Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 20:35:42 GMT
How much do you reckon Mildenhall, Brown, Smith, McChrystal, Harrold, Parkes and Gow will be on? I bet it is very good League 2 wages.
Rovers budget will be one of if not the highest budgets in the league.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 20:45:27 GMT
I think the existing squad still here from last season are taking up a massive amount of the budget even with there relegation pay cuts. DC might only be left with something like approx £400k to spread on 8-9 new players wages, meaning he can only offer players £500-£750 per week plus bonuses. Could have really done with shipping out another big earner. I received this info from someone that knows non-league quite well: Spalding who just got promoted from the UCL and on crowds of 100+ pay some of the players as much as £350+ (Jones from G Trinity for example) Forget £1000 a week for some in the conference prem, many players in conf North and South would be getting that and loads would be on £6/£700 a week.
Stefan Moore was mentioned who at St Neots when previously enjoying a **** ***** with their sugar daddy paid a £15K transfer fee for him and allegedly rewarded him with a weekly wage of £900/1000 a week. It was mentioned recently though that the offer he was given by Brackley mid way through last season was his best ever outside his league career, and they have several players on well over £500 a week on crowds of about 250/350.
Harrogate too, again with a sugar daddy pay obscene wages in relation to the crowds they attract. Walshaw a very decent player is reported to be getting a huge increase on his already decent wages at Altrincham. Some of the Worksop players in the NPL are, or were beefore the money man withdrew his funding a couple of weeks ago being paid £500, it is utter madness.
Chesham were allegedly paying £400+ a week for Dillon and Roberts, Hemel were paying more than that Mackie, the NL world has gone mad. Dunstable were gave out two year contracts for ex conf players in the Calor central on crowds of less than 150 and the list goes on.
Half way through the season, and only because he knew the manager well Rik left Stamford to go to Arlsey who were paying him nearly £400 a week, after a month where he didn't start, he simply said sod this, I wont to play, sod the money and he went back to Stamford for half that amount, but his attitude towards money is the exception.
Eastleigh one of your biggest rivals this year are allegedly now offering two year deals to some recruits approaching the £2500 a week, how the f*** is that sustainable. If their backer disappears, the players either unilaterally agree to terminate their contracts or the club will face administration and lets not mention Forest Green and especially Luton whose wages bill must be quite scary though ast least with the latter they could justify it
Whilst four figure wages aren't the norm in the top end of the conf prem it is quite common place.
Tamworth, who were really poor gave a £400 a week contract to a 18,19 year old centre half who failed at Corby and Boston then never played him. Wrexham paid we are told about a £6000 transfer fee for Durell from Hednesford and an accompanying wage of about £800 a week then (tho I guess he could be injured never played him) Halifax offered two five figure transfer requests for Ricky before the deadline with about eight games left in the season.....why would you do that.
Desperation, madness or the norm?
Ferriby in the conf North, though again with great backing from former Hull Directors are no more than a village team though hospitable, its horrible place to visit, just not a football club in my eyes average crowd probably less than 300 yet pay many of their many of their players in excess of £600, how is that possible?
We cant all be models of fiscal propriety like Maidstone or FC United, but hey conference glory will not come cheaply Wes.
im sure all thats true,it seems some rich people just pump there money into clubs with no fan base or history,when they go or get bored the club is stuffed,,footballs a weird industry it strikes me that dc wants to build a good team on a sustainable budget with clear ideas on the type of contracts on offer so despite everthing i feel optimistic.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 20:49:00 GMT
How much do you reckon Mildenhall, Brown, Smith, McChrystal, Harrold, Parkes and Gow will be on? I bet it is very good League 2 wages. Rovers budget will be one of if not the highest budgets in the league. dont forget d red that gow has no contract with us
|
|
|
Post by Westcountry Gas on Jun 24, 2014 20:49:09 GMT
How much do you reckon Mildenhall, Brown, Smith, McChrystal, Harrold, Parkes and Gow will be on? I bet it is very good League 2 wages. Rovers budget will be one of if not the highest budget in the league. This is just an approx guess but wages could be something like Mildenhall - £2.5k per week McChrystal - £2k per week Parkes - £2.5k per week Smith - £2k per week Brown - £1.5k per week Harrold - £1.5k per week Brunt - £1.5k per week Harrison - £1k per week Clarke - £750 per week Lockyer - £750 per week Santos - £500 per week Lucas - £350 per week Wilson - £350 per week Greenslade - £350 per week Ward-Baptiste - £350 per week Thomas - £350 per week Total = Approx £18k per week Approx £930k per year
|
|
Alveston Gas
Brucie Bannister
Once a Gashead always a Gashead
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 746
|
Post by Alveston Gas on Jun 24, 2014 22:25:49 GMT
Am I right in thinking that under FFP. On a turnover of £3.8m we could spend 55% ie around £2m on football related wages? My guess that if still our budget for next season would be far and away the biggest in the Conference.
