchise FC]

There needs to be consequences in order to discourage scum from doing the cheating-through-administration over and over again.

There are consequences - the points deductions are meant to be a deterrent, but they patently aren't because of the number of times they've been used. And the massive, massive problem with them as a deterrent/punishment are twofold :

- they punish over-spending and failing. All the clubs who over-spend and get promoted as a result don't go bust and so don't get punished,
- they often punish people who are trying to rescue a club after the person who did the damage was long moved on.

Again, the only way forward is proper monitoring and checking - not punishment after teh crime has been done.

Interesting view.

In business, you generally invest to achieve. The view you've expressed (or at least my reading of it) is that this philosophy should not be allowed in football.

I would prefer heavier penalties if it goes wrong, thus discouraging the overspending. You can't simply stop someone funding it at all.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

There needs to be consequences in order to discourage scum from doing the cheating-through-administration over and over again.

There are consequences - the points deductions are meant to be a deterrent, but they patently aren't because of the number of times they've been used. And the massive, massive problem with them as a deterrent/punishment are twofold :

- they punish over-spending and failing. All the clubs who over-spend and get promoted as a result don't go bust and so don't get punished,
- they often punish people who are trying to rescue a club after the person who did the damage was long moved on.

Again, the only way forward is proper monitoring and checking - not punishment after teh crime has been done.

Interesting view.

In business, you generally invest to achieve. The view you've expressed (or at least my reading of it) is that this philosophy should not be allowed in football.

I would prefer heavier penalties if it goes wrong, thus discouraging the overspending. You can't simply stop someone funding it at all.

Absolutely not. But what you can completely stop is them funding it without money they've actually got. So if they want to put money into a club, they give it over and it's not on the balance sheet as liabilities - debt is the problem, not actual money spent.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Interesting view.

In business, you generally invest to achieve. The view you've expressed (or at least my reading of it) is that this philosophy should not be allowed in football.

I would prefer heavier penalties if it goes wrong, thus discouraging the overspending. You can't simply stop someone funding it at all.

The problem is that spending money you haven't got, with no obvious way of ever making that money back, is not "investment". Football really is the Peter Principle in sporting terms, where clubs aim to get promoted until they are no longer competent to compete at the level they are playing in.

In other words, getting promoted doesn't actually make a club any money because the rise in income will be more than matched by the rise in expenses of playing in the new division.


Penalties are not, and never have been, a deterrent. You only have to look at non-league football, where punishments are much more severe, to see it just doesn't work. Far too many chairman "chase the dream" either with the small fortune they've made, or by not paying the bills and hoping for some windfall.

You need to put regulation in place to prevent clubs getting into trouble in the first place. After all, it's the endemic overspending that forces other clubs to overspend even if they don't want to, or be left at a competitive disadvantage.

[Uke]

Plymouth Argyll fans not interested in investing in own club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21119453?

[SPARTA]

Birmingham have a fire sale. Marlon King somehow on an extraordinary 18k a week has been told he can leave on a free. Zigic wont budge and is sucking up 55k a week. Chris Burke is also available, as is Curtis Davies for a knock-down £1.5m. He's another on stupid wages for that level - £27k a week.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

Birmingham have a fire sale. Marlon King somehow on an extraordinary 18k a week has been told he can leave on a free. Zigic wont budge and is sucking up 55k a week. Chris Burke is also available, as is Curtis Davies for a knock-down £1.5m. He's another on stupid wages for that level - £27k a week.

Ouchie

[Jackson Corner]

Swindon in trouble again?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21047858

Here we go again. This is a club that is rotten to the core, it's entire history is one of illigal payments, administration
dodgy dealings. They should be wound up, shut down, the ground flattened and the land used as a site to give a permenant home the traveling community.

[reading_fan]

Brighton's view on it - they've lost £8m in the last set of accounts and expect to lose the same this year...

Brighton & Hove Albion: Paul Barber issues financial warning
Brighton & Hove Albion chief executive Paul Barber says the club will have to work hard to comply with new Financial Fair Play rulings which are being introduced to Championship clubs.

