My First ITK

[Minton]

8 minutes ago, pat blondeau said:

16/17 there was as I said.

This season there’ll be around 21k season tickets.

 

We’ll have made virtually zero ticket POTG money against Charlton.

 

Even on Saturday, we’ve sold around 4k POTG tickets so that’ll be about 100k in total revenue from ticket sales we’ve made from the last two home games?
 

I can’t see where you’ve got a 60% increase in match day revenue from

 

 

Because the prices have gone up by 60%...

 

If we have the same number of fans this season as the last MM season and the prices are 60% higher, that would mean 60% more money. That's fairly simple maffs innit.

[torres]

1 minute ago, pioowl said:

Wolves,Newcastle,Villa

 

Leicester 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

So where has all the money gone then?

 

Whos benefitted from these high prices?

 

It would seem that the players are the ones who have benefited from the high prices due to our through-the-roof wage bill. Some players like Fletcher have earned a decent wage and always been available and given their all. As far as I am aware he is one of the highest paid but we did have the benefit of not having to pay a transfer fee for him and overall he has been a good signing. 

Some players the money has quite simply been wasted on.

 

To me the strategy at the start of the Chansiri era seemed risky but potentially worth the risk. Sign a few players who are known to be good at this level for relatively low fees or free but have to pay high wages. Sign them on 3 or 4 year contracts, give promotion a proper push for two years and if it isn't achieved then sell some players on and have a season to refresh the squad then go again. The strategy collapses if you treat players like family and refuse to sell them because that's not how football works. it also didn't help when the club gave into players chucking their toys out the pram and demanding to be paid as much as the next new signing is getting. Forestieri getting a new contract for throwing a strop had a knock on effect and 3 or 4 others ended up getting improved deals to remain 'loyal' to the family.  

[shez owl]

3 minutes ago, torres said:

 

Leicester 

Watford

[toppOwl]

9 minutes ago, sw1867 said:

 

They may have been a selling club but they have then reinvested that money. Agree they have had a large slice of luck however they have made their own luck in some cases. I.e selling players at the right time.

 

Ill make no further comment on this. Need to bleach myself down after a good birching for going anywhere near giving them praise. My humblest of apologies

 

Again I disagree, what did they re-invest the money on? They sold James Beattie at a time when he was scoring for fun and they were on the cusp of the play-offs, they failed to reach the play offs after his sale, hardly the "right time". They couldn't even pay staff wages at some points despite fairly good income from transfers.

[torres]

1 minute ago, shez owl said:

Watford

 

Burnley 

 

10m on Gray if i remember and that was massive at the time 

[pioowl]

2 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

It would seem that the players are the ones who have benefited from the high prices due to our through-the-roof wage bill. Some players like Fletcher have earned a decent wage and always been available and given their all. As far as I am aware he is one of the highest paid but we did have the benefit of not having to pay a transfer fee for him and overall he has been a good signing. 

Some players the money has quite simply been wasted on.

 

To me the strategy at the start of the Chansiri era seemed risky but potentially worth the risk. Sign a few players who are known to be good at this level for relatively low fees or free but have to pay high wages. Sign them on 3 or 4 year contracts, give promotion a proper push for two years and if it isn't achieved then sell some players on and have a season to refresh the squad then go again. The strategy collapses if you treat players like family and refuse to sell them because that's not how football works. it also didn't help when the club gave into players chucking their toys out the pram and demanding to be paid as much as the next new signing is getting. Forestieri getting a new contract for throwing a strop had a knock on effect and 3 or 4 others ended up getting improved deals to remain 'loyal' to the family.  

Havent heard anything players chucking their toys out.Who were they? Bet you don't or cant answer that.

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

13 minutes ago, pioowl said:

Wolves,Newcastle,Villa

Newcastle hardly spent anything..

[Minton]

13 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

That’s just one

 

That doesn’t make it virtually guaranteed to go up by spending more

Wolves, Villa, Fulham, Brighton, Leicester, Bournemouth, Newcastle and QPR all did. It's certainly not virtually guaranteed, but it's a bloody good start.

