Paul Barber: Why the Albion lose £1m a month

[Stat Brother]

Yup, it is Walsall, not Warsaw though!

They pay £46 for a ST, and get a £2 voucher to spend each match on food and other merchandise.

I think the Albion do a pretty good deal for kids though, for £75 (U-10) or /£125 (U-16) in the family stand they get the benefits of the travel voucher, plus a few goodies too over the season. Anyone who has taken their kids to a theme park or even cinema knows that those prices are reasonable. I'm not sure why they discriminate when kids get to 10 though, as the kids aren't earning at that age (unless you send them up chimneys to clean them) and it's a cost being borne solely by the parents.

Wow, just wow, I didn't even realise I'd mixed up a run down, depressing, grey, drab, communist enclave with the capital of Poland. ba boom tish.

Don't get me wrong I think the juniors are fantastically served by the club and get considerably more than what they pay for.
They had a science bloke making flavoured sugar with them a month ago, how cool is that.
Better than a crappy PS that doesn't work, most of the time.

But as PB's issue is maximising revenue streams, having £2 returned to their S/T upon entry will 90% of the time be spent at the till within 1 minute, the remaining 10% will be saved and spent in the shop.
Either way it wouldn't surprise me if that £2 spend generates multiple extra pounds by way of 'getting something else as well'.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

You have to balance the options;

1. Go for it spend money and hope for promotion and the pot of gold it brings.
2. Prudent spending to keep the club solvent but not diminishing ambition.

I believe we tried option 1 under Gus and it failed we are now engaged on option 2. I honestly believe that we will eventually reach the Premier based on player ability rather than big spending.

This - except for the bit about reaching the Premierthingy which I still believe is pie in the sky with current squad.

 

[Return of the Rev]

If I was to win the euro millions and offer the club say £50 million for their rare iPhone covers and tax disc holders could that cash then be used by the club to buy players? Especially if they were to put the said items available for sale on the clubshop at £50k each. Can the FL turn round and say you can't sell them for that price if someone is willing to pay that price for them? If the FL can say that then surely the same would hold for charging £45 for a shirt when you can buy the same shirt a lot cheaper.

There is a massive loophole in FFP and the likes of QPR and Forest have found it, it will just be time till we find out what they have found will hold up in a court of law

Be a right old stink on here if there was a price hike in the club shop 50 million that would plug the hole for 4 years

 

[Brighton Mod]

I'm not sure what your point is? I'm not saying it's not doable, I'm saying balancing all the competing factors isn't easy.

I agree its not easy, but you are by definition of what you say criticising the upper tear of management at the club.

 

[BensGrandad]

I wonder whether having different opperators in the same concourse woud improve the quality and turnover as an example using beer to illustrate it one servery has Guinness, John Smiths and Fosters and the other one has Tetleys Carlsberg and Murphys. I know no mention of Harveys or any other real ale but this is just for example purposes

 

[spanish flair]

i wonder what % of season tickets holders would actually be upset if the club were filling these empty seats with special offers,personally it wouldnt bother me in the slightest.

i can imagine some being miffed,but in the big scheme of things surely the financial need for more bums on seats outweighs any personal feelings about being ripped off if some people get in cheaper with last minute special deals.

I would not renew mine and buy per game and hence cash in on the deals when available.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

I wonder whether having different opperators in the same concourse woud improve the quality and turnover as an example using beer to illustrate it one servery has Guinness, John Smiths and Fosters and the other one has Tetleys Carlsberg and Murphys. I know no mention of Harveys or any other real ale but this is just for example purposes

That would work for one bloke buying a pint for himself, but what if my son decided to buy me a Harvey's but wanted a Kronenburg for himself?

Unlikely, I know. But possible?

Maybe not.

 

[halbpro]

I agree its not easy, but you are by definition of what you say criticising the upper tear of management at the club.

