Talk sport and the city model

[CotswoldRed]

City got quite lucky, ending up with a decent number of good, young valuable players. In some significant way, this was in spite of, not because of, their management strategy. 

They never knew why it worked. So they could never recognise when it started to fail. 

[Super]

1 hour ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Quite.

Ron Noades ran a successful Crystal Palace on a shoestring for years by just that strategy of buying players 24 or under who could develop and selling them for a profit. Chris Armstrong was one.

Then Simon "is he wearing Harmony hairspray?" Jordan took over, thought he knew better and nearly bankrupted the club.

The bloke's an idiot and it's laughable that he's criticising other clubs' financial models.

The bloke made his own mistakes he accepts that but he is spot on regarding us.

[Davefevs]

 

10 minutes ago, Swede said:

I've never had any time for this bloke & especially after his club went into administration. I am sure there was extenuating circumstances much like a business model where one source of projected revenue is calculated on the amount of footfall through the stadium on a matchday basis pre covid and the very same business models are now having to be adjusted through covid yet we are still being asked to be accountable? Every club is different so I'm not sure on what basis he can pass judgement unless he knows our major shareholder very well which I somewhat doubt.

As an example, I think I read somewhere that 18,000 pints of beer are bought over a matchday weekend when the Bears & City are at home which is a considerable amount of money lost. How do you factor that in.

He's on a talk show and is paid to be controversial. I reckon he's tangoed quite a few people with his comments.

 

Basically the EFL have changed the FFP rules for 19/20 and 20/21 and allowed you to reduce your losses by the income you lost out on through covid.  They’ve been pretty fair in that respect, which is why Jordan is saying clubs have had 2 years to react.  So for FFP purposes our £38.4m loss will be less than that.

[Davefevs]

49 minutes ago, Red Alert said:

This clown is in no place to lecture anyone how to run a football club. 

I read his book & hasn’t a clue how to run a financially sound business, he got lucky when he blagged he way through the mobile phone gold rush & then spunked the money he made

It’s embarrassing how much money he squandered.

Maybe he has learned from his own experiences.  I read his book too, and it completely changed my view if him.  I like him now, thought he was a bit of dick beforehand.

He has highlighted a number of fundamental flaws in football as a business.

[Rob k]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Maybe he has learned from his own experiences.  I read his book too, and it completely changed my view if him.  I like him now, thought he was a bit of dick beforehand.

He has highlighted a number of fundamental flaws in football as a business.

Football (imo) is still not really a business outside the top flight, a sustainable one anyway, 

If the EFL clubs were a joint business, how much money do they lose every single year? The model doesn’t work
 

[Red-Robbo]

33 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Maybe he has learned from his own experiences.  I read his book too, and it completely changed my view if him.  I like him now, thought he was a bit of dick beforehand.

He has highlighted a number of fundamental flaws in football as a business.

 

But they are hardly just a "Bristol City Model". As I said, nearly all clubs have to have the buy low, sell high mentality to stay afloat. Some seasons that won't work, you then go through a dry patch where you have no war chest to speak of. 

The economics of football are ridiculous though. Without TV money and that trickle down virtually all non-PL clubs would go bust, as would a number in the top tier. Nowhere else would such a large number of relatively modest sized enterprises be able to pay such incredible salaries. No companies with such modest numbers of active consumers could operate as FL clubs do.   

Edited February 17, 2022 by Red-Robbo

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

Simon Jordon, him and Paul Scally, not sure who I dislike the most, the guy who could not let that ghost goal go and forever talks us down or the one who screwed us with Pulis, then took us to court over it. 

Oh dear, oh dear....

I've covered this umpteen times before but as you appear not to have understood, here are the facts (as evidenced by the court transcripts that Scally published:)

Pulis, as manager at The Gills, undertook a number of childish and personally vindictive actions that would normally have seen him instantly dismissed for gross misconduct. This culminated in him threatening to 'blackmail'  Scally ahead of The Gills play-off final against Man City. Scally had nothing to hide and already had Pulis' measure.

A few months earlier Pulis attended for interview at both City and Stoke, without Scally's permission or either club approaching The Gills for permission, contrary to EFL regulation. Pulis met the City directors at one of their homes and later that evening he was entertained by City at a restaurant in Park St. Pulis attended Stoke the following day. For the whole of his trip Pulis claimed expenses from The Gills stating he was out 'scouting players'.

