Clubs in trouble

[nechells]

Remind me, how much are we in the red now ?

That is a good point but I'm sure we are still beig subsidised by Randy in some capacity.

We have upped our wages expenditure & obviously our transfer spending during the past 3 1/2 years-I doubt we have increased incoming revenue to counter balance this as yet.I have no doubt that we are bridging the gap in this area & am relaxed about the way our club is run.

I agree with Chris Smith-if clubs like Pompey are irresponsible enough to get themselves in this position,why should the better run clubs like ourselves be expected to help them out?

[hawkeye]

I should have posted here then the Genera's thread but it was put there to try and see if/why clubs refuse to take an active role in this.

The hardship fund concept should be explored more though.

I'm not really in favour. Portsmouth are in trouble because they borrowed money to try to live beyond their means. The banks wanted their money back and they couldn't pay it. Why should other clubs help them out so that they can compete with us again?

i think that there has been  a bit more going on at Pompey!!!,

[hawkeye]

Remind me, how much are we in the red now ?

£100 million is the debt, most of it loans from RL

[pdiddybaby]

Remind me, how much are we in the red now ?

around £70-80m

if we did not spend that money, where do you think we would have been in the league ?

[hawkeye]

As I tried to explain in the earlier posts clubs that overspend/overstretch themselves need to go through the natural mechanism that will strip them back to the bare bones so thet they can pay off the crippling debts to allow them to survive. Such as Leeds, Bradford, Forest, Oldham etc

This usually means the best players go, but so do their salaries. It means relegation but ultimately survival and a chance to continue. It also means they find their level again and start from there.

The Premier league has created a huge cash cow that many clubs strive to attain. Its not just their fault though because fans will berate a 'sensibly' run club that want to keep its house in order and not jeopardise the clubs future.

We all want Randy to pump more money into Villa to get to the 'promised' land of the top 4. We are guilty of wanting more and don't think of potential consequences.

but football today needs to have businessmen, or proper accountants, to run the money side of the operation. Its no point a manager and fans putting pressure on the board/chairman to supply funds and then simply cross fingers that it will come off.

But that's a different scenario to kings Lynn who no longer have a club because of an unapid tax-bill( I think). Stockport who have a council taht have no intrest in helping the club and who have virtually given away their ground to the tenants who are acting as bullying squatters.

These clubs could apply to those sitting on the board of the Hardship Fund Committee to see if they fulfill the criteria for getting money.

Now, it doesn't need to be the full amount paid off but enough to keep the wolf from the door and then have a business plan drawn up as to how they will look to stay afloat, and how they can live within their means in order to stay afloat. If it means relegation, and dropping out of the leage then so be it.

Any fans of these clubs would prefer that not to happen. But would be a damned sight happier to be relegated than to have no club at all.

The fund's committee will be there to help these clubs and help them with their business plans. However, if the club has already gone into administartion then that should be taken care of. They will pay the money directly to the body who is owed the moeny - usually the tax office.

It shouldn't be used to pay wages of playing staff. If its needed to pay rank and file employees then that maybe considered but probably not wise to go down that route.

The club still has to look at all other options first before the hardship grant is paid. I.E. selling of assets (not the ground), going into administration, having a clearly read line of ownership (unlike Leeds), opening the books to the hardship Fund Committee, going part-time, kicking-off at 2pm on a Sat afternoon, or earlier, to avoid higher electricity charges.

If they pass the criteria set out then they get the money needed. Now, I'm not a business/account minded person so if going into administration is actually worse for the club that can be looked at also. Its for the Fund to organise the criteria but something along the lines above is practicable.

If we are serious about not wanting to see clubs fold when its not their own fault, then we should be lobbying our own club(s) to do something about it.

sorry Peter but there a whole lot of laws that determine the allocation of funds in respect of Insolvent companys which would render a lot of your ideas unworkeable and potentioly illegal, and how large do you think this fund would need to be? only 3 championship and prem clubs have net assets, the amounts involved are stagering.

[peter w]

Every 20 Prem clubs at the start of each season donate £500,000 into the fund straight from the TV money. Or they get Sky to put it straight into fund.

At the Stockport are not insolvent so they and other clubs could get the grant before they'd get into that position.

[hawkeye]

Eventually the Premier League or others will have to adopt the Franchise mechanism that controls the Major Sports in the USA.
The PL is in fact run by ametuers and the stupidity of the people that currently controll the game will mean that there cows eventually come home to roost.
The credit crisis still has a long way to run and its full impact on the economy has yet to be fully recognised.
football is caught in a trap of declining revenues and unsustainable cost structures, there will inevitably be casualties.

[hawkeye]

Every 20 Prem clubs at the start of each season donate £500,000 into the fund straight from the TV money. Or they get Sky to put it straight into fund.

