This 'club being tight' nonsense.


Status
Not open for further replies.
Going as far back as Waghorn, I believe the club see the academy as some sort of moneymaking feeder to the lower leagues now rather than towards the first team.
 
Going as far back as Waghorn, I believe the club see the academy as some sort of moneymaking feeder to the lower leagues now rather than towards the first team.

I don't think we're proactive enough at getting the young lads good loan moves, either. Although Pickford to Preston seems a good one. If we're not going to play Watmore why the bollocks is he not at a Championship club playing every week?
 
I don't think we're proactive enough at getting the young lads good loan moves, either. Although Pickford to Preston seems a good one. If we're not going to play Watmore why the bollocks is he not at a Championship club playing every week?

Yep, could be at say Leeds, an hour n a half down the road, terrorising defences and playing in premiership style atmospheres/gates.
 
I don't think we're proactive enough at getting the young lads good loan moves, either. Although Pickford to Preston seems a good one. If we're not going to play Watmore why the bollocks is he not at a Championship club playing every week?
He's currently carrying an injury, I also expect Dick is keeping him around till we know who we bring in over the next few weeks.
 
A lot of fans are sick after years of turgid football and the reaction to getting spanked by Leicester is predictable if nothing else. We all want to be better and to have better players but the accusations made by so many people that the club, and Short, are being tight are miles wide of the mark. The facts and figures show that. Lots of other clubs are in a much better situation that we are.

From the latest accounts available I've pulled a few stats out for comparison with clubs in and around us.

Let's start and benchmark with Sunderland.
Turnover - £104.4m
Wages - £69.5m
Wages to turnover - 67%
Loss in last accounting period - £17.1m
Net debt - £92.9m

This summer we have sold Wickham for ~£9m and purchased Lens, Kaboul, Coates, Matthews & Vergini. M'Vila has joined on loan and we have Alvarez hanging over us as well. Should Alvarez go through that's a net of ~£16m so far.

Now West Ham.
Turnover - £114.9m. £10.5m more than SAFC.
Wages - £63.9m. £5.6m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 56%. 11% less than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £10.3m. £27.4m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £73.5m. £19.4m less than SAFC.

Next summer they also move into the Olympic Stadium for an annual rent of a Curly Wurly and a box of TicTacs.

West Brom
Turnover - £86.8m. £17.6m less than SAFC.
Wages - £65.5m. £4m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 75%. 8% more than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £10.8m. £27.9m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £4.2m. £88.7m less than SAFC.

Quite an interesting one here as they have a smaller turnover but still manage to turn a profit and their net debt is a whopping £88.7 less than ours. They have invested pretty heavily this summer so far but that is likely to be offset when/if Berahino leaves.

Swansea
Turnover - £98.7m. £5.7m less than SAFC
Wages - £63.2m. £6.3m less than SAFC
Wages to turnover - 64%. 3% less than SAFC
Profit in last accounting period - £1.7m. £18.8m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - Is it actually PLUS £0.5m. £93.4m better off than SAFC.

Turnover, wages and WtT ratio are all very similar to SAFC but they have (at the end of the accounting period) no debt and turned a profit. Added to this they'll have the Bony transfer fee sloshing around.

Stoke
Turnover - £98.3m. £6.1m less than SAFC.
Wages - £60.6m. £8.9m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 62%. 5% less than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £3.8m. £20.9m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £37.8m. £55.1m less than SAFC.

Again, some similar stats for turnover, wages and WtT ratio but they turned a profit and net debt is a lot lower than ours. They've also sold Begovic and N'Zonzi this summer already so that can account for a lot of their investment.

Southampton
Turnover - £106.1m. £1.7m more than SAFC.
Wages - £63.0m. £6.5m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 59%. 8% less than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £33.4m. £50.5m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £25.1m. £67.8m less than SAFC.

Having sold a lot of players for huge money Southampton turned a big profit and their net debt is a lot, lot less than ours. They've sold Clyne and Schneiderlin in this window as well. Clearly far better placed to invest than we are.

Newcastle
Turnover - £129.7m. £25.3m more than SAFC.
Wages - £78.3m. £8.8m more than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 60%. 7% less than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £18.7m. £35.8m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £94.9m. £2m more than SAFC.

Newcastle are a curious one. They have a pretty high turnover compared to competitors but have a lower WtT ratio and turned a pretty big profit last time. Their accounts show £34.1m in cash as well but net debt is slightly higher than ours. From the outside it looks like Ashley is pushing the boat out.

