|
Post by tomylil on Oct 30, 2019 16:28:37 GMT
I don't understand how clubs can spend up to 200% of their turnover on wages! I guess SCMP/FFP rules are fairly toothless in the Championship. It's easy....define turnover. Creative book keeping, think Derby Sheffield Wednesday Aston Villa ground sales as examples.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Oct 30, 2019 16:33:39 GMT
Lansdowne has pumped how many hundreds of millions into that lot? And they're still no where near the "promised land". You're wishing them good luck? Seriously? I expect he will be pleased with a £9.8m trading profit from last season. It'll be interesting to see if they can keep up the circa £33m p/a in player sales.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 16:37:09 GMT
Just a side point - The opinion of my bathonian mates that follow neither of us is that city are basically prem in waiting and we are 30 years behind the times and on the decline with conference like facilities! I don’t argue with them!
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Oct 30, 2019 17:53:21 GMT
That "chart" must be old, given that it shows Sunderland as they have been in div One for 2 years now
|
|
|
Post by Okebournegas on Oct 30, 2019 20:09:16 GMT
Still swap places with them in a heart beat. They will eventually get into the promised land of the premier league and we risk losing future generations of supporters. The gulf between us has never been as big, good luck to them I say. If only we had owners like the duke of guernsey Lansdowne has pumped how many hundreds of millions into that lot? And they're still no where near the "promised land". You're wishing them good luck? Seriously? [br Yeah , good luck to them , if they’re willing to keep spunking millions to try and achieve promotion that’s they’re look out. Eventually if you throw enough sh** at something it’ll stick. In all fairness I don’t give them a thought but anyone can see that they are most definitely making huge steps towards the premier league. I’ve always favoured the under dog but I would never begrudge anyone success , even though I’d prefer it to not be them !
|
|
|
Post by rovers5charlton5 on Oct 30, 2019 20:32:31 GMT
For a club our size, unless we find a rich billionaire then yes, that's the only way I'm afraid. I don't think you need to be a billionaire, just a mere millionaire prepared to spend some of your fortune and not expect to see a financial return. Not a queue of them waiting in the wings no doubt but other clubs get them. I think the charge over the Mem and the fact the AQ's will not write that off, means there isn't likely to be a change of ownership anytime soon. Most grounds which are still owned by their clubs have some kind of charge over them, so I'm sure that wouldn't put investors off. Spending money just for the sake of it doesn't necessarily guarantee success, just look at Bury and Bolton.
|
|
|
Post by Gastafari on Oct 30, 2019 22:35:00 GMT
Makes the stomach turn doesn't it. As time goes on i am more and more "Meh" regarding football. I will always love Rovers but something needs to change in the game. I am not sure there is even an answer. Unfortunately it will probably take half the Football League to do a Bury before something changes. I dont think that will make any difference whatsoever. For every Bury, Stockport, Darlington, Hereford, Chester, etc that goes, there'll be a Fleetwood, Crawley, Salford etc to take its place
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Oct 31, 2019 12:58:08 GMT
Just a side point - The opinion of my bathonian mates that follow neither of us is that city are basically prem in waiting and we are 30 years behind the times and on the decline with conference like facilities! I don’t argue with them! Because it’s true. We cannot be compared to the 82 , not in any way. The only reason we all still get wound up and have the feelings we do is because we are in the same city but that is where any and all comparisons end. Regardless of emotion, they really are a prem club in the waiting and I’m sure it will happen and SL knows that even one season there will change finances in the positive for them. There really is no comparisons to be made with them. They have moved onward and upward while we have just about tread water but making losses that are bigger in nature when you take everything into consideration. Sad but true.
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Oct 31, 2019 13:01:05 GMT
I don't think you need to be a billionaire, just a mere millionaire prepared to spend some of your fortune and not expect to see a financial return. Not a queue of them waiting in the wings no doubt but other clubs get them. I think the charge over the Mem and the fact the AQ's will not write that off, means there isn't likely to be a change of ownership anytime soon. Most grounds which are still owned by their clubs have some kind of charge over them, so I'm sure that wouldn't put investors off. Spending money just for the sake of it doesn't necessarily guarantee success, just look at Bury and Bolton. I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831, can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see.
|
|
|
Post by bristolsfinestever on Oct 31, 2019 13:05:15 GMT
Just a side point - The opinion of my bathonian mates that follow neither of us is that city are basically prem in waiting and we are 30 years behind the times and on the decline with conference like facilities! I don’t argue with them! Because it’s true. We cannot be compared to the 82 , not in any way. The only reason we all still get wound up and have the feelings we do is because we are in the same city but that is where any and all comparisons end. Regardless of emotion, they really are a prem club in the waiting and I’m sure it will happen and SL knows that even one season there will change finances in the positive for them. There really is no comparisons to be made with them. They have moved onward and upward while we have just about tread water but making losses that are bigger in nature when you take everything into consideration. Sad but true. A very well thought out and balanced post. Think you are spot on with "Regardless of emotion, they really are a prem club in the waiting and I’m sure it will happen and SL knows that even one season there will change finances in the positive for them" part - also last time when Windass became a Gas legend, they didn't have the infrastructure supporting them that they do now. As you allude to though, these comments are "regardless of emotion", which is very difficult for many between the 2 clubs. Just need to push on looking at our own club and trying to ignore any noisy neighbours.
