Embargos, HMRC Payment defaults, non payment of wages, the usual under Dai Wrongge

[Stranded]

Tbh, the change that is desperately needed, which most fans probably agree with, would be bitterly opposed by the industry. We should have owners making forecasts and depositing capital to cover expected losses, with an allowance for uncertainty so that one key injury doesn't tip a club over the edge (see Everton's argument about player Y; don't sail so close to the wind). Some owners would agree, but definitely not the majority needed to pass it.

What is needed is a way to force clubs to live within their means (and FFP is an imperfect step in this direction), so that they should be able to manage ordinary fluctuations in revenue (with perhaps some kind of safety net to preserve clubs that unexpectedly fall into hardship whilst they work their way back out of it).

It would mean clubs not relying heavily on rich owners pumping in huge amounts of cash (thus putting pressure on everybody else to compete at that level of expenditure), not mortgaging anticipated future revenues to pay for today's excesses, not offering unsustainable contracts, and (hopefully) investing in training facilities to produce a revenue stream.

But it also requires clubs to accept that they can't just take a perceived (if by no means guaranteed) shortcut to shoot up the leagues by pumping money. Ideally, you'd like to see the money within the game being shared better across all the levels, to ensure the strength of the entire league, rather than being mostly sequestered in the hands of a few rich clubs (and extracted by shareholders).

Which is why we can't just rely on clubs to do this.

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

[rabidbee]

But does an owner need to bank enough money to cover the length of all the contracts offered to players? What happens if an owner agrees to bankroll everything, then gets hit by some kind of industrial crisis which sees their income collapse? Or the owner dies and their heirs just want to take their cash? Or the owner is a foreign plutocrat who is placed on a FCO sanctions list prohibiting them from fulfilling their obligations to the club? IF clubs can't rely any longer on player sales, that's just a stronger argument for a far wider redistribution of the £bns circulating in the game already, such as tv money.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Tbh, the change that is desperately needed, which most fans probably agree with, would be bitterly opposed by the industry. We should have owners making forecasts and depositing capital to cover expected losses, with an allowance for uncertainty so that one key injury doesn't tip a club over the edge (see Everton's argument about player Y; don't sail so close to the wind). Some owners would agree, but definitely not the majority needed to pass it.

What is needed is a way to force clubs to live within their means (and FFP is an imperfect step in this direction), so that they should be able to manage ordinary fluctuations in revenue (with perhaps some kind of safety net to preserve clubs that unexpectedly fall into hardship whilst they work their way back out of it).

It would mean clubs not relying heavily on rich owners pumping in huge amounts of cash (thus putting pressure on everybody else to compete at that level of expenditure), not mortgaging anticipated future revenues to pay for today's excesses, not offering unsustainable contracts, and (hopefully) investing in training facilities to produce a revenue stream.

But it also requires clubs to accept that they can't just take a perceived (if by no means guaranteed) shortcut to shoot up the leagues by pumping money. Ideally, you'd like to see the money within the game being shared better across all the levels, to ensure the strength of the entire league, rather than being mostly sequestered in the hands of a few rich clubs (and extracted by shareholders).

Which is why we can't just rely on clubs to do this.

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

It's not just debt though, it's cashflow forecasts and manageable wages. You can have a great owner who is putting in finance, but if their circumstances change the club needs to be self sufficient. If you look back to SJM, he lost a lot of wealth in the financial crash but the club could handle it when he could no longer support us. We had to sell our best talent which is ultimately why the team promoted in 2012 couldn't compete like in 2006. But we were sustainable.

Compare that to when AZ went AWOL, he had tied us into contracts on Pogrebnyak, Guthrie, Drenthe and Williams which crippled us. And Dai has done the same.

I get the overall point of equity instead of debt, but having low debt today isn't enough if you're locked into expensive 4 year contracts.

