Current situation at the club

[El Presidente]

Here are some figures that might reveal how precarious the financial situation is:

Last year the club lost £2.23million before player sales, on an average gate of 6,802, and with TV income of £1.26 million

This season crowds are averaging 5,977, a decrease of 825. If the club makes £14 per ticket on average (which takes into account VAT and travel vouchers), then gate receipts are down £266,000. TV income is down £626,000 this season.

This means that the loss for the year to 30 June 2007 is standing at £3.122million, or £60,000 a week, before taking into account wage cut cluases that will come into play for being relegated last season.

In the year to 30 June 2006 the total wage bill was £4.08million, and we had 88 full time staff members (including players). In addition there are 215 staff for match days. I have assumed that the part time staff are paid £5.50 an hour, and have a 5 hour shift on match days. Their wage bill comes to £148,000 for the year, leaving £3.93million for the playing and admin staff, an average salary of £44,681 per person.

If the players had on average a 10% pay cut this season, then the wage bill might be down by about £400,000 in total.

This still leaves an estimated loss of £2.72million this year, before taking into acount the fact that we have sold CKR (next income to club £100,000 after paying Bury), and about £200,000 from the West Ham game.

The loss is therefore looking at about £2.42million, or £46,500 a week.

On those figures it is clear that the playing budget is going to be very tight.

The club has total debts of about £13.5million at 30 June 2006, of which I suspect about £5.7million is due to the directors, directly or indirectly, the overdraft is £334k, season ticket advances are £1.3million, and there is £4.3million of 'other loans' which may be due to a bank.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Here are some figures that might reveal how precarious the financial situation is:

Last year the club lost £2.23million before player sales, on an average gate of 6,802, and with TV income of £1.26 million

This season crowds are averaging 5,977, a decrease of 825. If the club makes £14 per ticket on average (which takes into account VAT and travel vouchers), then gate receipts are down £266,000. TV income is down £626,000 this season.

This means that the loss for the year to 30 June 2007 is standing at £3.122million, or £60,000 a week, before taking into account wage cut cluases that will come into play for being relegated last season.

In the year to 30 June 2006 the total wage bill was £4.08million, and we had 88 full time staff members (including players). In addition there are 215 staff for match days. I have assumed that the part time staff are paid £5.50 an hour, and have a 5 hour shift on match days. Their wage bill comes to £148,000 for the year, leaving £3.93million for the playing and admin staff, an average salary of £44,681 per person.

If the players had on average a 10% pay cut this season, then the wage bill might be down by about £400,000 in total.

This still leaves an estimated loss of £2.72million this year, before taking into acount the fact that we have sold CKR (next income to club £100,000 after paying Bury), and about £200,000 from the West Ham game.

The loss is therefore looking at about £2.42million, or £46,500 a week.

On those figures it is clear that the playing budget is going to be very tight.

The club has total debts of about £13.5million at 30 June 2006, of which I suspect about £5.7million is due to the directors, directly or indirectly, the overdraft is £334k, season ticket advances are £1.3million, and there is £4.3million of 'other loans' which may be due to a bank.

Blimey

pass me the rope

 

[Big Jim]

Here are some figures that might reveal how precarious the financial situation is:

Last year the club lost £2.23million before player sales, on an average gate of 6,802, and with TV income of £1.26 million

This season crowds are averaging 5,977, a decrease of 825. If the club makes £14 per ticket on average (which takes into account VAT and travel vouchers), then gate receipts are down £266,000. TV income is down £626,000 this season.

This means that the loss for the year to 30 June 2007 is standing at £3.122million, or £60,000 a week, before taking into account wage cut cluases that will come into play for being relegated last season.

In the year to 30 June 2006 the total wage bill was £4.08million, and we had 88 full time staff members (including players). In addition there are 215 staff for match days. I have assumed that the part time staff are paid £5.50 an hour, and have a 5 hour shift on match days. Their wage bill comes to £148,000 for the year, leaving £3.93million for the playing and admin staff, an average salary of £44,681 per person.

If the players had on average a 10% pay cut this season, then the wage bill might be down by about £400,000 in total.

This still leaves an estimated loss of £2.72million this year, before taking into acount the fact that we have sold CKR (next income to club £100,000 after paying Bury), and about £200,000 from the West Ham game.

The loss is therefore looking at about £2.42million, or £46,500 a week.

On those figures it is clear that the playing budget is going to be very tight.

The club has total debts of about £13.5million at 30 June 2006, of which I suspect about £5.7million is due to the directors, directly or indirectly, the overdraft is £334k, season ticket advances are £1.3million, and there is £4.3million of 'other loans' which may be due to a bank.

So am I correct in sayign people calling DK Dick Tight, are a bit out of order?

 

[Les Biehn]

Here are some figures that might reveal how precarious the financial situation is:

Last year the club lost £2.23million before player sales, on an average gate of 6,802, and with TV income of £1.26 million

This season crowds are averaging 5,977, a decrease of 825. If the club makes £14 per ticket on average (which takes into account VAT and travel vouchers), then gate receipts are down £266,000. TV income is down £626,000 this season.

This means that the loss for the year to 30 June 2007 is standing at £3.122million, or £60,000 a week, before taking into account wage cut cluases that will come into play for being relegated last season.

In the year to 30 June 2006 the total wage bill was £4.08million, and we had 88 full time staff members (including players). In addition there are 215 staff for match days. I have assumed that the part time staff are paid £5.50 an hour, and have a 5 hour shift on match days. Their wage bill comes to £148,000 for the year, leaving £3.93million for the playing and admin staff, an average salary of £44,681 per person.

If the players had on average a 10% pay cut this season, then the wage bill might be down by about £400,000 in total.

This still leaves an estimated loss of £2.72million this year, before taking into acount the fact that we have sold CKR (next income to club £100,000 after paying Bury), and about £200,000 from the West Ham game.

The loss is therefore looking at about £2.42million, or £46,500 a week.

On those figures it is clear that the playing budget is going to be very tight.

The club has total debts of about £13.5million at 30 June 2006, of which I suspect about £5.7million is due to the directors, directly or indirectly, the overdraft is £334k, season ticket advances are £1.3million, and there is £4.3million of 'other loans' which may be due to a bank.

Facts facts facts. Thats all they are, what do they really mean?

 

[Dave the OAP]

Facts facts facts. Thats all they are, what do they really mean?

basically, put up you f***ing moaning ungrateful wankers and shut up, I think is what El Pres is getting at

 

[El Presidente]

Facts facts facts. Thats all they are, what do they really mean?

We're f***ed

 

[Les Biehn]

We're f***ed

Wheres the proof? If I want to carry on moaning about Dick Tight and the club I don't needs evidence that gets in the way of that.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Has it been said anywhere that next seasons playing budget is less than this seasons? Or is it just part of the great internet whispers that somehow become passed off as fact?

 

[Big Jim]

Wheres the proof? If I want to carry on moaning about Dick Tight and the club I don't needs evidence that gets in the way of that.

It's a free world, but presuambly you're doing it tongue in cheek?

 

[El Presidente]

Has it been said anywhere that next seasons playing budget is less than this seasons? Or is it just part of the great internet whispers that somehow become passed off as fact?

DK said it on the Harty phone in after the Donny match

 

[Les Biehn]

It's a free world, but presuambly you're doing it tongue in cheek?

Of course not. If I have an irrational agenda I don't expect people to counter it with sensible arguments and 'facts'.

 

[Uncle Buck]

DK said it on the Harty phone in after the Donny match

Good place to bury bad news. Not that many people listen to it and most of the calls seem to be about Mavis from Mile Oak's piles.

 

[Brovion]

Here are some figures that might reveal how precarious the financial situation is:

Last year the club lost £2.23million before player sales, on an average gate of 6,802, and with TV income of £1.26 million

This season crowds are averaging 5,977, a decrease of 825. If the club makes £14 per ticket on average (which takes into account VAT and travel vouchers), then gate receipts are down £266,000. TV income is down £626,000 this season.

This means that the loss for the year to 30 June 2007 is standing at £3.122million, or £60,000 a week, before taking into account wage cut cluases that will come into play for being relegated last season.

In the year to 30 June 2006 the total wage bill was £4.08million, and we had 88 full time staff members (including players). In addition there are 215 staff for match days. I have assumed that the part time staff are paid £5.50 an hour, and have a 5 hour shift on match days. Their wage bill comes to £148,000 for the year, leaving £3.93million for the playing and admin staff, an average salary of £44,681 per person.

If the players had on average a 10% pay cut this season, then the wage bill might be down by about £400,000 in total.

