by skipper » 02 Feb 2024 08:59
by YorkshireRoyal99 » 02 Feb 2024 09:02
skipper How does a relatovely average club like Reading end up with debts so high?
Like... even duong the terrible period of sig inf average players for 7 mil, and paying silly wages, durely that couldn't add up to nearly 200 million??
by Brogue » 02 Feb 2024 09:10
YorkshireRoyal99skipper How does a relatovely average club like Reading end up with debts so high?
Like... even duong the terrible period of sig inf average players for 7 mil, and paying silly wages, durely that couldn't add up to nearly 200 million??
I have been asking myself the same question as well, we've spent some daft money on players and wages, but to wrack up that amount in terms of losses over 6/7 years just seems ridiculous.
by Snowflake Royal » 02 Feb 2024 09:39
YorkshireRoyal99skipper How does a relatovely average club like Reading end up with debts so high?
Like... even duong the terrible period of sig inf average players for 7 mil, and paying silly wages, durely that couldn't add up to nearly 200 million??
I have been asking myself the same question as well, we've spent some daft money on players and wages, but to wrack up that amount in terms of losses over 6/7 years just seems ridiculous.
by Stranded » 02 Feb 2024 09:41
Snowflake RoyalYorkshireRoyal99skipper How does a relatovely average club like Reading end up with debts so high?
Like... even duong the terrible period of sig inf average players for 7 mil, and paying silly wages, durely that couldn't add up to nearly 200 million??
I have been asking myself the same question as well, we've spent some daft money on players and wages, but to wrack up that amount in terms of losses over 6/7 years just seems ridiculous.
Our income has been between £12m and £16m during Dai's tenure, which is about the same as our non-wage costs. Then wages that are basically all loss of £41m, £37m, £33m, £27m, £22m, £16m... something like that anyway.
by Sutekh » 02 Feb 2024 09:55
StrandedSnowflake RoyalYorkshireRoyal99
I have been asking myself the same question as well, we've spent some daft money on players and wages, but to wrack up that amount in terms of losses over 6/7 years just seems ridiculous.
Our income has been between £12m and £16m during Dai's tenure, which is about the same as our non-wage costs. Then wages that are basically all loss of £41m, £37m, £33m, £27m, £22m, £16m... something like that anyway.
Yep, it's basically all wage related (bar the training ground) - wages covered by "loans" from Dai, which turns into debt. When wages were running at over 200% of income, the level of debt can and does climb massively because not only are we using twice our income to pay players, we still have to pay all the other bills (or Dai did). All goes on the debt pile.
by rabidbee » 02 Feb 2024 10:07
by bcubed » 02 Feb 2024 10:16
rabidbee As I've posted before, when Rick Parry was before the Commons committee, he said the EFL's preference was to move to a squad-cost ratio (I think he said the costs of the squad should be pegged at a maximum of 70% of turnover), instead of the current system, so that the EFL could intervene pretty much immediately (by not registering a player who would push a club over the threshold) rather than waiting to sanction a club for a decision made three years earlier. All of this is part of the on-going negotiations with the PL, though.
by rabidbee » 02 Feb 2024 10:19
by Sutekh » 02 Feb 2024 12:07
rabidbee He discussed it in detail at the hearing, if you want to look back at the video. IIRC, the teams involved in Europe may already be aiming for this level, because of UEFA rules. His other point, besides reforming FFP, was that the parachute clubs have a massive advantage over everyone else. Think the PL wanted a higher squad-ratio for those clubs than for everyone else.
by 3points » 02 Feb 2024 13:34
by Wycombe Royal » 02 Feb 2024 13:37
rabidbee As I've posted before, when Rick Parry was before the Commons committee, he said the EFL's preference was to move to a squad-cost ratio (I think he said the costs of the squad should be pegged at a maximum of 70% of turnover), instead of the current system, so that the EFL could intervene pretty much immediately (by not registering a player who would push a club over the threshold) rather than waiting to sanction a club for a decision made three years earlier. All of this is part of the on-going negotiations with the PL, though.
by Hound » 02 Feb 2024 14:00
by Snowflake Royal » 02 Feb 2024 14:16
a majority of the FL clubs run by those owners would have to agree to that.SutekhStrandedSnowflake Royal Our income has been between £12m and £16m during Dai's tenure, which is about the same as our non-wage costs. Then wages that are basically all loss of £41m, £37m, £33m, £27m, £22m, £16m... something like that anyway.