[WestYorksRoyal]

But does an owner need to bank enough money to cover the length of all the contracts offered to players? What happens if an owner agrees to bankroll everything, then gets hit by some kind of industrial crisis which sees their income collapse? Or the owner dies and their heirs just want to take their cash?

That actually happened in to Gretna in Scotland. They had a stereotyped Scottish owner who lived on a diet of fried food and Irn Bru. They lived the dream, went from non league to top flight, reached a cup final. He died from heart disease, his family stopped funding the club. They went bankrupt and now there is a phoenix back in non league.

[Needle]

I've seen some talk of a hardship fund and a gofundme being set upon twitter. That's very well intentioned but I can't see it getting much support with people having no idea what will happen to the funds, will they get reimbursed etc. Also, assuming the staff get paid on tuesday, it's too late to have any effect this month.

If it is likely this issue will repeat in December, I think it would be great if STAR could organise a hardship fund with clear guidance as to what the funds will be used for and whether there will be loans or gifts and would there be reimbursement if not required. Just some guidelines. I don't know the sort of funds required to meet the non playing staff bill for a month but I can't imagine it's that huge. It would be great if, say, 1,000 people chipped an average of £100 each to raise £100,000 which staff can call on temporarily as required. Even better if the players were invited to chip in, plus a starter from SCL.

Great PR for the club and demonstrating it's community spirit, utter disgrace for Dai who will be seen in the media as a multi millionaire shafting ordinary staff who have had to be bailed out by other ordinary fans.

I have no idea about an legalities regarding this but I, and I'm sure many others, would be happy to contribute and trust the good intentions of STAR to do what's best depending on the circumstances

[Royal_jimmy]

Tbh, the change that is desperately needed, which most fans probably agree with, would be bitterly opposed by the industry. We should have owners making forecasts and depositing capital to cover expected losses, with an allowance for uncertainty so that one key injury doesn't tip a club over the edge (see Everton's argument about player Y; don't sail so close to the wind). Some owners would agree, but definitely not the majority needed to pass it.

What is needed is a way to force clubs to live within their means (and FFP is an imperfect step in this direction), so that they should be able to manage ordinary fluctuations in revenue (with perhaps some kind of safety net to preserve clubs that unexpectedly fall into hardship whilst they work their way back out of it).

It would mean clubs not relying heavily on rich owners pumping in huge amounts of cash (thus putting pressure on everybody else to compete at that level of expenditure), not mortgaging anticipated future revenues to pay for today's excesses, not offering unsustainable contracts, and (hopefully) investing in training facilities to produce a revenue stream.

But it also requires clubs to accept that they can't just take a perceived (if by no means guaranteed) shortcut to shoot up the leagues by pumping money. Ideally, you'd like to see the money within the game being shared better across all the levels, to ensure the strength of the entire league, rather than being mostly sequestered in the hands of a few rich clubs (and extracted by shareholders).

Which is why we can't just rely on clubs to do this.

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

[Royal_jimmy]

The EFL certainly owe us an apology for approving this scumbag's takeover of us when the PL failed him in their directors test.

You're an idiot.

and I go week in week out so I'm entitled to voice my opinion, and not just an armchair fan who only goes every so often.

[Hendo]

The EFL certainly owe us an apology for approving this scumbag's takeover of us when the PL failed him in their directors test.

You're an idiot.

and I go week in week out so I'm entitled to voice my opinion, and not just an armchair fan who only goes every so often.

Of course you're allowed to voice you're opinion.

Just as everyone else is allowed to call you out when you're opinion is a shit/incorrect one.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

What is needed is a way to force clubs to live within their means (and FFP is an imperfect step in this direction), so that they should be able to manage ordinary fluctuations in revenue (with perhaps some kind of safety net to preserve clubs that unexpectedly fall into hardship whilst they work their way back out of it).

It would mean clubs not relying heavily on rich owners pumping in huge amounts of cash (thus putting pressure on everybody else to compete at that level of expenditure), not mortgaging anticipated future revenues to pay for today's excesses, not offering unsustainable contracts, and (hopefully) investing in training facilities to produce a revenue stream.

