Have we sold our ground

[marcx666]

25 minutes ago, The Claw said:

more than one way to skin a cat....................laughs profusely

Wait, why are you planning to skin Hitcat?

[Yellowbelly]

30 minutes ago, Jeffjohnsonmyhero said:

The issue with me is the parachute payment ,We should be allowed to spend the same money as a club coming down ,Or scrap FFP and parachute payment .

If the current FFP rules were to stay in place then I believe there should be relegation clauses written into every contract that would drop the players wages to a % of their new income once relegated. Then the player stays on the reduced amount or gets sold. The only parachute payment the clubs should get is to ensure the non playing/coaching staffs wages are still paid in full or an acceptable severance payment for these individuals can be agreed. This still allows the relegated clubs to spend what they generate through player sales etc but doesn’t skew the competition. When we were relegated we basically had to let half the team walk away for pittance & rebuild from the bottom up again, I’m not saying it should be that draconian but parachute payments drive up the prices for everyone when only a small percentage have the income to afford those prices.

[billyblack]

1 hour ago, TodwickOwl said:

People slating this - need to realise Bruce wouldn't have come nowhere near us if this wasn't agreed or in plan at the start of last year.

 

This must've been the safety net to allow Bruce to come and spend. 

 

I don't see an issue with it, Chansiri will have bought us out - he owns the club anyway, if we get out of FFP then so be it 

 

Or do we want to be loitering around mid table again next year or...?? 

so when DC leaves one day and we need a new owner, what happens then?

 

Do we end up renting from DC until we can buy it back?

[billyblack]

Just now, Yellowbelly said:

If the current FFP rules were to stay in place then I believe there should be relegation clauses written into every contract that would drop the players wages to a % of their new income once relegated. Then the player stays on the reduced amount or gets sold. The only parachute payment the clubs should get is to ensure the non playing/coaching staffs wages are still paid in full or an acceptable severance payment for these individuals can be agreed. This still allows the relegated clubs to spend what they generate through player sales etc but doesn’t skew the competition. When we were relegated we basically had to let half the team walk away for pittance & rebuild from the bottom up again, I’m not saying it should be that draconian but parachute payments drive up the prices for everyone when only a small percentage have the income to afford those prices.

Agree totally about the contract clauses, makes total sense to me. 

 

That's why it wont happen

[Guest mkowl]

12 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

Quite right, he owns it anyway he is Sheffield Wednesday Ltd. Seems to make sense. 

So no ffp problems now, we get cash all the risk on who ever has bought the ground. One of the "friends" DC refers to.

 

Do you really think we get cash

 

DC is owed a lot by the Club already from monies to cover our operating losses

 

This transaction would undoubtedly just reduce that debt 

[OwlinOldham]

15 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said:

 

 

Its obvious you don't like the chairman but this line is just not true, he says the the rules wouldn't allow him to allocate more than £1.2m of the money he had put in to sponsorship for the year those accounts referred to.

 

He is currently putting in £2m+ in cash every month to pay the bills, everything we are taking about here is purely a paper exercise by the accountants to work around the P&S rules and bares little relation to cash in the bank.

 

I did point out this very fact to him in my earlier response to his posts about this, I didn't receive a response after that.

Edited May 17, 2019 by OwlinOldham

[BARMYARMY2010]

4 hours ago, room0035 said:

I understand what you are saying but comparing like with like.

 

The season 2 years ago when the teams in the championship got promoted there was an article about how much each got for their shirt sponsorship the lowest Huddersfield received £1.5m a season, our chairman in comparison pays into the club the same season £1.2m.

 

But he has his name on most of the advertising boards, the seats, the shirts and the side of the football ground. Huddersfield get £1.5m for the shirts we get £1.2m for the shirts, the stadium, the stadium seats and the stadium advertising hording. So simple is DC putting in the most he can or is he putting in the most he wants to.

 

Within the filed accounts from May 2017 on page 29' Income of £1,200,000 was received from D Chansiri the owner and director of the company, in respect of a sponsorship agreement relating to the club shirt and certain areas of the stadium'

 

In comparison Stoke city where paid £9.6m this season from Bet365 a company owned by the wife of the guy who run Stoke City for the sponsorship of the ground and the shirts. Yes a deal signed when they were in the premier league but give you an idea of what we could be getting was the chairman to up his sponsorship we could easily argue in the 4th most popular league in the world the going rate for sponsoring of shirts and stadium should be nearer the £5m mark..

Now Bearing in mind that Town only own 40% of their stadium.

Two seasons ago "PURE LEGAL" were the sponsors of town,which gave them the rights for pitchside advertising and corporate hospitality.(No financial info given)

"OPE SPORTS" agreed to become sponsors of town During the close season after they won promotion at wembley in readiness for their maiden season in the premier league,valued at £1.5 million a season.................(.not during their promotion season),

Stadium sponsorship or re-naming in the championship for the money you reckon is a myth,if it weren't we wouldn't be calling the following Villa Park,St.Andrews,Ewood Park,Griffin Park,Ashton Gate,Elland Road,Riverside stadium,Carrow Road,City Ground,Deepdale,Etc,Etc.

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by DELUDED OWL

[room0035]

35 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

I did point out this very fact to him in my earlier response to his posts about this, I didn't receive a response after that.

As you both say according to the rules he can only put the amount he has put in according to DC, but in the same league other chairman within the rules put in a lot more money and found ways for their clubs to trade without having to sell their stadium.

 

Presumably they are just lucky.

 

 

 

 

[Owls77]

No change of ownership according to Land Registry records!

[owlinexile]

Don't like this at all.

 

Just how far in hock to one person does the club want to be? It's not in the least bit healthy. 

 

What happens if we don't get promoted again and the relationship with Chansiri turns sour? 

[gillyno9]

I got absolutely hammered on here when posted a thread about ground being sold back in December or something. 

[Sham67]

3 minutes ago, owlinexile said:

Don't like this at all.

 

Just how far in hock to one person does the club want to be? It's not in the least bit healthy. 

 

What happens if we don't get promoted again and the relationship with Chansiri turns sour? 

 

He owns the club lock, stock and barrel.  Is he going to fall out with himself?

Edited May 17, 2019 by Sham67

[OwlinOldham]

19 minutes ago, room0035 said:

As you both say according to the rules he can only put the amount he has put in according to DC, but in the same league other chairman within the rules put in a lot more money and found ways for their clubs to trade without having to sell their stadium.

 

Presumably they are just lucky.

 

 

 

 

 

Again it all boils down to whats already in place and what can and cant be done within the rules set out by the EFL. For a long time Sheffield Wednesday football club has not been an attractive proposition. You cant just click your fingers and make that right in a season. For the first time in a long time we have a chairman who wants yo put money into the club. While it may not have always worked out, you cant seriously suggest he wants to ruin the whole thing by being cheap on the sponsorship by choice? The guys got millions on the line and shown hes willing to spend. If he says that was all he could put in as per the rules at that time, im gonna believe him. Why even sell the ground if hes not willing to put what it takes in to start with? 

[Burnsie]

4 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

He owns the club lock, stock and barrel.  Is he going to fall out with himself?

Erm.... Maybe 

[Guest]

I don’t understand what people are crying about here me,  he owns the club lock stock and barrel , he’s taking what’s probably the only option out of FFP restrictions 

 

But lets hound him, what exactly do u think he’s gonna do ? Fall out with himself and lock himself out of the ground ?

[swfcjack27]

One season fix we can’t sell it again wonder what Chansiri has up his sleeve for 12 months time failing promotion, doubt he’s even thinking that far. Shows our mess selling the ground should be the last resort and one which will cause more problems down the line when DC decides he’s bored of owning a football club 

[Minton]

12 minutes ago, swfcjack27 said:

One season fix we can’t sell it again wonder what Chansiri has up his sleeve for 12 months time failing promotion, doubt he’s even thinking that far. Shows our mess selling the ground should be the last resort and one which will cause more problems down the line when DC decides he’s bored of owning a football club 

 

As you see it, what would the consequences be if Chansiri decided to sell the club? 

 

Because as far as I can see, whomever bought the club from him would either;

 

a) Buy the ground as part of the sale and continue to lease the ground to us.

 

or

 

b) Not buy the ground and continue to pay Chansiri (or whatever company owns it) a fee for leasing the ground.

 

I fail to see why it would cause issues, unless another team or sport were to take up residency of the ground. Of which there are zero candidates.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Minton

[S36 OWL]

The D-TAXI'S STADIUM is on its way.

[Sonny]

1 hour ago, DELUDED OWL said:

Now Bearing in mind that Town only own 40% of their stadium.

Two seasons ago "PURE LEGAL" were the sponsors of town,which gave them the rights for pitchside advertising and corporate hospitality.(No financial info given)

"OPE SPORTS" agreed to become sponsors of town During the close season after they won promotion at wembley in readiness for their maiden season in the premier league,valued at £1.5 million a season.................(.not during their promotion season),

Stadium sponsorship or re-naming in the championship for the money you reckon is a myth,if it weren't we wouldn't be calling the following Villa Park,St.Andrews,Ewood Park,Griffin Park,Ashton Gate,Elland Road,Riverside stadium,Carrow Road,City Ground,Deepdale,Etc,Etc.

 

 

Well recalled/researched. He’s been told all this type of thing before yet still insists on using examples of premiership sponsorship as being somehow relevant to us.

[Harrysgame]

1 hour ago, mkowl said:

 

Do you really think we get cash

 

DC is owed a lot by the Club already from monies to cover our operating losses

 

This transaction would undoubtedly just reduce that debt 

Of course we don't get actual cash. But solves an immediate problem. If he or an associate has bought it got to be better than a loan from who knows where with interest like the old charter house deal.