At the Stockport are not insolvent so they and other clubs could get the grant before they'd get into that position.

yeh right that would sort it out, virtually every club would be in a position to demand the money and there would not be enough to go round, so a director who is lending the club £10 mil withdraws it, the club would get the money right? there are so many wholes in your idea, also i think you need at least an understanding of finance, company law and insolvency law before you can be taken seriously

[Rip Van We Go Again]

I wouldn't say rare Dave, there have been more than enough chancers running lower league clubs.

Pleny, but usually for other reasons than redevelopment.

Either way, how can we guarantee that they don't get their sticky fingers on the subsidy cash, directly or indirectly?

[dave.woodhall]

I wouldn't say rare Dave, there have been more than enough chancers running lower league clubs.

Pleny, but usually for other reasons than redevelopment.

Either way, how can we guarantee that they don't get their sticky fingers on the subsidy cash, directly or indirectly?

You can't, which is why it's not the right solution.

[Risso]

 Kings Lynn went under because their previous owners neglected to pay a £64,000 tax bill to the Inland Revenue, the fans raised nearly half of it, but still they went, 130 years of history gone for Sidwell's weekly wage.

Owing money to the taxman is just like any other bill, if you don't pay it, you get shut down, just like any other business which doesn't pay what it owes.  If the directors spent the money they should have been paying in PAYE and NI, then tough as it is on the Linnets' fans, they deserved to be wound up.  The fact that it's miniscule by Premier League standards is neither here nor there.

[Dave Cooper please]

 Kings Lynn went under because their previous owners neglected to pay a £64,000 tax bill to the Inland Revenue, the fans raised nearly half of it, but still they went, 130 years of history gone for Sidwell's weekly wage.

Owing money to the taxman is just like any other bill, if you don't pay it, you get shut down, just like any other business which doesn't pay what it owes.  If the directors spent the money they should have been paying in PAYE and NI, then tough as it is on the Linnets' fans, they deserved to be wound up.  The fact that it's miniscule by Premier League standards is neither here nor there.

 There but for the grace of God and all that.
 If Randy walked tomorrow, demanded his £80m and no buyer was found before the next tax bill was due, I assume you'd be saying the same? That Villa deserved to be wound up because the owner happened to turn out to be a shyster?
 It wouldn't happen to Villa of course for many reasons, but why are fans of "big clubs" more worthy than fans of a club only five years younger than ourselves just because they can always find someone else to bail them out?

[ROBBO]

The failure of the governing body to enforce the fit and proper person rule and allowing buyers to borrow the full purchase price has destroyed the heart and soul of many clubs. Eventually the premierchip will implode as the attraction of owning a Liverpool or Chelsea diminishes, it may not happen next year but it will happen.It only needs two things to happen for Liverpool to go under, the first is missing out on Europe and the revenue it brings the second is if potential buyers go cold and they are left with the two Yanks who are mortgaged to the hilt. If clubs were forced to live within their means i.e revenue streams and not be allowed massive subsidies from outside sources we may get back a game that we loved.

[pauliewalnuts]

 Kings Lynn went under because their previous owners neglected to pay a £64,000 tax bill to the Inland Revenue, the fans raised nearly half of it, but still they went, 130 years of history gone for Sidwell's weekly wage.

Owing money to the taxman is just like any other bill, if you don't pay it, you get shut down, just like any other business which doesn't pay what it owes.  If the directors spent the money they should have been paying in PAYE and NI, then tough as it is on the Linnets' fans, they deserved to be wound up.  The fact that it's miniscule by Premier League standards is neither here nor there.

 There but for the grace of God and all that.
 If Randy walked tomorrow, demanded his £80m and no buyer was found before the next tax bill was due, I assume you'd be saying the same? That Villa deserved to be wound up because the owner happened to turn out to be a shyster?
 It wouldn't happen to Villa of course for many reasons, but why are fans of "big clubs" more worthy than fans of a club only five years younger than ourselves just because they can always find someone else to bail them out?

No club should be protected - owe money, don't pay it, get shut down. Unfortunately, that's the way it has to be.

I run a business and spend half my life writing cheques to HMRC. If we suddenly stopped paying them, they'd come after us and keep coming after us until they got the money.

I don't run a 100 year old football club, but if my business got shut down and I heard football clubs were getting special treatment because of the sport, I'd be very annoyed, and so would all the people who lost their jobs as a result of our demise.

[dave.woodhall]

No club should be protected - owe money, don't pay it, get shut down. Unfortunately, that's the way it has to be.

I run a business and spend half my life writing cheques to HMRC. If we suddenly stopped paying them, they'd come after us and keep coming after us until they got the money.

I don't run a 100 year old football club, but if my business got shut down and I heard football clubs were getting special treatment because of the sport, I'd be very annoyed, and so would all the people who lost their jobs as a result of our demise.

Clubs in trouble are mostly in trouble becasue of the way the big clubs act. Football is still a sport and everyone involved owes it to the sport to look after those least able. Ultimately, if there's only one club left who do they play against?