myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pl00peh91 Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 What does rugby have to do with FFP? 14 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Oil Services Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 Wish Steve would make his mind up - does he love the rugby/hate the City, or as this week suggests love the City/hate the rugby? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 51 minutes ago, myol'man said: ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? PLAYERS WAGE BILL BRISTOL RUGBY = £7 million including marquee players and homegrown PLAYERS WAGE BILL BRISTOL CITY = £12Million according to salarysport.com 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Marina's Rolls Royce Posted November 27, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted November 27, 2021 54 minutes ago, myol'man said: ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? Really? SL could be rightly accused of spending his money unwisely or of making bad decisions but accusations of not spending in support of all his sporting interests and their facilities is utter nonsense. P.s membership /support for OTIB is £5. Whose wallet is dustiest? 16 1 7 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Rojo Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 'Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson' classic arrogant and disrespectful post. Lack of any concept of the financial differences between the 2 sports and in particular the financial constraints this football club are in. Do some research. Close thread mods. 15 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevedon Red Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 3 hours ago, Moments of Pleasure said: Wish Steve would make his mind up - does he love the rugby/hate the City, or as this week suggests love the City/hate the rugby? What’s he done for you to draw this conclusion? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the1stknowle Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 4 hours ago, myol'man said: ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? 'Oh hey there tired old chesnut. Nice to see you again. It's been weeks.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Oil Services Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Clevedon Red said: What’s he done for you to draw this conclusion? Give us a minute while I go back through the old threads, and I'll get back to you on that .... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 Just trying to open the debate boys and girls ️ I know that the top rugby boys earn the equivalent of a championship football player and the restraints of FFP in the EFL but SL isn't the Almighty you know 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevedon Red Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 35 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said: Give us a minute while I go back through the old threads, and I'll get back to you on that .... Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 5 hours ago, The Bard said: PLAYERS WAGE BILL BRISTOL RUGBY = £7 million including marquee players and homegrown PLAYERS WAGE BILL BRISTOL CITY = £12Million according to salarysport.com 12 mil? Lansdown wishes. Double that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 49 minutes ago, myol'man said: I know the restraints of FFP in the EFL Cool you've answered your own question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: Just trying to open the debate boys and girls ️ I know that the top rugby boys earn the equivalent of a championship football player and the restraints of FFP in the EFL but SL isn't the Almighty you know So you "open the debate" then closed it yourself in your next post. Great. My dad used to refer to things like this as "attention getting behaviour"... but he was talking about children usually. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 47 minutes ago, Port Said Red said: So you "open the debate" then closed it yourself in your next post. Great. My dad used to refer to things like this as "attention getting behaviour"... but he was talking about children usually. I know that I'm getting shot down in flames here, but outside of the four walls of OTIB, fans ask this question. The point I'm making is the Bears are safe in the Premiership bubble, they sure ain't gonna win it this season, City haven't really spent big for several windows, so, will Pearson be given a bit of leeway to improve the squad? £££ A couple of years ago it was being said that as we are nowhere near the £39m loss over 3 season threshold it'll be soon time to splash the cash. Hasn't happened yet? *puts on tin helmet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, myol'man said: I know that I'm getting shot down in flames here, but outside of the four walls of OTIB, fans ask this question. The point I'm making is the Bears are safe in the Premiership bubble, they sure ain't gonna win it this season, City haven't really spent big for several windows, so, will Pearson be given a bit of leeway to improve the squad? £££ A couple of years ago it was being said that as we are nowhere near the £39m loss over 3 season threshold it'll be soon time to splash the cash. Hasn't happened yet? *puts on tin helmet When you factor in wages etc, we have no leeway on that loss figure. The only way we could spend is to sell someone for a significant fee. The people "outside the OTIB bubble" need educating on these things. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrick's Marvels Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 4 hours ago, Clevedon Red said: What’s he done for you to draw this conclusion? Whooooosh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 (edited) 43 minutes ago, myol'man said: I know that I'm getting shot down in flames here, but outside of the four walls of OTIB, fans ask this question. The point I'm making is the Bears are safe in the Premiership bubble, they sure ain't gonna win it this season, City haven't really spent big for several windows, so, will Pearson be given a bit of leeway to improve the squad? £££ A couple of years ago it was being said that as we are nowhere near the £39m loss over 3 season threshold it'll be soon time to splash the cash. Hasn't happened yet? *puts on tin helmet I'm genuinely confused. In one post you seem to be implying that SL isn't spending by choice and this had something to to with the bears, in another post you say you know about the "restraints of FFP in the EFL", then in another following post you seem to then once again imply that it is some sort of decision not to fund Pearson. To be clear SL is wealthy enough that he could if he wanted to fund Bristol City the Bears and all the other sports ventures he is involved in a few times over but as you say there are rules such as FFP that stop this. I doubt he has a kitty for sport and then decides which way to push the money. Can you remember 19/20 when we did spend big when Kalas, Palmer, JD, HNM, Wells, Nagy, Bentley as well as about 5 other (at least) players joined? In what I think is an answer to your question - that's when we spent big. Edited November 27, 2021 by Pezo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 8 hours ago, myol'man said: ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? Why is this myth still being peddled ffs 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlyotib Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 8 hours ago, myol'man said: ...and there is no danger of relegation from the rugby Premiership, will Lansdown hand his dusty wallet to Pearson in January ? Let’s face it has he really ever backed us in January 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 57 minutes ago, myol'man said: I know that I'm getting shot down in flames here, but outside of the four walls of OTIB, fans ask this question. The point I'm making is the Bears are safe in the Premiership bubble, they sure ain't gonna win it this season, City haven't really spent big for several windows, so, will Pearson be given a bit of leeway to improve the squad? £££ A couple of years ago it was being said that as we are nowhere near the £39m loss over 3 season threshold it'll be soon time to splash the cash. Hasn't happened yet? *puts on tin helmet Firstly, I don’t understand why you bring Bears into the subject matter. It’s totally irrelevant in whether City have money to spend or not. If you genuinely want to discuss where City are in FFP terms, then I’m happy to get involved. Just reply as such and I’ll try and explain. But it is not “SL isn’t funding City, he’s funding Bears instead”, because actually he’s funding City massively. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 46 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Firstly, I don’t understand why you bring Bears into the subject matter. It’s totally irrelevant in whether City have money to spend or not. If you genuinely want to discuss where City are in FFP terms, then I’m happy to get involved. Just reply as such and I’ll try and explain. But it is not “SL isn’t funding City, he’s funding Bears instead”, because actually he’s funding City massively. Bringing the Bears into the discussion as we are all in the Bristol Sport team together, Bears are now much nearer being self sufficient than City. We all know SL funds both teams with huge amounts but he won't be here forever, so does he throw one more massive wedge at it before he rides off into the sunset? Or is he constrained by the FFP that you are about to explain? Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 1 minute ago, myol'man said: Bringing the Bears into the discussion as we are all in the Bristol Sport team together, Bears are now much nearer being self sufficient than City. We all know SL funds both teams with huge amounts but he won't be here forever, so does he throw one more massive wedge at it before he rides off into the sunset? Or is he constrained by the FFP that you are about to explain? Thank you Bears and City “funding” is completely separate, although both companies form part of Pula Sport…which SL owns. SL can put as much money as he likes into Bristol City, but unfortunately FFP means it’s pointless, because FFP says he can only cover losses not inject money - this is to stop an owner buying their way to success. A Champ club is allowed to make losses of £15m over a normal 3 year cycle (let’s ignore covid for now) without an owner offering to support (Ave. £5m p.a). If an owner offers to underwrite losses, then those increase to £39m of losses (Ave. £13m p.a). There are a few costs that are allowed to be left out of FFP, e.g. Academy and Ladies football. The losses over the last few years get complicated by covid. So that’s part one. Do you want to get into City’s position? 