numbeast Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I have read on this forum and elsewhere that we are facing administration or we are totally skint, I just wondered if there was any substance in this or are people just looking at the annual figures and assuming the worst? And before anyone mentions the fact that Steve Lansdown is the only reason we're not already there i know this. But when Steve relinquished the Chair of the club he stated the financing of the club would not alter and I have no reason to believe this to be untrue. During SL's time at the club he has backed successive managers without fail even having stated the wage bill had to be reduced. Now we are at a more manageable level on that front I feel that Steve and to a lesser extent Keith Dawe will back DMc with a significant amount for bringing in new players. As a club we have never been wealthy but have had people willing to back us with generous donations such as Steve, Harry Dolman and others. If Lansdown had lost interest surely he would have made noises about selling up, and not elavate his son to the board, I may be being naive but I can't see any difference now that 5 years ago other than us not offering stupid wages to average players because of the introduction of FFP in the near future. If someone knows different I'd love to be enlightened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Holbrook Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I notice coventry fans have been saying it a lot on there forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportingmad0209 Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I have read on this forum and elsewhere that we are facing administration or we are totally skint, I just wondered if there was any substance in this or are people just looking at the annual figures and assuming the worst? And before anyone mentions the fact that Steve Lansdown is the only reason we're not already there i know this. But when Steve relinquished the Chair of the club he stated the financing of the club would not alter and I have no reason to believe this to be untrue. During SL's time at the club he has backed successive managers without fail even having stated the wage bill had to be reduced. Now we are at a more manageable level on that front I feel that Steve and to a lesser extent Keith Dawe will back DMc with a significant amount for bringing in new players. As a club we have never been wealthy but have had people willing to back us with generous donations such as Steve, Harry Dolman and others. If Lansdown had lost interest surely he would have made noises about selling up, and not elavate his son to the board, I may be being naive but I can't see any difference now that 5 years ago other than us not offering stupid wages to average players because of the introduction of FFP in the near future. If someone knows different I'd love to be enlightened. More money going out, than coming in... Simples! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskay Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 More money going out, than coming in... Simples! Pretty much the same as every other Championship club (in fact - most clubs across all divisions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly The Kid Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 It had to change, especially with the FIFA Fair play rules coming in. Whilst I believe SL will continue to back the club, and manager with funds for players, he can't chuck money around like he used to otherwise we will be in contravention of those fair play rules, so we will always have to cut the cloth accordingly. the first aim should be to get the season ticket sales up to last years level (which will be difficult), but a few imaginative signings might wet the appetite of those who haven't renewed... Fans of clubs like Leicester, Hull etc are living in cloud cuckoo land, as they've been used to their owners spending fortunes on players totally out of synch with the clubs income, Ipswich are an example of a well run championship club. They spend a few bob but live within their means (mostly) and they show it can be done. But yes, the bleeding obvious is that without SL's backing, we'd have gone bust a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 Most people think we are skint, because we are effectively. Years of overspending under the current 'owner' have seen smaller debts of around 1 mill per season at league one level, with a lower income, spiral to 12 million a season in the space of 6 years, despite increased revenues. Fundamentally the club is a busted flush. It wasnt before and statements like the one below are utter tripe We would likely be better off now financially with out SL's backing. We may still have been in League One, that can be debated until the cows come home, but Im pretty certain the losses wouldnt be as catastrophic as they are now. We certainly wouldnt have gone bust or have inate need for his cash. It's nice that we have had it, it wasnt however critical or pivotal to our survival chances we were losing 3 - 4 million a seaon in league one Ralph also the 12 million loss a season we all go on about for the last 2 years include training ground upgrade (about 1.5 - 3 million so far) and money already spent on trying to get the new ground (rumoured to be as little as 8 or as much as 15 million) So the 24 million over the last two seasons could include 18 million of debt because of the training and new ground projects, All figures are only rumours but the important thing to take into account is we owe the bank £0 zip nothing which means no massive intrest rates which is the main reason clubs go into administration as the don't pay the HMRC to make intrest paymants to the bank, If lansdown hadn't banked rolled us we would be a mid table league one team owing the bank about 8 million quid selling players just to make intrest payments, we would have 14k crowds it would be 8k on par with the gas Careful what you wish for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 best we are portrayed as skint.. keeps the transfer payments lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 just reading the account information from 2011 The club is 30 milllion in debt 23.6million of which is owed to Steve Lansdown (roughly) Our Wage bill was 14 million (31 players 115 operating staff including directors) The highest paid director is on 127k a year (at the time of the accounts) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 Here is roughly the year by year losses for BCFC with links where appropriate Losses 2000 - £175,000 Losses 2001 - £2,684,000 Losses 2002 - £3,000,000 Losses 2003- £1,900,000 Losses 2004- £1,117,000 Losses 2005- £1,905,000 Losses 2006- £1,117,000 Losses 2007 £1,997,779 Losses 2008- £6,565,072 