|
Post by Galpharmer on May 24, 2020 13:59:53 GMT 1
I’m pleased that Town used the furlough scheme - soon they may be asking fans to make financial sacrifice to help them out. They’ll get a far more receptive ear if the club shows it is and has done everything it possibly can to save money and is only pulling on the fans heart strings as a last resort Jesus wept. If they come cap in hand to the fans after two Premier League seasons, players on full whack through this and Dean Hoyle walking away fully compensated, there might be a few choice responses.
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on May 24, 2020 14:23:37 GMT 1
I’m pleased that Town used the furlough scheme - soon they may be asking fans to make financial sacrifice to help them out. They’ll get a far more receptive ear if the club shows it is and has done everything it possibly can to save money and is only pulling on the fans heart strings as a last resort Jesus wept. If they come cap in hand to the fans after two Premier League seasons, players on full whack through this and Dean Hoyle walking away fully compensated, there might be a few choice responses. I agree it would be a shocking indictment where it to happen My point is though that they need to be saving money where they can and not taking the furlough option when they're closed as a business would be remiss My guess is that before they put on the fans either PH will have to write a cheque or PH and DH will have to revisit the scheduled 2020 loan repayment and see what can be done there; postponed, part write off, cash for equity etc At the end of the day they are both big fans - so want what’s best for the club - and if the business goes down the pipes they’d both loss a lot of money so obviously in their shared interest not to see that happen
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on May 24, 2020 14:28:17 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well.
Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value.
Could be a big problem
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on May 24, 2020 14:33:34 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well. Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value. Could be a big problem It’s odd they’ve not furloughed some, ie many business (inc Town) have furloughed some staff and not others. You’d think clubs would furlough the players they’re releasing this summer - ie no future - and save on the wages between now and then - I guess there must some contractual reason blocking that
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on May 24, 2020 14:38:04 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well. Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value. Could be a big problem It’s odd they’ve not furloughed some, ie many business (inc Town) have furloughed some staff and not others. You’d think clubs would furlough the players they’re releasing this summer - is no future - and save on the wages between now and then - I guess there must some contractual reason blocking that Some staff are still required to work, however little being done you cant furlough and then ask to work. I saw an argument that as clubs are asking players to keep fit by doing training at home this is classed as work and therefore clubs can't furlough players like they can other staff. Wage cut would be the only way to reduce the wage bill where players are concerned.
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on May 24, 2020 14:43:46 GMT 1
It’s odd they’ve not furloughed some, ie many business (inc Town) have furloughed some staff and not others. You’d think clubs would furlough the players they’re releasing this summer - is no future - and save on the wages between now and then - I guess there must some contractual reason blocking that Some staff are still required to work, however little being done you cant furlough and then ask to work. I saw an argument that as clubs are asking players to keep fit by doing training at home this is classed as work and therefore clubs can't furlough players like they can other staff. Wage cut would be the only way to reduce the wage bill where players are concerned. Take Jordan Ibe, he’s leaving Bournemouth on 1st July regardless - www.skysports.com/transfer/news/12691/11992179/jordon-ibe-to-leave-bournemouth-on-july-1Why not just furlough him now and save the months wages if he’s not going to figure again? No requirement to train etc I can only think this is either contractually not possible (ie we’ll pay you £X a year for 4 years regardless) or it doesn’t meet the criteria of the furlough scheme in terms of keeping a job open for someone who was furloughed to return to?