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevedon Red Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said: Whooooosh Not at all, mention made of something SL has done this week, just don’t know what it is that’s all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Bears and City “funding” is completely separate, although both companies form part of Pula Sport…which SL owns. SL can put as much money as he likes into Bristol City, but unfortunately FFP means it’s pointless, because FFP says he can only cover losses not inject money - this is to stop an owner buying their way to success. A Champ club is allowed to make losses of £15m over a normal 3 year cycle (let’s ignore covid for now) without an owner offering to support (Ave. £5m p.a). If an owner offers to underwrite losses, then those increase to £39m of losses (Ave. £13m p.a). There are a few costs that are allowed to be left out of FFP, e.g. Academy and Ladies football. The losses over the last few years get complicated by covid. So that’s part one. Do you want to get into City’s position? Yes, carry on please, very interesting Edited November 27, 2021 by myol'man 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RivieraRed Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 A pointless comment... taking pot shot at the Bears for no good reason... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 2 minutes ago, RivieraRed said: A pointless comment... taking pot shot at the Bears for no good reason... Taking pot shot at rugby Premiership for no relegation policy, Bears are just part of the closed shop now so they don't need anymore SL funding, finish bottom every season, no one cares! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC-Tom Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, myol'man said: Taking pot shot at rugby Premiership for no relegation policy, Bears are just part of the closed shop now so they don't need anymore SL funding, finish bottom every season, no one cares! No I’m pretty sure the Bristol Bears fans will care seeing them finish bottom every year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 (edited) Sometimes things are finger-licking good, other times they're just ass-wiping bad. Do bears? I can't speak for all of you, but I need no second chance to post up a video of this beautiful, iconic British legend. I'm talking about Kate, but Rowan is pretty iconic too. Edited November 27, 2021 by AppyDAZE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 4 hours ago, myol'man said: I know that I'm getting shot down in flames here, but outside of the four walls of OTIB, fans ask this question. The point I'm making is the Bears are safe in the Premiership bubble, they sure ain't gonna win it this season, City haven't really spent big for several windows, so, will Pearson be given a bit of leeway to improve the squad? £££ A couple of years ago it was being said that as we are nowhere near the £39m loss over 3 season threshold it'll be soon time to splash the cash. Hasn't happened yet? *puts on tin helmet 6 hours ago, myol'man said: I know the restraints of FFP in the EFL You clearly don't know the restrains of FFP then..... And I wonder what could have happened in the last 20 ish months that might have changed the financial standpoint of the club from when people were talking about having a healthy buffer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: Yes, carry on please, very interesting Part deux!! City’s accounts. We are currently waiting for last season’s accounts to be published - could be soon, could be Jan / Feb. Why two sets? As per part one City Ltd and Ashton Gate Ltd are part of Bristol City Holdings - nothing to do with Bears or Bristol Sport Ltd. We can assume that for FFP purpose that we report at Holdings level, but I split the above the pic into Holdings at the top, City football at the bottom. You can see that City’s income was £16.2m in 19/20 but costs were £49.8m, over 3x our income. Thank **** we made £25.6m on transfers. Thats the model - sell players to cover the costs. Even with those sales we still lost £7.4m (City / £9.1m (Holdings) Whoaaaaaaa, hang on a minute. That’s not really sustainability is it? As an owner might you question: - what happens if you don’t make so much money on transfers - what happens if costs keep going up (wages up 93% in 4 years, amortisation 419%, other costs 129%) As a smarmy golden bollox CEO you might answer (in annoying midland accent): - nobody understands the market as well as I do The head-coach might say: - I need that that extra “no10” / club in the bag Ah yes, but nobody could have foreseen a pandemic. Indeed not, but all covid did was bring forward the point when we no longer had enough assets (players to sell) to cover the rising cost base. I’ve been on the case for 3+ years. I’m not an accountant but I saw it coming. Lansdown (snr and jr) took their eyes off the ball, the chief protagonists have left for League One. Dean Holden got the first end of the rough stick, Nige is getting the double ended dildo of the mess left by to use his words - “the collective”. To add some balance, thank **** we did make those player sales, we’d have lost over £100m otherwise, and thank **** we did make a profit in 18/19. I’ll come back to that. You ready for part three….what it means for City going forward - January and beyond? 