|
|
Post by Up the Duff. on Jul 7, 2023 20:21:16 GMT 1
Why are we always skint and have (one of) the lowest budget in the league? Relegated from the Premier League with parachute payments = skint Get a new owner = skint Sell our better players = skint Finish third, on Sky every week, a play off campaign and Wembley final = skint Sell our better players = skint Get a new owner = skint Why always us? £249. £459 wouldn't solve it |
|
incognito
Jimmy Nicholson Terrier
Posts: 1,531
|
Post by incognito on Jul 7, 2023 20:42:13 GMT 1
The question is..why did the EFL demand spending constraints?. What did we do wrong because we've been nowhere near breaching FFP. ?..or is it a new thing when foreign owners come in?. Town's track record of financial management as regards FFP is excellent, so how come our new owner can't pump in £5m extra or something?. Someone explain it to me I would imagine the 2023/24 budget proposals have been generated at our end. The takeover gives the EFL the opportunity to obtain a specific commitment to adhere to it as a condition of approving the change of ownership (I suspect, in an ideal world, they would like to be able to exert this level of control over clubs across the board.) While we currently sit in a reasonable 3-yr FFP position (parachute payment assisted) were we to propose a £5 million uplift to the budget this year - a year in which there is unlikely to be any significant player sale to offset the operating loss - we would effectively be proposing to put ourselves on pace for the P&S upper loss threshold from year #1 of the new regime... |
|
goodbet
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,611
|
Post by goodbet on Jul 7, 2023 21:01:06 GMT 1
The question is..why did the EFL demand spending constraints?. What did we do wrong because we've been nowhere near breaching FFP. ?..or is it a new thing when foreign owners come in?. Town's track record of financial management as regards FFP is excellent, so how come our new owner can't pump in £5m extra or something?. Someone explain it to me I would imagine the 2023/24 budget proposals have been generated at our end. The takeover gives the EFL the opportunity to obtain a specific commitment to adhere to it as a condition of approving the change of ownership (I suspect, in an ideal world, they would like to be able to exert this level of control over clubs across the board.) While we currently sit in a reasonable 3-yr FFP position (parachute payment assisted) were we to propose a £5 million uplift to the budget this year - a year in which there is unlikely to be any significant player sale to offset the operating loss - we would effectively be proposing to put ourselves on pace for the P&S upper loss threshold from year #1 of the new regime... We don't know what the basis of the budget submitted was, it could have been :- a) We will be relegate and in League 1 b) No takeover and Dean did not want to support the club at all A new company will have a very different idea on how how to run the club, but probably would not be planning on increasing the budget by £5M. The assumptions made in making any budget can change and are often wrong, this posturing may be all about not paying more than the minimum for any players. I will wait until the window closes before I get worried about the new season. It would be a pity for all the speeches and Videos to end in a repeat of last season. |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Jul 7, 2023 21:54:43 GMT 1
downatthemac.proboards.com/post/3195202/threadI would imagine the 2023/24 budget proposals have been generated at our end. The takeover gives the EFL the opportunity to obtain a specific commitment to adhere to it as a condition of approving the change of ownership (I suspect, in an ideal world, they would like to be able to exert this level of control over clubs across the board.) While we currently sit in a reasonable 3-yr FFP position (parachute payment assisted) were we to propose a £5 million uplift to the budget this year - a year in which there is unlikely to be any significant player sale to offset the operating loss - we would effectively be proposing to put ourselves on pace for the P&S upper loss threshold from year #1 of the new regime... We don't know what the basis of the budget submitted was, it could have been :- a) We will be relegate and in League 1 b) No takeover and Dean did not want to support the club at all A new company will have a very different idea on how how to run the club, but probably would not be planning on increasing the budget by £5M. The assumptions made in making any budget can change and are often wrong, this posturing may be all about not paying more than the minimum for any players. I will wait until the window closes before I get worried about the new season. It would be a pity for all the speeches and Videos to end in a repeat of last season. Agree with this. Plenty of weeks to go before the end of the window and hopefully they’re bluffing. If I don’t build up my hopes I can’t be disappointed That being said I’m just as interested in how they shake things up off the field this season with the expectation we’ll have a few more quid next year to play with. |
|
|
|
