collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Follow us on...

Author Topic: The Accounts are out.  (Read 59100 times)

Offline damon loves JT

  • Member
  • Posts: 18458
  • Location: The Historic County of York
  • GM : 31.08.2016
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #360 on: March 06, 2014, 09:57:48 PM »
They are top, top losses but they're with another club so I really can't say anyfink.

Offline peter w

  • Member
  • Posts: 35469
  • Location: Istanbul
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #361 on: March 06, 2014, 10:07:17 PM »
Whose with another club? The losses at another club are bigger? Or QPR are with another club?


What is going on at ITN?

Offline damon loves JT

  • Member
  • Posts: 18458
  • Location: The Historic County of York
  • GM : 31.08.2016
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #362 on: March 07, 2014, 01:40:31 PM »
*winds up car window, drives away*

Offline Boz

  • Member
  • Posts: 1924
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #363 on: March 07, 2014, 04:07:21 PM »
I wonder if anyone, except the nineties directors who floated then sold their shares for massive profits (Doug, Martin Edwards, that horrible bunch of chancers at Sheffield Wednesday) ever have or will make money from owning a football club.

Ken Bates, more than once  ;D

Offline Matt Collins

  • Member
  • Posts: 10884
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #364 on: March 08, 2014, 09:01:36 AM »
Quick thoughts:

1. Previous mistakes well understood and still punishing us. Given retrenchment and ditching of high paid players, it could have been a lot worse than it has been. We could easily have gone down

2. Surely TV revenue this season will make a big impact on profitability

3. Concerned about how gabby and Delph will be treated when high cost contracts expire

4. Lots of lambert signings now worth more than we paid: Guzan 0, benteke 8, Lowton 1, Westwood 1.5, vlaar 3.5, bacuna 2. I expect the same to apply to Okore at 3.5

Online AV82EC

  • Member
  • Posts: 10233
  • Location: Macclesfield
  • GM : 22.02.2024
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #365 on: March 08, 2014, 09:33:56 AM »
Quick thoughts:

1. Previous mistakes well understood and still punishing us. Given retrenchment and ditching of high paid players, it could have been a lot worse than it has been. We could easily have gone down

2. Surely TV revenue this season will make a big impact on profitability

3. Concerned about how gabby and Delph will be treated when high cost contracts expire

4. Lots of lambert signings now worth more than we paid: Guzan 0, benteke 8, Lowton 1, Westwood 1.5, vlaar 3.5, bacuna 2. I expect the same to apply to Okore at 3.5

My major concern is how we are stagnating on the nonTV revenue. Faulkner may have made some progress over the last few years in improving commercial income but let's be honest the main increases in our turnover and hence ability to pay decent wages has been through TV revenue.  The fact we're not keeping up with Spurs, Newcastle and are only on a par with the likes of Everton and West Ham means we have to focus on Matchday revenues and commercial income to compete otherwise we'll just end up getting stuck with the rest of the division using the TV money as our main source of revenue and support.  The problem is we need to sort out the mess on the playing side of the club first so that we actually have an attractive product to watch hence an ability to then push Matchday and commercial revenues. The fact we're not over the £100m revenue line yet should be seen as a major failure of the running of the club by Lerner/Faulkner.

Online eamonn

  • Member
  • Posts: 29738
  • Location: Down to Worthing...and work there
  • GM : 26.07.2020
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #366 on: March 08, 2014, 04:25:07 PM »

I personally think the walk out of O'Neill came down to a discussion between O'Neill and Faulkner, the latter having to answer to Randy asking where his money had been spent. Faulkner telling O'Neill players needed to be sold before any more were purchased, nobody would want them because of the contracts they were on, which Faulkner agreed in the first place, and O'Neill felt his position was untenable. He couldn't improve the squad, until some dead weight was lifted from the wage bill, which has been awfully hard and long drawn out to achieve.


How many of the Harewood/Sidwell/Davies/Cuellar/Shorey/Young/Dunne/Beye etc. deals did Faulkner negotiate though? I thought he only became CEO relatively soon before O'Neill flounced out.

Online rob_bridge

  • Member
  • Posts: 8273
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Shirleyshire
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #367 on: March 08, 2014, 05:02:22 PM »

I personally think the walk out of O'Neill came down to a discussion between O'Neill and Faulkner, the latter having to answer to Randy asking where his money had been spent. Faulkner telling O'Neill players needed to be sold before any more were purchased, nobody would want them because of the contracts they were on, which Faulkner agreed in the first place, and O'Neill felt his position was untenable. He couldn't improve the squad, until some dead weight was lifted from the wage bill, which has been awfully hard and long drawn out to achieve.



