Jump to content
IGNORED

More Bad News Financial Debt


Super

Recommended Posts

You have to bear in mind that figure should be lower next year. Those accounts will only take into account a few months of our new lower wage bill. Remember the cuts we made in the summer? Either way, it doesn't look good, but it shouldn't be quite as bad next year.

it will be about 10 million next season imo,

But as pointed out we had to pay out on hunt stewert and Johnson, pay St Johnstone, so it would be higher,

It doesn't take fully into account the high earners who left and I doubt very much any of the new players will be paid higher then those who left,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly this quote is the reality of it all: "“The main challenge facing the Board will be to reduce our losses, achieve FFP, whilst remaining competitive. With good planning and ownership I am confident this can be achieved."

All I can say is, thank god for Lansdown. I know he gets some stick but people must surely realise without him, we would be fkdecu!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to bear in mind that figure should be lower next year. Those accounts will only take into account a few months of our new lower wage bill. Remember the cuts we made in the summer? Either way, it doesn't look good, but it shouldn't be quite as bad next year.

People said that last year !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is why we can't splash the cash that posters keep demanding,

We willl have to go down to move forward again, we've signed up 8 or 9 promsing youngsters once high earners are gone (pitman Stead Skuse etc...) expect the likes of ried Bryan Jones to take their place,

I’ve been thinking exactly the same thing. I believe City are hoping to stay in the Championship, but plan B is relegation and eventual rebuilding for the future via the academy and other new players coming in on cheaper salaries. It may take a few years, but if successful, the long term future for the club will be good. If not successful, then it’s stagnation and lots of local derbies with Yeovil, Exeter, Torquay, possibly Forest Green etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an error in that article, surely. i dont think stewart was released, i was sure we paid up his contract?

this fully re-iterates the point i made in a post recently that the #1 focus in january should be sell, sell, sell and just reduce the wage bill be around 50%

And get relegated! Did you go to the same school as George Osborne?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although people are correct in saying thank god for SL. Surely he has to take a bit of blame for the some of the bad decisions that have been made over the years, or is it all bad luck?

Swansea, Stoke, Blackpool, to name a few got to the PL without losing 15m each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although people are correct in saying thank god for SL. Surely he has to take a bit of blame for the some of the bad decisions that have been made over the years, or is it all bad luck?

Swansea, Stoke, Blackpool, to name a few got to the PL without losing 15m each year.

the only mistake he's made is having faith in his manager

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve just looked at the statement again. An interesting part relating to the Financial Fair Play regulations is:

“In effect, this means the club cannot afford to lose more than £5m in the financial year that ends on May 31, 2013, if they are to fully comply with the regulations.

The club insists that the loss of big wage earners together with cost-cutting measures brought into play in the past six months will ensure they go at least some way to achieving this.”

I’ve highlighted the last part. I read this as meaning that the current cost reduction plan is only going to partially solve the problem and another big loss (though less than £14m) is on the way next year. In other words City will not comply with the FFP regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve just looked at the statement again. An interesting part relating to the Financial Fair Play regulations is:

“In effect, this means the club cannot afford to lose more than £5m in the financial year that ends on May 31, 2013, if they are to fully comply with the regulations.

The club insists that the loss of big wage earners together with cost-cutting measures brought into play in the past six months will ensure they go at least some way to achieving this.”

I’ve highlighted the last part. I read this as meaning that the current cost reduction plan is only going to partially solve the problem and another big loss (though less than £14m) is on the way next year. In other words City will not comply with the FFP regulations.

city have reduced alot of things since then, the new players we've brought in are not on the sort of wages dished out under johnson coppel and millen for a start,

We've also got the rest of the high earners out of contract this season thats pitman stead fontaine and skuse thats will probbliy save another 3 million if we don't replace any of them,

I think this is why a massive investment in the devlopment squad has taken place signing cheap young players who are currently top of their crop,

these will be replacing the current first team not signing players from other clubs,

Problem is they need to make the step up in a short space of time,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the three highest earners - Damion Stewart. What great value for money that deal was.

You could say the same about Anderson, Morris, Wilson M, Wilson D, Briggs - what a waste.

Davies and Baldock can't get a start whilst James Wilson, considered good enough to start key games in last years relegation struggle isn't trusted and is lower down the pecking order than Nyatanga and a host of loanees. At least he is young enough to get better with experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only mistake he's made is having faith in his manager

True, the last 4 have certainly let him down at one time or another, which in itself tells you how bad a judge of these things he is. Which is probably why he has stood down. The trouble is, are the people he has left in charge any better a judge than he was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've lost £14M and the players wages are £18M, it's hard to see how we can possibly make ends meet without the income from a new stadium, if things had gone according to plan we'd have had that by now. The club is £45M in debt and the accountants state the obvious in saying the club's really bust it's only Stephen Lansdown that's keeping us afloat. If we make a similar loss next year when the Fair Play rules cut in then we'll end up having a transfer embargo and having to pay millions to the clubs who are profitable which will make the financial situation even worse. For those on this forum who are saying we should 'splash the cash' we're already doing it too much, also we shouldn't be criticising Stephen Lansdown!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, the last 4 have certainly let him down at one time or another, which in itself tells you how bad a judge of these things he is. Which is probably why he has stood down. The trouble is, are the people he has left in charge any better a judge than he was?

Well they (Jon Lansdown and Guy Price) are considerably more inexperienced than Steve, so I would guess not. Keith Dawe has the most experience but often gives off an air of not really being too involved in decisive matters.

We also now have a 'player recruitment analyst' Pete Smith who to my knowledge has no previous experience 'in football' as it were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every year this happens but we never take action !

i suggest making 13 redunanceys from the off field team, restructuring the entire coaching and youth set up paying up a few high earners leeting another 8 leave with out reall replacing them (in june 2012 so this isn't taken into account)

Suggests that we are taking action

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone else alluded... are these losses allowed to be offset against other businesses owned by SL?

We have to remember that these losses have come about not because of overt spending by previous managers, but because our board and SL have allowed them to do it.

As a manager, you would try to bring in the best footballers you could and pay the going rate if needs be.

The board are responsible for budget and would tell the manager what he is allowed to spend.

These losses are purely down to the board and SL overly spending and knowing we would make that loss.

They know the figures, and projected income.

They would know that we would make these losses.

So SL must be willing to do it.

Do people actually think we will be able to recover those figures, purely by having a new stadium?

Will we actually make that much more money from outside interests at AV?

I presume those figures have been researched and projected.

Tbh... I think Clubs are going to be in trouble across the board with these new regulations.

It will be interesting to see what sort of action will be taken to Clubs that don't conform.

Knowing City... we'll abide by all the rules and the likes of Cardiff will do what they want and get deducted 3 points... :bored:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our losses have gone up by £3M , how much was he earning FFS !!!!!

Millen 3 year deal, Wigley 3 year deal, Naylor 3 year deal, Walsh 3 year deal, lets say millen was on 5k a week wigley 3k a week walsh and naylor 1k a week, (not sure if thats the going rate for championship managers and coaches),

So 5k a week for 3 years is 780k pay-off 3k a week for 3 years is 468k and naylor and Walsh 312k thats 1.5 million on geting rid of the manager and coaching staff, plus paying up players and paying compo to St Johnstone for Del and Docs that would probbily come to about 3 million yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i suggest making 13 redunanceys from the off field team, restructuring the entire coaching and youth set up paying up a few high earners leeting another 8 leave with out reall replacing them (in june 2012 so this isn't taken into account)

Suggests that we are taking action

I kno but every year u hear 'we need to cut our cloth' etc etc but then the next year's figures come in. Even if we reduce the losses by a 3rd then that would still be terrible figures ...dark days loom I fear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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