The cost of being a Championship club though...

[HootHoot]

You see stats like this and wonder why anyone in their right mind would buy a football club.

 

Excluding the prem, I'd be interested to see how many clubs actually turn a profit. 

 

92 teams altogether in the PL and EFL, yet only 16 of them can consider themselves to be a potential success story, and even then one of those that survived relegation can always be relegated the next season.

 

Its a crazy business to get into and there are better ways to burn a hole in your pocket than owning a football club.

[Wizzard1867]

They should try looking down the back of the sofa...

 

[Hirstyslaces]

On 11/11/2021 at 12:05, matthefish2002 said:

Think a lot of the problems in football boil down to Footballers wages getting way out of hand.

Not just financially but also the way football has lost its soul.

Very true. Well said!

[Guest Mcguigan]

Hypothetically then, let’s say parachute payments were scrapped by the PL.

 

We get promoted to the PL in 22/23 with a £24m income and a £35m wage bill. So with operating expenses of say £15m and promotional bonuses of say £10m, we post losses of £36m but we are promoted.

 

Our total income increases to £140m overnight but we have a Championship squad in the PL. What’s the plan?

 

To be at least competitive with the bottom four clubs we’d need at least £50m invested in signings, that in itself would add probably £30m to wage bill. So £50m transfers + £75m wage bill + £20m operating costs and our moneys gone.

 

If we are relegated and without any parachute payments our income drops back to £24m, what happens then?

 

The promoted clubs would just do what Norwich are doing this season, keep things tight, take the £100m bonus back down to the Championship and get promoted again the next season. Rinse and repeat.

 

Same three clubs every season dropping back down with lottery wins to invest to go straight back up.

 

Obviously that’s a broad brush view but that’s what would happen with PP’s removed.

 

The number of clubs in the last 10 years promoted back whilst been in receipt of PP’s is less than clubs been promoted without any.

[heppers]

Why would you bother getting involved in football?

[sherlyegg]

3 hours ago, Mcguigan said:

The number of clubs in the last 10 years promoted back whilst been in receipt of PP’s is less than clubs been promoted without any.

Yeah and many of the clubs getting promoted do so by breaking ffp rules...and they do so because of unfair parachute payments

[Guest Mcguigan]

20 minutes ago, sherlyegg said:

Yeah and many of the clubs getting promoted do so by breaking ffp rules...and they do so because of unfair parachute payments

Which clubs broke FFP rules to get promoted that weren't in receipt of PP?

[sherlyegg]

1 hour ago, Mcguigan said:

Which clubs broke FFP rules to get promoted that weren't in receipt of PP?

Villa wolves qpr leicester bournmouth..etc

Which have been promoted that were not in receipt of PP?

Not many

 

[Musn't Grumble]

On 11/11/2021 at 11:50, WalworthOwl said:

 

You're being sarcastic, but I don't see why.  The number of clubs going bankrupt has been massively reduced under FFP/P&S, although the money and the ownership has been getting crazier every year.  There might be a lot wrong with football, but I don't think FFP/P&S is part of it.

 

 

I don't think that the fans of Derby, Macclesfield, Bury, Reading, etc., would necessarily agree with you on that point. It's a "one size fits all" solution to a fairly complex problem. The more solvent owner can possibly afford more to support the club but is prevented from doing so by the rules.

 

There has to be simpler ways around this... For instance, club owners could lodge an annual bond (via Escrow or similar) that covers the losses for each season. If the owners pulled the plug, the bond could be used and would effectively neutralise any debt and make the club more saleable or at least make the business more likely to be solvent and trading.

 

For instance, if an owner wants to spend £50m over and above what the club receives in income, they can do so providing they lodge a £50m bond. Whilst this may well deter many owners who might well then consider that break even target is within their business plan, owners who would like to take the club to next level can invest providing that the bond is covered.

 

The bond would also encourage owners to be more prudent with their management but would not necessarily discourage the clubs and owners who can afford to invest more than the clubs further down the "income pyramid". And, of course, if the club breaks even or makes a profit, there is no need for a bond (or a current bond would be reduced the following season with a partial or full refund made back to the club). 

 

However, I do take your point... It will be interesting to see what happens when Newcastle are relegated at the end of this season. They will have a massive advantage over their Championship rivals so the current set up is hardly fair and reasonable.