Post by twyford on Jul 7, 2023 23:54:42 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. History has shown that the Hodgkinson deal was the wrong call by Hoyle but he deferred his loan repayments when Covid affected the club's cashflow and then made further loans when Hodgkinson's businesses failed. Writing off (apparently) £40m of loans (which IIRC peaked at c£55m) as part of the sale to Nagel means in practice repayment of c£15m of the money he put in (though it seems may receive a further payment if a return to the PL is achieved). He then put in more money following the sale agreement to allow the club to continue, on the basis Nagel covered this when the sale completed. There's no indication whatsoever that any sales proceeds etc will go to Hoyle. I'm not advocating a statue but it's not hard to see what he's done for the club - not sure whether he or Rubery will have lost more money through their involvement. But then there's none as blind as those that won't see. |
|
|
|
Post by twyford on Jul 8, 2023 0:10:06 GMT 1
The question is..why did the EFL demand spending constraints?. What did we do wrong because we've been nowhere near breaching FFP. ?..or is it a new thing when foreign owners come in?. Town's track record of financial management as regards FFP is excellent, so how come our new owner can't pump in £5m extra or something?. Someone explain it to me I would imagine the 2023/24 budget proposals have been generated at our end. The takeover gives the EFL the opportunity to obtain a specific commitment to adhere to it as a condition of approving the change of ownership (I suspect, in an ideal world, they would like to be able to exert this level of control over clubs across the board.) While we currently sit in a reasonable 3-yr FFP position (parachute payment assisted) were we to propose a £5 million uplift to the budget this year - a year in which there is unlikely to be any significant player sale to offset the operating loss - we would effectively be proposing to put ourselves on pace for the P&S upper loss threshold from year #1 of the new regime... Are we though? Pretty sure '23 accounts will show a loss given the management payoffs and additional players brought in seeking survival (many of whom did little to help) I read that the '22 accounts have now been submitted but don't know what they show. I would hope that with a Wembley appearance they make reasonable reading but what legacy payments were still going through and didn't Forrest break with the tradition of allowing the loser to keep all gate receipts? With the talk of constraints for '24 (but not beyond) can't help thinking the '22 figures must be poor and need to pass out of the rolling 3 year tracking to allow Nagel the opportunity to run up some losses of his own. |
|
|
|
Post by workshyfop on Jul 8, 2023 7:44:12 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. History has shown that the Hodgkinson deal was the wrong call by Hoyle but he deferred his loan repayments when Covid affected the club's cashflow and then made further loans when Hodgkinson's businesses failed. Writing off (apparently) £40m of loans (which IIRC peaked at c£55m) as part of the sale to Nagel means in practice repayment of c£15m of the money he put in (though it seems may receive a further payment if a return to the PL is achieved). He then put in more money following the sale agreement to allow the club to continue, on the basis Nagel covered this when the sale completed. There's no indication whatsoever that any sales proceeds etc will go to Hoyle. I'm not advocating a statue but it's not hard to see what he's done for the club - not sure whether he or Rubery will have lost more money through their involvement. But then there's none as blind as those that won't see. Fair points and you’re right, I’ve been too harsh. Just frustrated that a lot of the club’s problems have been self-inflicted by poor decisions from those in charge. Hopefully we can scrape through this period and try to rebuild on more solid foundations. |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Jul 8, 2023 8:16:52 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. History has shown that the Hodgkinson deal was the wrong call by Hoyle but he deferred his loan repayments when Covid affected the club's cashflow and then made further loans when Hodgkinson's businesses failed. Writing off (apparently) £40m of loans (which IIRC peaked at c£55m) as part of the sale to Nagel means in practice repayment of c£15m of the money he put in (though it seems may receive a further payment if a return to the PL is achieved). He then put in more money following the sale agreement to allow the club to continue, on the basis Nagel covered this when the sale completed. There's no indication whatsoever that any sales proceeds etc will go to Hoyle. I'm not advocating a statue but it's not hard to see what he's done for the club - not sure whether he or Rubery will have lost more money through their involvement. But then there's none as blind as those that won't see. The damage was done long before the sale to PH. That chapter seems to be missing from the overall analysis. |
|
|
|
Post by detox on Jul 8, 2023 8:29:56 GMT 1
SC prices, assuming we sell 16000 brings in around £3.5m
I think there are tax and EFL deductions from this and maybe still a contribution to ksdl for stadium management (not 100% sure this still happens).
