|
Post by saddletramp on Jul 16, 2012 7:12:33 GMT
The thing is,IL said that bringing in new players wasnt an option because of the salary cap,it will have to be loan deals. So how did the scum get around the cap?
|
|
|
Post by concretebob on Jul 16, 2012 7:51:46 GMT
The thing is,IL said that bringing in new players wasnt an option because of the salary cap,it will have to be loan deals. So how did the scum get around the cap? One year grace period after relegation. Another reason why them winning the league last season wasn't a surprise at all.
|
|
|
Post by greatunclekip on Jul 16, 2012 8:39:17 GMT
The salary cap rules have more holes than Blackburn, Lancashire.
See Crawley, Fleetwood, Swinedon, Rotherham etc. directors can pump in cash, sponsors can contribute etc.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 16, 2012 10:06:38 GMT
Why? What have they done? What have you done in support of OUFC save for subjecting us to going-on 10,000 posts of drivel on here? I'm still interested as to why you think Swindon will suffer the same plight as Luton?
|
|
|
Post by moomooland on Jul 16, 2012 10:51:26 GMT
What have you done in support of OUFC save for subjecting us to going-on 10,000 posts of drivel on here? I'm still interested as to why you think Swindon will suffer the same plight as Luton? Something to do with clubs spending money they don't have. nb. See also Portsmouth, Rangers and a host of other clubs. Geddit now?
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 16, 2012 11:12:49 GMT
But the point is that they DO have the money.
The only blot on the landscape is if they are breaching the salary cap.
There seems to be a lot of jealousy on here, especially cos it's Swindon.
I'd advocate concentrating on OUFC - that's what's important to people on here.
Isn't it???
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 16, 2012 11:49:20 GMT
I'm still interested as to why you think Swindon will suffer the same plight as Luton? Something to do with clubs spending money they don't have. nb. See also Portsmouth, Rangers and a host of other clubs. Geddit now? But they do have it. Their owners have it and are investing it in the club. You can't make unfounded accusations unless you have some insight or it's actually happened. Ian Moore is right - it's jealousy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2012 11:57:45 GMT
But the point is that they DO have the money. The only blot on the landscape is if they are breaching the salary cap. There seems to be a lot of jealousy on here, especially cos it's Swindon. I'd advocate concentrating on OUFC - that's what's important to people on here. Isn't it??? Of course they have the money. And they're unlikely to fall into financial danger as their loans are "soft" loans to the owners, who are hardly going to file for bankruptcy / CVA to get 10p in the £ of their own money back. But I'd advocate you remember that the Scum are not just another club. They are our only rivals, and people will naturally look for any chink of misfortune in their affairs. Call it jealousy if you like, I call it rivalry.
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 16, 2012 12:37:10 GMT
Fair comment - but it sometimes appears that some on here are more interested in Swindon crashing and burning than OUFC doing well.
Perverse
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2012 12:51:53 GMT
Fair comment - but it sometimes appears that some on here are more interested in Swindon crashing and burning than OUFC doing well. Perverse That would indeed be perverse, but I don't recall anyone - even Swindon-detesting Eric - showing that amount of imbalance. The ideal would be OUFC do well while STFC suffer. I would rather have had promotion last season than the double, but preferably both! I don't believe the Scummers who claimed the double defeats meant nothing to them because they were promoted, unless they're too young / thick to understand the history.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 16, 2012 13:10:19 GMT
Then again, our whole season was about those 2 games to the detriment of the season as a whole.
As they say 'don't take your eyes off the prize'
|
|
|
Post by barmyarmy on Jul 16, 2012 18:28:41 GMT
Something to do with clubs spending money they don't have. nb. See also Portsmouth, Rangers and a host of other clubs. Geddit now? But they do have it. Their owners have it and are investing it in the club. You can't make unfounded accusations unless you have some insight or it's actually happened. Ian Moore is right - it's jealousy. So the Scum owners invest in their team to buy success and thats ok, we are just jealous. Man City and Chelsea owners invest in their team to buy success but thats not fair because its not a level playing field. You are just jealous. Hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 16, 2012 19:50:07 GMT
That's a ridiculous comment.