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on May 24, 2020 14:53:00 GMT 1
Some staff are still required to work, however little being done you cant furlough and then ask to work. I saw an argument that as clubs are asking players to keep fit by doing training at home this is classed as work and therefore clubs can't furlough players like they can other staff. Wage cut would be the only way to reduce the wage bill where players are concerned. Take Jordan Ibe, he’s leaving Bournemouth on 1st July regardless - www.skysports.com/transfer/news/12691/11992179/jordon-ibe-to-leave-bournemouth-on-july-1Why not just furlough him now and save the months wages if he’s not going to figure again? No requirement to train etc I can only think this is either contractually not possible (ie we’ll pay you £X a year for 4 years regardless) or it doesn’t meet the criteria of the furlough scheme in terms of keeping a job open for someone who was furloughed to return to? In that particular circumstance then yeah, furlough would be fine, however I'd imagine the PFA would probably get involved and argue the case that it would be a breach of contract or summat. Footballers are always in a unique position when it comes to being paid compared to us normal folk, performance, sickness etc. so o doubt this would be the same l. Shame players wont come out and take a lay cut, but then I guess most of our lot have o affinity to the club so why should they.
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on May 24, 2020 15:03:58 GMT 1
Take Jordan Ibe, he’s leaving Bournemouth on 1st July regardless - www.skysports.com/transfer/news/12691/11992179/jordon-ibe-to-leave-bournemouth-on-july-1Why not just furlough him now and save the months wages if he’s not going to figure again? No requirement to train etc I can only think this is either contractually not possible (ie we’ll pay you £X a year for 4 years regardless) or it doesn’t meet the criteria of the furlough scheme in terms of keeping a job open for someone who was furloughed to return to? In that particular circumstance then yeah, furlough would be fine, however I'd imagine the PFA would probably get involved and argue the case that it would be a breach of contract or summat. Footballers are always in a unique position when it comes to being paid compared to us normal folk, performance, sickness etc. so o doubt this would be the same l. Shame players wont come out and take a lay cut, but then I guess most of our lot have o affinity to the club so why should they. I agree on the footballers in general but fair play to Leeds and the other sides who took a cut ages back, www.lep.co.uk/sport/football/preston-north-end/leeds-united-players-and-senior-staff-taking-wage-cut-so-non-football-staff-can-be-paid-2518724I’ve seen nothing yet that towns players have taken a cut There are a lot of normal Director and senior staff at all kinds of businesses around the country taking voluntary pay cuts to support their business and avoid redundancies for their colleagues - and not on footballer salaries It would be good if the town players showed some solitary to their fellow employees
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on May 24, 2020 15:17:59 GMT 1
In that particular circumstance then yeah, furlough would be fine, however I'd imagine the PFA would probably get involved and argue the case that it would be a breach of contract or summat. Footballers are always in a unique position when it comes to being paid compared to us normal folk, performance, sickness etc. so o doubt this would be the same l. Shame players wont come out and take a lay cut, but then I guess most of our lot have o affinity to the club so why should they. I agree on the footballers - Leeds and other sides took a cut ages back, www.lep.co.uk/sport/football/preston-north-end/leeds-united-players-and-senior-staff-taking-wage-cut-so-non-football-staff-can-be-paid-2518724I’ve seen nothing yet that towns players have taken a cut There are a lot of normal Director and senior staff at businesses around the country taking voluntary pay cuts to support their business and avoid redundancies for their colleagues - and not on footballer salaries It would be good if the town players showed some solitary to their fellow employees Leeds players have only taken a deferral, not a cut, so they will get paid eventually. From what I've heard from people close it, it was pretty much forced on them but spun to make it a 'good news' story. They will also all get a 2% bonus for agreement of the defferal. Nevertheless fair play to them for agreeing to it. Wonder if any Town directors have taken a pay cut? Players get the main brunt of it buy will have directors on high salaries as well. I know everyone's personal circumstances and outgoings are relative, but you'd expect directors of companies to lead by example in the first instance to get others to follow.