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 5 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Part deux!! City’s accounts. We are currently waiting for last season’s accounts to be published - could be soon, could be Jan / Feb. Why two sets? As per part one City Ltd and Ashton Gate Ltd are part of Bristol City Holdings - nothing to do with Bears or Bristol Sport Ltd. We can assume that for FFP purpose that we report at Holdings level, but I split the above the pic into Holdings at the top, City football at the bottom. You can see that City’s income was £16.2m in 19/20 but costs were £49.8m, over 3x our income. Thank **** we made £25.6m on transfers. Thats the model - sell players to cover the costs. Even with those sales we still lost £7.4m (City / £9.1m (Holdings) Whoaaaaaaa, hang on a minute. That’s not really sustainability is it? As an owner might you question: - what happens if you don’t make so much money on transfers - what happens if costs keep going up (wages up 93% in 4 years, amortisation 419%, other costs 129%) As a smarmy golden bollox CEO you might answer (in annoying midland accent): - nobody understands the market as well as I do The head-coach might say: - I need that that extra “no10” / club in the bag Ah yes, but nobody could have foreseen a pandemic. Indeed not, but all covid did was bring forward the point when we no longer had enough assets (players to sell) to cover the rising cost base. I’ve been on the case for 3+ years. I’m not an accountant but I saw it coming. Lansdown (snr and jr) took their eyes off the ball, the chief protagonists have left for League One. Dean Holden got the first end of the rough stick, Nige is getting the double ended dildo of the mess left by to use his words - “the collective”. To add some balance, thank **** we did make those player sales, we’d have lost over £100m otherwise, and thank **** we did make a profit in 18/19. I’ll come back to that. You ready for part three….what it means for City going forward - January and beyond? So salaries are a bit more than £12M, then . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderInACan Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 5 minutes ago, Davefevs said: You ready for part three…. I’m off to bed but this is like who shot JR 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 28, 2021 Author Share Posted November 28, 2021 35 minutes ago, Lrrr said: You clearly don't know the restrains of FFP then..... And I wonder what could have happened in the last 20 ish months that might have changed the financial standpoint of the club from when people were talking about having a healthy buffer.... Ah! I wondered how long it would be before someone mentioned the C word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgrsimon Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: Taking pot shot at rugby Premiership for no relegation policy, Bears are just part of the closed shop now so they don't need anymore SL funding, finish bottom every season, no one cares! Only last season and this I think? The idea is to get all the 13 "big clubs" plus one into the Premiership, then 1up 1down. Almost a closed shop but not quite. Otherwise it would almost always be the case that the 1/13 that gets relegated comes straight back up again. I think basically Exeter f'd the system up by not getting relegated and becoming a "big" club when they went up. At the end of next season one of the minnows can go up if they want it / can afford it but will be odds-on to go straight back down. So almost a closed shop but not quite. Not sure what happens if none of the minnows fancy it because you'd end up with an unbalanced 13 team league like this season, with 1 team always having a blank weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 10 minutes ago, CyderInACan said: I’m off to bed but this is like who shot JR Poison Dwart? Charlene Tipton, not Lee Johnson (yeah, I know it wasn’t her - Kristen) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgrsimon Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 A question for the more knowlegable Is there no way that any of the Bears income can offset FFP for City? I'm thinking specifically of money through Ashton Gate given that it's owned by Bristol CITY Holdings. If not wouldnt it be better overall if Bcfc 1982 still technically owned the stadium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 minute ago, billywedlock said: This is the nonsense of FFP. It is not fair play when there are parachute payments. Why is it that a wealthy owner is not be allowed to invest the same as the Premier league gives to a few clubs. That is not fair play, that is making an unfair system even more unfair. Of course you want to see the money, not like Derby where it is loans upon loans. But FFP should allow an owner to invest the same as the Premier league does . Or, just get rid of parachute payments. Steve L should be allowed to add £30M to our budget in funding if he wisihes, otherwise the EFL is just creating the most unfair league in the world. I’ve never quite “got” how a single solution of FFP solved two problems - 1) stop clubs going bust 2) create a level playing field. Some of the salary cap / squad size proposals that Lg1/2 had put in place and then got rid of last season were a good starting point….a good starting point for discussion not implementation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, fgrsimon said: A question for the more knowlegable Is there no way that any of the Bears income can offset FFP for City? I'm thinking specifically of money through Ashton Gate given that it's owned by Bristol CITY Holdings. If not wouldnt it be better overall if Bcfc 1982 still technically owned the stadium? Different structures IMO but not looked into it massively. Different groups- at least at the UK level. Although they sit under Pula, that isn't a UK company IIRC? 5 minutes ago, billywedlock said: This is the nonsense of FFP. It is not fair play when there are parachute payments. Why is it that a wealthy owner is not be allowed to invest the same as the Premier league gives to a few clubs. That is not fair play, that is making an unfair system even more unfair. Of course you want