The Seagulls have confirmed that last year they operated at a loss of around £8 million and expect to announce a similar figure this year.

"Like a lot of Championship club, we are losing millions of pounds every year," Barber told BBC Sussex.

"In the past, clubs which have lost money have been able to run their businesses like that and get away with it. Going forward, that won't be the case."

Next season, sides in the second tier making a loss of more than £8 million will be subject to sanctions, which will take effect in 2014-15.

The figure of acceptable loss will decrease to £5 million from the 2015-16 season.

And Barber, who was appointed Albion's chief executive last summer, has warned that the club will be fined if they fail to adhere to the rules.

"The key thing with Financial Fair Play is that clubs are required to break even within a certain time period," Barber said.

"There will be sanctions imposed if people don't make the break-even point within the time specified by the League.

"The sanctions are really severe. They could be transfer embargoes and perhaps more emotively clubs could be fined and the fine distributed among your competitors.

"Can you imagine a situation where we don't comply with the rules and we fund Crystal Palace's promotion push?

"We are taking this seriously and want to make fans aware of the implications if we don't comply with the rules."

Brighton fans have seen the club transformed since moving to the Amex Stadium in summer 2011, following 14 years without a permanent home.

The Seagulls currently have the highest average attendance in the Championship, at 25,579, and will soon increase the capacity to 30,000.

And Barber says the side's fans will need to continue supporting the team financially while he continues his aim of increasing the club's commercial revenues.

"We have to stand on our own two feet and manage the club more efficiently," he said.

"In other words reduce our costs where we can and build our revenues.

"That means obviously working hard to get our fans to support us as much as possible; with ticket buying, merchandise buying, food and drink purchasing at the stadium and bringing other events to the stadium.

"We need to find new fans to build the club for the future because that is critical given where this club has come from, what it has been through and how hard people have worked, particularly the fans, to get us to where we are.

"We don't want to slip backwards again. We can't allow that to happen.

"The supporters are the lifeblood of any football club and we need their help.

"We need to build and build and build, and keep producing a great experience at the Amex.

"Although it is pretty full every week, it is not sold out every week.

"We have got a fantastic foundation here and all of the ingredients for a good football club. We've still got a lot of work to do."

“We have to stand on our own two feet and manage the club more efficiently. The supporters are the lifeblood of any football club and we need their help”

Alongside the move to the Amex came an increase in ticket prices - adult fans are charged between £28 and £39 for home matches, compared to between £24 and £27.50 for the final season at Withdean Stadium, when the club were in League One.

However the Amex is a different world compared to Withdean, which was always supposed to be a temporary home, with their new ground having a roof and padded seats.

Tickets do include the cost of travel to and from the stadium and fans can choose to pay for season tickets on a monthly basis via direct debit.

Brighton fan Stefan Swift, the co-editor of fanzine The Seagull Love Review, says that such increases are understandable given the club's recent disclosure of a financial loss.

"Before the £8 million loss was announced we were a bit in the dark as to the financial situation of the club," Swift told BBC Sport.

"There are still many questions.

"We don't know whether that accounts for certain elements, such as the improvements to the stadium which are being undertaken already.

"The stark reality of being a football club chasing a place in the top flight is that prices will inevitably have to go up.

"I think the general consensus is that as the stadium is so good and the fans have never had it this good, the unintended consequence is that we have to pay a bit more."

But Paul Samrah, an Albion fan who was involved heavily in the club's fight for a new home, says the club must be wary of walking a financial tightrope with their supporters.

"The ordinary fan spends money on season tickets, a programme, a pie and a pint and a bit of merchandise," Samrah told BBC Sussex.

"That is where they cap themselves.

"It's a catch-22 situation for all clubs.

"We've got a significant number of season-ticket holders and clearly sponsorship is going to be a major contributor to finance.

"Even without the Financial Fair Play rules, I don't think Tony Bloom as chairman and benefactor, will want to continually support losses. We always knew it would be a financial balancing act.