But it also requires clubs to accept that they can't just take a perceived (if by no means guaranteed) shortcut to shoot up the leagues by pumping money. Ideally, you'd like to see the money within the game being shared better across all the levels, to ensure the strength of the entire league, rather than being mostly sequestered in the hands of a few rich clubs (and extracted by shareholders).

Which is why we can't just rely on clubs to do this.

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

Well I don't know about the part about Dai not being bothered about what he's lost, he's certainly lost a fair bit with us and will do so if/when a sale is completed through whatever means. At her peak, his sister (Dai Xiu Li) had a net worth around £700m before passing on her shares of the company as a "free gift" to Dai, he's invested north of £200m in ourselves, I'd suspect he's lost a significant amount of what he's worth.

[Snowflake Royal]

You're an idiot.

and I go week in week out so I'm entitled to voice my opinion, and not just an armchair fan who only goes every so often.

Of course you're allowed to voice you're opinion.

Just as everyone else is allowed to call you out when you're opinion is a shit/incorrect one.

They never get it, do they.

Waaah free speech. Yeah mate, that's what I'm exercising.

[Hendo]

and I go week in week out so I'm entitled to voice my opinion, and not just an armchair fan who only goes every so often.

Of course you're allowed to voice you're opinion.

Just as everyone else is allowed to call you out when you're opinion is a shit/incorrect one.

They never get it, do they.

Waaah free speech. Yeah mate, that's what I'm exercising.

The one for me is when people keep going on about how did the EFL allow him to buy us when 2 clubs he has owned have gone bust?

Yeah, that happened after he bought us.

bUt WhErE iS tHe EFL aPoLoGy!

[From Despair To Where?]

But does an owner need to bank enough money to cover the length of all the contracts offered to players? What happens if an owner agrees to bankroll everything, then gets hit by some kind of industrial crisis which sees their income collapse? Or the owner dies and their heirs just want to take their cash?

That actually happened in to Gretna in Scotland. They had a stereotyped Scottish owner who lived on a diet of fried food and Irn Bru. They lived the dream, went from non league to top flight, reached a cup final. He died from heart disease, his family stopped funding the club. They went bankrupt and now there is a phoenix back in non league.

Correct, except he was English, smoking was his downfall, not food and it wasn't his family who stopped funding the club but on his death, it was discovered that he didn't have any money, owed millions to various people unconnected to football (including a £½m overdraft) and his estate was declared bankrupt.

[stealthpapes]

:idea:

But does an owner need to bank enough money to cover the length of all the contracts offered to players? What happens if an owner agrees to bankroll everything, then gets hit by some kind of industrial crisis which sees their income collapse? Or the owner dies and their heirs just want to take their cash?

That actually happened in to Gretna in Scotland. They had a stereotyped Scottish owner who lived on a diet of fried food and Irn Bru. They lived the dream, went from non league to top flight, reached a cup final. He died from heart disease, his family stopped funding the club. They went bankrupt and now there is a phoenix back in non league.

Correct, except he was English, smoking was his downfall, not food and it wasn't his family who stopped funding the club but on his death, it was discovered that he didn't have any money, owed millions to various people unconnected to football (including a £½m overdraft) and his estate was declared bankrupt.

The one I'd possibly use would be the lad who used to own Leyton Orient.

https://theblizzard.co.uk/tag/leyton-orient/

[From Despair To Where?]

Yeah, his whole fortune was wiped out by the Rwandan genocide.

I referenced him on a post in GF a few weeks ago.

I seem to remember at the time, Mileson was desperate to sell or attract additional investment but he'd created a financial commitment so utterly unsustainable that no-one in their right mind would give it a second look

[Snowflake Royal]

What is needed is a way to force clubs to live within their means (and FFP is an imperfect step in this direction), so that they should be able to manage ordinary fluctuations in revenue (with perhaps some kind of safety net to preserve clubs that unexpectedly fall into hardship whilst they work their way back out of it).

