Jump to content
IGNORED

A Reminder About Scmp And What It Means For City - Please Read

Loderingo

By Loderingo
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

Loderingo

Loderingo

Posted
Posted

This year like all other League 1 clubs City are subject to Salary Cost Management Protocol which means that our total wage budget is not allowed to exceed 60% of our revenue. We have to update the league on our compliance throughout the season and if we exceed the 60% limit we will be hit by a transfer embargo (as happened to Swindle last year)

Now in the medium term SCMP ought to help us as we are one of the best supported clubs in the division - if we can get 11k average attendance and Stevenage say get 3k then we might have 3 times as much revenue than them and can then spend 3x as much on the playing squad.

Unfortunately for this season SCMP has put us at a disadvantage. All the clubs in League 1 and League 2 were already on SCMP last season. Peterborough were not big spenders in the Champ so can adapt easily. Wolves would be screwed but are still getting Premier League parachute payments.

Our problem is that we are paying for the sins of the past where we were once supposed to have been spending us much as 150% of revenue on wages. Despite having a large number of players leave, O'Driscoll said before the season that 80% of our wage limit was already spent. Now since then Adomah and Davies left which has helped the situation a bit but unfortunately we still have likely high wage earners such as Elliott, Kilkenny and Fontaine. What sticks in the craw with the last 2 is that not only have their performances on the pitch been dreadful but with their high wages they have cost us the chance to buy some better players!

The club have made much of the new policy to recruit youth which I agree with but this hides the fact that being stuck with expensive deadwood we had very little choice! At the end of this season I expect Fontaine, Kilkenny, Elliott, Cunningham and maybe Baldock to leave and we will then be on a fairer footing for next season but until then we are disadvantaged.

LANSDOWN'S MILLIONS DON'T MATTER ANY MORE

I saw a thread last week asking Lansdown to get his checkbook out but he can't do this any more under the new rules. He could sell up to the King of Saudi and it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

We have had a poor start to the campaign against some tough teams and I hope we improve soon. What if we don't though? Let's say we are struggling down the bottom by mid-October. Under the old system Lansdown could hand the manager his P45. He could then get a new manager and give him say the 1.5 million from selling Adomah and Davies to buy 5 new players in January. Under the new system you can't do that. Any new manager would be stuck with the same players with maybe 1 or 2 inexpensive additions or loans in January at best.

UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM WHAT MATTERS IS REVENUE

1) - Bums on seats really matter now. Under the old system it might not seem to have mattered much whether the club was getting 11k or 12k attendances. Now it does. 1,000 extra tickets sold x 23 games x £20 a game on average = £460,000 revenue. 60% of that = £276,000 of wages = £5307 per week of wages. So that's a couple of extra players at this level. It's probably more than that with programmes, food etc

2) - Cups matter too. All clubs at this level budget on the assumption of going out at the first round of each cup so any progress is a bonus. Look at the JPT game for instance. We got 17,888 crowd at I think £15 per ticket = £268,320. Now split with Rovers this equals £134,160. 60% of that = £80496 = £1548 a week of wages. Of course on top of that again is programmes, food etc plus Sky money so that game would have been a nice little earner for us. I would go so far as to say that this game plus beating Palace to get Southampton in the next round of the League Cup has given us the money to go out and loan O'Connor and Shorey (getting rid of some of Fontaine's wages has now doubt helped too).

3) A new/refurbished stadium is more important than ever - Part of the reason we have lost so much in recent years is that compared to other clubs we have had less non-football revenue. Whether it is AG or AV, we desperately need to have improved facilities for conferences/concerts/corporate boxes etc if we are to financially compete in the future.

SUCCESS BREEDS SUCCESS AND FAILURE BREEDS FAILURE

Under the new system, there is less ability to turn a problem club around and it is easier for successful clubs to keep on doing well.

Imagine 2 identical mid-table league 1 clubs with 7,500 crowds. Let's call them Club A and Club B

Club A has an average league start to the season but wins its first 2 Carling Cup ties and draws Liverpool Away and loses. It also makes it through several rounds of the JPT. It then reaches FA Cup round 3 and draws Everton. At the transfer window, Club A has had lots of extra revenue from the cups and goes out and spends that money on 3 new players. In the second half of the season Club A then goes on a good run and finishes just outside the playoffs. Buoyed by the exciting end to the season, Club A sells another 1,500 season tickets. It then uses this money to buy more decent players and challenges for promotion in the new season.

Club B has an average league start to the season and goes out of the first round of each cup. By the transfer window the club's attendances have dipped slightly due to lack of excitement. Worried about breaching the 60% limit the club accepts an offer for one of their better players and don't replace him. In the 2nd half of the season, results are poor and the club finishes just above the drop zone. Following a disappointing season, the club sells 1,000 less season tickets and so has to cut the playing budget selling a couple of key players and replacing them with youth team members. The club has a poor start and is soon threatened with relegation in the new season.

CONCLUSION

So all in all the message is that for this season at least we have very few options if league results don't pick up soon. We could replace SOD but a new guy would have very little in the pot to spend. The only way to improve the situation is to keep going to games and spending money with the club. If we could beat Soton somehow and get one of the big guns or get to the 3rd round of the FA Cup and draw a big gun that would really help too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aizoon

Aizoon

Posted
Posted

Right. SCMP not FFP. Lot of good points there.