However budget size as we know guarantees nothing other than big losses.
FGR are cutting right back and Vince Dale will not be putting in anywhere near so much this season.
There won't be many players set this level on the money half our squad is on, Mildy, Smudge, Tom P, McC, Browner, Harrold, Brunt, Gow (who has been offered a deal subject to fitness). No wonder so many had to go!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 22:50:14 GMT
If the FFP rules apply to the non league then we will be GIANTS ( broadly speaking ). However: I understand the rules are a bit more relaxed with some conditions. So based on average crowds of over 6500 and season tickets around 3500. Also income from add on transfer fees our accounts for year ending 2014 would be twice as big as any other club if not more. The narrowing down of the 65% rule to 55% turnover would put us in a favourable place for the first season. Our nearest rivals would be Luton Town and Cambridge United who average 7000 plus and 3000 plus respectfully. On paper Grimsby Town who average just over 3500 and have healthy ST sales : they would be our number 2 contender. After that we drop right down to average crowds of under 3000 and with Chester 5th with 2300 it puts things into context. If Forest Green Rovers submitted to the FFP rules with crowds of 1000 and modest turn over . They would have a small playing budget... However: given the FFP rules do-not apply it is a lottery to know the actual figure rich people put in. Also we may have by far the biggest turn over on paper but are we in big debt ? Do we need to reduce our budget to meet debt repayments ?. On paper Pompey And Plymouth would have massive turn overs but this is meaningless if they owe millions. So on one hand we have a big turn over but we also have big debts. To answer the question 6500+ average crowds! I'll have some of whatever you're drinking.
|
|
|
Post by lincolnfan on Jun 24, 2014 23:24:37 GMT
Financial Fair Play is nonsense as, indeed, is anything that originates from FIFA. Rich owners can get round all those rules by, for example, sponsoring the pitch for £40m (provided they don't have a right to the money back) or sponsoring two sets of goalposts at £20m each. The Conference do not have FFP but, from this season onwards, they are instituting a system of an inspection of club books (some without warning)as well as a formal inspection of books (with notice) selected at random. So far they have proved reasonably resolute (and quicker than the Football League) in dealing with financial issues at Hereford and Salisbury (the latter ongoing so far as I know).
Provided the Sugar Daddy of the time is gifting money with no formal requirement to see ANY of it returned they can all pump in as much money as they like. Originally there were supposed to be tough sanctions such as formidable points deductions but then of course some of the FIFA heirarchy realised that this might actually affect some high profile national European clubs outside of the UK and so that idea got binned.
It's lip service.
My personal opinion is that the Conference is mostly about how you organise the players you have not necessarily how much you pay them. If you look at the history of football there are legendary accounts of part-time players dumping "famous" clubs out of the FA Cup. Unless old age is letting me down there was one not that far from you at Yeovil at one time, assisted by the legendary sloping pitch or so it was claimed.
|
|
|
Post by empirebaypete on Jun 25, 2014 9:09:03 GMT
Financial Fair Play is nonsense as, indeed, is anything that originates from FIFA. Rich owners can get round all those rules by, for example, sponsoring the pitch for £40m (provided they don't have a right to the money back) or sponsoring two sets of goalposts at £20m each. The Conference do not have FFP but, from this season onwards, they are instituting a system of an inspection of club books (some without warning)as well as a formal inspection of books (with notice) selected at random. So far they have proved reasonably resolute (and quicker than the Football League) in dealing with financial issues at Hereford and Salisbury (the latter ongoing so far as I know). Provided the Sugar Daddy of the time is gifting money with no formal requirement to see ANY of it returned they can all pump in as much money as they like. Originally there were supposed to be tough sanctions such as formidable points deductions but then of course some of the FIFA heirarchy realised that this might actually affect some high profile national European clubs outside of the UK and so that idea got binned. It's lip service. My personal opinion is that the Conference is mostly about how you organise the players you have not necessarily how much you pay them. If you look at the history of football there are legendary accounts of part-time players dumping "famous" clubs out of the FA Cup. Unless old age is letting me down there was one not that far from you at Yeovil at one time, assisted by the legendary sloping pitch or so it was claimed. I'm pretty sure the owners can't just sponsor the goalposts or the club cat. I won't argue about it with you as I can't remember where I read it but there was an article about Manchester City. There were clear guidelines on what the actual owners of the club could do. I'm sure it said sponsoring the pitch etc as you're suggesting is a no no.
