Sunderland's running costs are 'scary' and must be reduced, says Stewart Donald


Status
Not open for further replies.
Where’s your evidence that it wasn’t

The offer of a free transfer in January was suggestive of the club still thinking they could get his full wages off the books, which wasn’t realistic in the real world. I’m sure they wanted rid of him last summer but making him available for transfer isn’t the same thing.
 
Rodwell, Kone, cattermole, Ndong, dillydodgy, Khazri...6 players our club now can't afford or need...
 
Players wages are the biggest problem at the club However certain high earning players under contract are not going to walk away...
Maybe they are but that’s not what Donald is talking about is it, he’s talking about the running costs, the cost ofmaintaing the stadium, the ground staff, the ticket office, the club shop, stewarding, council rates, legal costs, electricity bill, water rates etc etc. Theylike player salaries have to be bought under control and reflect the fact that we are a league one club

I’m just pleased it’s not my headache
 
I think we need to be doing everything we can to keep that women’s team, even at a lower level. It’s important and once it’s gone it will be incredibly different to bring back. What kind of message would it send to young women and girls if we basically say ‘sorry, I know your team has been far more successful than the men’s side in recent years but we’re going to scrap that to benefit the men’s team’.
I’m probably in the minority but I havent got the slightest interest in it and if it saves £600k then I’d bladder it tomorrow
 
Last edited:
Maybe they are but that’s not what Donald is talking about is it, he’s talking about the running costs, the cost ofmaintaing the stadium, the ground staff, the ticket office, the club shop, stewarding, council rates, legal costs, electricity bill, water rates etc etc. Theylike player salaries have to be bought under control and reflect the fact that we are a league one club

I’m just pleased it’s not my headache
That might be right however getting rid of a groundsman on 18k is the tip of the iceberg
 
Interesting but as I pointed out they’re dwarfed by player wages....I doubt they could even cut as much as what they’d save losing Rodwell alone. The focus HAS to be on non contributing players.
The focus has to be on all areas of the club which are bloated
 
Yes they obviously were but the response when it came didn’t really factor in just how far the situation had deteriorated...offering him a free transfer halfway through the season when his stock was at an all time low and expecting another club to pay £70k/week for him was a real lack of realism by the club.

What should have happened was at the start of the last season offer him half of what he was due for the remaining two years of his contract and allowed him to retire from football as ultimately that’s been his aim for at least 18 months that I know of.
Why would he accept that though? Especially if he had a mind for doing what he did this season anyway.

I just think it’s not as easy to get rid as some people think. Especially without costing vast resources we don’t/didn’t have or could afford. I think the new owners are set to find that out with a lot of our players, as you’ve articulately already said on this thread. In Rodwell’s case it may be easier this year compared to last due to his salary drop.
 
The problem is that any costs which can easily be cut are absolutely dwarfed by ones we only have part control over.....ie player’s wages. In an ideal world we’d raise millions in fees and get the full wages off the books but as we saw last season they’re all tainted by the failure of their time here and unattractive propositions to better run clubs.

As an example there was an article about Ndong out yesterday saying there’s interest from 3 clubs in him....Cardiff, Lyon and an unamed club but apparently the fucker doesn’t want to return to France. We are going to be held to ransom by these fuckers and their agents all summer....it’s one thing saying we’ll be tough on them and their agents but ultimately they have signed contracts in their hands and can sit on them regardless of how it impacts us
Exactly I fear Donald will do his best to move these type players on, but he has no experience dealing with these spoilt millionaires
 
I think we need to be doing everything we can to keep that women’s team, even at a lower level. It’s important and once it’s gone it will be incredibly different to bring back. What kind of message would it send to young women and girls if we basically say ‘sorry, I know your team has been far more successful than the men’s side in recent years but we’re going to scrap that to benefit the men’s team’.

We are in desperate need of cost cutting, the club needs to stop losing/spending money that puts us into debt and the women's team contributes fuck all in terms of income so has to go.
 
Last edited:
I was hoping someone would enlighten me
You can also cherry pick any youths you want from academies that don't have cat 1. Something which Donald said we haven't been utilising, but definitely will be going forward, he used the word ruthless.
 
I think we need to be doing everything we can to keep that women’s team, even at a lower level. It’s important and once it’s gone it will be incredibly different to bring back. What kind of message would it send to young women and girls if we basically say ‘sorry, I know your team has been far more successful than the men’s side in recent years but we’re going to scrap that to benefit the men’s team’.
The men’s team generates all the club’s revenue. From a business perspective every decision should be about benefitting that.
 
That might be right however getting rid of a groundsman on 18k is the tip of the iceberg
Maybe but if we’ve got 10 groundsman and only need 9 one needs to and should go, it’s hard it’s tough but it’s good business practice, look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves as the adage goes

And I’m not saying that the “Rodwell” situations should not be addressed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top