A significant price increase would certainly see reduced sales as many couldn't afford that outlay. If 25% didn't renew at a price of around £350 then there would be no significant financial gain for the club, and worse you potentially lose 4000 customers..
Nagel is right to look elsewhere for additional revenues,and these need to be substantial of we want to rise above mediocrity.. Maybe stadium sponsorship is one avenue,not sure when JS deal ends but encouragingly there are several realistic ways we can boost revenue..I think Nagel is on the ball with this but obviously needs to be given time to get the deals done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Jul 8, 2023 8:40:13 GMT 1
History has shown that the Hodgkinson deal was the wrong call by Hoyle but he deferred his loan repayments when Covid affected the club's cashflow and then made further loans when Hodgkinson's businesses failed. Writing off (apparently) £40m of loans (which IIRC peaked at c£55m) as part of the sale to Nagel means in practice repayment of c£15m of the money he put in (though it seems may receive a further payment if a return to the PL is achieved). He then put in more money following the sale agreement to allow the club to continue, on the basis Nagel covered this when the sale completed. There's no indication whatsoever that any sales proceeds etc will go to Hoyle. I'm not advocating a statue but it's not hard to see what he's done for the club - not sure whether he or Rubery will have lost more money through their involvement. But then there's none as blind as those that won't see. The damage was done long before the sale to PH. That chapter seems to be missing from the overall analysis. The timing of covid didn't help, but two catastrophic transfer windows in the Prem killed us. Spent a fortune on players that were virtually all sold for much less. The consequence of scrimping on those overseeing recruitment, |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Jul 8, 2023 8:55:10 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. It does make you wonder whether there is some other reason for there being £0 available for transfers straight after a takeover by a billionaire when the club is debt free and hasn't exactly been run recklessly in recent years! |
|
|
|
Post by 66738 on Jul 8, 2023 9:06:00 GMT 1
How much does a couple of decent cup runs bring these days? We’ve not had any in the last god knows how many years.
