Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Ashton Gate Limited - Job Losses


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Yes

A clear and to the point answer!

I  should point out that they got hammered over the decision. Including by a proportion of their own fans it is worth noting. 

I also reiterate that perennial (until this season) non PL Leeds didn't need to go to use furlough or make any redundancies.

I'm assuming they were an outlier however- think all players and coaching staff cut their wages to £5k per week or somesuch or deferred at least. 

As they might say

Side. Before. Self. 

In that respect anyway.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Harry said:

It’s incredibly virtuous of him isn’t it! 
 

End of the day, there is currently no work for these people. Sad as it is. A company cannot continue to employ people if it has no income. 
 

As regards refunds. Let’s assume we have 15k season tickets. Let’s assume half of those opted for a refund (and that’s a high assumption). The average refund would’ve been about £90 I believe. So we’re talking less than £7k hit to the club. 
I don’t think that £7k would’ve gone very far had they wanted to keep these staff on. 
 

Think you need to check your maths mate!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

A clear and to the point answer!

I  should point out that they got hammered over the decision. Including by a proportion of their own fans it is worth noting. 

I also reiterate that perennial (until this season) non PL Leeds didn't need to go to use furlough or make any redundancies.

I'm assuming they were an outlier however- think all players and coaching staff cut their wages to £5k per week or somesuch or deferred at least. 

As they might say

Club. Before. Self. 

In that respect anyway.

Doesn't matter the reaction of fans, most fans don't have a good understanding of football finances or how on a knife edge clubs operate when it comes to income and spending. All the general public/football fans see is players being given big wages with no other consideration. The wages relate to their income and how much they can afford, if you factor the income/spend out is it different to smaller companies who may have similar pay disparity but still use the scheme? All companies were permitted to use the furlough scheme and there's no reason every club in the country should have been criticised for using it, football clubs don't tend to operate with masses of reserves so aren't that different.

Frankly other options should have been presented to clubs and I feel the EFL/PL have been lazy in this regard, for example owners should have been told if they're willing they can invest the income the club has lost into the club so the finances act as normal etc obviously owners like Ashley would probably be repulsed by the idea but you get the idea owners like Lansdown could have been willing to invest a bit extra to ensure the financial stability of the club. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Doesn't matter the reaction of fans, most fans don't have a good understanding of football finances or how on a knife edge clubs operate when it comes to income and spending. All the general public/football fans see is players being given big wages with no other consideration. The wages relate to their income and how much they can afford, if you factor the income/spend out is it different to smaller companies who may have similar pay disparity but still use the scheme? All companies were permitted to use the furlough scheme and there's no reason every club in the country should have been criticised for using it, football clubs don't tend to operate with masses of reserves so aren't that different.

Frankly other options should have been presented to clubs and I feel the EFL/PL have been lazy in this regard, for example owners should have been told if they're willing they can invest the income the club has lost into the club so the finances act as normal etc obviously owners like Ashley would probably be repulsed by the idea but you get the idea owners like Lansdown could have been willing to invest a bit extra to ensure the financial stability of the club. 

Tottenham and Liverpool made enormous profits over a couple of seasons but then profit and cashflow differ of course.

As you say fair enough to use it, certainly legally. People will have different opinions, think they got some criticism in general public discourse.

I'm not fully sure what my overall view is. I'll cut the club ie City some slack though, plenty of big businesses with large reserves used it as you say.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tottenham and Liverpool made enormous profits over a couple of seasons but then profit and cashflow differ of course.

As you say fair enough to use it, certainly legally. People will have different opinions, think they got some criticism in general public discourse.

I'm not fully sure what my overall view is. I'll cut the club ie City some slack though, plenty of big businesses with large reserves used it as you say.

Difference? Football, that's all the public saw

Edited by Lrrr
  • Hmmm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NickJ said:

Think you need to check your maths mate!

 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Yeah Harry, sort your zeros out.

Indeed. Fully acknowledged. 😳 
My excuse - mrs was working, I was looking after 2 kids whilst trying to type and then too late to edit when mistake noted. 
My bad. 
Anyway - less than £700k. For a company with a payroll of over £5.5m. It wouldn’t have gone far. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Do you think those two mega clubs weere justified or no? Simple yes or no question here- simple one word answer would be interesting for that bit.

Indeed they were- didn't exactly help the reputation of Liverpool or Tottenham however did it. 

Their fans were up in arms about it- unless it was a vocal minority of course.

I think it's an interesting debate- they got hammered in the court of public opinion, those two clubs. Look it up if you don't remember it.

I think I made it quite clear in my reply that all companies had every right to furlough. 
 

But if you just want one word. Yes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harry said:

I think I made it quite clear in my reply that all companies had every right to furlough. 
 

But if you just want one word. Yes. 

Fair. Court of public opinion seemed to take a different view but yeah that's clear enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Fair. Court of public opinion seemed to take a different view but yeah that's clear enough.

A lot of that public opinion was also probably fans of rival clubs loving the chance of a dig at their rivals

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Fair. Court of public opinion seemed to take a different view but yeah that's clear enough.

Court of public opinion was predominated by preconceived bias of footballers wages. 
Form your own opinion Pops. 
You seem incredibly uncertain on this, wanting to wait and see or analyse what other clubs have done. 
Make your own call. 
You remind me of indecisive Dave. 
 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

A lot of that public opinion was also probably fans of rival clubs loving the chance of a dig at their rivals

Maybe. Some of it anyway.