[CF_Owl]

15 minutes ago, pioowl said:

Wolves,Newcastle,Villa

 

QPR in 10/11 season, Utd in 05/06

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, pioowl said:

Havent heard anything players chucking their toys out.Who were they? Bet you don't or cant answer that.

 

Perhaps I phrased that incorrectly. One player chucked his toys out of the pram and got an improved deal as a result. 3-4 players then got improved contracts on the back of that when there was no real need to do so which needlessly pushed a big wage bill up higher.

[toppOwl]

Getting promotion is a mix of many factors but having funds helps, it doesn't guarantee anything but does help, even Wilder bemoaned the lack of January transfer activity on their first season in the Championship.

[morley]

What concerns me most about all this mess is the situation with our ground.

 

Well it was our ground until DC sold it to another company for £80m to plug a gap in our finances and now it's his ground.

 

If he wants to sell up you would assume that any would be new owner will want to buy the ground back so they will have to find £80m for that before we even start thinking about the football club.

 

I can't see that DC could accept much less than the said £80m without blowing holes in his "valuation" previously submitted to the EFL as part of his attempt to comply with P & S restrictions.

 

Also, he needs £80m as I believe that he has not yet paid the club for the ground so once he has been paid he can then settle his obligations to the club.

 

I have no idea what level of debt the club is carrying but hopefully the £80m ground sale monies will take care of most of this as most of the rest of the club's assets will be worth almost nothing with player contracts running out all over the shop.

 

In this case we probably could get a new buyer if DC agrees to walk away and write of the substantial amount of his own money that he has spent so far, but if he is looking to recover some of his losses I fear we could me in for a long wait while he waits for the right "mug" to come along.

 

Unhappy times and still a long way to go in this saga 

 

 

[WL_Owl_JC]

9 hours ago, latemodelchild said:

I wondered if the points deduction stuff was the catalyst for the bad run. Obviously the question then is when did the players find out? Was it at Stoke with 6 minutes to go? Cos this bad run started with that match. They stood up and beat Leeds, probably cos even the players hate Leeds and they managed to beat a shockingly poor Charlton side. During that game we saw glimpses of togetherness and spirit. The players should have upped their game to ensure a points deduction didn't cost us a playoff place. 12 points could easily be the spread between 3rd and 6th. If that's the reason for our horrific run then they're more spineless than I thought.

 

Orlando has been on here years. I'd say he has nothing to gain by making stuff up. His mates mate may have but everything he says either rings true/makes sense or is stuff people have been saying for a while now. 

 

I'm slowly accepting the fact that I'm gonna have a very expensive league 1 season ticket. 

 

 

It could also be the reason they played well at QPR, battled well and lots of energy going forwards. If they've given up on the league, may as well try to get a cup run going and get on the TV, shop window etc...

[toppOwl]

2 minutes ago, morley said:

What concerns me most about all this mess is the situation with our ground.

 

Well it was our ground until DC sold it to another company for £80m to plug a gap in our finances and now it's his ground.

 

If he wants to sell up you would assume that any would be new owner will want to buy the ground back so they will have to find £80m for that before we even start thinking about the football club.

 

I can't see that DC could accept much less than the said £80m without blowing holes in his "valuation" previously submitted to the EFL as part of his attempt to comply with P & S restrictions.

 

Also, he needs £80m as I believe that he has not yet paid the club for the ground so once he has been paid he can then settle his obligations to the club.

 

I have no idea what level of debt the club is carrying but hopefully the £80m ground sale monies will take care of most of this as most of the rest of the club's assets will be worth almost nothing with player contracts running out all over the shop.

 

In this case we probably could get a new buyer if DC agrees to walk away and write of the substantial amount of his own money that he has spent so far, but if he is looking to recover some of his losses I fear we could me in for a long wait while he waits for the right "mug" to come along.

 

Unhappy times and still a long way to go in this saga 

 

 

 

It was £60m and why would he want money back that hasn't gone anywhere?

[ChinaOwl]

2 minutes ago, morley said:

What concerns me most about all this mess is the situation with our ground.