Surely every club owner, including our own, invests in their club in order to achieve success.
Just because some decide to invest more than others is just the way of the world.
And don't tell me that if IL or anyone in the future decided to pump serious cash into our club you would be dead against it
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 16, 2012 20:39:42 GMT
But they do have it. Their owners have it and are investing it in the club. You can't make unfounded accusations unless you have some insight or it's actually happened. Ian Moore is right - it's jealousy. So the Scum owners invest in their team to buy success and thats ok, we are just jealous. Man City and Chelsea owners invest in their team to buy success but thats not fair because its not a level playing field. You are just jealous. Hypocrite. Not quite the same thing though is it? Are Swindon paying a wage bill far and above what they generate? If yes, I prefusely apologise. But I doubt it
|
|
|
Post by whitehorsered (Swindon fan) on Jul 16, 2012 22:26:46 GMT
It would appear that the answer is yes even after player sales and this is likely to be evidenced (again) in the next set of company accounts.
It would also appear that the playing budget is not especially excessive by league one standards, even if it stayed at a middling league one level last season.
However the club does have serious backers of some substance who incidentally are not money launderers. It also has a vision. That is championship football and a redeveloped town centre ground.
The club is starting to convert debts to its backers into share capital to make it more sustainable and less dependent on soft loans.
For every Abramovich-style sugar daddy, there are the Chanrais the Venkys and so on and I like our honest and moderately wealthy, UK backers from the likes of Betfair and Perpetual etc who have experience of succesful speculation.
I don't entirely see that the Championship is some sort of goldmine however as you are competing with parachute premiership clubs so the old balancing of the operating Profit and Loss will continue to be a challenge I expect. I can't see us filling a redeveloped ground with a third rate championship team. There is certainly "hope" for you lot on the financial front that our speculation might fail, but mind you don't get left behind either, especially if there is a Premiership 2 and we sneak into it.
It is surely right to have ambition though (even if that is hardly the story of either of our clubs, in the main).
Perhaps form will bomb and PDC will storm out by October and you will sit pretty at the top of League 2 by Christmas.
Realistically, how each club handles its ground situation will be key to our comparative fortunes for the medium term though.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Jul 16, 2012 22:35:36 GMT
So the Scum owners invest in their team to buy success and thats ok, we are just jealous. Man City and Chelsea owners invest in their team to buy success but thats not fair because its not a level playing field. You are just jealous. Hypocrite. Not quite the same thing though is it? Are Swindon paying a wage bill far and above what they generate? If yes, I prefusely apologise. But I doubt it Moobs you are right that Swindon generally earn more than they spend on players but their overall wages bill including Directors, Staff and Players is nearly always close to their total revenue. For example in the year to May 2011 their turnover was £4.6M with wage bill of £4.4M. Their overall expenditure was just under £8M so that means they spent another £3.6M in addition to their wages. This suggests to me that they overspent massively on players. Their wages v turnover for the last six years were(T/O - Wages - Profit or Loss): 2011 - £4.6M - £4.4M - £1.33M loss 2010 - £5.3M - £4.3M - £0.42M profit 2009 - £3.5M - £3.9M - £3.01M loss 2008 - £3.8M - £3.9M - £2.81M loss 2007 - £3.5M - £3.3M - £1.76M loss 2006 - £3.2M - £2.3M - £0.73M loss In the two years to May 2011 they sold players and wrote back costs relating to legal cases against previous owners of £4.9M and they wrote of debt of over £1M relating to a CVA (so some creditors lost money) but they still made losses of just under £1M despite having turnover of £10M for those two years. They had made cumulative losses of £14M up until May 2011 and that also suggests that they have been overspending for years. It will be interesting to see how much they overspent last season. This is not a problem if the owners/backers are funding the losses but we do not know exactly how deep their pockets are and circumstances change (IL was worth 100s of millions a few years ago but realised a fraction of the value earlier this year). How many times have we seen supposedly wealthy owners take their clubs to the verge of bankruptcy or beyond? They are far from the worst offenders in football but does that make it right?