Crystal Palace
Turnover - £90.4m. £14m less than SAFC.
Wages - £45.8m. £23.7m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 51%. 16% less than SAFC.
Profit in last accounting period - £17.9m. £35m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - It is actually PLUS £16.5m. £109.4m better off than SAFC.

Loads of cash reverses, in the red, loads of room on the wage bill. Miles better off to invest than SAFC.

Aston Villa
Turnover - £116.9m. £12.5m more than SAFC.
Wages - £69.3m. £0.2m less than SAFC.
Wages to turnover - 59%. 8% less than the SAFC.
Loss in last accounting period - £3.9m. £13.2m swing from SAFC.
Net debt - £102.0m. £9.1m more than SAFC.

Villa's finances are pretty similar to ours. Massive net debt but they have sold Benteke and Delph this summer which has covered nearly all of their spending.

So, as you can see if you're still reading, we are in a crap position compared to pretty much all of those sides we should be competing with. Years of signing dross and not being to sell many players on has left us a bit stuck now. Hopefully we can pull something out of the bag but it's certainly not a case of us being tight. Our circumstances are just not great. I didn't realise our comparisons were quite so unfavourable to be honest.
I totally agree with your post but that only shows that the real problem lays elsewhere. The top management of the club have brought this mess on with their appointments. Now thats where the real problem is.
 
I totally agree with your post but that only shows that the real problem lays elsewhere. The top management of the club have brought this mess on with their appointments. Now thats where the real problem is.

I was simply pointing out that it isn't a case of being tight or simply refusing to spend.
 
The first club outside the top six that fucks off FFP will get points deducted. We're like a dog shitting in the background of the PLs expensive promotional video, they'd love to batter us for a violation and get rid.

Absolutely wrong.

There are no penalties for breaking FFP. The entire league has yet to sit down and agree any. That's a fact and there's no arguing this.


This season has started and there cannot be any retrospective penalties. They obviously won't agree anything for next season because every club will want to spend the shed load of money we're all going to get.

I'll say it again, just to be absolutely clear.

THERE ARE NO PENALTIES FOR BREAKING FFP
 
I was simply pointing out that it isn't a case of being tight or simply refusing to spend.
Yes quite clear on that scale. However the common denominator in all of this is the rank amaturism with ALL of the top management at the club, including Ellis Short. Until an appointment of a knowledgeable football person is in place and not someone who is passing time until a position at the FA becomes available, then thing will continue as they are or worse. You can blame managers, players, coaching staff, DoF's, wages, sponsorship but the buck firmly lays at Ellis Short and Margaret Byrnes door.
 
Absolutely wrong.

There are no penalties for breaking FFP. The entire league has yet to sit down and agree any. That's a fact and there's no arguing this.


This season has started and there cannot be any retrospective penalties. They obviously won't agree anything for next season because every club will want to spend the shed load of money we're all going to get.

I'll say it again, just to be absolutely clear.

THERE ARE NO PENALTIES FOR BREAKING FFP

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29361839

What are the possible sanctions for clubs in breach of FFP?
"The atomic bomb is a ban from European competition," said Jean-Luc Dehaene, the first chairman and chief investigator of CFCB, back in 2011 (Dehaene died in May 2014).

The CFCB's investigatory chamber can offer clubs settlement agreements, with potential punishments including warnings, fines, withholding prize money, transfer bans, points deductions, a ban on registration of new players and a restriction on the number of players who can be registered for Uefa competitions.

Is there just one form of FFP?
No. The Premier League has brought in its own form of financial regulation which is not as stringent as Uefa's FFP.

Clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons (as with FFP, investment in infrastructure and youth development is exempt).

Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29361839

What are the possible sanctions for clubs in breach of FFP?
"The atomic bomb is a ban from European competition," said Jean-Luc Dehaene, the first chairman and chief investigator of CFCB, back in 2011 (Dehaene died in May 2014).

The CFCB's investigatory chamber can offer clubs settlement agreements, with potential punishments including warnings, fines, withholding prize money, transfer bans, points deductions, a ban on registration of new players and a restriction on the number of players who can be registered for Uefa competitions.

Is there just one form of FFP?
No. The Premier League has brought in its own form of financial regulation which is not as stringent as Uefa's FFP.

Clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons (as with FFP, investment in infrastructure and youth development is exempt).

Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction.

I read about the points deduction but is it set in stone? All seems to be as clear as mud.
 
I read about the points deduction but is it set in stone? All seems to be as clear as mud.
Nope not a single things been actually set in stone..........the wage bill penalties were supposed to start from last December but nothings been done...

Only the FFP penalties below the PL have been set in stone and applied although even then there looks to be huge anomalies in them and a back track on QPRS fine.................
 
Nope not a single things been actually set in stone..........the wage bill penalties were supposed to start from last December but nothings been done...

Only the FFP penalties below the PL have been set in stone and applied although even then there looks to be huge anomalies in them and a back track on QPRS fine.................

Will it ever come to fruition then?
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29361839

What are the possible sanctions for clubs in breach of FFP?
"The atomic bomb is a ban from European competition," said Jean-Luc Dehaene, the first chairman and chief investigator of CFCB, back in 2011 (Dehaene died in May 2014).

The CFCB's investigatory chamber can offer clubs settlement agreements, with potential punishments including warnings, fines, withholding prize money, transfer bans, points deductions, a ban on registration of new players and a restriction on the number of players who can be registered for Uefa competitions.

Is there just one form of FFP?
No. The Premier League has brought in its own form of financial regulation which is not as stringent as Uefa's FFP.

Clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons (as with FFP, investment in infrastructure and youth development is exempt).

Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction.


Please try to understand this. I'm a little tired of having to explain this repeatedly to people.

We are not going to qualify for Europe so let's just ignore that for the minute shall we. I was also referring to a post the Exile made about points deduction in the Premier League, which you rightly recognise is completely different....so on to that one.

As you quite clearly state in the quote..... the key word is could. As things stand THERE ARE NO PENALTIES. The clubs were supposed to sit down last year and agree what exactly would be those 'severe penalties' and what 'points deductions' would apply for breaking FFP by a little and a lot... a sliding scale of points deduction depending on the offence and where to draw the line for them.

I want to be absolutely clear about this because you and a lot of others continue to get this wrong.

To date they have not done this. Consequently there are actually no penalties. Nor are they going to sit down anytime soon and decide it? Highly unlikely with the big uplift in TV money coming at the end of this season. They certainly have not done anything about this season. When/If they do they will not be able to apply them retrospectively.

Do you understand that?

What are we left with?

This - There are no penalties for breaking Premier League FFP. Once again.... THIS IS A FACT.
 
Will it ever come to fruition then?
In its proposed form I very much doubt it..........next year the TV money goes ballistic but the wage bill restrictions means players cant have most of it............

I cant see that at all as we know the script for this................
 
Please try to understand this. I'm a little tired of having to explain this repeatedly to people.

We are not going to qualify for Europe so let's just ignore that for the minute shall we. I was also referring to a post the Exile made about points deduction in the Premier League, which you rightly recognise is completely different....so on to that one.

As you quite clearly state in the quote..... the key word is could. As things stand THERE ARE NO PENALTIES. The clubs were supposed to sit down last year and agree what exactly would be those 'severe penalties' and what 'points deductions' would apply for breaking FFP by a little and a lot... a sliding scale of points deduction depending on the offence and where to draw the line for them.

I want to be absolutely clear about this because you and a lot of others continue to get this wrong.

To date they have not done this. Consequently there are actually no penalties. Nor are they going to sit down anytime soon and decide it. When/If they do they will not be able to apply them retrospectively.

Do you understand that?

What are we left with?

This - There are no penalties for breaking Premier League FFP. Once again.... THIS IS A FACT.

Can you be a bit more to the point? Finding it a bit difficult to read between the lines here.
 
For me it's not so much about the money but the way we spend it..you can give any numpty millions to spend..the trick is to get the right people in to spend it

And when you consider Riyad Mahrez who destroyed us at Leicester, cost them £400,000 about a year ago - makes you want to weep doesn't it?
 
One of the main reasons out wage level is high is the large amount of other employees we have such as the academy and the Foundation

Most of which can be excluded from FFP.

I think you will find it has cost him his own money not the club's. He has to subsidise the debt. He has made mistakes (giving de Fanti free reign etc). However if you want to continue thinking he is happily spunking away his own fortune, I don't think it's my head that needs pulling from anyone's arse. Maybe trying pulling yours from your own.

Think where we could've been if he hadn't come along, after quinn admitted Drumaville were all out of cash.

It's often overlooked, but much of the mess we have comes from the large overspend by Drumaville. Of course Short has made mistakes, but God knows where we would be if he hidden come onboard
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top