Just to add that the ticketing shambles becomes even more important in the light of this.

We don't want people strolling in with photocopied/double-printed tickets.

We don't want people giving up and finding something better to do after standing for half an hour in a queue stewarded by Rentathug morons.

We do need as much ticket income as we can get.

Palatable food and drink and an adequate supply of programmes wouldn't do any harm, either.

PS I always thought SCMP was Stream Control Message Protocol - we live and learn ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aizoon

Aizoon

Posted
Posted

Excuse my ignorance, but does total wage bill mean players only, or all members of staff ?

If so, STEVE LANSDOWNS MONEY DOES MATTER, as he can employ top people to sort out the shambolic mess the clubs in.

Players only according to the FL site so, FFS let's get some competent administrators in :grr:

"The SCMP broadly limits spending on total player wages to a proportion of each club's turnover, with clubs providing budgetary information to The League at the beginning of the season that is updated as the campaign progresses."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loderingo

Loderingo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Right. SCMP not FFP. Lot of good points there.

Just to add that the ticketing shambles becomes even more important in the light of this.

We don't want people strolling in with photocopied/double-printed tickets.

We don't want people giving up and finding something better to do after standing for half an hour in a queue stewarded by Rentathug morons.

We do need as much ticket income as we can get.

Palatable food and drink and an adequate supply of programmes wouldn't do any harm, either.

PS I always thought SCMP was Stream Control Message Protocol - we live and learn ;)

Absolutely, Aizoon. Hopefully the boardroom reshuffle will lead to some improvements in these areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stoke_Gifford_Red

Stoke_Gifford_Red

Posted
Posted

Players only according to the FL site so, FFS let's get some competent administrators in :grr:

"The SCMP broadly limits spending on total player wages to a proportion of each club's turnover, with clubs providing budgetary information to The League at the beginning of the season that is updated as the campaign progresses."

If no more than 60% of turnover can be spent on players wages what is there to stop any rich owner 'gifting' other businesses to the club to improve their revenue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aizoon

Aizoon

Posted
Posted

If no more than 60% of turnover can be spent on players wages what is there to stop any rich owner 'gifting' other businesses to the club to improve their revenue?

What, you mean Bristol City Football Club and Financial Services plc? Don't think

It would wash although other profitable club activities are permitted. I was thinking of Plutonium Club seating with seats for Lansdown father and son at £1M per year. Possibly with catering by Fortnum and Mason.

I think you'll find they have those loopholes covered, although if anyone knows a way through it'll be our Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stoke_Gifford_Red

Stoke_Gifford_Red

Posted
Posted

What, you mean Bristol City Football Club and Financial Services plc? Don't think

It would wash although other profitable club activities are permitted. I was thinking of Plutonium Club seating with seats for Lansdown father and son at £1M per year. Possibly with catering by Fortnum and Mason.

I think you'll find they have those loopholes covered, although if anyone knows a way through it'll be our Steve.

Yeah that sort of thing. It would appear to be what has happened at man city with companies owned by the same family paying sponsorship at presumably vastly over inflated rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aizoon

Aizoon

Posted
Posted

Yeah that sort of thing. It would appear to be what has happened at man city with companies owned by the same family paying sponsorship at presumably vastly over inflated rates.

Yes, but I think the Prem is totally deregulated. Might be wrong, though.

PS Yes, totally wrong. This is interesting, though.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/8939314/English-clubs-in-fight-over-Financial-Fair-Play-loophole.html

Maybe we could do what happened in Dolman's day, and give players jobs with Hargreaves Lansdown?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pezo

Pezo

Posted
Posted

What, you mean Bristol City Football Club and Financial Services plc? Don't think

It would wash although other profitable club activities are permitted. I was thinking of Plutonium Club seating with seats for Lansdown father and son at £1M per year. Possibly with catering by Fortnum and Mason.

I think you'll find they have those loopholes covered, although if anyone knows a way through it'll be our Steve.

The difference being that every £ he has given us so far is as debt and he can put that on his own balance sheet as an asset, what you propose would basically be a gift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pezo

Pezo

Posted
Posted

Yes, but I think the Prem is totally deregulated. Might be wrong, though.

PS Yes, totally wrong. This is interesting, though. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/8939314/English-clubs-in-fight-over-Financial-Fair-Play-loophole.html

Maybe we could do what happened in Dolman's day, and give players jobs with Hargreaves Lansdown?

I don't think mr Hargreaves would be very happy with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stoke_Gifford_Red

Stoke_Gifford_Red

Posted
Posted

Anyone else think this is a load of bollocks to help the rich stay rich and poor stay poor?

I agree with clubs not getting in debt and owing money, but if i want to GIVE 60m to City why can't I.

From reading FAQs on the system on the Hartlepool United website

(http://www.hartlepoolunited.co.uk/news/article/060613-scmp-information-857082.aspx), it would appear gifts are included in turnover; however, loans aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wayne allisons tongues

wayne allisons tongues

Posted
Posted

Hasn't stopped premier league clubs splashing 600 million in the transfer window.

Think Uefa said last week if clubs break the rules we can't really do a lot about it, they have the cash why should we stop them spending it.

If this is going to happen in the top leagues then that's unfair for one, but can see some clubs are soon going to implode with amount of cash being spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...