 

Well it was our ground until DC sold it to another company for £80m to plug a gap in our finances and now it's his ground.

 

If he wants to sell up you would assume that any would be new owner will want to buy the ground back so they will have to find £80m for that before we even start thinking about the football club.

 

I can't see that DC could accept much less than the said £80m without blowing holes in his "valuation" previously submitted to the EFL as part of his attempt to comply with P & S restrictions.

 

Also, he needs £80m as I believe that he has not yet paid the club for the ground so once he has been paid he can then settle his obligations to the club.

 

I have no idea what level of debt the club is carrying but hopefully the £80m ground sale monies will take care of most of this as most of the rest of the club's assets will be worth almost nothing with player contracts running out all over the shop.

 

In this case we probably could get a new buyer if DC agrees to walk away and write of the substantial amount of his own money that he has spent so far, but if he is looking to recover some of his losses I fear we could me in for a long wait while he waits for the right "mug" to come along.

 

Unhappy times and still a long way to go in this saga 

 

 

 

The valuation was £60 million and it is only a figure on a contract between the seller (the club) and the buyer (another company owned by Chansiri). £60 million didn;t exchange hands, in fact very little of it has been exchanged. Chansiri could pass the deeds onto any new owner without losing exceptional amounts of money. The sale of the ground is the least significant barrier in a sale.

[pioowl]

5 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Perhaps I phrased that incorrectly. One player chucked his toys out of the pram and got an improved deal as a result. 3-4 players then got improved contracts on the back of that when there was no real need to do so which needlessly pushed a big wage bill up higher.

Didn't know that either but I bow to your greater knowledge

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Minton said:

Wolves, Villa, Fulham, Brighton, Leicester, Bournemouth, Newcastle and QPR all did. It's certainly not virtually guaranteed, but it's a bloody good start.

 

I agree it can be successful. Had the clubs you mention not managed to get promoted though I have little doubt they would have sold some players to balance the books and refresh the squad, some of them did so anyway.

 

We had half of that kind of strategy and were semi-successful but are now paying the price for not doing the other half. 

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

4 minutes ago, morley said:

What concerns me most about all this mess is the situation with our ground.

 

Well it was our ground until DC sold it to another company for £80m to plug a gap in our finances and now it's his ground.

 

If he wants to sell up you would assume that any would be new owner will want to buy the ground back so they will have to find £80m for that before we even start thinking about the football club.

 

I can't see that DC could accept much less than the said £80m without blowing holes in his "valuation" previously submitted to the EFL as part of his attempt to comply with P & S restrictions.

 

Also, he needs £80m as I believe that he has not yet paid the club for the ground so once he has been paid he can then settle his obligations to the club.

 

I have no idea what level of debt the club is carrying but hopefully the £80m ground sale monies will take care of most of this as most of the rest of the club's assets will be worth almost nothing with player contracts running out all over the shop.

 

In this case we probably could get a new buyer if DC agrees to walk away and write of the substantial amount of his own money that he has spent so far, but if he is looking to recover some of his losses I fear we could me in for a long wait while he waits for the right "mug" to come along.

 

Unhappy times and still a long way to go in this saga 

 

 

No it was his ground until he sold it to another company and now it's his ground just separate from swfc ltd.  Purchase price of ground and club still same as before.   

[morley]

2 minutes ago, toppOwl said:

 

It was £60m and why would he want money back that hasn't gone anywhere?

Happy to stand corrected if it was £60m. I was speaking from memory because I was too lazy to check.

 

He will need the cost of the ground at valuation because he still has to pay the club for it and the EFL will know beyond doubt that he was taking the pee with the valuation and he will not want to lose face on this matter.

 

He has spent a fortune of his own money. If he is happy to sell and not recoup any of that then we are in with a chance.

 

If on the other hand he wishes to recover a substantial part of his losses or he will not sell, then we have a real problem.

 

His attitude on not selling players when we really needed to suggests that he is more likely to be in the latter camp to me, but then I'm happy to admit that I know nothing.