|
|
GasHeadGaz
Vita Astafjevs
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 518
|
Post by GasHeadGaz on Jun 25, 2014 9:31:10 GMT
Financial Fair Play is nonsense as, indeed, is anything that originates from FIFA. Rich owners can get round all those rules by, for example, sponsoring the pitch for £40m (provided they don't have a right to the money back) or sponsoring two sets of goalposts at £20m each. The Conference do not have FFP but, from this season onwards, they are instituting a system of an inspection of club books (some without warning)as well as a formal inspection of books (with notice) selected at random. So far they have proved reasonably resolute (and quicker than the Football League) in dealing with financial issues at Hereford and Salisbury (the latter ongoing so far as I know). Provided the Sugar Daddy of the time is gifting money with no formal requirement to see ANY of it returned they can all pump in as much money as they like. Originally there were supposed to be tough sanctions such as formidable points deductions but then of course some of the FIFA heirarchy realised that this might actually affect some high profile national European clubs outside of the UK and so that idea got binned. It's lip service. My personal opinion is that the Conference is mostly about how you organise the players you have not necessarily how much you pay them. If you look at the history of football there are legendary accounts of part-time players dumping "famous" clubs out of the FA Cup. Unless old age is letting me down there was one not that far from you at Yeovil at one time, assisted by the legendary sloping pitch or so it was claimed. I'm pretty sure the owners can't just sponsor the goalposts or the club cat. I won't argue about it with you as I can't remember where I read it but there was an article about Manchester City. There were clear guidelines on what the actual owners of the club could do. I'm sure it said sponsoring the pitch etc as you're suggesting is a no no. You can Pete. I was listening a while back to 5live, they had a lawyer on and he was talking about FFP. He was saying how the rich owners can sponsor a bin for £20M, set the top price tickets at £40M each(guess who buys those tickets?) Sponsor the shirts for £X Millions. FFP is easily got around.
|
|
|
Post by empirebaypete on Jun 25, 2014 9:46:51 GMT
I'm pretty sure the owners can't just sponsor the goalposts or the club cat. I won't argue about it with you as I can't remember where I read it but there was an article about Manchester City. There were clear guidelines on what the actual owners of the club could do. I'm sure it said sponsoring the pitch etc as you're suggesting is a no no. You can Pete. I was listening a while back to 5live, they had a lawyer on and he was talking about FFP. He was saying how the rich owners can sponsor a bin for £20M, set the top price tickets at £40M each(guess who buys those tickets?) Sponsor the shirts for £X Millions. FFP is easily got around. OK, mate I'll take your word for it. I'm sure I read there was a reason Manchester City's owners weren't allowed to do such things. Maybe discuss further here. www.gasheads.org/thread/375/financial-fair-play
|
|
|
Post by mancgas has left the building on Jun 25, 2014 10:10:38 GMT
If the FFP rules apply to the non league then we will be GIANTS ( broadly speaking ). However: I understand the rules are a bit more relaxed with some conditions. So based on average crowds of over 6500 and season tickets around 3500. Also income from add on transfer fees our accounts for year ending 2014 would be twice as big as any other club if not more. The narrowing down of the 65% rule to 55% turnover would put us in a favourable place for the first season. Our nearest rivals would be Luton Town and Cambridge United who average 7000 plus and 3000 plus respectfully. On paper Grimsby Town who average just over 3500 and have healthy ST sales : they would be our number 2 contender. After that we drop right down to average crowds of under 3000 and with Chester 5th with 2300 it puts things into context. If Forest Green Rovers submitted to the FFP rules with crowds of 1000 and modest turn over . They would have a small playing budget... However: given the FFP rules do-not apply it is a lottery to know the actual figure rich people put in. Also we may have by far the biggest turn over on paper but are we in big debt ? Do we need to reduce our budget to meet debt repayments ?. On paper Pompey And Plymouth would have massive turn overs but this is meaningless if they owe millions. So on one hand we have a big turn over but we also have big debts. To answer the question 6500+ average crowds! I'll have some of whatever you're drinking. depends on number of complimentary tickets we print........
|
|
|
Post by onedaytheuwe on Jun 25, 2014 16:59:12 GMT
I was setting our average attendance this season ending May 2014. If you check ours we are around 3rd in the table with around 6500. As I understand you can only set your playing budget within the rules the previous season. However: I am not sure if FFP applys in THE CONFERENCE.