How many of the Harewood/Sidwell/Davies/Cuellar/Shorey/Young/Dunne/Beye etc. deals did Faulkner negotiate though? I thought he only became CEO relatively soon before O'Neill flounced out.

I am no fan of Faulkner but don't think he was involved in any of those you quoted.

He was CEO when we signed Ireland on £60k+ per week, CNZ on £60k, Shay Given on similar amount, Makoun on c40k, Hutton £40k and Jenas for £2m for 1 year which turned out, to no-one's surprise, to be a lot less. Clearly he hadn't learned very much from O'Neill's mistakes.
Oh and post O'Neill he was involved in having to recruit no fewer than 3 permanent managers + staff in 21months which cost around about £125k per week during that period (some of which would have been ammortised).

Not very clever at all.

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14178
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #368 on: March 08, 2014, 11:40:40 PM »
86% wages to turnover is not good at all given we've been costcuting for close to 4 years now. I accept these are from a year ago and we've moved on a few since but we'll still do well to get it below 80%. My personal target would be to get it below 70% but we'll probably get there around 2050 when we're in league one.

I think we can expect more cautious spending this summer, just hopes Lambert goes for say 3 players in the 6m range who don't drain us in wages rather than the usual 7-8 on a fiver a week.

Yeah that is a worry.  Saying that, I guess Dunne, Ireland, Bent, Hutton, Given, N'Zogbia and Makoun were all still on the wage bill during that season and offering very little. Just a quick question - does that figure include off the field staff as well?     

Offline Ad@m

  • Member
  • Posts: 12563
  • GM : 23.03.2023
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #369 on: March 10, 2014, 01:27:49 PM »
86% wages to turnover is not good at all given we've been costcuting for close to 4 years now. I accept these are from a year ago and we've moved on a few since but we'll still do well to get it below 80%. My personal target would be to get it below 70% but we'll probably get there around 2050 when we're in league one.

I think we can expect more cautious spending this summer, just hopes Lambert goes for say 3 players in the 6m range who don't drain us in wages rather than the usual 7-8 on a fiver a week.

Yeah that is a worry.  Saying that, I guess Dunne, Ireland, Bent, Hutton, Given, N'Zogbia and Makoun were all still on the wage bill during that season and offering very little. Just a quick question - does that figure include off the field staff as well?     

Yep - all wages.

Offline glasses

  • Member
  • Posts: 2546
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #370 on: March 10, 2014, 01:55:14 PM »

I personally think the walk out of O'Neill came down to a discussion between O'Neill and Faulkner, the latter having to answer to Randy asking where his money had been spent. Faulkner telling O'Neill players needed to be sold before any more were purchased, nobody would want them because of the contracts they were on, which Faulkner agreed in the first place, and O'Neill felt his position was untenable. He couldn't improve the squad, until some dead weight was lifted from the wage bill, which has been awfully hard and long drawn out to achieve.



How many of the Harewood/Sidwell/Davies/Cuellar/Shorey/Young/Dunne/Beye etc. deals did Faulkner negotiate though? I thought he only became CEO relatively soon before O'Neill flounced out.

I am no fan of Faulkner but don't think he was involved in any of those you quoted.

He was CEO when we signed Ireland on £60k+ per week, CNZ on £60k, Shay Given on similar amount, Makoun on c40k, Hutton £40k and Jenas for £2m for 1 year which turned out, to no-one's surprise, to be a lot less. Clearly he hadn't learned very much from O'Neill's mistakes.
Oh and post O'Neill he was involved in having to recruit no fewer than 3 permanent managers + staff in 21months which cost around about £125k per week during that period (some of which would have been ammortised).

Not very clever at all.

That was when he became CEO, however he was operating in a role at the club for a long time prior to that. He spoke openly with someone I know about what his dutes at the club where when they met him during the pre season 08/09. He said he dealt with sorting out transfers, speaking with agents and the like.

I can't say categorically that Faulkner was agreeing the contracts (The bit in bold above should probably read ''O'Neill felt Faulkner had agreed in the first place'') this is just my take on what I have been told, and also, as has been pointed out in the second part. It's all very well saying O'Neill wasted vast sums of money on average ageing players on long contracts, but it still went on long after he'd gone. You'd have to say that something that wasn't right in the first place had remained in the years prior to Lambert taking over.