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on May 24, 2020 15:22:32 GMT 1
Leeds players have only taken a deferral, not a cut, so they will get paid eventually. From what I've heard from people close it, it was pretty much forced on them but spun to make it a 'good news' story. They will also all get a 2% bonus for agreement of the defferal. Nevertheless fair play to them for agreeing to it. Wonder if any Town directors have taken a pay cut? Players get the main brunt of it buy will have directors on high salaries as well. I know everyone's personal circumstances and outgoings are relative, but you'd expect directors of companies to lead by example in the first instance to get others to follow. In fairness the directors took a deferral at the start of April - www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52136690In that article (nearly two months old) it said the players and manager were talking to the PFA and LMA about what they could do
|
|
|
Post by alexdire on May 24, 2020 15:54:18 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well. Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value. Could be a big problem Reading between the lines, I think we are in serious financial trouble. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Town factor some of the parachute payments? If we don't get all of the money, it could be a real problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2020 16:07:57 GMT 1
I’m pleased that Town used the furlough scheme - soon they may be asking fans to make financial sacrifice to help them out. They’ll get a far more receptive ear if the club shows it is and has done everything it possibly can to save money and is only pulling on the fans heart strings as a last resort What do you mean about asking fans to make financial sacrifices to help the club??
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on May 24, 2020 16:09:50 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well. Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value. Could be a big problem Reading between the lines, I think we are in serious financial trouble. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Town factor some of the parachute payments? If we don't get all of the money, it could be a real problem. All clubs are in serious financial trouble mate. How long do you think tv will want to show football in empty stadia?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2020 16:10:12 GMT 1
In that particular circumstance then yeah, furlough would be fine, however I'd imagine the PFA would probably get involved and argue the case that it would be a breach of contract or summat. Footballers are always in a unique position when it comes to being paid compared to us normal folk, performance, sickness etc. so o doubt this would be the same l. Shame players wont come out and take a lay cut, but then I guess most of our lot have o affinity to the club so why should they. I agree on the footballers in general but fair play to Leeds and the other sides who took a cut ages back, www.lep.co.uk/sport/football/preston-north-end/leeds-united-players-and-senior-staff-taking-wage-cut-so-non-football-staff-can-be-paid-2518724I’ve seen nothing yet that towns players have taken a cut There are a lot of normal Director and senior staff at all kinds of businesses around the country taking voluntary pay cuts to support their business and avoid redundancies for their colleagues - and not on footballer salaries It would be good if the town players showed some solitary to their fellow employees Leeds players haven’t taken a cut, they’ve taken a deferral haven’t they??
|
|
|
Post by Galpharmer on May 24, 2020 16:26:50 GMT 1
How well protected are players contracts in these situations? My understanding is very well. Said a while ago it would be typical if the TV companies cut the payments and the parachute payments didn’t materialise or were reduced leaving us with a major wage bill issue and very few players of any value. Could be a big problem Reading between the lines, I think we are in serious financial trouble. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Town factor some of the parachute payments? If we don't get all of the money, it could be a real problem. Oh aye, we've either spaffed them on shite wingers or used them to pay Dean, so Phil can own the Club for nowt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2020 16:53:01 GMT 1
Reading between the lines, I think we are in serious financial trouble. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Town factor some of the parachute payments? If we don't get all of the money, it could be a real problem. All clubs are in serious financial trouble mate. How long do you think tv will want to show football in empty stadia? agree with you and there are many efl clubs in a far morecritical state than town and town will feel the pinch as well
|
|
|
Post by brickthespecial on May 24, 2020 17:45:13 GMT 1
You would think if a % of the sky sports money is to be refunded or withheld then future payments including parachute money promised, will be reduced accordingly. Meaning the club is unlikely to receive the full pay-out due over the next 2 years to enable Phil to fulfil the repayment schedule agreed with Deano.
PH might have to dig into his own personal wealth to cover any such shortfall. Deano meanwhile could write off 'some' of what he had hoped to recoup, agree to extend the term of repayment or increase the proposed 25% holding he was going to be left with if the bucks aren't forthcoming from the paymasters in Sky HQ as hoped.
Whatever the outcome, without 2 years worth of sizeable & guaranteed parachute money going towards vital team rebuild to make us competitive again and we are all crystal clear now it's already spoken for to fund Phil's acquisition, we appear to be on that greasy pole without a foothold, fast track slippery sliding to ………. mediocrity, at best!