In regards complimentary tickets I would have a root and branch evaluation . Have anyone else noticed the ammount of 0.00 on tickets left behind on the terrace and seats. It would be worth paying someone to go around and collect every single ticket and scan it to justify it:s release. It must be costing the club a small fortune...
Of course have special deals to bring back supporters but 'cut out' all these 0.00 tickets...
|
|
|
Post by onedaytheuwe on Jun 25, 2014 17:28:11 GMT
1) Portsmouth 15460 2) Plymouth 7304 3) Rovers 6420
2013/14 season
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jun 25, 2014 17:41:58 GMT
How much do you reckon Mildenhall, Brown, Smith, McChrystal, Harrold, Parkes and Gow will be on? I bet it is very good League 2 wages. Rovers budget will be one of if not the highest budget in the league. This is just an approx guess but wages could be something like Mildenhall - £2.5k per week McChrystal - £2k per week Parkes - £2.5k per week Smith - £2k per week Brown - £1.5k per week Harrold - £1.5k per week Brunt - £1.5k per week Harrison - £1k per week Clarke - £750 per week Lockyer - £750 per week Santos - £500 per week Lucas - £350 per week Wilson - £350 per week Greenslade - £350 per week Ward-Baptiste - £350 per week Thomas - £350 per week Total = Approx £18k per week Approx £930k per year Pretty wide of the Mark on most. The younger players are on peanuts but make it up if they are selected in the first team, are on the bench and make an appearance. They make more if picked to play from the start and less if on as a sub.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jun 25, 2014 18:09:11 GMT
This is just an approx guess but wages could be something like Mildenhall - £2.5k per week McChrystal - £2k per week Parkes - £2.5k per week Smith - £2k per week Brown - £1.5k per week Harrold - £1.5k per week Brunt - £1.5k per week Harrison - £1k per week Clarke - £750 per week Lockyer - £750 per week Santos - £500 per week Lucas - £350 per week Wilson - £350 per week Greenslade - £350 per week Ward-Baptiste - £350 per week Thomas - £350 per week Total = Approx £18k per week Approx £930k per year Pretty wide of the Mark on most. The younger players are on peanuts but make it up if they are selected in the first team, are on the bench and make an appearance. They make more if picked to play from the start and less if on as a sub. That's irrelevant though as the younger players in total are only being paid the same as the likes of Parkes own individual salary. The figures do seem high but with win bonuses & expenses etc they might not be too far off the mark, as £2m plus was spent somewhere last season on wages
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2014 18:28:30 GMT
Pretty wide of the Mark on most. The younger players are on peanuts but make it up if they are selected in the first team, are on the bench and make an appearance. They make more if picked to play from the start and less if on as a sub. That's irrelevant though as the younger players in total are only being paid the same as the likes of Parkes own individual salary. The figures do seem high but with win bonuses & expenses etc they might not be too far off the mark, as £2m plus was spent somewhere last season on wages Does not the £2m spent on wages also include manager / coaches / ground staff etc?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2014 18:59:18 GMT
6500+ average crowds! I'll have some of whatever you're drinking. depends on number of complimentary tickets we print........ Bonkers, stark staring unquantifiable lunacy. if you're not already certified please contact a doctor immediately and explain why relegation will equal greater average gate in the conference than the Football League. Then off to the bin for you. Gate=number who pay you rose tinter
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jun 25, 2014 19:33:47 GMT
depends on number of complimentary tickets we print........ Bonkers, stark staring unquantifiable lunacy. if you're not already certified please contact a doctor immediately and explain why relegation will equal greater average gate in the conference than the Football League. Then off to the bin for you. Gate=number who pay you rose tinterThose emmets living in Cornwall have to take on some strange behaviourisms mind lol
|
|