to see the money, not like Derby where it is loans upon loans. But FFP should allow an owner to invest the same as the Premier league does . Or, just get rid of parachute payments. Steve L should be allowed to add £30M to our budget in funding if he wisihes, otherwise the EFL is just creating the most unfair league in the world. As I understand it, the FFP regs such as they are- ie the 3 year P&S,, £39m- more on which in a minute- were voted in and ratified by the EFL, a majority of EFL clubs but in exchange for the Solidarity Payments. It was in a Governance review a couple of years back, will try and find it. Further, you might want to add that not only can (subject to equity injections), PL sides receive the Parachute Payments on relegation and have them count as income, each PL season has an Upper Loss Limit of £35m...whereas in the Championship it is £13m. @Davefevs I think there is actually something in the FFP regs about cash losses which should help with the solvency issue- although how enforceable this is, well clearly something has gone badly wrong with Derby. As for competitiveness, that's a whole different ballgame. Edited November 28, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) Found the snippet in q- and two other articles which also mention the idea of P&S being tied to Solidarity Payments. https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/201920/governance-reviews/governance-review.pdf The two other sources. http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/the-championship-embargo-and-premier-league-s-role-in-the-rule-change https://thedonstrust.org/2014/11/05/nov-14-dons-trust-board-meeting-summary/ Further down the first bit, I noticed this bit- would be useful to halt issues such as clubs getting promoted with FFP controversy under the current system- I can think of two in the Midlands. Given the regs themselves are fundamentally the same in the PL and Championship, this should've been in from Day 1- ie 2016/17 but there we go. Edited November 28, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 16 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Found the snippet in q- and two other articles which also mention the idea of P&S being tied to Solidarity Payments. https://www.efl.com/siteassets/image/201920/governance-reviews/governance-review.pdf The two other sources. http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/the-championship-embargo-and-premier-league-s-role-in-the-rule-change https://thedonstrust.org/2014/11/05/nov-14-dons-trust-board-meeting-summary/ Further down the first bit, I noticed this bit- would be useful to halt issues such as clubs getting promoted with FFP controversy under the current system- I can think of two in the Midlands. Given the regs themselves are fundamentally the same in the PL and Championship, this should've been in from Day 1- ie 2016/17 but there we go. Almost as though we need an independent regulator isn't it...? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 28, 2021 Author Share Posted November 28, 2021 @Davefevs in part 3 could you explain how at the end of his reign SL walks away with either a massive loss or a huge profit from his time here? Blows £45m on stadium redevelopment plus £100m on propping up the football club, but, by the end will own steady championship football club + never to be relegated Premiership rugby club + ladies & basketball teams + huge new Sports Village including hotels, apartments and events venue + massive housing development site over at Ashton Vale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 9 hours ago, JamesBCFC said: Let's sign Sancho to be a long term academy coach, 200k p/w. And then offer him £500 to play for the first team too I think Bears have done similar over the years. Jon Afoa this season is both a player and coach. Players with long term injuries have been found roles whilst going through recovery process which I imagine has removed them from the salary cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 9 hours ago, JamesBCFC said: Let's sign Sancho to be a long term academy coach, 200k p/w. And then offer him £500 to play for the first team too Not a million miles from the set up Gilmartin had right? @billywedlock did you read the Fan Led Review? It covers a lot of what you discuss in your fine post, including how to replace parachute payments, and why it doesn't think a salary cap would work. You make a good point about learning from the US sport systems, that is not really mentioned in the report. Edited November 28, 2021 by ExiledAjax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 9 hours ago, Davefevs said: I’ve never quite “got” how a single solution of FFP solved two problems - 1) stop clubs going bust 2) create a level playing field. Some of the salary cap / squad size proposals that Lg1/2 had put in place and then got rid of last season were a good starting point….a good starting point for discussion not implementation. I often think the EFL got it wrong in the major principle of FFP. I never had a problem with Jack Walker giving money to Blackburn or leaving a trust for them when he died. It wasn’t even an ‘investment’ save wanting to see his team succeed on the pitch. To my mind the issue was when clubs/owners borrow the money to invest against the club and it’s assets, essential putting the club at risk. That’s the issue. If Steven Lansdown wanted to make a one off donation of £100m, why shouldn’t he? You always had wealthier and poorer clubs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 59 minutes ago, myol'man said: @Davefevs in part 3 could