Not good enough

Anything yellow and blue
slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2884
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Post by slappy »

Anyway, no offence taken - it is an ongoing joke that GY and myself try and find fault in each other's posts.

I had downloaded most of those accounts last Summer (£1 a go, so hardly breaking the bank) as I was interested to see what the finances of our competitors in the league were like - at the time I wondered which clubs owned their stadium, whether they were still paying for it, or got cheap rent from the council etc.

It seems a bit simplistic to infer that all clubs will spend the max of 55% of turnover on the squad (as stadium overheads and admin eat into that for clubs that own their grounds), but some definitely have extra donations / equity / cup runs that will up their available budget. I suspect our squad budget is somewhere between 3rd and 7th, but how even Kelvin knows for sure is a mystery, as surely every club has the right to keep that information confidential.

Anyway, I reckon Wilder is doing perhaps slightly lower than expected, whereas as Torquay and Cheltenham overachieving, Gillingham and Crawley underachieving. Why has Barnett gone out on loan - is it to reduce salaries to meet the wage cap? I couldn't imagine us selling two of our top goalscorers, (let alone one!).
Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re:

Post by Kernow Yellow »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:Based on the information available, I reckon only Crawley and Swinedown definitely have higher budgets than us, with Shrewsbury still to be looked at in detail.
Hang on a minute, I thought you were arguing that Crawley had a *smaller* wage budget than ours, but used it better! Or are you now persuaded that that is not the case?

Personally, I think that sources of income other than gate receipts should probably not be underestimated when considering likely wage budgets. GY, you mention a few clubs whose turnover has been 'inflated' by transfer fees received, but this is all part and parcel of being a lower league football club, isn't it? Clubs developing players and selling them at a profit is hardly a 'one-off' occurrence (even if we don't seem to be doing much of it). That's what Crewe's academy is all about, isn't it? Also, I imagine that some clubs which directly own their grounds and associated facilities are able to generate reasonably significant income from them. Plus there's outside investment and sponsorship to consider (presumably Crawley have benefited from quite a lot of that recently).

In short, I think it's quite hard to second guess what wage budgets other clubs might have in the absence of up-to-date accounts (certainly not just a case of looking at average attendances).
A-Ro
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Beset by fools and ne'er do wells.

Re:

Post by A-Ro »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:
&quotA-Ro&quot wrote:GY in &quotdo as I say not as I do&quot shocker.
I think that is grossly unfair and mis-representative.

I am trying to think of a single good reason why are you persisting with this?
I compliment you on your speedy edit.

I am merely pointing out that the phrase &quotHaha, I've just spotted your schoolboy error Slappy.&quot is the epitome of &quotpersonalised finger pointing&quot which is an activity which you appear to be trying to discourage. I was simply pointing out the apparent dichotomy in your two statements.

I have absolutely no wish to offend you over this, my &quotshocker&quot comment was tongue in cheek and meant as a humourous comment.
theox
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:33 pm
Location: Broncos

Re:

Post by theox »

&quotslappy&quot wrote:Why has Barnett gone out on loan - is it to reduce salaries to meet the wage cap? I couldn't imagine us selling two of our top goalscorers, (let alone one!).
He's been sold for £1m but due to the deal being done after the window, its loan til the end of the season with the permanent transfer being completed in June.

I guess we would sell Constable and Leven if someone fronted up a combined £1.8m!
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotKernow Yellow&quot wrote:
&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:Based on the information available, I reckon only Crawley and Swinedown definitely have higher budgets than us, with Shrewsbury still to be looked at in detail.
Hang on a minute, I thought you were arguing that Crawley had a *smaller* wage budget than ours, but used it better! Or are you now persuaded that that is not the case?

Personally, I think that sources of income other than gate receipts should probably not be underestimated when considering likely wage budgets. GY, you mention a few clubs whose turnover has been 'inflated' by transfer fees received, but this is all part and parcel of being a lower league football club, isn't it? Clubs developing players and selling them at a profit is hardly a 'one-off' occurrence (even if we don't seem to be doing much of it). That's what Crewe's academy is all about, isn't it? Also, I imagine that some clubs which directly own their grounds and associated facilities are able to generate reasonably significant income from them. Plus there's outside investment and sponsorship to consider (presumably Crawley have benefited from quite a lot of that recently).

In short, I think it's quite hard to second guess what wage budgets other clubs might have in the absence of up-to-date accounts (certainly not just a case of looking at average attendances).
I began with Crawley must have a lower budget, but it became clear that they had self funded by 2 big player sales. SO their budget will be at least equal to ours and quite possibly slightly higher.