"The tricky bit is not disappointing the thousands of loyal supporters by trying to increase season ticket prices, merchandise and programmes to an unrealistic figure.

"Don't take them for granted."

Meanwhile Barber says that Albion chairman Tony Bloom, who largely bankrolled Albion's move to the Amex Stadium and has backed Seagulls boss Gus Poyet in the transfer market, will only be able to back the club to a certain extent.

"That won't be allowed under Financial Fair Play.

"Tony has been incredibly generous and has done a fantastic job in moving the club on to another level.

"Going forward, even if he wanted to support the club in terms of losses, he won't be allowed to.

"It's even more reason for us to make sure we run our business as effectively as we can."

Despite the challenges which Financial Fair Play poses, Barber feels the move to impose the scheme is for the good of the game.

"There is no doubt football clubs being asked to operate like normal businesses is not a bad thing," Barber said.

"It will certainly take a lot more discipline and time for those rules to bed in to make sure there are no loopholes.

"The Football League have worked very hard to put in place a set of rules which are fair to everyone.

"It has to be a good thing if football clubs end up being healthier and run better."

[cmonurz]

I'd like to see automatic relegation, at the end of current season should they get there, not a points deduction, for anyone going into administration. It's often a by-product of the current rules anyway, but I'd like to see it set in stone.

And a fine for breaking fair play rules? That just encourages financial risk, doesn't it?

[Ian Royal]

I'd like to see automatic relegation, at the end of current season should they get there, not a points deduction, for anyone going into administration. It's often a by-product of the current rules anyway, but I'd like to see it set in stone.

And a fine for breaking fair play rules? That just encourages financial risk, doesn't it?

Presumably the FA withhold payments and distribute that elsewhere. And combined with transfer embargos it should be ok. I mean lets face it, most teams would have spent more than any fine in a transfer window anyway.

[Mr Optimist]

Swindon in trouble again?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21047858

Here we go again. This is a club that is rotten to the core, it's entire history is one of illigal payments, administration
dodgy dealings. They should be wound up, shut down, the ground flattened and the land used as a site to give a permenant home the traveling community.

Why should hard working members of the travelling community live on ground tainted by cheating immoral bumpkins.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I'd like to see automatic relegation, at the end of current season should they get there, not a points deduction, for anyone going into administration. It's often a by-product of the current rules anyway, but I'd like to see it set in stone.

And a fine for breaking fair play rules? That just encourages financial risk, doesn't it?

Presumably the FA withhold payments and distribute that elsewhere. And combined with transfer embargos it should be ok. I mean lets face it, most teams would have spent more than any fine in a transfer window anyway.

Using administration as the trigger for punishment still means that those who cheat and are successful get away with it, and those who fail at it are the ones punished, with a punishment that hurts the club (which may have new owners by now) even more.

Let me give you the perfect example ... in 2005 West Ham were massively over-spending in order to try and get back to the PL, and it got them to the play-off final. They beat Preston in that and went up, and the over-spending had worked, they didn't need to go into administration and there was no penalty. If they'd lost to Preston, they would have almost certainly gone into administration the very next day, and been punished by a 10 point penalty. But what they did was no different to what Portsmouth or Bradford did - except it worked!

Punishing an insolvency event means you punish the cheats who don't prosper - the cheats who do prosper get away with it scot free.

BTW - the DCMS Committee into Football Governance report is issued at midnight tonight - it contains some very, very interesting stuff.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

BTW - the DCMS Committee into Football Governance report is issued at midnight tonight - it contains some very, very interesting stuff.

Most - if not all - of which will be ignored or brushed under the carpet, no doubt.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

BTW - the DCMS Committee into Football Governance report is issued at midnight tonight - it contains some very, very interesting stuff.

Most - if not all - of which will be ignored or brushed under the carpet, no doubt.

I don't think so - and I certainly hope not. They had the chance to do this by accepting the FA's initial response last year and didn't, and the tone of this latest report - and the ultimatum they give the FA - suggests that they are taking this properly seriously.