Selling off any prize asset worth a few quid will be the only cash generating option, we face limited match day income anyway (mainly away fans ticket sales) due to our high take up of low cost season ticket sales. The club is going to have to shed all the remaining contractual ex premiership high earners over the next 12-18 months and slimline massively, anyone wishing to hang around still, re-negotiate new deals reflecting the next 12/24/36 months expectation.
The covid situation has without doubt thrown a grenade into an already precarious and worrying state of affairs in our beloved club's history and the new chap Devlin at the helm is going to have his work cut out to try steer the whole organisation through some choppy waters once any kind of re-start is possible.
I expect to see some form of similar holiday and airline company style 'voucher' offer in lieu of hard cash refunds for the 19-20 season up to 7th March last game and future 20/21 games played behind closed doors - I cant imagine supporters being allowed in any stadium until well into 2021.
It's going to get messy for sure.
|
|
|
Post by yappledapple on May 24, 2020 19:26:42 GMT 1
|
|
TTCMatt
Iain Dunn Terrier
Posts: 584
|
Post by TTCMatt on May 24, 2020 19:49:15 GMT 1
Leeds players have only taken a deferral, not a cut, so they will get paid eventually. From what I've heard from people close it, it was pretty much forced on them but spun to make it a 'good news' story. They will also all get a 2% bonus for agreement of the defferal.
Nevertheless fair play to them for agreeing to it. Wonder if any Town directors have taken a pay cut? Players get the main brunt of it buy will have directors on high salaries as well. I know everyone's personal circumstances and outgoings are relative, but you'd expect directors of companies to lead by example in the first instance to get others to follow. and then furloughed the staff they'd reckoned they'd saved after lapping up the praise when the media were looking the other way.
|
|
|
Post by faffa on May 24, 2020 20:36:52 GMT 1
You would think if a % of the sky sports money is to be refunded or withheld then future payments including parachute money promised, will be reduced accordingly. Meaning the club is unlikely to receive the full pay-out due over the next 2 years to enable Phil to fulfil the repayment schedule agreed with Deano.
More legal action. You can’t just withhold money from somebody who has completed there part of the deal, got relegated, just because you didn’t get paid by somebody else. Because you didn’t complete your end of the bargain. Unless the EPL are going to go into some form of administration. Surely the parachute payments are a done deal. Future ones fair enough, Norwich et al.
Be interested to see how the contract is set out in this case.
|
|
|
Post by specialun on May 24, 2020 22:41:25 GMT 1
Sensible comments from Hodgkinson here - and he’s spot on in what he’s saying
More importantly for us is the repayment to Hoyle from our one moment in time funds...
BBC article “Their accounts to 30 June 2019, released on Thursday, confirm the debt that must be repaid to Hoyle - and offer one explanation for why they did not invest as heavily in the transfer market as some fans hoped.
Under the agreement, £15m must be paid within five working days of the end of this summer's transfer window, with an additional £10m due on 31 August in both 2021 and 2022.”