I also began with Bredford being higher based on gates alone, but that then became clear that they had significantly reduced ticket prices to ahcieve those gates, so their budget is probably quite a bit lower than ours.

The position is a little less clear than I had believed back on page 1, but I still think we are at least a top 5 budget holder, and possibly 4th highest, and I would stick to my original points that Wilder has not performed well enough with the resources, that we should be borderline for automatic promotion, that we should reach at least the play off final this season and we should review Wilder's performance at the end of the season.

I also hope Wilder proves me wrong and makes me eat my words.
Last edited by GodalmingYellow on Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Isaac
Dashing young thing
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:32 am

Re:

Post by Isaac »

&quotslappy&quot wrote: I had downloaded most of those accounts last Summer (£1 a go, so hardly breaking the bank) as I was interested to see what the finances of our competitors in the league were like - at the time I wondered which clubs owned their stadium, whether they were still paying for it, or got cheap rent from the council etc.
An an aside - Slappy I found this the other day
http://www.duedil.com/

seems to have most of accounts information on it and is free (once you sign up).
Brahma Bull
Puberty
Posts: 354
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:15 am
Location: Slumdon

Re:

Post by Brahma Bull »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote: I've met Simon a few times as well, but to me his comment felt a bit more in your face (well my face), not that I'm bothered, I just wanted to make sure things didn't get too heated. I've got a lot of time for Simon, who is a pretty decent lad.
:oops:

Terry I like everyone. In fact, I love all Oxford fans. If I have offended you I apologise, I certainly didn't want you to think I was finger-pointing or alike. Just trying to debate. I agreed with all you said bar the budgets.

I am glad we are all happy with each other. I don't want to be banned or nuffin.

As for the point you made about the real issue at debate, my personal opinion is that I don't think we have done well enough with the budget we have at our disposal. We should be getting more out of the players we have had (Deane Smalley) and some of the loans.

Kerrouche has played less than 90 minutes and cost £4k - hopefully he will play at The New Gay Meadow next week and score and ram that point down my throat.
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotBrahma Bull&quot wrote:
&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote: I've met Simon a few times as well, but to me his comment felt a bit more in your face (well my face), not that I'm bothered, I just wanted to make sure things didn't get too heated. I've got a lot of time for Simon, who is a pretty decent lad.
:oops:

Terry I like everyone. In fact, I love all Oxford fans. If I have offended you I apologise, I certainly didn't want you to think I was finger-pointing or alike. Just trying to debate. I agreed with all you said bar the budgets.

I am glad we are all happy with each other. I don't want to be banned or nuffin.

As for the point you made about the real issue at debate, my personal opinion is that I don't think we have done well enough with the budget we have at our disposal. We should be getting more out of the players we have had (Deane Smalley) and some of the loans.

Kerrouche has played less than 90 minutes and cost £4k - hopefully he will play at The New Gay Meadow next week and score and ram that point down my throat.
You haven't offended me, not even remotely, and I suspect we agree on most of this debate.
theox
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:33 pm
Location: Broncos

Re:

Post by theox »

&quotIsaac&quot wrote:
&quotslappy&quot wrote: I had downloaded most of those accounts last Summer (£1 a go, so hardly breaking the bank) as I was interested to see what the finances of our competitors in the league were like - at the time I wondered which clubs owned their stadium, whether they were still paying for it, or got cheap rent from the council etc.
An an aside - Slappy I found this the other day
http://www.duedil.com/

seems to have most of accounts information on it and is free (once you sign up).
This can also be useful for certain info:
http://companycheck.co.uk/
Snake
Grumpy old git
Posts: 4376
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Oxfordshire

Re:

Post by Snake »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:I am sure Kelvin would be willing to meet me to discuss it Simon, but I don't really see why you and Tim think I would want to undertake a 150 mile round trip to do so, just to try to prove or disprove a piece of information in an internet forum discussion.
To be honest, Terry, if you’re anywhere around the Oxford area on a non-matchday that coincides with your work or anything else then you should try to make an appointment to see Kelvin. I’m not sure how many 1-2-1 KT’s done, but as far as I’m aware only that basket case called ‘Ken’ or ‘Karim’ (or whatever other name he’s used) has ever breached the implicit rules of confidentiality after seeing him. For everyone else there remains an open door policy and I think you’d enjoy it. Not that you ever listen to my advice mind...

Might see you on Saturday, and don’t forget to set your alarm clock on Friday night to get to Minchery Farm in good time for the warm up activities :-)
Post Reply