This still leaves an estimated loss of £2.72million this year, before taking into acount the fact that we have sold CKR (next income to club £100,000 after paying Bury), and about £200,000 from the West Ham game.

The loss is therefore looking at about £2.42million, or £46,500 a week.

On those figures it is clear that the playing budget is going to be very tight.

The club has total debts of about £13.5million at 30 June 2006, of which I suspect about £5.7million is due to the directors, directly or indirectly, the overdraft is £334k, season ticket advances are £1.3million, and there is £4.3million of 'other loans' which may be due to a bank.

So what? We should still be spending money on players. We need better players, it doesn't matter if we go into debt, we must speculate to accumulate. If we get better players we'll get bigger crowds and this will solve the financial problem. What happened to the WHU, Zamora, Playoff, Spurs money etc etc etc?

Disclaimer. Above statment may not be financially accurate. The value of investments can go down as well as up. Your home is at risk if you do not keep up the repayments of mortages or other loans secured on it.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Good place to bury bad news. Not that many people listen to it and most of the calls seem to be about Mavis from Mile Oak's piles.

I thought they had cleared up


I will pop round after work

 

[Big Jim]

Of course not. If I have an irrational agenda I don't expect people to counter it with sensible arguments and 'facts'.

Blimey, your name isn't Blair is it?

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Jesus, if that is the reality and it certainly looks well thought out, we are royally screwed, If we get the Falmer decision I still reckon that attracting the £60m we will need to build there is going to be difficult when we can't even balance our books at the stadium of shite.

 

[Big Jim]

Jesus, if that is the reality and it certainly looks well thought out, we are royally screwed, If we get the Falmer decision I still reckon that attracting the £60m we will need to build there is going to be difficult when we can't even balance our books at the stadium of shite.

Again I've probably got my facts wrong, but itsn't there the possibility of investors once we get Falmer? Or once it's all definately going to happen?

I've heard Ardiles mentioned before, but I thought there were a few millionaires locally that wanted to throw some dosh in the pot.

 

[ROSM]

Jesus, if that is the reality and it certainly looks well thought out, we are royally screwed, If we get the Falmer decision I still reckon that attracting the ?60m we will need to build there is going to be difficult when we can't even balance our books at the stadium of shite.

But it is withdean that is part of the problem.

There are many on here who now question why we came back to withdean rather than continue groundsharing. Put simply, businesses were not prepared to sponsor the club, supporters weren't attending and a whole generation were missing out.

The return could address those which were essesntial to secure the support for a new stadium.

However in renting withdean, we initially had to deal with ecovert who managed the stadium for the council and that necessitated hige expenditure being given away to a third party company just for the pleasure. In addition we had to pay to develop the stadium (c?0„53m overall in total) which is a sunk cost plus all the other costs such as traffic control, park and ride etc.

In return we get very little due to the inability to offer suitable match day packages for business and regular executive box income. We also miss out on the non matchday income such as conferences, function hire, office space rental, grant funding etc that clubs with new stadia get.

But the basic difference is that when you own a building, you get a mortgage to do so. With renting, it is dead money. We need to think of much of our costs so far on the planning side as being our deposit on the new property.

The funniest moment on satdi was the fans phone in where the usual 'where is plan B' caller came on and Ian Hart quite categorically told the caller that Withdean was our plan B. No mention as to how the losses we see could be sustained or indeed how many would bother coming.

There was even mention that we could remove the athletics track and expand the site. Again no explanation as to where the athletics would go or indeed how we overcome all the issues that restrict the site being expanded (and were accepted at the public inquiry so much so that even falmer and LDC are no longer putting staying at withdean forward as a reasonable site!).

Of course, it's been said on the BBC so it must be right. It wasn't presented as opinion - but said as fact.

If that is the case and even if a potnetially tory council allow us to stay at withdean forever (but without any further expansion) then get used to us having to cut our cloth accordingly to cover the operating losses which will mean (even) less money for players, continued poor value tickets and a team plummeting faster than Nigel Erskine's shorts when he was a ball boy.

 

[El Presidente]

and a team plummeting faster than Nigel Erskine's shorts when he was a ball boy.

Am I alone in thinking that is not a very arousing thought

 

[Uncle Buck]

Am I alone in thinking that is not a very arousing thought

It could have been worse.

He could have said Guppy's shorts....