PDA

View Full Version : Spend...disappointed?



SaxonMiller
21-08-2014, 08:47 PM
As always...I feel a perennial urge to start most topics with an apology in case its been discussed beforehand...and given this board can be volatile at the best of times.

However... Does anyone else feel slightly concerned about our lack of spend compared to possible income and competition?

Firstly, play off final win revenue...then ALF and Grabban sell on...add in TV rights for this season and now Agards fee there's certainly revenue. Bear in mind we've only spent on Bowery plus signing ones and wages for new starters I'm really disappointed the club hasn't invested financially in talent.

I'm aware there's cheap and loan talent out there and a huge chairman investment in stand and facilities but I look at Brentford et all and their player purchases and I seriously worry we're going to struggle against anyone bar the poorer clubs in this division.

Just a thought. Sure a few quality purchases will appease my mind.

millmoorlane
21-08-2014, 08:51 PM
Wages. It's all about wages.

djsld
21-08-2014, 08:53 PM
In SE we trust, my friend, in SE we trust.

TMiller
21-08-2014, 09:03 PM
yea i get that disapointment but i do trust the manager

jolly_roger
21-08-2014, 09:05 PM
Hmmmmmm...well...it's hard to answer that one without looking like a moaner, considering the progress the club has made in the last few years.

But...I think there is a hell of a lot of "book balancing" going on behind the scenes and there is a definite requirement that inflated signing fees, wages and agents fees don't get out of control. This is a good thing but it means that a wage has to be saved befre a new player can be signed, often a "massive" club can sign a player then clear out the deadwood, we have to do the clearing first.

There are other indicators that cashflow is tight, ie the unfinished away end car park and the unused retail spaces, we dont even use them for our own shop. The lack of stock also indicates that the cub wants to operate on a low inventory manner, ie dont risk buying stock and not selling it.

We must also remember that at best we can ony get 11000 in the ground with maybe a 9000 average, traditionally clubs with crowds as low as that get relegated fr

armo12
21-08-2014, 09:11 PM
I was thinking the same thing today totally agree. The money thats come in is realy good we dont do the accounts.whats brentford got we havent .nothing there will be a stewards inquiry if we dont spend some money on pace at the back and a proper finisher. Brentford have spent good im not sure all ours are good time wel tell . The stadium holds water in the back carpark the units have not been filled the guest chrimes site well looks bad. Come on tony we get the money out .me and lad 560 pound for season away matches its not cheap but we still turn up

kevthemaltbymiller
21-08-2014, 09:17 PM
Wages. It's all about wages.

Whether we like it or not, and because of the size of our club and the income it generates it's always going to be difficult for us to sustain championship football. We simply cannot afford the wage demands of the top players who can deliver in this league.

With regards too the footballing pyramid the fact is we are punching above our weight.

The pressure is on Steve to find us these gems who we can afford and make them into championship hero's.

That's it a nut shell, in Evans we trust

walter10
21-08-2014, 09:32 PM
20m on the ground - has to be paid for some way. Just a thought.

But I remember the winter of discontent when Booth failed to open his wallet and where that led us.

AdidasSantiago
21-08-2014, 09:42 PM
whats brentford got we havent .nothing

I think you'll find the backing of Matchbook.com is a little bit more than nothing.

walter10
21-08-2014, 09:48 PM
Call me old fashioned but I d prefer it if we were top third L1 bottom third Championship and solvent than chase top half championship and bust. There is no financial return on the investment (except the prospect of spending still more to maintain it).

In that sense I would resist a campaign pushing the chairman to spend. It may just back him into a corner and might become disillusioned with the whole thing (as happens all too often in the football world).

walter10
21-08-2014, 09:49 PM
whats brentford got we havent .nothing

I think you'll find the backing of Matchbook.com is a little bit more than nothing.[/quote]

Have Brentford just spent 20m on a ground?

SaxonMiller
21-08-2014, 09:50 PM
Some really good points I'd not considered. I just can't help but think a few large investments in talent could see us do well...and at worst if it fails and we go down then we can still sell to sustain the club. Peterborough in Div 1 can get 5m plus for a player they fundamentally took a chance on.

AdidasSantiago
21-08-2014, 10:02 PM
whats brentford got we havent .nothing

I think you'll find the backing of Matchbook.com is a little bit more than nothing.[/quote]

Have Brentford just spent 20m on a ground?[/quote]

Going ahead with a 70+ mill project including new 20k stadium, housing, hotel etc

TMiller
21-08-2014, 10:05 PM
Some really good points I'd not considered. I just can't help but think a few large investments in talent could see us do well...and at worst if it fails and we go down then we can still sell to sustain the club. Peterborough in Div 1 can get 5m plus for a player they fundamentally took a chance on.

it seems like goalscorers are so expensive at the moment, that the only chance we have is to take a punt on somebody unproven and give them a run in the team. like a vukic or i tell you who is looking really confident and strong at the moment...reuben reid

walter10
22-08-2014, 04:16 AM
whats brentford got we havent .nothing

I think you'll find the backing of Matchbook.com is a little bit more than nothing.[/quote]

Have Brentford just spent 20m on a ground?[/quote]

Going ahead with a 70+ mill project including new 20k stadium, housing, hotel etc[/quote]

So, in answer to the original question, brentford have got a hell of a lot more than us.

millertop
22-08-2014, 05:18 AM
This is why I think we should stay in the championship for a couple of seasons, get the best out of what we've got before we even think about entertaining the Prem.