Scally sacked Pulis for misconduct who knew that was coming his way and walked straight into the role he'd already lined up at City. Arriving at City his first action was, knowing he had City over a barrel over their illegal approach, to look to renegotiate the deal City thought they'd agreed. Specifically, and as Pulis had tried to do at The Gills, he demanded a significant cut of all transfers out of the club. At The Gills Scally had agreed (I think it was 20%) profit made in developing a player (there it was limited to players signed by and disposed of by Pulis ). Scally honoured that in all transactions. Pulis attempted to claim monies on players already at the club when he arrived and also on kids coming through the academy ranks, both of which were excluded in his contract. He claimed likewise at City, who were reluctant to agree but who didn't want their illegal approach exposed. Recall at both clubs Pulis' first day in charge saw him enter the dressing room informing all players he thought they were rubbish and didn't figure in his long-term plans. Nothing to do with quality, everything to do with him turning a personal buck. Thereafter ensued 'The Great Bristolian Pen Crisis'. Pulis never did sign a contract with City, he was never their employee, his company retained on a consultancy basis. One might argue he was never City's manager. As soon as the opportunity arose to offload 'bad trouble' City did so, to Pompey where he deployed the same tactic. Recall, to the end, City denied ever having made an illegal approach. 

Much later Pulis issued proceedings against both The Gills and Scally personally for sums he claimed were outstanding. His claims were not supported by the LMA nor the EFL. They knew Scally had agreed to settle in the sums owed under his contract, but not those to which Pulis wished himself entitled. On the second day of the High Court trial there was an interesting twist. Against what is normal practice Scally's counsel asked Pulis who was underwriting his expensive, personal action? Pulis at first declined to answer but the Judge ruled it was to be answered as it was material to a test of Pulis' character and motives. Reluctantly, Pulis informed the cost of his action was being funded by Bristol City FC, a company with which he had no association, for whom he had never been an employee and who had no material interest in the case. Later, and after a character destruction of Pulis by Scally's counsel, the Judge suggested to Pulis' counsel they might wish to have a discussion with their client and, post lunch, Pulis withdrew his action. The Judge's comments in reminding Pulis was also claiming damage to reputation and as to evidenced demonstrations of his character already disclosed in court could not have been more scathing. Outside the court even the LMA were desperate to dissociate themselves from their member.

Though Scally later threatened to sue both City and Stoke for costs incurred in defending actions they, not Pulis, had funded, I don't believe the cases ever materialized.  Much like Randy Andy I believe Sexstone confirmed City had settled the matter out of court and 'in confidence', without admitting any wrongdoing. I did ask Steve Lansdown when he took over to confirm, given my shareholder interest, whether Pulis had repaid all costs in respect of the action? I was told to mind my own business, that it was history and should be forgotten.

As an aside I, many years ago it must be said, occasionally used to drink with Scally. Fascinating character, decent, humerous bloke and brilliant story as to how he, a diehard 'Wall' fanatic, came to buy The Gills (he had no interest until approached.) Interesting that given all the issues City now suffer, the reason The Gills fans took against Scally was simply because he bought a failing business, had no interest in throwing his money away and transformed a nigh-on bankrupt club into one that for many years turned him a decent profit, if not with major success on the park. Fans hated he wouldn't push on by buying the type of players they wanted but wouldn't themselves fund.

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by BTRFTG

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, Rob k said:

Football (imo) is still not really a business outside the top flight, a sustainable one anyway, 

If the EFL clubs were a joint business, how much money do they lose every single year? The model doesn’t work
 

Agree with the overarching point and we even see some big PL clubs making losses prior to Covid, Chelsea £100m in 2018/19, Arsenal for so long a byword of stability and financial sense, around £30-35m that same season! Quite dependent on CL revenue but I digress- worth distinguishing between accounting losses and cash losses though. If a business is cash neutral or cash positive in the case of the latter, they're on pretty reasonable ground.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[bearded_red]

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

History shows that most Championship clubs have occasionally won the gamble taken (though be careful for that you wish.) City are one of a very select band who have shown themselves to be reckless and clueless punters.

Increasing in number though- since 2018, it's Birmingham, Derby, Reading and Sheffield Wednesday- all penalised to date and potentially as per Jon Lansdown 7 or 8 more- us included- in the firing line.

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, lenred said:

Derby county fans wetting their knickers about it already I see. Sad ****s

It never ceases to amaze me how of all the clubs who could throw mud, it's most vocally them- yet their clubs actions from 2018 and perhaps 2015 onwards make them the least appropriate, the brassneck is something else!