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Court of public opinion was predominated by preconceived bias of footballers wages. 
Form your own opinion Pops. 
You seem incredibly uncertain on this, wanting to wait and see or analyse what other clubs have done. 
Make your own call. 
You remind me of indecisive Dave. 
 

 

I can see both sides but...doesn't sit so well in the economic context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

@Mr Popodopolous Arsenal with proposed redundancies, more than AG as well

https://www.arsenal.com/news/club-update-2020

Thanks for flagging it- saw it online and was about to come on and post about it- with their resources and revenue- and the Sky rebate deferred until (I think) late 2020-21, that's fairly shoddy! In fact, it's poor!

Poor stuff. If I was questioning ours I'm absolutely questioning theirs! £100m in Sky money as a base starting point!!

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Was about to come on and post about it- with their resources and revenue- and the Sky rebate deferred until (I think) late 2020-21, that's fairly shoddy! In fact, it's poor!

Poor stuff. If I was questioning ours I'm absolutely questioning theirs! £100m in Sky money as a base starting point!!

Their prize money for the FA cup win alone would probably cover the employees wages for a year, let alone qualification for the Europa League

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Their prize money for the FA cup win alone would probably cover the employees wages for a year, let alone qualification for the Europa League

Hadn't thought of that and am not sure so shall defer to you on FA Cup Prize money- but yes, yes it could!

Given how Liverpool and Tottenham got panned for taking furlough, it will be interesting to see how the media cover it- especially given Arsenal are being linked with the likes of Partey, Coutinho to name two! Oh and Willian- though he is on or will be on a free, his wages won't exactly be small!

EDIT- Googled quickly, £3.6m. £3.6m/55= Depends on which employees of course but certainly feels plausible!

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to post
Share on other sites

Europa League isn't the CL but CAN be quite lucrative- lots of variables so can is the key word but think Chelsea got some tidy earnings when they won it in 2018/19- seems pretty terrible really.

To make matters worse, saw that they are looking to give Aubameyang a significant new contract! Media coverage of the contrast, this will be interesting.

The optics for this are terrible! £250k per week for Aubameyang- dunno what he's on now but I suspect the annual payrise could cover all 55 staff? Or go a long way towards doing so in any case!

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Europa League isn't the CL but CAN be quite lucrative- lots of variables so can is the key word but think Chelsea got some tidy earnings when they won it in 2018/19- seems pretty terrible really.

To make matters worse, saw that they are looking to give Aubameyang a significant new contract! Media coverage of the contrast, this will be interesting.

The optics for this are terrible! £250k per week for Aubameyang- dunno what he's on now but I suspect the annual payrise could cover all 55 staff? Or go a long way towards doing so in any case!

It helped Rangers revenues to the tune of £14m in 18/19s accounts. Not to be sniffed at!!!  Obviously not reflected by covid impact. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arsenal have gone about it horribly, publicly stating that its so they can remain competitive on the pitch. Everyone seems to be hammering Ozil but apparently part of the reason he didn't take a wage cut was because he wasn't convinced by how the club would use that money, suspicion confirmed I suppose

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks for flagging it- saw it online and was about to come on and post about it- with their resources and revenue- and the Sky rebate deferred until (I think) late 2020-21, that's fairly shoddy! In fact, it's poor!

Poor stuff. If I was questioning ours I'm absolutely questioning theirs! £100m in Sky money as a base starting point!!

The players aren’t too happy either. They thought their wage deferral was going to avoid this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

Arsenal have gone about it horribly, publicly stating that its so they can remain competitive on the pitch. Everyone seems to be hammering Ozil but apparently part of the reason he didn't take a wage cut was because he wasn't convinced by how the club would use that money, suspicion confirmed I suppose

Horrible way to go about it indeed.

I might be mistaken but I thought deferrals had to be repaid before fresh expenditure took place, or is that not a thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Horrible way to go about it indeed.

I might be mistaken but I thought deferrals had to be repaid before fresh expenditure took place, or is that not a thing?

Think Arsenal were talking about smaller pay cuts in addition to the deferrals, but as said above the Arsenal players were told the deferrals at least were prevent this from happening

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Middlesbrough have...

Quote

"confirmed job losses for the second summer in a row - and this time it includes a “small number” of compulsory redundancies."

My earlier comments regarding City having a potentially larger operation due to some operations being done in-house rather than outsourced as at many other stadiums is somewhat backed up by the article which says...

Quote

The accounts said as of June 2019, the club employed just over 230 people overall, made up of 75 players and 159 non-playing staff.

The latest Bristol City Holdings account report 773 staff (308 stadium operations, 119 football admin and support, 243 food and beverage, 28 stadium admin and sales, 75 players).

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/boro-confirm-compulsory-job-losses-18833189

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feel sorry for those getting laid off.

Timing not good especially since fans in some numbers are supposed to be able to return in October. That is lacking somewhat in detail

Was ours solely Ashton Gate Limited? Don't recall now! Was 40, around 1/3 IIRC. 

773 is quite well staffed indeed! Am guessing that reflects concerts, trade shows, coffee shop etc. Thought The Riverside had a number of the same capabilities too, in terms of off the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...