No chance of being able to pay £15m this summer or total £25m to Hoyle by summer 2021
Any answer to our financial position will have to include a deferral of this summers amount for starters
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on May 24, 2020 23:15:14 GMT 1
Sensible comments from Hodgkinson here - and he’s spot on in what he’s saying More importantly for us is the repayment to Hoyle from our one moment in time funds... BBC article “Their accounts to 30 June 2019, released on Thursday, confirm the debt that must be repaid to Hoyle - and offer one explanation for why they did not invest as heavily in the transfer market as some fans hoped. Under the agreement, £15m must be paid within five working days of the end of this summer's transfer window, with an additional £10m due on 31 August in both 2021 and 2022.” No chance of being able to pay £15m this summer or total £25m to Hoyle by summer 2021 Any answer to our financial position will have to include a deferral of this summers amount for starters In the podcast that Phil did a couple of months ago for And He Takes That Chance, he said that the club had already paid £11m of this summer's installment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2020 0:06:59 GMT 1
Sensible comments from Hodgkinson here - and he’s spot on in what he’s saying More importantly for us is the repayment to Hoyle from our one moment in time funds... BBC article “Their accounts to 30 June 2019, released on Thursday, confirm the debt that must be repaid to Hoyle - and offer one explanation for why they did not invest as heavily in the transfer market as some fans hoped. Under the agreement, £15m must be paid within five working days of the end of this summer's transfer window, with an additional £10m due on 31 August in both 2021 and 2022.” No chance of being able to pay £15m this summer or total £25m to Hoyle by summer 2021 Any answer to our financial position will have to include a deferral of this summers amount for starters Why no chance?? We’ve got money coming in from the transfers of Billing, Mooy, Smith, Zanka, Van La Parea, and Lowe, in addition to EPL distribution of around £34m. If the club can’t pay out £15m at the end of the window then it’s a business that doesn’t deserve to continue.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on May 25, 2020 7:47:33 GMT 1
What PH said is absolutely correct, it is absolutely baffling that this debate is not being had. The press seem to be shying away from it, I don't understand why, and banging on about finishing the season and rhetoric about integrity.
It's essentially the last day of the season today. In normal circumstances we would be looking forward to next season but no one is even suggesting how that may work. The structure, finance and what will be permissible all seem to be ignored.
I know this season hasn't concluded but surely you need to have a plan? The Euros are said to happen next year so there is a hard stop. If fans can't come and watch games, initially, what's the plan.
PH had a rocky start to his tenure as owner but since the appointment of the Cowleys has been far more impressive. More power to him for sticking his head above the parapet. It's also sensible that he wrote to those concerned first before going public.
Covid 19 has shown how "week to week" football really is. Something will have to change.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2020 9:14:03 GMT 1
What PH said is absolutely correct, it is absolutely baffling that this debate is not being had. The press seem to be shying away from it, I don't understand why, and banging on about finishing the season and rhetoric about integrity. It's essentially the last day of the season today. In normal circumstances we would be looking forward to next season but no one is even suggesting how that may work. The structure, finance and what will be permissible all seem to be ignored. I know this season hasn't concluded but surely you need to have a plan? The Euros are said to happen next year so there is a hard stop. If fans can't come and watch games, initially, what's the plan. PH had a rocky start to his tenure as owner but since the appointment of the Cowleys has been far more impressive. More power to him for sticking his head above the parapet. It's also sensible that he wrote to those concerned first before going public. Covid 19 has shown how "week to week" football really is. Something will have to change. I do agree with you. However, days ago people were crying like little babies that football shouldn’t even be discussing how to plan for finishing THIS season one way or the other...as there were “more important things to think about” (not sure what involvement the corridors of footballing power have in researching for virus vaccines or coming up with schemes to protect care home residents though?). One week “we can’t be talking about the football that needs to be played now”...the next week, “why isn’t next season being publicly discussed and reported on”. Seems like a nonsense and just an excuse to lay into football. Of course they’ll be thinking about next season, but it’s just not the most important thing to worry about at the moment. It’s akin to government previously saying the message was “stay at home”....the media clamouring for details of an exit strategy....government saying, “it’ll confuse people, the message is stay at home”...then producing a clear exit strategy and saying when the first steps will happen, to be greeted with idiotic confusion by the media...”you’ve said I can go out on Monday, does that mean I can go out now...it’s all too confusing, why did you release this strategy”!! To start to release tentative thoughts about next season NOW would just send the media into an unwarranted tizz, far better to focus on getting this season up and running first. The EFL is not a massive organisation, they have to prioritise where their efforts lay. (And also...why do football club owners “send letters to all the other clubs”...what year is it.?”
|
|
bogart
David Wagner Terrier
Posts: 2,815
|
Post by bogart on May 25, 2020 9:34:41 GMT 1
"They may not like me saying this, but [players' union] the PFA need to put in place salary cuts of between 30% and 50% for all players at all levels until such a time as crowds are allowed back into football stadiums and income streams return.