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 11,319
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 31, 2019 13:10:54 GMT
Most grounds which are still owned by their clubs have some kind of charge over them, so I'm sure that wouldn't put investors off. Spending money just for the sake of it doesn't necessarily guarantee success, just look at Bury and Bolton. I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831, can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see. I set up this thread a while ago so is out of date. In terms of a charge, quite a few although not sure if the circumstances are comparable. gaschat.co.uk/thread/11708/football-finances
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Oct 31, 2019 13:14:34 GMT
I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831 , can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see. I set up this thread a while ago so is out of date. In terms of a charge, quite a few although not sure if the circumstances are comparable. gaschat.co.uk/thread/11708/football-financesThank you. Very much appreciated Stuart. It makes for some interesting reading and I will have a better look when I’m done at the dental hospital. Thanks again
|
|
|
Post by rovers5charlton5 on Oct 31, 2019 13:45:25 GMT
Most grounds which are still owned by their clubs have some kind of charge over them, so I'm sure that wouldn't put investors off. Spending money just for the sake of it doesn't necessarily guarantee success, just look at Bury and Bolton. I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831, can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see. The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Oct 31, 2019 14:04:37 GMT
I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831, can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see. The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank. We left Eastville on a deal done with a handshake. Sold us down the river.
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Oct 31, 2019 14:28:32 GMT
I will ask you the same question that I asked @kingswoodgas18831 , can you name, say 10 clubs with charges against their stadium please ? I will forget the interest. I’d be genuinely interested to see. The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank. Yet NH, however I and others viewed him, never did this. We now do not own the ground as the equity has been drawn from it if Daniel is correct. NH may have got many things wrong but he never jeopardised us by placing any charge on the ground and it has been widely reported that the club was passed on for the 7.5 million that covered the directors debts, in the belief that finance would not be an issue and that a new ground was on it way with finance not being an issue
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Oct 31, 2019 14:50:15 GMT
The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank. Yet NH, however I and others viewed him, never did this. We now do not own the ground as the equity has been drawn from it if Daniel is correct. NH may have got many things wrong but he never jeopardised us by placing any charge on the ground and it has been widely reported that the club was passed on for the 7.5 million that covered the directors debts, in the belief that finance would not be an issue and that a new ground was on it wat but there have 'always' been charges of some sort on the ground, be it MSP, Courage's, Deltavon (Geoff D I believe)
|
|
|
Post by splitter on Oct 31, 2019 15:15:20 GMT
The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank. Yet NH, however I and others viewed him, never did this. We now do not own the ground as the equity has been drawn from it if Daniel is correct. NH may have got many things wrong but he never jeopardised us by placing any charge on the ground and it has been widely reported that the club was passed on for the 7.5 million that covered the directors debts, in the belief that finance would not be an issue and that a new ground was on it wat That doesn't make sense. Dwane own the ground. The loan is from Dwane. Therefore Dwane still own the ground. By having a charge over it, it means that Dwane get "first dibs" on the the cash from any sale if for instance we went into administration. As PP has mentioned, there has been a charge on the ground in various forms throughout the years. Previously they have included Deltavon, Courage brewery, Barclays Bank. You could argue that was infact a worse position to be in, as they debt was to a third party who would have had first refusal on money owed.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Oct 31, 2019 15:20:44 GMT
The amount of time it'd take me to check isn't worth it. I could throw it back at you, and ask you to name 10 which don't. It has been widely accepted as a means of football league clubs securing their debt for many years, and most banks have insisted on it. One of the reasons we left Eastville was that we didn't own the ground, and so couldn't secure the debt which we owed to the bank. Yet NH, however I and others viewed him, never did this. We now do not own the ground as the equity has been drawn from it if Daniel is correct. NH may have got many things wrong but he never jeopardised us by placing any charge on the ground and it has been widely reported that the club was passed on for the 7.5 million that covered the directors debts, in the belief that finance would not be an issue and that a new ground was on it wat Sorry mate but that's just not true, what do you think a mortgage is?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Oct 31, 2019 15:31:22 GMT
Yet NH, however I and others viewed him, never did this. We now do not own the ground as the equity has been drawn from it if Daniel is correct. NH may have got many things wrong but he never jeopardised us by placing any charge on the ground and it has been widely reported that the club was passed on for the 7.5 million that covered the directors debts, in the belief that finance would not be an issue and that a new ground was on it wat That doesn't make sense. Dwane own the ground. The loan is from Dwane. Therefore Dwane still own the ground. By having a charge over it, it means that Dwane get "first dibs" on the the cash from any sale if for instance we went into administration. As PP has mentioned, there has been a charge on the ground in various forms throughout the years. Previously they have included Deltavon, Courage brewery, Barclays Bank. You could argue that was infact a worse position to be in, as they debt was to a third party who would have had first refusal on money owed. Who would put BRFC 1883 Ltd into administration ?
|
|
|
Post by blueridge on Oct 31, 2019 16:10:50 GMT
That doesn't make sense. Dwane own the ground. The loan is from Dwane. Therefore Dwane still own the ground. By having a charge over it, it means that Dwane get "first dibs" on the the cash from any sale if for instance we went into administration. As PP has mentioned, there has been a charge on the ground in various forms throughout the years. Previously they have included Deltavon, Courage brewery, Barclays Bank. You could argue that was infact a worse position to be in, as they debt was to a third party who would have had first refusal on money owed. Who would put BRFC 1883 Ltd into administration ? Dwane Sports Limited ?
|
|