you explain how at the end of his reign SL walks away with either a massive loss or a huge profit from his time here? Blows £45m on stadium redevelopment plus £100m on propping up the football club, but, by the end will own steady championship football club + never to be relegated Premiership rugby club + ladies & basketball teams + huge new Sports Village including hotels, apartments and events venue + massive housing development site over at Ashton Vale. Part three …and they all lived happily ever after in Guernsey and Bermuda. ok, a bit about where we are now and what it means for the future, and for Average Joe what we might have available to spend in the window(s). Caveat - based on estimated figures as accounts for last season aren’t out yet, and obviously not this season and beyond either. Firstly, we know that having made huge sums in transfer profit, up to 19/20, the depressed market has curtailed that Avenue of sustainability, last season we made a bit of money on Eliasson and Szmodics (believe it or not), but £2.6m transfer profit is nowhere near the amounts required to satisfy a high cost base. I’m predicting a loss of £29.2m last season. I’m probably being bullish, it could be £35m plus. SL has said it will be “horrible”. Part of the reason for me putting it lower is that I think a slug of costs also come out because we didn’t have to pay things if we weren’t having crowds! I’m predicting a £20m loss this season, and that’s assuming we don’t sell anyone, because we have little to sell. It also factors in Nige removing £10-12m of costs in the summer through reduced wages and amortisation coming to nil on the players he let go. That is a big factor and one Nige deserves a lot of credit. He’s working with one arm tied behind his back. What we see above is the relevant year’s being added together to show a three year total (4 year cycle during covid years where 19/20 and 20/21 are aggregated and halved - highlighted in yellow) in the penultimate column. In my previous post I said you can exclude Academy costs, amongst others and I reckon that saves us reporting £3m p.a., hence the £9m allowable exclusions in a 3 year cycle. So, if we take the cycle to the end of this season (21/22), which includes 18/19, 19/20 (50%), 20/21 (50%) and 21/22, you can see we are sitting with a FFP reporting loss of £18.3m, well inside the £39m. So why aren’t we going crazy in January? Why didn’t we go crazy in the summer? Well, it’s because the current FFP cycle includes 18/19, where we made a profit. That drops off at the end of this season, and you then see next season's cycle suddenly bust FFP…and the season after that. Basically, we are trying to correct years of huge overspend, when there is no transfer market to bail us out. So we are correcting by reducing costs, in particular wage bill and amortisation. Every fee we pay adds some costs onto those future year losses for the length of the players contract. A £3m signing on £10k p.w. on a 3 year contract costs us £1.5m p.a over those 3 years. A £6m striker on £20k p.w., double, obviously. We can’t afford those committed costs over future years. Hence why we are looking at free transfers, low fee / small wage players from Lg1/2 (Tanner / Atkinson). Hence why we resigned Baker and Weimann on lower wage contracts. We couldn’t afford to pay a fee to bring in other CB alongside Atkinson (£1.6m but longevity, future selling potential). So we brought Baker back, and bar concussion, he’s played ever so well this season. Likewise Weimann. So that positions where we are. As for SL, he may not make any money out of Bristol City, but he will make a load of money out of all the other pies he’s got his finger in. Looking at your username, you’re not Jon L are you….trying to work out what yer dad is doing are you? Part Four - ask away, what do you want to know? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 14 minutes ago, 054123 said: I often think the EFL got it wrong in the major principle of FFP. I never had a problem with Jack Walker giving money to Blackburn or leaving a trust for them when he died. It wasn’t even an ‘investment’ save wanting to see his team succeed on the pitch. To my mind the issue was when clubs/owners borrow the money to invest against the club and it’s assets, essential putting the club at risk. That’s the issue. If Steven Lansdown wanted to make a one off donation of £100m, why shouldn’t he? You always had wealthier and poorer clubs. Totally agree on that aspect. Level playing field part of it goes out the window though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said: Not a million miles from the set up Gilmartin had right? Other way round, paid as a player who then coached while under contract as a player Edited November 28, 2021 by Lrrr 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, Davefevs said: Totally agree on that aspect. Level playing field part of it goes out the window though. I know, but that’s part of it. If Man City can draw crowds of 28k in division 3 with a comparatively huge marketing and merchandise division to say Forest Green, then it isn’t a level playing field, it’s just the way it is. I have no problem with Jack Walker buying the league title for the people of Blackburn. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, Davefevs said: Part three …and they all lived happily ever after in Guernsey and Bermuda. ok, a bit about where we are now and what it means for the future, and for Average Joe what we might have available to spend in the window(s). Caveat - based on estimated figures as accounts for last season aren’t out yet, and obviously not this season and beyond either. Firstly, we know that having made huge sums in transfer profit, up to 19/20, the depressed market has curtailed that Avenue of sustainability, last season we made a bit of money on Eliasson and Szmodics (believe it or not), but £2.6m transfer profit is nowhere near the amounts required to satisfy a high cost base. I’m predicting a loss of £29.2m last season. I’m probably being bullish, it could be £35m plus. SL has said it will be “horrible”. Part of the reason for me putting it lower is that I think a slug of costs also come out because we didn’t have to pay things if we weren’t having crowds! I’m predicting a £20m loss this season, and that’s assuming we don’t sell anyone, because we have little to sell. It also factors in Nige removing £10-12m of costs in the summer through reduced wages and amortisation coming to nil on the players he let go. That is a big factor and one Nige deserves a lot of credit. He’s working with one arm tied behind his back. What we see above is the relevant year’s being added together to show a three year total (4 year cycle during covid years where 19/20 and 20/21 are aggregated and halved - highlighted in yellow) in the penultimate column. In my previous post I said you can exclude Academy costs, amongst others and I reckon that saves us reporting £3m p.a., hence the £9m allowable exclusions in a 3 year cycle. So, if we take the cycle to the end of this season (21/22), which includes 18/19, 19/20 (50%), 20/21 (50%) and 21/22, you can see we are sitting with a FFP reporting loss of £18.3m, well inside the £39m. So why aren’t we going crazy in January? Why didn’t we go crazy in the summer? Well, it’s because the current FFP cycle includes 18/19, where we made a profit. That drops off at the end of this season, and you then see next season's cycle suddenly bust FFP…and the season after that. Basically, we are trying to correct years of huge overspend, when there is no transfer market to bail us out. So we are correcting by reducing costs, in particular wage bill and amortisation. Every fee we pay adds some costs onto those future year losses for the length of the players contract. A £3m signing on £10k p.w. on a 3 year contract costs us £1.5m p.a over those 3 years. A £6m striker on £20k p.w., double, obviously. We can’t afford those committed costs over future years. Hence why we are looking at free transfers, low fee / small wage players from Lg1/2 (Tanner / Atkinson). Hence why we resigned Baker and Weimann on lower wage contracts. We couldn’t afford to pay a fee to bring in other CB alongside Atkinson (£1.6m but longevity, future selling potential). So we brought Baker back, and bar concussion, he’s played ever so well this season. Likewise Weimann. So that positions where we are. As for SL, he may not make any money out of Bristol City, but he will make a load of money out of all the other pies he’s got his finger in. Looking at your username, you’re not Jon L are you….trying to work out what yer dad is doing are you? Part Four - ask away, what do you want to know? I like to think- great post and series of posts btw, but just on the excludable costs bit though (before we come to Covid), I like to think it might be closer to £5m per season. What with the hefty depreciation of recently built/redeveloped assets. IIRC it's £1.5m per year on a Category 2 Academy alone? Then Depreciation and a little of amortisation on non Football based Intangible Assets, plus Women's Football and Community- I like to think (well hope perhaps) that it's pushing £5m per season. Agree, the splurge idea- it could have been possible in isolation for this season but the caveat would have, in technical financial terms been get promotion right now or screwed. Edited November 28, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: I like to think- great post and series of posts btw, but just on the excludable costs bit though (before we come to Covid), I like to think it might be closer to £5m per season. What with the hefty depreciation of recently built/redeveloped assets. IIRC it's £1.5m per year on a Category 2 Academy alone? Then Depreciation and a little of amortisation on non Football based Intangible Assets, plus Women's Football and Community- I like to think (well hope perhaps) that it's pushing £5m per season. Agree, the splurge idea- it could have been possible in isolation for this season but the caveat would have, in technical financial terms been get promotion right now or screwed. Is the RHPC part of BC Holdings or AG Ltd? I don’t know where it fits in if I’m being honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Is the RHPC part of BC Holdings or AG Ltd? I don’t know where it fits in if I’m being honest. I was using the BCFC Holdings accounts as my reference point- Robins High Performance (Ha on recent form) Centre? Interested to know if it's hit the Balance Sheet yet or if the £2.8m in Depreciation was before it arrived. My basic calculation for the Tangible Fixed Assets Depreciation was to look at the BCFC Holdings Accounts and knock off the depreciation- could have missed something or double counted of course, although on the £5m for total allowables bit I also saw that on SwissRamble's calculations last season so I hope- the higher it is the better it is for us- that it is pushing towards £5m. Double checked in fact, being an asset under construction (at that time), that Depreciation is as per the Accounts before the HPC hits the Balance Sheet- I think. Edited November 28, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 28, 2021 Author Share Posted November 28, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, Davefevs said: Looking at your username, you’re not Jon L are you….trying to work out what yer dad is doing are you? Part Four - ask away, what do you want to know? Ah yes, myol'man the billionaire you mean? I don't think so It would seem that due to EFL FFP rules no multimillionaire can plough money into his local club to break the parachute yo-yo monopoly, the Championship will become as divided as the Premier League. Every season there will be a top 2 or 3, with a dozen teams fighting for the scraps of a playoff place. From the fans point of view it might seem better to take the drop and hope for another Cotts season rather than bumbling along in the bottom half of the championship for the next 10 seasons. Thanks to @Davefevsfor explaining in detail why SL can't hand is dusty wallet over to Pearson. Conclusion, we're f*cked! Edited November 28, 2021 by myol'man 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: Ah yes, myol'man the billionaire you mean? I don't think so It would seem that due to EFL FFP rules no multimillionaire can plough money into his local club to break the parachute yo-yo monopoly, the Championship will become as divided as the Premier League. Every season there will be a top 2 or 3, with a dozen teams fighting for the scraps of a playoff place. From the fans point of view it might seem better to take the drop and hope for another Cotts season rather than bumbling along in the bottom half of the championship for the next 10 seasons. Thanks to @Davefevsfor explaining in detail why SL can't hand is dusty wallet over to Pearson. Conclusion, we're f*cked! Thanks for bearing with my trilogy!! I should’ve made it 5 parts (HHGTTG)!! Its pretty shocking how it has been allowed to get in the state it has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 28, 2021 Author Share Posted November 28, 2021 Hey! Could be worse, could be gas, with a five bob fake sheikh in charge *are we allowed to say that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted November 28, 2021 Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: From the fans point of view it might seem better to take the drop and hope for another Cotts season rather than bumbling along in the bottom half of the championship for the next 10 seasons. This is a what most fans of bottom half prem teams tell you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Maesknoll Red Posted November 28, 2021 Admin Share Posted November 28, 2021 1 hour ago, myol'man said: Ah yes, myol'man the billionaire you mean? I don't think so It would seem that due to EFL FFP rules no multimillionaire can plough money into his local club to break the parachute yo-yo monopoly, the Championship will become as divided as the Premier League. Every season there will be a top 2 or 3, with a dozen teams fighting for the scraps of a playoff place. From the fans point of view it might seem better to take the drop and hope for another Cotts season rather than bumbling along in the bottom half of the championship for the next 10 seasons. Thanks to @Davefevsfor explaining in detail why SL can't hand is dusty wallet over to Pearson. Conclusion, we're f*cked! It’s a disgrace, I’ve mentioned this many times in posts, I’m wondering how long before people start to drift away from the Championship (fans) as there is such a bias to the parachute payment sides who are rewarded for failure. I’d immediately open it up so all the other clubs can match the highest parachute payment each season, not all clubs could afford it, but for those that can it would help even it up. Then I’d completely revamp FFP and the relationship between the Premier League and the Championship. Let’s be fair, yo-yo clubs like Norwich must be building the bank account, a big wedge for going up, don’t spend too much, come down, parachute payment, go back up and another big wedge, fair play to them if that’s what they want to do, but how you can call a set of rules that allows that to happen, Financial Fair Play, is beyond me. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted November 29, 2021 Share Posted November 29, 2021 On 27/11/2021 at 21:15, onlyotib said: Let’s face it has he really ever backed us in January Evidently a bit short after Christmas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted November 29, 2021 Share Posted November 29, 2021 On 28/11/2021 at 00:17, CyderInACan said: I’m off to bed but this is like who shot JR Can we just fast forward to the scene where we've just beaten Man Utd and the last three years was all a dream? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted November 29, 2021 Share Posted November 29, 2021 1 hour ago, Red Skin said: Can we just fast forward to the scene where we've just beaten Man Utd and the last three years was all a dream? No Bobby Ewing, just the “shower” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted November 29, 2021 Share Posted November 29, 2021 22 hours ago, myol'man said: It would seem that due to EFL FFP rules no multimillionaire can plough money into his local club to break the parachute yo-yo monopoly, the Championship will become as divided as the Premier League. Every season there will be a top 2 or 3, with a dozen teams fighting for the scraps of a playoff place. If you look at every season since PP started, at least 2 of the promoted teams had PP, therefore generally only 1 place up for grabs of the non yo-yo teams. The system is broke and I can't believe more clubs and fans do not fight against a clearly rigged competition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.