Fat chance of that with that geriatric Talyor in charge.
|
|
|
Post by specialun on May 25, 2020 10:37:25 GMT 1
Sensible comments from Hodgkinson here - and he’s spot on in what he’s saying More importantly for us is the repayment to Hoyle from our one moment in time funds... BBC article “Their accounts to 30 June 2019, released on Thursday, confirm the debt that must be repaid to Hoyle - and offer one explanation for why they did not invest as heavily in the transfer market as some fans hoped. Under the agreement, £15m must be paid within five working days of the end of this summer's transfer window, with an additional £10m due on 31 August in both 2021 and 2022.” No chance of being able to pay £15m this summer or total £25m to Hoyle by summer 2021 Any answer to our financial position will have to include a deferral of this summers amount for starters Why no chance?? We’ve got money coming in from the transfers of Billing, Mooy, Smith, Zanka, Van La Parea, and Lowe, in addition to EPL distribution of around £34m. If the club can’t pay out £15m at the end of the window then it’s a business that doesn’t deserve to continue. Last one of switch the lights then! I’d expect we’d have a cash hole in next 12 months before making those instalments to Hoyle. 1. It’s not necessarily about having £15m at that point - but what does our cash flow look like in 6, 12 months if no fans, less tv money 2. Per Ph: “In normal revenue, we are looking at losing between £7m and £10m. The claw-back for TV is going to be £10m-£30m.” 3. I’d suggest we won’t be getting all the instalments you refer above... not paying all we owe We will have a significant cash requirement in the next 12 months that will need to be filled via a combination of 1. Hoyle deferral of £4m this year (see below) and £10m in Summer 21 for now 2. Owner injection - Ph or more likely see 1 3. Player Sales - Grant and whatever other sales we can make 4. Player wage cuts 5. Player wage part deferrals - deferrals kick the can but provide breathing space 6. Other - Expect we’ll also need to I. make job cuts in non playing staff II. seek agreement to defer amounts due to stadium company III. seek suppprt from Hmrc to defer paye/ni (hmrc will expect to see DH defer amounts if they are to agree to this) [Nb - Understand from posts we’ve already paid Hoyle £11m of £15m in which case we’re needing £4m. I assume that was part of agreement rather than us paying in advance of requirements. Hoyle should defer the £4m payment. Why should the tax payer (you and me) cover our furloughed non playing staff wages whilst our part owner has been paid £11m and due to be paid another £4m?]
|
|
deepc
Tom Cowan Terrier
Posts: 642
|
Post by deepc on May 25, 2020 10:44:25 GMT 1
Just listened to TS interview with Phil. He painted a very bleak picture. Basically the focus on finishing this season is missing the point. What happens next year is key and football in the lower leagues will not exist without spectators in the ground. He thinks that applies to every club below the championship level immediately and to some championship clubs next year.
Came across very well and made a great deal of sense imo
|
|
|
Post by lossiemouthtownfan on May 25, 2020 10:48:02 GMT 1
Think up here in Scotland that St Johnstone have furloughed their players that are out of contract in the summer to save money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2020 12:05:45 GMT 1
Just listened to TS interview with Phil. He painted a very bleak picture. Basically the focus on finishing this season is missing the point. What happens next year is key and football in the lower leagues will not exist without spectators in the ground. He thinks that applies to every club below the championship level immediately and to some championship clubs next year. Came across very well and made a great deal of sense imo agree with you he has spoken very well on this and yes its what happens next season whatever division we are in the is the real issure.the pyramid system is in great danger and many clubs may well go.efl sleepwalking if not sorted and the prem can play a big part in this but we will see
|
|