|
|
|
Post by junior1 on Jul 17, 2012 7:50:29 GMT
It would appear that the answer is yes even after player sales and this is likely to be evidenced (again) in the next set of company accounts. It would also appear that the playing budget is not especially excessive by league one standards, even if it stayed at a middling league one level last season. However the club does have serious backers of some substance who incidentally are not money launderers. It also has a vision. That is championship football and a redeveloped town centre ground. The club is starting to convert debts to its backers into share capital to make it more sustainable and less dependent on soft loans. For every Abramovich-style sugar daddy, there are the Chanrais the Venkys and so on and I like our honest and moderately wealthy, UK backers from the likes of Betfair and Perpetual etc who have experience of succesful speculation. I don't entirely see that the Championship is some sort of goldmine however as you are competing with parachute premiership clubs so the old balancing of the operating Profit and Loss will continue to be a challenge I expect. I can't see us filling a redeveloped ground with a third rate championship team. There is certainly "hope" for you lot on the financial front that our speculation might fail, but mind you don't get left behind either, especially if there is a Premiership 2 and we sneak into it. It is surely right to have ambition though (even if that is hardly the story of either of our clubs, in the main). Perhaps form will bomb and PDC will storm out by October and you will sit pretty at the top of League 2 by Christmas. Realistically, how each club handles its ground situation will be key to our comparative fortunes for the medium term though. You keep on believing that pal.. It's soon going to go tits up
|
|
|
Post by helsinkiyellow on Jul 17, 2012 10:42:48 GMT
So the Scum owners invest in their team to buy success and thats ok, we are just jealous. Man City and Chelsea owners invest in their team to buy success but thats not fair because its not a level playing field. You are just jealous. Hypocrite. Not quite the same thing though is it? Are Swindon paying a wage bill far and above what they generate? If yes, I prefusely apologise. But I doubt it I think Scoob's analysis concludes that Swindon ARE spending far and above what they generate - so would you agree that they are a lower league version of Chelsea/Man City? However, I have no doubt that the owners have deep pockets. It's not inconceivable that they could get promoted from L1 season, shove another £10m in and be in contention for promotion to the premier league in the following year. Just one season in the premier league could clear all debts and subsequent parachute payments would ensure they were competitive in the Championship for a few more seasons after following relegation. Some will say fairplay to the Swindon owners for giving it a go but surly this is the footballing equivalent of roulette? It's hardly sustainable and if it turns sour, it's ultimately the fans that will pay.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 17, 2012 11:07:09 GMT
I stand corrected.
Whether they get into financial problems as a result remains to be seen
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 17, 2012 11:22:05 GMT
A lot of clubs are in financial difficulties even if they have not pumped money into the playing side.
Forget it's Swindon - I say fair play to them if they can make it work.
I don't see how what they are aiming for is any different from what Reading started off doing when Majdeski took over.
But one thing's for sure - without substantial funds available for the playing side there is only so far ANY club can go up the pyramid - and that most definitely includes us
|
|
|
Post by yelloexile on Jul 17, 2012 11:33:29 GMT
Fair comment - but it sometimes appears that some on here are more interested in Swindon crashing and burning than OUFC doing well. Perverse You seem to be posting a lot about them.
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 17, 2012 11:37:54 GMT
Didn't start the thread - just responding.
Can't be a hypocrite as what is happening at Swindon is what I would like to see at OUFC.
|
|
|
Post by barmyarmy on Jul 17, 2012 16:00:47 GMT
Didn't start the thread - just responding. Can't be a hypocrite as what is happening at Swindon is what I would like to see at OUFC. Why would you want OUFC to be £14 million in debt? Where do you think they will be if the owners money runs out and he walks away or worse takes his money with him? Investing is another word for gambling, an owner comes in and shoves some money in hoping that they can sell at a profit. I dont want someone gambling with OUFC. Buy the stadium, increase income and insure we have a manager that can get the most out of a very competitive budget.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 17, 2012 16:26:12 GMT
STFC increasing their budget by £2MM is like ours going up by £200K. They have some extremely wealthy backers, though whether Arbib is actually putting more in would be worth seeing.