It would mean clubs not relying heavily on rich owners pumping in huge amounts of cash (thus putting pressure on everybody else to compete at that level of expenditure), not mortgaging anticipated future revenues to pay for today's excesses, not offering unsustainable contracts, and (hopefully) investing in training facilities to produce a revenue stream.

But it also requires clubs to accept that they can't just take a perceived (if by no means guaranteed) shortcut to shoot up the leagues by pumping money. Ideally, you'd like to see the money within the game being shared better across all the levels, to ensure the strength of the entire league, rather than being mostly sequestered in the hands of a few rich clubs (and extracted by shareholders).

Which is why we can't just rely on clubs to do this.

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

He's sunk about £200m into us. And he 'only' had about £950 to start with. Plus he's just been through two years of lockdown for.his retail businesses in China and had part of his wealth frozen.

He's still minted, but he's got to have lost something like a 5th to a 3rd of his wealth in the last 6 yeara.

[The Royal Forester]

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

He's sunk about £200m into us. And he 'only' had about £950 to start with. Plus he's just been through two years of lockdown for.his retail businesses in China and had part of his wealth frozen.

He's still minted, but he's got to have lost something like a 5th to a 3rd of his wealth in the last 6 yeara.

That takes some doing, investing £200m from his "wealth" of £950. No wonder he can't pay the staff wages!

[Ascotexgunner]

There needs to be a mechanism that allows owners to pump in money but not be allowed to load the club with debt - if a new owner wants to give a club say 100m, they should be able to - what they shouldn't be able to do is load that on as debt. Beyond that the wages to turnover rules seen in L1 and L2 should be mandatory at all levels, with a top level of 75% - so if you want to pay more, the club needs to earn more - either by sales or again an owner happy to pump in money they will never see again.

Of course, the problem with selling players is that less and less clubs actually want to or can afford to pay a fee, so the market for selling is getting smaller and smaller.

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

He's sunk about £200m into us. And he 'only' had about £950 to start with. Plus he's just been through two years of lockdown for.his retail businesses in China and had part of his wealth frozen.

He's still minted, but he's got to have lost something like a 5th to a 3rd of his wealth in the last 6 yeara.

That statement should have ended "He's sunk 200m into us badly". Bad buys, disastrous managerial appointments, stupid wages, ridiculous transfers.....it's not a case of sinking money into us, it's that he pissed his fortune away due to bad decision making and being totally out of his depth as an owner.

[PieEater]

100% agree. This is exactly the problem. Dai has thrown money at us and expected to recoup it with promotion to the premier league which we didn't achieve. Now he has lost interest now we're in league one. The man is an avid gambler. The few bob he's lost won't matter lots to him, but we're as fans are the ones who have suffered.

He's sunk about £200m into us. And he 'only' had about £950 to start with. Plus he's just been through two years of lockdown for.his retail businesses in China and had part of his wealth frozen.

He's still minted, but he's got to have lost something like a 5th to a 3rd of his wealth in the last 6 yeara.

That takes some doing, investing £200m from his "wealth" of £950. No wonder he can't pay the staff wages!

Pedant alert - someone missed an "m" and some uttercunt picked it up

[Reading4eva]

Surely the EFL should have the ability to take the club off the oxf*rd crooks hands. Then the EFL and Nigel Howe would be able to thrash out what's best for the club not this man's back pocket.

He has damaged the club beyond belief. The players are working their backsides off and Dai Wrongge just messes it up.

Sooner he is out the better

[Pepe the Horseman]

Surely the EFL should have the ability to take the club off the oxf*rd crooks hands. Then the EFL and Nigel Howe would be able to thrash out what's best for the club not this man's back pocket.

He has damaged the club beyond belief. The players are working their backsides off and Dai Wrongge just messes it up.

Sooner he is out the better

Thought you supported Bournemouth m8.