Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Should TB have waited before he expanded the capacity of the Amex?



Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
As we can't speculate on what's happening on the staffing side of the club can I throw this out there?

Were the extra seats a gamble on us being promoted and needing the extra capacity once we were promoted.. What if TB had spent whatever it cost on players?

There is an excellent chance that we could have secured auto promotion and then put in the extra seats using the windfall that we would have received on a few players and the stadium expansion, gambling that we'd have enough to stay up. If that had failed we'd still have the new seats and the parachute payments which would surely have put us in a better position than we are in now. Not that we are in a bad place at the moment btw.

Am I talking crap? I'm not a mover and shaker in big business so it's possible that there is something glaringly flawed in the above speculation.

Thoughts?
 


One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 4, 2006
21,482
Worthing
Your observation is perfectly reasonable. Perhaps it is under a different funding stream rather than the playing budget? Potentially, would the wages, signing on fee's, agent fee's and transfer fee cost a lot more than the seats and potentially if we had still failed, we'd be in a worse position, with a higher wage bill and no seats?

Just guessing...
 










Vegas Seagull

New member
Jul 10, 2009
7,782
Infrastructure first in everything, costs are sometimes 10X higher on returning to complete an unfinished project than continuing to the end
 


Brovion

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Jul 6, 2003
19,322
No. Some of the more gullible have been defending the principle of paid-for membership schemes as necessary now for 'when' we're a big club in the Premiership (maybe for those people the club should increase ticket prices to premiership levels, just in preparation for 'when' we get there). They're obviously wrong, but for the infrastructure changes to make us a 'big' club there really is no time like the present. Costs won't get cheaper and, perish the thought, TB might come to a stage where he feels he's done enough. The Amex certainly needed the extra seats as in the first season, although we all loved it, it DID give the impression of only being half-finished. Now it looks even more fantastic than it did when it opened.

Also we've proved it wasn't a mistake size-wise as we've been able to sell out the increased capacity. The challenge now is for the club to be able to do it on a regular basis, and certainly for next season I don't think paid-for membership schemes is the way to do it. (And we're back on THAT again! Sorry!)
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
Hmm I can't see that waiting a year would have had a massive cost implication. Of course we could have invested the money in players and still not gone up which would have made putting the seats in this season a wise move. BUT if we'd gone up, which I really believe we would have done with an Ulloa in place and another Phillips like player earlier in the season, I can't see that the cost implication of the extra seats going in during the summer would have been any different :shrug:

Whether we actually need these seats in the Championship will become clear if we're not pacesetters this season.
 




One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 4, 2006
21,482
Worthing
Hmm I can't see that waiting a year would have had a massive cost implication. Of course we could have invested the money in players and still not gone up which would have made putting the seats in this season a wise move. BUT if we'd gone up, which I really believe we would have done with an Ulloa in place and another Phillips like player earlier in the season, I can't see that the cost implication of the extra seats going in during the summer would have been any different :shrug:

Maybe you're a bigger gambler than Tony? :wink:
 


8ace

Banned
Jul 21, 2003
23,811
Brighton
If he had done perhaps the scarcity of tickets would have fuelled demand even further (like Nintendo and Apple are said to do when they launch a new product).
Then again when we got the top flight previously our crowds never reached the heights of the previous seasons when we were going for promotion.
Maybe it would be different now though as it more ST sales than pay on the gate.
 


elbowpatches

Active member
Jul 7, 2003
1,177
Cambridge
Will our £8mill loss last year and a probable loss this year be mainly made up of investments in new seats and the training ground? If all the infrastructure can be built and paid for in the next couple of years whilst FFP comes in we will see the long term benefits.

I'm sure costs have been inflated for last year to include training ground and seating costs so they don't have be claimed as part of FFP next year.
 




nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
13,653
Manchester
Will our £8mill loss last year and a probable loss this year be mainly made up of investments in new seats and the training ground? If all the infrastructure can be built and paid for in the next couple of years whilst FFP comes in we will see the long term benefits.