|
|
|
|
Post by workshyfop on Jul 8, 2023 9:25:42 GMT 1
How much does a couple of decent cup runs bring these days? We’ve not had any in the last god knows how many years. The cups are dying, sadly. Poor attendances, even with cheap tickets, as teams field weakened teams. There might be a little bit of tv money, but probably not much. Premier League clubs would rather finish one place higher in the league than win a cup, such is the financial disparity. |
|
|
|
Post by brighousebandbred on Jul 8, 2023 11:52:44 GMT 1
How much does a couple of decent cup runs bring these days? We’ve not had any in the last god knows how many years. The cups are dying, sadly. Poor attendances, even with cheap tickets, as teams field weakened teams. There might be a little bit of tv money, but probably not much. Premier League clubs would rather finish one place higher in the league than win a cup, such is the financial disparity. A good cup run for us always leads to better league form, we don’t do cups but we should. |
|
incognito
Jimmy Nicholson Terrier
Posts: 1,531
|
Post by incognito on Jul 8, 2023 13:31:46 GMT 1
downatthemac.proboards.com/post/3195202/threadI would imagine the 2023/24 budget proposals have been generated at our end. The takeover gives the EFL the opportunity to obtain a specific commitment to adhere to it as a condition of approving the change of ownership (I suspect, in an ideal world, they would like to be able to exert this level of control over clubs across the board.) While we currently sit in a reasonable 3-yr FFP position (parachute payment assisted) were we to propose a £5 million uplift to the budget this year - a year in which there is unlikely to be any significant player sale to offset the operating loss - we would effectively be proposing to put ourselves on pace for the P&S upper loss threshold from year #1 of the new regime... Are we though? Pretty sure '23 accounts will show a loss given the management payoffs and additional players brought in seeking survival (many of whom did little to help) I read that the '22 accounts have now been submitted but don't know what they show. I would hope that with a Wembley appearance they make reasonable reading but what legacy payments were still going through and didn't Forrest break with the tradition of allowing the loser to keep all gate receipts? With the talk of constraints for '24 (but not beyond) can't help thinking the '22 figures must be poor and need to pass out of the rolling 3 year tracking to allow Nagel the opportunity to run up some losses of his own. I shared my thoughts on this a bit further up this thread: downatthemac.proboards.com/post/3194985/threadI don't personally hold the same concerns about what's in store with the 2021/22 numbers (largely due to the artificial turnover boost from the final parachute payment). Hopefully it won't be too much longer before we get to have a look. To some degree I'm actually expecting the opposite effect when the scope of the 3-year reference period rolls forward a year in March '24 and March '25 - in the sense that the AEBT figures for 2023/24 and 24/25 are likely to be less favourable than for the seasons dropping out of the equation. I do still think Nagle is taking over a relatively clean slate in this respect though so there should exist some opportunity for flexibility of budget from next season. |
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 7,249
|
Post by ben1987 on Jul 8, 2023 15:39:26 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. It does make you wonder whether there is some other reason for there being £0 available for transfers straight after a takeover by a billionaire when the club is debt free and hasn't exactly been run recklessly in recent years! Look at who liked your post, it gives you a clue as to how close your wondering is. |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Jul 8, 2023 20:05:46 GMT 1
It does make you wonder whether there is some other reason for there being £0 available for transfers straight after a takeover by a billionaire when the club is debt free and hasn't exactly been run recklessly in recent years! Look at who liked your post, it gives you a clue as to how close your wondering is. Transfer fees for the likes of Billing, Grant, LOB going straight to Hoyle? |
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Jul 8, 2023 20:24:42 GMT 1
It does make you wonder whether there is some other reason for there being £0 available for transfers straight after a takeover by a billionaire when the club is debt free and hasn't exactly been run recklessly in recent years! Look at who liked your post, it gives you a clue as to how close your wondering is. It's easy to jump to conclusions but if it is true that income from player sales goes to Hoyle then that is absolutely disgusting. I'm hoping to god that isn't the case. Loves a good NDA does our Dean though doesn't he. |
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Jul 8, 2023 20:27:07 GMT 1
How much does a couple of decent cup runs bring these days? We’ve not had any in the last god knows how many years. 2021/22 we lost to Forest in the 5th round. 2017/18 we lost to Utd in the 5th too. |
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Jul 8, 2023 20:28:45 GMT 1
Look at who liked your post, it gives you a clue as to how close your wondering is. Transfer fees for the likes of Billing, Grant, LOB going straight to Hoyle? Are we still actually due fees for Billing and Grant? Billing left 4 years ago now. Grant 3. |
|
stable
Iain Dunn Terrier
Posts: 466
|
Post by stable on Jul 8, 2023 20:37:39 GMT 1
Transfer fees for the likes of Billing, Grant, LOB going straight to Hoyle? Are we still actually due fees for Billing and Grant? Billing left 4 years ago now. Grant 3. Not sure how long Billing’s was but I’m pretty sure Grant’s was a ridiculous 6 years at 2million a pop |
|
crux
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,122
|
Post by crux on Jul 8, 2023 20:53:55 GMT 1
Look at who liked your post, it gives you a clue as to how close your wondering is. It's easy to jump to conclusions but if it is true that income from player sales goes to Hoyle then that is absolutely disgusting. I'm hoping to god that isn't the case. Loves a good NDA does our Dean though doesn't he. Not saying it might not happen, but it's utterly pointless from KN's point of view. He may as well pay DH an agreed amount of money to get a 'clean slate' as KN is just going to have to fund the club anyway. An 'easier' way for DH to gain funds from this is to sell Canalside above value. |
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Jul 8, 2023 21:03:14 GMT 1
It's easy to jump to conclusions but if it is true that income from player sales goes to Hoyle then that is absolutely disgusting. I'm hoping to god that isn't the case. Loves a good NDA does our Dean though doesn't he. Not saying it might not happen, but it's utterly pointless from KN's point of view. He may as well pay DH an agreed amount of money to get a 'clean slate' as KN is just going to have to fund the club anyway. An 'easier' way for DH to gain funds from this is to sell Canalside above value. I don't think it's true to be honest because he is always talked up by Nagle and Warnock. I think it's unfair to start rumours until we get the 👀 from Maynard |
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Jul 8, 2023 21:12:02 GMT 1
Can someone please tell me if I am wrong. But FFP is reviewed for a club every 3 years. Our last one was 2 years ago. Which to me, makes sense that regardless of a takeover, we have 1 year left of our current review?
If we go silly with money, even though the club may not be at a loss due to KN wealth, it will be way over what we submitted/can spend 2 years ago?
In May next year we should pass the next review and use KN wealth in reporting our new review in 10 months time?
|
|
|
|
Post by King Neil on Jul 8, 2023 21:15:00 GMT 1
It's not money that gets results it's good managent
Remember that saying you can't polish a turd
Well...as it happens Neil Warnock can
Time we forget about finances and just chill for a while and enjoy the season ahead....Neil knows what he's doing so there's no point in worrying about things
|
|
|
|
Post by Torquayterrier on Jul 8, 2023 21:17:20 GMT 1
But sufficient money can buy good management too as Man City have proved. Pep didn't go there for the climate did he?
|
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Jul 8, 2023 21:22:27 GMT 1
It's not money that gets results it's good managent Remember that saying you can't polish a turd Well...as it happens Neil Warnock can Time we forget about finances and just chill for a while and enjoy the season ahead....Neil knows what he's doing so there's no point in worrying about things This is my biggest worry. The expectation of NW is way too much. We have a very very difficult first 5 games. We could quite easily lose all 5. We could also do well. But if the former happens... it will all become toxic again and Nagel will be getting abuse, the club will be targeted for not bringing people in etc. This high right now could be deflated quicker than a balloon being popped. As fans, we need to be realistic. If we aren't improving our squad, we are looking at a low mid table finish in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by King Neil on Jul 8, 2023 21:31:04 GMT 1
Ah look we had 15 hard games to play at the end of last season and look how we did
How about they need to worry about us???
Not having all this bollox time and again
Enjoy!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Jul 8, 2023 21:32:09 GMT 1
The damage was done long before the sale to PH. That chapter seems to be missing from the overall analysis. The timing of covid didn't help, but two catastrophic transfer windows in the Prem killed us. Spent a fortune on players that were virtually all sold for much less. The consequence of scrimping on those overseeing recruitment, How do equate spending a fortune on players as "scrimping"? |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jul 8, 2023 21:38:55 GMT 1
So, Hoyle fucked it up when “selling” to PH in order to get the most money possible back and hamstrung us with that deal by taking parachute payments and money from player sales. Now he’s done it again by sabotaging the budget for the new owner. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the Coady money and player sales this summer as part of the deal. Keep gathering your coppers for a statue and tugging your forelocks. Truly insightfull |
|