Offline Dave Clark Five

  • Member
  • Posts: 9767
  • Location: In Doctor Who's Tardis trying to find Villa Park anytime between 1970 and 1972.
  • GM : June, 2013
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #371 on: March 10, 2014, 09:41:22 PM »

I personally think the walk out of O'Neill came down to a discussion between O'Neill and Faulkner, the latter having to answer to Randy asking where his money had been spent. Faulkner telling O'Neill players needed to be sold before any more were purchased, nobody would want them because of the contracts they were on, which Faulkner agreed in the first place, and O'Neill felt his position was untenable. He couldn't improve the squad, until some dead weight was lifted from the wage bill, which has been awfully hard and long drawn out to achieve.



How many of the Harewood/Sidwell/Davies/Cuellar/Shorey/Young/Dunne/Beye etc. deals did Faulkner negotiate though? I thought he only became CEO relatively soon before O'Neill flounced out.

I am no fan of Faulkner but don't think he was involved in any of those you quoted.

He was CEO when we signed Ireland on £60k+ per week, CNZ on £60k, Shay Given on similar amount, Makoun on c40k, Hutton £40k and Jenas for £2m for 1 year which turned out, to no-one's surprise, to be a lot less. Clearly he hadn't learned very much from O'Neill's mistakes.
Oh and post O'Neill he was involved in having to recruit no fewer than 3 permanent managers + staff in 21months which cost around about £125k per week during that period (some of which would have been ammortised).

Not very clever at all.

That was when he became CEO, however he was operating in a role at the club for a long time prior to that. He spoke openly with someone I know about what his dutes at the club where when they met him during the pre season 08/09. He said he dealt with sorting out transfers, speaking with agents and the like.

I can't say categorically that Faulkner was agreeing the contracts (The bit in bold above should probably read ''O'Neill felt Faulkner had agreed in the first place'') this is just my take on what I have been told, and also, as has been pointed out in the second part. It's all very well saying O'Neill wasted vast sums of money on average ageing players on long contracts, but it still went on long after he'd gone. You'd have to say that something that wasn't right in the first place had remained in the years prior to Lambert taking over.

There can be little doubt that a tribunal would not have paid O'Neill for walking out due to constructive dismissal. Sooner or later, the facts will be revealed.

Offline peter w

  • Member
  • Posts: 35469
  • Location: Istanbul
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #372 on: March 10, 2014, 10:12:03 PM »
In this day and age the commercial side has overtaken the playing side for many clubs. We're forced to being like any business run for money and prices do go up. It's a reality until the world changes we have to compete at the level we want to be getting as much money out of every avenue as well as can be done.

Online rob_bridge

  • Member
  • Posts: 8273
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Shirleyshire
Re: The Accounts are out.
« Reply #373 on: March 11, 2014, 12:24:31 PM »

I personally think the walk out of O'Neill came down to a discussion between O'Neill and Faulkner, the latter having to answer to Randy asking where his money had been spent. Faulkner telling O'Neill players needed to be sold before any more were purchased, nobody would want them because of the contracts they were on, which Faulkner agreed in the first place, and O'Neill felt his position was untenable. He couldn't improve the squad, until some dead weight was lifted from the wage bill, which has been awfully hard and long drawn out to achieve.



How many of the Harewood/Sidwell/Davies/Cuellar/Shorey/Young/Dunne/Beye etc. deals did Faulkner negotiate though? I thought he only became CEO relatively soon before O'Neill flounced out.

I am no fan of Faulkner but don't think he was involved in any of those you quoted.

He was CEO when we signed Ireland on £60k+ per week, CNZ on £60k, Shay Given on similar amount, Makoun on c40k, Hutton £40k and Jenas for £2m for 1 year which turned out, to no-one's surprise, to be a lot less. Clearly he hadn't learned very much from O'Neill's mistakes.
Oh and post O'Neill he was involved in having to recruit no fewer than 3 permanent managers + staff in 21months which cost around about £125k per week during that period (some of which would have been ammortised).

Not very clever at all.

That was when he became CEO, however he was operating in a role at the club for a long time prior to that. He spoke openly with someone I know about what his dutes at the club where when they met him during the pre season 08/09. He said he dealt with sorting out transfers, speaking with agents and the like.

I can't say categorically that Faulkner was agreeing the contracts (The bit in bold above should probably read ''O'Neill felt Faulkner had agreed in the first place'') this is just my take on what I have been told, and also, as has been pointed out in the second part. It's all very well saying O'Neill wasted vast sums of money on average ageing players on long contracts, but it still went on long after he'd gone. You'd have to say that something that wasn't right in the first place had remained in the years prior to Lambert taking over.

There can be little doubt that a tribunal would not have paid O'Neill for walking out due to constructive dismissal. Sooner or later, the facts will be revealed.

What do you base your supposition on re tribunal?

As for facts, there is little doubt that the settlement includes a confidentiality, no blame clause.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal