Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
Well then, the law is an ass.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Bolton £163 million in debt (!)
- Thread starter shaolinpunk
- Start date
Well then, the law is an ass.
So lets take Arsenal as a viable business model. Successfully in the top 6 of the Premier for the last god knows how long, and yet consistently make a profit. They are now in a position where they could this year win league. When a club like Arsenal can do it, others can as well. The problem with the majority of football clubs is they want to buy their way to success "now", not in the future. It is also very much the reason why a capitalist society like ours finds ourselves in so much debt.
Creaky
Well-known member
Hardly!
Would it be OK for there to be a mandatory clause, (irrespective of the employer's or employee's wishes), governing the future wages or employment status of accountants, bricklayers, teachers etc.
gordonchas
New member
- Jul 1, 2012
- 230
Arsenal should have been near the top of the league. Over the period you mention they had the 2nd highest income of any English club after Manchester United, and the fifth biggest income in European football (though that is admittedly a long way behind the elite 4).
Yes, they have been prudent, but much of the profit they have generated has been i) at the expense of the strength of their side though sales of their best players, and ii) from property development. In fact, they made losses in each of the last two years if you exclude transfers and property sales.
If this approach is changed into making big-name signings like Ozil, with all the long-term implications that has on wage costs, then even they won't be making profits, or breaking even, much longer.
As for Bolton.... what a telling comment by Chairman Gartside "This year's results show the difficulties faced in the football business when a club has enjoyed a sustained and successful period in the Premier League, in our case 11 years, then suffers relegation back to the Football League Championship"
"Successful" in the Premier League obviously leads to a hopeless, cavernous, non-repayable debt. The truth of the matter is that the richer the Premier League gets, the more hopeless the financial situation of the majority of the clubs in it becomes.
Turnover £28.5 million
Wage Bill £32.7 million
In the words of the late great David Coleman "Quite remarkable"
Wage Bill £32.7 million
In the words of the late great David Coleman "Quite remarkable"
Seagull over Canaryland
Well-known member
Exactly - unless you can somehow guarantee long term survival in the Prem, say like the top four seem to, then eventually the bubble has to burst, leaving relegated clubs with the reality of having to eventually exist within their own means, which is nigh on impossible for most. OK there are parachute payments but this is still an artificial cushion that is temporarily deferring the inevitable consequences. It seems Bolton are a 'good' example.
Yes getting to the Prem is seen as football's holy grail, it is really based on a perverse financial model that is almost entirely dependent on the sponsors money. They are fortunate that Sky and BT are now in a bidding war but you only have to look at the ITV and Setanta disasters to see how the promised monies can evaporate overnight. Without the Sky and Barclays monies how would the smaller Prem clubs survive?
The sooner we migrate to the German model of club ownership and financing (which isn't perfect but seems far more sustainable) the better. I fear that FFP will be great in theory and some clubs (like us) will work within it but the sanctions for others will be ineffective.
Perhaps the promised land of 4pm Sunday kick-offs, success at avoiding relegation and half and half scarves isn't quite as alluring after all?
Bolton's wage bill also explains why Dougie Freedman left Palace for a team 16 places below them.
Seagull over Canaryland
Well-known member
Good point, which also underlines just how Bolton have underachieved in the Championship. All that money for so little end result.
Ok they have now put a little run of wins together, but a month ago Dougie must have been close to getting his P45.
If we are competing with clubs who have £30m wage bills then did we 'hit the ceiling' in getting to fourth last year? Leicester, QPR, Forest and a few others are paying far more than the Albion for wages.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
And is a very good example of how paying huge wages and transfer fees does not guarantee success. As I hope QPR find out this year too.
I really do think nothing will change until a number of clubs go to the wall. It is so glaringly obvious English football finances are completely ****ed yet no one seems to want to do anything about it. Maybe the FA and the FL should just let clubs fold as opposed to helping them limp along?
Part of the problem is that there is not a level playing field. Clubs such as City, Chelsea, QPR, Forest, Leicester and others have sugar daddies who can afford to spunk away hundreds of millions, other clubs cannot compete, but fan pressure and boardroom stupidity and vanity sometimes means that they try to live beyond their means.
Corrected for you!
To a degree, TB has invested in infrastructure rather than playing silly wages. Yaya Toure was paid more in City's league winning season than everyone at the Albion put together, including non-playing staff.
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
It certainly explains why Gartside was pushing for a closed shop of the top flight and has since gone quiet on the idea.
Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
What is Burnden Leisure? Do they run at a profit? I'm not sure I would want to work for an organisation that saw fit to 'invest' money in a football club as opposed to my Christmas bonus.
Dougie
Well-known member
- Jan 11, 2012
- 5,709
I dont think bolton can afford to sack him and his back room staff , it cost bolton alot in the first place to get them . It is staggering they lost £50m this year !
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
No, we burst through the ceiling and we are likely to do so again this season. But this ceiling is only put there by people that believe that paying top money guarantees success.
Trying to put this ridiculously complex FFP debacle in simplistic terms, if I understand correctly this is what will happen:-
1) Club breaks FFP
2) FL imposes transfer "embargo" (although it is not an "embargo" as all it means is that transfers would have to be sanctioned by FL)
3) FL refuses to sanction a transfer
4) Club sues FL (presumably under the "restraint of trade" legislation)
5) FL bottles it and approves transfer
If my understanding is correct, the rules are totally ineffective. By complying with FFP regulations, we are putting ourselves (in promotion to PL terms) at a massive disadvantage against those clubs who have given the FFP regulations the finger and who, it would appear, will not actually suffer any meaningful sanctions in the future for doing so?
Have I missed something? I must have done; please put me right!
1) Club breaks FFP
2) FL imposes transfer "embargo" (although it is not an "embargo" as all it means is that transfers would have to be sanctioned by FL)
3) FL refuses to sanction a transfer
4) Club sues FL (presumably under the "restraint of trade" legislation)
5) FL bottles it and approves transfer
If my understanding is correct, the rules are totally ineffective. By complying with FFP regulations, we are putting ourselves (in promotion to PL terms) at a massive disadvantage against those clubs who have given the FFP regulations the finger and who, it would appear, will not actually suffer any meaningful sanctions in the future for doing so?
Have I missed something? I must have done; please put me right!