Absolutely not, unless you'd also say I was being critical if I said "Winning the FA Cup isn't easy." I would argue many clubs haven't got the balance quite right, but that's not to say I'd criticise their management. Everything is always a learning process, and the only way to learn is to fiddle and tune until you get everything working just how you want it. Looking at how close we've come over the last two seasons to promotion we've clearly nearly got it right, but haven't quite been there. That means you tweak the various factors a bit more, and we're currently seeing the results. Maybe we'll be promoted, maybe we won't - the only way to tell is to wait and see what happens.

 

[BensGrandad]

That would work for one bloke buying a pint for himself, but what if my son decided to buy me a Harvey's but wanted a Kronenburg for himself?

Unlikely, I know. But possible?

Maybe not.

We have that now as my brother buys himnself a Guinness from one stall and his mates Lager from another. I just refuse to buy anything in the ground.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Lower players wages..?

 

[BensGrandad]

Lower players wages..?

Wont work unless it is universal wage cap. If 6 clubs in The Championship decided to do this they would miss out on the better signings to the other 17.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Wont work unless it is universal wage cap. If 6 clubs in The Championship decided to do this they would miss out on the better signings to the other 17.

Make it universal..?
Never gonna happen

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Wont work unless it is universal wage cap. If 6 clubs in The Championship decided to do this they would miss out on the better signings to the other 17.

What happens to the other club?

 

[BensGrandad]

My mistake thinking 46 games so 23 teams forgot about not playing ourselves.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I've heard Barber talk about parachute payments being swallowed up servicing existing Premier League contracts on Championship income before. To now suggest clubs benefit from such payments is a little disingenuous.

 

[BensGrandad]

Why cant the authorities insist on a clause in all contracts that a players wage would be reduced back to the level in The Championship on relegation then the parachute payments wouldnt be needed or given.

 

[Bozza]

I've heard Barber talk about parachute payments being swallowed up servicing existing Premier League contracts on Championship income before. To now suggest clubs benefit from such payments is a little disingenuous.

How so? Given that, generally, higher wages obtains better players then clubs who receive them really do benefit.

 

[AZ Gull]

Has no one got an answer to my question about an investor wanted to put in £50 million and if they are supposedly allowed by FFP?

Of course an investor is allowed to invest ANY sum of money into a football club, under FFP. But I suspect what your question is getting at, is: could that money be used to pay for new players (either transfer fees or wages)? And the answer is - if there is no corresponding increase in revenue to ensure that losses stay within the FFP limits, then that increased expenditure will fall foul of the regulations.

The objective of FFP is to move clubs towards being more financially sustainable. The regulations to achieve this have focused on setting increasingly smaller allowable losses each season (ie what the club can spend is restricted by what the club can earn).

It seems that some on this thread think that an investor, if they so desired, should be able to inject Xmillion into a club to "buy" promotion. They argue that as long as this is a gift (ie they are not saddling the club with debt) that this is a good thing, and should be allowed. What they don't seem to appreciate is the effect that this would STILL have on driving up transfer fees and wages across the board (which is precisely the reason football is in the mess it is in now).

FFP allows investment (of any amount) in club infrastructure, such as new stadiums, academies etc (because these expenditures help ensure the longer-term viability of the club).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

How so? Given that, generally, higher wages obtains better players then clubs who receive them really do benefit.

Fair point but after relegation the better and/or more driven players typically move on, either via their own volition, or because the club need to cut costs and it's the more desirable players who attract interest. Clubs are then lumbered with the not-so-good players on big wages ie the bare-bones of a team which has just proved it's not good enough for the Prem. Take Will Buckley, who has just probably doubled, or more , his salary . Should Sunderland get related they could be stuck with him on 2 times the money we were paying him. Will that be to their benefit in The Championship? I guess Bridcutt is another.

Also, there was a report some time ago which indicated parachute payments are not an indicator of competitiveness. There are many factors but being stuck with average players on big money is one of them.

 

[spanish flair]

How so? Given that, generally, higher wages obtains better players then clubs who receive them really do benefit.

I know it is early but that is not working so far this season, with only one club with parachute payments in the top 6, only three in the top half. It goes against the thought you need this kind of money to be up there challenging.