Losses 2009 £11,808,085 Losses 2010 £11,454,525 I think I lost my way with the years and seasons they covered during that a little but it's in vaguely correct order Steve took over as chair in Nov 2004 but had been on the board since 1997 It's only really since the play off near miss that spending has gone insane., before that it was about £1 million- £2 million per season ( The losses for 2001 were higher because of player value depreciation at transfer according to the linked report as income and expenditure remained largely the same) We weren't losing anywhere near as much 4 million in league one and the discrepancies for at least one of the bigger losses is addressed above by the then Chairmen, So no, we wouldnt be in such a position without Landsown tbh as for the if Lansdown hadnt bankrolled us we would still be a league one club is pure conjecture and the losses which were the same or similar as before dont back that up. Whether we would have got out of League one without the money is a massive what if scenario as well though From the last lot of accounts spending on the new ground in 2010 was 2million and then 700k from 2011 hardly the 8 to 15 million you mentioned. So is it better? Really? being in the league above playing better teams with bigger crowds yea it is better, As long as lansdown is involved we are in no danger, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sglosbcfc Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I agree, I would much rather City be in the Championship. We lay out hundreds of pounds each year for season tickets which is a sizeable sum for a working class man on average wages, Steve L is very wealthy and is willing to fork out to keep us competitive, good on him I say. If I had hundreds of millions I would be happy to come on board and assist Steve L in bank rolling the club I love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 25, 2012 Report Share Posted May 25, 2012 Sorry about the tardy reply, but the assumption for both of those statements is that we wouldnt have made the Champs without Steve L's money. It's just speculative that we wouldn't, We can never know on that score whether we would have or we wouldnt have. We went close enough without his full time investment to say it was possible, following the previous relegation in the late 1990's. However to some (many?) its all about how Steve L's money has saved us, when it hasnt really done all that at all tbh apart from cause more debt by chucking good money after bad! It's naive to say that as long as Steve L is involved we are in no danger. What happens if it all goes a bit Gretna or similar? There are a myriad of things that could go wrong, and we are going to be curtailed quite a bit when the FFP comes in at the end of the season anyway, having frittered away millions recklessly. Even a new stadium wont redress that balance (something Ive discussed indepth on here before. In summary we will have to go on our best run as a club of all time inorder to sustain and maximise potential income, or else it will be a case of bigger stadium more costs and not a great deal else to show for it. Fans arent going to suddenly be magicked out of thing air as things stand and a new stadium wont suddenly bring out the droves past curiousities sake). Clearly people wont agree with this, but hey ho I'm not disagreeing that we've thrown millions away, we have, Sexston as set us on the correct path imo, the large contracts have come to an end, we are now offering players two and a half to three years contracts instead of 4 and 5 which is what we have been doing We're not offering contracts due to loyaty (Carey is on half his prevous wages and only get perfomance related bonuses now) We've survied a tough season while carrying out a full review of the playing and coaching staff We've continued to improve off the field I think in the next few years we'll start seeing the results I'll be suprised if our loss for 2011/2012 is above 8 million and I think that will be further reduced the following year, We have to take into account that we haven't sold a player for any sort of now for 4 seasons while still spending 1.5 - 3 million bringing in loans and players, Now we have stablised with McInnes (a manager many people seem very happy with) and we've cut 60% of our deadwood, we can start to be positive, First thing our aim should be is brining down our wage bill from 120% about turnover to first 100% then down to 70% thats going to take 3 years at least, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dolman Pragmatist Posted May 25, 2012 Report Share Posted May 25, 2012 I'm not disagreeing that we've thrown millions away, we have, Sexston as set us on the correct path imo, the large contracts have come to an end, we are now offering players two and a half to three years contracts instead of 4 and 5 which is what we have been doing We're not offering contracts due to loyaty (Carey is on half his prevous wages and only get perfomance related bonuses now) We've survied a tough season while carrying out a full review of the playing and coaching staff We've continued to improve off the field I think in the next few years we'll start seeing the results I'll be suprised if our loss for 2011/2012 is above 8 million and I think that will be further reduced the following year, We have to take into account that we haven't sold a player for any sort of now for 4 seasons while still spending 1.5 - 3 million bringing in loans and players, Now we have stablised with McInnes (a manager many people seem very happy with) and we've cut 60% of our deadwood, we can start to be positive, First thing our aim should be is brining down our wage bill from 120% about turnover to first 100% then down to 70% thats going to take 3 years at least, I admire your optimism. My own feeling is that a few clubs will go to the wall before football gets it's house in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin101 Posted May 26, 2012 Report Share Posted May 26, 2012 What happened at Gretna? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Albert Posted May 27, 2012 Report Share Posted May 27, 2012 New poster here to OTIB! I have been reading the forum for quite a few months but only decided to join after the whole BBC vs Village Green fiasco. Thought it would be good to start off my "OTIB posting career" on a good note and praise Lansdown for what he has put into this club over the years. I remember walking back on a wet and windy evening after losing 2-0 to Watford and for the entire journey home my mate was knocking Lansdown and all he has done for City. At times I don't think he gets the praise he deserves and whilst some people may not agree with me, I think he has been fantastic to the club over the years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.