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Tbf , most businesses run on the basis of selling goods for more than they’ve paid for them, so the “buy low, sell high”. The trick is generally ensuring your stock is accurately valued

I think the big thing that Jordan’s missing (and it has been lost) is that our model isn’t based solely on sales and that also isn’t the difference between FFP or not. Our major income generator is the stadium, and if you look at the income lost through Covid, that’s the difference between meeting and failing FFP. And I’d bet that the “acceptable losses” will consider this and we won’t fail FFP on that basis.

Lets flip the question. If Jordan doesn’t believe a good model is income generation from the stadium and player sales as the latter isn’t guaranteed, what does he believe is? Match day income doesn’t cover costs, and parachute payments also aren’t guaranteed long term. So, what is his better model?

Or is he just being a Cuprinol faced **** again?

I agree with a reasonable chunk of that post but I'm not so sure about that. Income generation from the stadium and associated corporate revenues is one thing and should be included for all who do that, attributing anything in lost player sales quite another.

[lenred]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It never ceases to amaze me how of all the clubs who could throw mud, it's most vocally them- yet their clubs actions from 2018 and perhaps 2015 onwards make them the least appropriate, the brassneck is something else!

I’d been having a somewhat heated (surprise! ) debate with a DCFC fan on another newspaper comments site, which actually ended up very amicably. This was from about 3 weeks ago. However literally 2 mins after the Talk sport piece I got a notification say he had replied again, gloating about how we are just as bad as them blah blah blah…….didn’t like it was pointed out about the tax bill again It’s fools like him that make me care not whether they do end up in the Matlock District League ! 

[BTRFTG]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Increasing in number though- since 2018, it's Birmingham, Derby, Reading and Sheffield Wednesday- all penalised to date and potentially as per Jon Lansdown 7 or 8 more- us included- in the firing line.

I forget the stats but The Price Of Football  has highlighted for seasons that all Championship clubs, bar the odd exception, are financial basket cases. City a basket case that never even made The Premier.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, BTRFTG said:

I forget the stats but The Price Of Football  has highlighted for seasons that all Championship clubs, bar the odd exception, are financial basket cases. City a basket case that never even made The Premier.

Think the stat at one point- unsure about right now- was 100% or above of turnover on wages alone as a divisional average.

Within that context I've had us down as one of the less badly run ones although recent accounts have changed things- but yes a division with that ratio of turnover to wages before any other costs is a shambles.

[chinapig]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It never ceases to amaze me how of all the clubs who could throw mud, it's most vocally them- yet their clubs actions from 2018 and perhaps 2015 onwards make them the least appropriate, the brassneck is something else!

They fail to understand the difference between financial mismanagement (us among others) and outright cheating (them).

[Silvio Dante]

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I agree with a reasonable chunk of that post but I'm not so sure about that. Income generation from the stadium and associated corporate revenues is one thing and should be included for all who do that, attributing anything in lost player sales quite another.

For clarity pop, I wasn’t suggesting lost player sales could be included in acceptable losses but stadium revenue could be, and that makes up a huge part of our incomings - and more pertinently, in normal times is reliable.

[firstdivision]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Haven’t listened, but I agree.

A. Flawed model in the first place, how many of signings returned a profit.  I reckon of the 69 “Ashton” signings, make that 52 (17 were loans) just 6 were sold for more than we paid for them.  You could argue that the 52 is really 37 because 15 were free transfers, but some of those free transfers were ones who we might’ve sold for a fee.  That’s a crap hit rate when that’s your strategy.

The 6 were:

• Magnússon (small profit)
• Eliasson (small profit)
• Brownhill
• Webster
• Szmodics (small profit)
• Eisa (small profit)

B. Yep, and the biggest failure was the recontracting debacle last summer.  Letting players like Diedhiou go for free.  Ashton had 2 years to extend I’d sell him.  Others too.

Something I don’t understand, Dave, and it might have been answered somewhere else is this: how can we possibly make the claim that we have have lost £30m in potential transfer revenue because of Covid? 
 

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

For clarity pop, I wasn’t suggesting lost player sales could be included in acceptable losses but stadium revenue could be, and that makes up a huge part of our incomings - and more pertinently, in normal times is reliable.

Totally agree and thanks for clarifying that point- although I think even with the Covid addbacks and averaging of 2019/20 and 2020/21 into one, there will still be a hole to fill next season, the size is a matter of debate and an unknown at this stage.

Obviously the bigger the hole, the bigger the potential deduction, chances of Business Plan etc.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

28 minutes ago, bearded_red said:

I trust he had Steve's permission to say that!

Still, one of the refreshing things about Nigel is that he doesn't feel obliged to say how great the Lansdowns are on a weekly basis.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

40 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

I think quite a few (of us) have used words similar to bonkers over the last 4 years or so. we had a great L1 winning side, struggled to cope after promotion, then progressively threw out of the window the very essence of what made us a successful side in the first place. Double self cluster duck, as we did exactly the same thing after GJ got us promoted suing exactly the same concepts as SC and Keith Burt. I mean talk about not learning your lessons. This is not hindsight stuff either, but I do recall getting so much abuse and others too for pointing out our folly under Ashton. He put us back years and wasted millions. We are lucky this time though, as it seems we do not need to get relegated whilst we put it right. I have no idea if Nige can get us to the Prem, but I do like he is building a side that has far more financial sense, is far more akin to those sides of GJ and SC and whatever the end result, our club will be far better for it as a result. But we will need patience , and having an outrage after every poor result is not helpful. Discussion fine, but if fans still have not grasped where we are and how deep the hole is then I worry for them. We should be pleased we have someone willing to take on this mess as it is not for the faint hearted. That during this painful reshaping we are seeing the emergence of some wonderful youth talent is as exciting as anything we have seen in years or decades. It is also very brave from NP and something very few would have had the balls to do. I beleive in 2/3 years time we will see a very different club, squad and playing approach, and it will be one that we can all stand behind and be proud of. We will need to improve recruitment, and regain our ability to see and sign talents in lower leagues much faster. No more scouting them at L2 and then trying to buy them 5 years later for millions. The posters that come up with names like @Harry @Davefevs and @JonDolman are on the money , as everytime they mention someone, hey a year or so later they get linked with our competitors. Add in a continued use of the academy with the great work going on there, and we start to see a far more logical and dare I say more exciting future. But fans have to accept it will not be plain sailing , it is a process and will take time. The first step to solving problems are admitting you have them, and finally it seems SL/JL have done that and are putting more faith into experienced football people to make that transition. 

IMHO our improvements will come faster than it may seem right now. It will depend on this summer, but keeping a few of the key players and improving our weaknesses and yes I think we can be much closer to the top than the bottom next year.  Finally we might have a plan, and instead of just talking about it we are actually doing it. COYR. 

I think the relative freedom on the recruitment front comes in 2023/24, summer 2023- about things improving perhaps faster than it seems right now, are you factoring in the risk of a possible deduction and or Business Plan next season too? Albeit if Jon Lansdown is right we might be in good company!

Agree with a fair chink of your post though, but I think we need a bit more balance of approach as opposed to mostly Bottom 2 divisions- the odd foreign or experienced player if the price right seems okay.

Was hoping a few years ago for a Brentford type model except with added flexibility but it hasn't necessarily transpired that way.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Nick Wilde]

Did he cough up the money for Nick Carle in the end? 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

But they are hardly just a "Bristol City Model". As I said, nearly all clubs have to have the buy low, sell high mentality to stay afloat. Some seasons that won't work, you then go through a dry patch where you have no war chest to speak of. 

The economics of football are ridiculous though. Without TV money and that trickle down virtually all non-PL clubs would go bust, as would a number in the top tier. Nowhere else would such a large number of relatively modest sized enterprises be able to pay such incredible salaries. No companies with such modest numbers of active consumers could operate as FL clubs do.   

For me, assuming we have an owner willing to commit to £13m of FFP losses each year, which in reality is around £18m each year because of allowances, is that our budget should reflect that at its worst.  Bear with me on that.

So if revenue is £27m, total costs budget should be £45m.  If we make money on transfers then that reduces the losses to a better position.

What we shouldn’t be doing is having a cost budget of £60m in the hope we make £15m p.a. in transfer fees.  That is where we have failed.  We’ve not been “honestly unlucky” or whatever term JL used.

FWIW in my example I still think budgeting to make a worse case loss of £18m is “bonkers”, and we should be looking to do much better than that…either we grow income or reduce costs, hopefully both.  It’s not really “self sustaining” which is what SL really wants - not just sustainable with handouts from him.

47 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

I think quite a few (of us) have used words similar to bonkers over the last 4 years or so. we had a great L1 winning side, struggled to cope after promotion, then progressively threw out of the window the very essence of what made us a successful side in the first place. Double self cluster duck, as we did exactly the same thing after GJ got us promoted suing exactly the same concepts as SC and Keith Burt. I mean talk about not learning your lessons. This is not hindsight stuff either, but I do recall getting so much abuse and others too for pointing out our folly under Ashton. He put us back years and wasted millions. We are lucky this time though, as it seems we do not need to get relegated whilst we put it right. I have no idea if Nige can get us to the Prem, but I do like he is building a side that has far more financial sense, is far more akin to those sides of GJ and SC and whatever the end result, our club will be far better for it as a result. But we will need patience , and having an outrage after every poor result is not helpful. Discussion fine, but if fans still have not grasped where we are and how deep the hole is then I worry for them. We should be pleased we have someone willing to take on this mess as it is not for the faint hearted. That during this painful reshaping we are seeing the emergence of some wonderful youth talent is as exciting as anything we have seen in years or decades. It is also very brave from NP and something very few would have had the balls to do. I beleive in 2/3 years time we will see a very different club, squad and playing approach, and it will be one that we can all stand behind and be proud of. We will need to improve recruitment, and regain our ability to see and sign talents in lower leagues much faster. No more scouting them at L2 and then trying to buy them 5 years later for millions. The posters that come up with names like @Harry @Davefevs and @JonDolman are on the money , as everytime they mention someone, hey a year or so later they get linked with our competitors. Add in a continued use of the academy with the great work going on there, and we start to see a far more logical and dare I say more exciting future. But fans have to accept it will not be plain sailing , it is a process and will take time. The first step to solving problems are admitting you have them, and finally it seems SL/JL have done that and are putting more faith into experienced football people to make that transition. 

IMHO our improvements will come faster than it may seem right now. It will depend on this summer, but keeping a few of the key players and improving our weaknesses and yes I think we can be much closer to the top than the bottom next year.  Finally we might have a plan, and instead of just talking about it we are actually doing it. COYR. 

Bold bits in order:

- yes, thank god we’ve not had to go down, Lg1 looks very competitive at the mo’.  Clubs taking advantage of the removal of the short-lived salary cap to give it a big gamble.

- I’m sure some will mis-quote him if we aren’t in the PL season 24/25….but he actually said “have a squad ready to complete for a place in the PL” - very different.  Also need to ensure people don’t mis-quote 3 seasons into 3 windows…again very different.

 

42 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Something I don’t understand, Dave, and it might have been answered somewhere else is this: how can we possibly make the claim that we have have lost £30m in potential transfer revenue because of Covid? 
 

In summary in the last 5 seasons we made c£80m in transfer profit, so for the 2 covid years JL / RG are saying on average we lost £16m p.a.  Therefore two seasons is £32m…rounded down to £30m.

I think that is incredibly hopeful.  It basically says, run a risky strategy and get bailed out for it.  Other clubs will turn around and tell us / EFL to eff-off…and rightly so.

I could see an argument where you impair players transfer fees and those costs (in the accounts) are excluded for FFP.  Like we did with Nagy - although at this point we aren’t excluding that from FFP.  This is the basis of Stoke’s losses in 19/20.  We have no idea whether the EFL will recognise this figure in their FFP submission.  But I can see a better argument for that…maybe only including players signed 18/19 and 19/20.  But it looks messy.

[Merrick's Marvels]

59 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I trust he had Steve's permission to say that!

Still, one of the refreshing things about Nigel is that he doesn't feel obliged to say how great the Lansdowns are on a weekly basis.

 

I admire anyone who speaks truth to power. The fact it's to his employer makes me like Pearson even more. 

[Red-Robbo]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For me, assuming we have an owner willing to commit to £13m of FFP losses each year, which in reality is around £18m each year because of allowances, is that our budget should reflect that at its worst.  Bear with me on that.

So if revenue is £27m, total costs budget should be £45m.  If we make money on transfers then that reduces the losses to a better position.

What we shouldn’t be doing is having a cost budget of £60m in the hope we make £15m p.a. in transfer fees.  That is where we have failed.  We’ve not been “honestly unlucky” or whatever term JL used.

FWIW in my example I still think budgeting to make a worse case loss of £18m is “bonkers”, and we should be looking to do much better than that…either we grow income or reduce costs, hopefully both.  It’s not really “self sustaining” which is what SL really wants - not just sustainable with handouts from him.