Yep, it's basically all wage related (bar the training ground) - wages covered by "loans" from Dai, which turns into debt. When wages were running at over 200% of income, the level of debt can and does climb massively because not only are we using twice our income to pay players, we still have to pay all the other bills (or Dai did). All goes on the debt pile.
This is the sort of thing the FL should be cracking down on at the time it happens. If a club is racking up debts to its owners and/or directors the FL should immediately sanction and embargo that club pending a review of its accounts. Not wait for a 3 year rolling period to complete so everything gets more expensive, muddier and even more complicated to sort out and the club concerned gets time to find and exploit any financial loopholes that the FL may not have closed off.
by Snowflake Royal » 02 Feb 2024 14:19
Hound Including all his businesses - understand his core business in China was massively hit by Covid, wonder how much the clown has lost in the last 5 years. Pretty special effort whatever it is
by YorkshireRoyal99 » 02 Feb 2024 14:27
Snowflake Royala majority of the FL clubs run by those owners would have to agree to that.SutekhStranded
Yep, it's basically all wage related (bar the training ground) - wages covered by "loans" from Dai, which turns into debt. When wages were running at over 200% of income, the level of debt can and does climb massively because not only are we using twice our income to pay players, we still have to pay all the other bills (or Dai did). All goes on the debt pile.
This is the sort of thing the FL should be cracking down on at the time it happens. If a club is racking up debts to its owners and/or directors the FL should immediately sanction and embargo that club pending a review of its accounts. Not wait for a 3 year rolling period to complete so everything gets more expensive, muddier and even more complicated to sort out and the club concerned gets time to find and exploit any financial loopholes that the FL may not have closed off.
Seems unlikely.
by Wanderlust » 02 Feb 2024 15:37
by Lower West » 02 Feb 2024 22:11
Sutekhrabidbee He discussed it in detail at the hearing, if you want to look back at the video. IIRC, the teams involved in Europe may already be aiming for this level, because of UEFA rules. His other point, besides reforming FFP, was that the parachute clubs have a massive advantage over everyone else. Think the PL wanted a higher squad-ratio for those clubs than for everyone else.
As part of any changes ALL clubs should be forced to put clauses into ALL their player contracts so that relegation means non-negotiable % wage reductions as well as any associated bonus payments being removed or significantly reduced. Likewise clubs would also include % wage increases etc. should a club be promoted.
by rabidbee » 03 Feb 2024 00:00
Lower WestSutekhrabidbee He discussed it in detail at the hearing, if you want to look back at the video. IIRC, the teams involved in Europe may already be aiming for this level, because of UEFA rules. His other point, besides reforming FFP, was that the parachute clubs have a massive advantage over everyone else. Think the PL wanted a higher squad-ratio for those clubs than for everyone else.
As part of any changes ALL clubs should be forced to put clauses into ALL their player contracts so that relegation means non-negotiable % wage reductions as well as any associated bonus payments being removed or significantly reduced. Likewise clubs would also include % wage increases etc. should a club be promoted.
Takes two parties to agree a contract. Players would only sign one year deals or negotiate an exit clause if the club were relegated.
by Sutekh » 03 Feb 2024 09:04
Lower WestSutekhrabidbee He discussed it in detail at the hearing, if you want to look back at the video. IIRC, the teams involved in Europe may already be aiming for this level, because of UEFA rules. His other point, besides reforming FFP, was that the parachute clubs have a massive advantage over everyone else. Think the PL wanted a higher squad-ratio for those clubs than for everyone else.
As part of any changes ALL clubs should be forced to put clauses into ALL their player contracts so that relegation means non-negotiable % wage reductions as well as any associated bonus payments being removed or significantly reduced. Likewise clubs would also include % wage increases etc. should a club be promoted.
Takes two parties to agree a contract. Players would only sign one year deals or negotiate an exit clause if the club were relegated.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 228 guests