I'd love to see us go storming up the divisions, but the problem of increasing wages by £2MM means that often lasts at least two seasons if you are signing players on long contracts.
Anyway, given the choice of 6 figures spent on the strength and conditioning, or 6 figures on players who get injured, I'd have to pick the former after last season.
|
|
|
Post by yelloexile on Jul 17, 2012 17:36:29 GMT
Didn't start the thread - just responding. Can't be a hypocrite as what is happening at Swindon is what I would like to see at OUFC. Why would you want OUFC to be £14 million in debt? Where do you think they will be if the owners money runs out and he walks away or worse takes his money with him? Investing is another word for gambling, an owner comes in and shoves some money in hoping that they can sell at a profit. I dont want someone gambling with OUFC. Buy the stadium, increase income and insure we have a manager that can get the most out of a very competitive budget. To be fair I'm not sure he remembers the time when the club nearly folded. Then a multi-milionaire came in to save the club and take us on a journey..... Football should be run on a sustainable basis - there's a growing list of fans from clubs (in no particular order) such as Rangers, Portsmouth, Luton, Darlington, Chester..... who've faced points deductions, relegations, and winding up due to financial mismanagement. I'm not jealous of Swindon at all. If we were in that position, I'd be nervous as hell and waiting for the wheels to come off. Even a club like Kidderminster had a sugar daddy, he died, and then they nearly went out of existence.
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Jul 17, 2012 17:56:20 GMT
I am not jealous - just a little envious I guess.
Some of us on here haven't got as much time as others to wait for the slow but sure approach - if, indeed, that will ever work.
It is strange, though, that when people trot out the clubs that have got into difficulties, they forget about Reading, Wigan even QPR etc.
A wealthy benefactor does not always equal financial meltdown.
|
|
|
Post by yelloexile on Jul 17, 2012 18:15:51 GMT
The clubs you list all have the potential.
All it takes is a fairly siple equation of huge wage bill + relegation = crisis.
I'd imagine there are a few Leeds fans who've been there and bought the t-shirt. Coventry are now in the crap. Yes, there are some clubs doing it well, but they're in the minority.
If Richard Branson wanted to come in and buy us, so be it. But I'd want a contingency plan if he become bored or kicked the bucket.
|
|
|
Post by barmyarmy on Jul 17, 2012 19:07:42 GMT
I am not jealous - just a little envious I guess. Some of us on here haven't got as much time as others to wait for the slow but sure approach - if, indeed, that will ever work. It is strange, though, that when people trot out the clubs that have got into difficulties, they forget about Reading, Wigan even QPR etc. A wealthy benefactor does not always equal financial meltdown. QPR? Not sure they are a good example. A wealthy benefactor doesnt always equal success. Have you forgotten Firoz? If the Scum owners are donating the money then fine, they are ok as long as they stay there. When they go then who pays the wage bill? If they are not donating the money then how and when do they want it back? If they get up one morning and think "f*ck this" im bored.... Yellowexile is right, good management on and off the pitch is the way forward, not some investor with dubious motives or wanting a toy to play with.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jul 18, 2012 9:47:08 GMT
The difference with Firoz is he had the money but didn't put it into the club - well not enough of it. Plus he didn't really have the clubs interest at heart.
Swindon's backers have the money and they ARE putting it in, and it seems they want the club to succeed.
|
|
|
Post by helsinkiyellow on Jul 18, 2012 10:04:34 GMT
The difference with Firoz is he had the money but didn't put it into the club - well not enough of it. Plus he didn't really have the clubs interest at heart. Swindon's backers have the money and they ARE putting it in, and it seems they want the club to succeed. Wasn't Ka$$am pretty much investing part of the money that was being generated by (1) the old stadium sell-off and (2) the assets on the Grenoble Road site which were intended to be owned by the club anyway? Yes Swindon's backers are pumping cash in but you don't know their long-term intentions. They could walk away in a couple of seasons and the club would implode under it's own debt mountain. Same arguement that you have made in favour of Arsenal's business model over Man City/Chelsea.
|
|