 

Yup. I think what jaundiced Jordan hinted at but doesn't clearly state, and Nigel alludes to, is that the standard "you have to sell" model was added to by Mark Ashton to include sweeping your acquisitions far more widely than we needed, buying players the club didn't need, in the hope they'd scooped up some hidden gems. It's a strategy that saw us pay far too much for non-required players and no hopers.

Perhaps we should call it the trawler method. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

On the £30m point I don't quite get another aspect.

Our audited accounts show that we made £30m or so as it is in Transfer Profits. Can see how too- Webster, Brownhill, Eliasson, Szmodics and some add ons from Reid or similar? Have I missed anyone.

Oh yes. Eisa, Pack, Morrell, Smith, Holden.

Which season or period exactly is the £30m referring to? Is it an additional (mythical) £30m?

Edited February 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[firstdivision]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For me, assuming we have an owner willing to commit to £13m of FFP losses each year, which in reality is around £18m each year because of allowances, is that our budget should reflect that at its worst.  Bear with me on that.

So if revenue is £27m, total costs budget should be £45m.  If we make money on transfers then that reduces the losses to a better position.

What we shouldn’t be doing is having a cost budget of £60m in the hope we make £15m p.a. in transfer fees.  That is where we have failed.  We’ve not been “honestly unlucky” or whatever term JL used.

FWIW in my example I still think budgeting to make a worse case loss of £18m is “bonkers”, and we should be looking to do much better than that…either we grow income or reduce costs, hopefully both.  It’s not really “self sustaining” which is what SL really wants - not just sustainable with handouts from him.

Bold bits in order:

- yes, thank god we’ve not had to go down, Lg1 looks very competitive at the mo’.  Clubs taking advantage of the removal of the short-lived salary cap to give it a big gamble.

- I’m sure some will mis-quote him if we aren’t in the PL season 24/25….but he actually said “have a squad ready to complete for a place in the PL” - very different.  Also need to ensure people don’t mis-quote 3 seasons into 3 windows…again very different.

 

In summary in the last 5 seasons we made c£80m in transfer profit, so for the 2 covid years JL / RG are saying on average we lost £16m p.a.  Therefore two seasons is £32m…rounded down to £30m.

I think that is incredibly hopeful.  It basically says, run a risky strategy and get bailed out for it.  Other clubs will turn around and tell us / EFL to eff-off…and rightly so.

I could see an argument where you impair players transfer fees and those costs (in the accounts) are excluded for FFP.  Like we did with Nagy - although at this point we aren’t excluding that from FFP.  This is the basis of Stoke’s losses in 19/20.  We have no idea whether the EFL will recognise this figure in their FFP submission.  But I can see a better argument for that…maybe only including players signed 18/19 and 19/20.  But it looks messy.

Thanks, Dave. As I thought - our argument is specious in the extreme. 

[Gert Mare]

3 hours ago, VT05763 said:

And most importantly ignore ridiculous transfer targets demanded by fans. 

Agreed. Also, don’t sign them from PL clubs as they have already been paid ludicrous wages for not even breaking into the first team.

As great as Kalas is he isn’t worth the fee or salary that was paid for him. Compare him against someone like Shaun Taylor for example. You are paying the money because it’s Chelsea who is the parent club, not a lower league team.

Blackburn warned us about Kasey Palmer, starts like Pele and turns into Tony Dinning.

Nahki Wells never wanted to come here. That is well known, so we pay over the odds for and ex Bradford City striker and he is played out of position and is happy to take the money.

We are far better off investing in our scouting network and pick up hungry players from lower league football, and find the best young talent we can, even in and around Bristol where our better youngsters have always seemed to end up at Norwich or Southampton.

The Bosman ruling has given too much power to players. The old system was wrong, but also holding clubs to ransom and then leaving for nothing is also wrong. Clubs should expect to get at least 50% of the original fee that they bought a player for rather than nothing. 

There needs to be a complete overhaul of finances in football full stop, otherwise players salary demands will eventually send clubs into liquidation.

Football as it is today is unsustainable whatever model you put in place.

[Ivorguy]

Again NP has shown he is the best manager we have had under the Lansdowns.  He speaks his mind and knows what he is doing.

JL needs to think before speaking.  Disgraceful comments.

I’m backing Nige

[Red-Robbo]

33 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Again NP has shown he is the best manager we have had under the Lansdowns.  He speaks his mind and knows what he is doing.

JL needs to think before speaking.  Disgraceful comments.

I’m backing Nige

 

Which ones, Ivor?