I'm sure costs have been inflated for last year to include training ground and seating costs so they don't have be claimed as part of FFP next year.

Investment in infrastructure doesn't count as a cost in FFP.
 


El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,689
Pattknull med Haksprut
Will our £8mill loss last year and a probable loss this year be mainly made up of investments in new seats and the training ground? If all the infrastructure can be built and paid for in the next couple of years whilst FFP comes in we will see the long term benefits.

I'm sure costs have been inflated for last year to include training ground and seating costs so they don't have be claimed as part of FFP next year.

Infrastructure costs are excluded from FFP calculations, so the answer to your first question is No.
 


Eddiespearritt

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
757
Central Europe
There have already been days when parts of the stadium look deserted during a game - and that well before the 85th minute exodus. Millwall is always the ground that comes to mind - they overbuilt their capacity and you rarely see any people sitting in seats on the TV view.

30,000 is probably great for the Premier League - but there will be many more times in the coming season when we see large empty spaces - although the official reported attendance will always be 23,000 +

Sadly I fear that the expectation level is now so high that floating customers and those who struggle to justify the cost from their personal budget will be hard to bring in when the team starts to struggle. Right to build out now ? - yes for cost reasons - will it always be a full and rocking atmosphere ? - certainly no.
 




Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patreon
Apr 30, 2013
13,763
Herts
Investment in infrastructure doesn't count as a cost in FFP.

Feel free to skip over this post - it contains some accounting that most will find pretty boring!

Is correct - mostly. There are two types of cost: investment in infrastructure (stadium, stadium expansion, training ground as examples) which is "capital" cost, and routine expenditure which recurs every week or month (wages, for example). The former type of cost is classed as an asset on the balance sheet and is written off over a number of years (building costs tend to be written off over 10 or 25 years). Each year, the write-off (called depreciation) comes off the balance sheet and onto the profit and loss account as cost, whereas the full wages cost has to be taken as a cost in the month it is incurred. Thus, the investment in seating would only be taken as a cost for FFP purposes in equal instalments over 10 or 25 years.

Obviously, the cash to build the extra seating will have had to be generated from somewhere (probably originally the loan from TB), but that is different from a "cost" in the P&L account.

An example in our lives is the purchase and running costs of a car. The purchase price of the car would be a capital item that would be depreciated over typically 5 years; petrol, road tax, insurance, repairs etc would be taken as a cost immediately.
 


Meade's Ball

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
13,612
Hither (sometimes Thither)
I would think the determination to have a ground filled means resolution of our current woes is be-sped through and the replacement gussers are quickly and spectacularly found. The brand has no expansion at present so desire has been stilted. If we have a bit of what we had, then ideally the newly arrived will stick with it and become part of the furniture like the rest of us old horses. It's an eerie sight at times a magnificent stadium just peppered with fans, and I like to think right now our scriptwriters are behind the scenes penning a new chapter of our pheonixesque rise that somehow outunputdowns the last. I don't think the bigness was a rush or rash decision. We just need to make sure we keep being growingly attractive to the modern fan and their wishes.
 




Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patreon
Apr 30, 2013
13,763
Herts
Is it correct to say, then, that if TB had invested that money in players instead our losses under FFP would have been much higher?

Yep. Investment in infrastructure is totally separate from paying players' wages except the annual depreciation charge incurred because of the infrastructure investment.
 




beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,264
...
Were the extra seats a gamble on us being promoted and needing the extra capacity once we were promoted.. What if TB had spent whatever it cost on players?

does the spending on the stadium effect player budget? big assumption to make and one i dont believe is the case. certainly it does not come in to the FFP rules.
 


brightn'ove

cringe
Apr 12, 2011
9,136
London
I can confirm, from a reliable source, that you are talking absolute bollocks. Without the seats we were losing £8m, we need the extra 8,000 for revenue.
 



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here