Stupid wages for Prem footballers, we can't complete yet if we're being honest

filipefelop
22-08-2014, 06:15 AM
Call me old fashioned but I d prefer it if we were top third L1 bottom third Championship and solvent than chase top half championship and bust. There is no financial return on the investment (except the prospect of spending still more to maintain it).

In that sense I would resist a campaign pushing the chairman to spend. It may just back him into a corner and might become disillusioned with the whole thing (as happens all too often in the football world).

Everything that man said, the most sensible post on here in ages.
Be greatful for what we have achieved in the last few years and think before criticizing T.S. Unless you are or know someone who is able and prepared to take his place.
I am enjoying the ride.

armo12
22-08-2014, 06:48 AM
What im saying brentford spend 1 mill on lad from leyton.what have spent ****all . Dont kid your self that its all about balacing books. This club is makeing money.

millavanilla
22-08-2014, 06:54 AM
You can see already a pattern developing...a few disgruntled fans...no spending...no big wages..outbid for players etc...it makes you realise that our proper place in football is the division weve just come from...this division is light years away from the one we were in for 17 years...and remember, the last twice we were here, we came down after a couple of seasons...its all about money now..with BIG money people and companys backing clubs...hopefully we can scrape through...bournemouth manage it...

martinthemiller1968
22-08-2014, 07:36 AM
How you going to keep all these players happy as well. Look at Agard i am sure at the end of the season am pretty sure he had no thoughts of leaving but players have come in and felt pushed out. My worry is that more of our player will get upset and put in transfer request if they are not getting regular first team action.

RedAnt
22-08-2014, 07:40 AM
Bournemouth haven't done it on a shoestring budget. They have spent a fortune getting out of L1 and trying to consolidating in the Championship, as have Brentford, Wolves, Huddersfield and so on.

If we do consolidate, then we will have spent millions less getting from L1 to stable in this division, than any other club in recent history.

We are doing things the right way, keeping the security of the club's financial future in tact, while competing with some of the biggest over-spenders in World football. How can any of our supporters have any disappointment about that?

AdidasSantiago
22-08-2014, 07:54 AM
Bournemouth are also backed by a very wealthy Russian.

Heman
22-08-2014, 07:57 AM
I expect our turnover will be in the region of 6 to 7 million. This is based on about 2.5 million for season tickets and 1.5 million for non- season ticket holders in the league games. Be generous and add a million for cups, a million for merchandise and a million or so for tv revenue.

Clubs such as Forest, Leeds and Derby can easily double that. Simple maths, we will always be a selling club. Get used to it.

I for one would rather be relegated than risk admin again.

LittleSquirt
22-08-2014, 08:08 AM
The amount of money we throw away on giving away players under contract, you'd think the club was flushed with cash.

Nardiello, Worrell, Taylor, Wilson, Hunt, Ainsworth, Noble, Hylton etc.
Not sure who ran their contract out but for those under contract why haven't we tried to get money for them?

The club have also wasted more on Agents fees than most clubs in the league with the constant conveyor belt of players in/out.

mikemiller
22-08-2014, 08:14 AM
We would have spent quite a lot on May, if t'Pigs hadn't stepped in. We deperately need a new goalscorer now though - not long to go to the transfer deadline, so I hope that SE has got somebody lined up. (Could make a big difference to our whole season)

RedAnt
22-08-2014, 08:19 AM
The amount of money we throw away on giving away players under contract, you'd think the club was flushed with cash.

Nardiello, Worrell, Taylor, Wilson, Hunt, Ainsworth, Noble, Hylton etc.
Not sure who ran their contract out but for those under contract why haven't we tried to get money for them?

The club have also wasted more on Agents fees than most clubs in the league with the constant conveyor belt of players in/out.

The money that you say has been 'wasted' has helped get us into the Championship. As has Steve Evans' transfer policy.

millertop
22-08-2014, 08:54 AM
I expect our turnover will be in the region of 6 to 7 million. This is based on about 2.5 million for season tickets and 1.5 million for non- season ticket holders in the league games. Be generous and add a million for cups, a million for merchandise and a million or so for tv revenue.

Clubs such as Forest, Leeds and Derby can easily double that. Simple maths, we will always be a selling club. Get used to it.

I for one would rather be relegated than risk admin again.

We are not a selling club though, Evans States that quite clearly

Galant
22-08-2014, 08:57 AM
IF the right talent can be found then we will splash out e.g. Stevie May - we know what happened there.
The club will take a risk e.g. Bowery but we then criticise them when the risk doesn't come off e.g. going to Bury jibes.
The club know what they are doing - they understand value and wage structures and won't be manipulated by agents - if sustainable finances keeps us in a relegation battle then so be it - we are Rotherham - the underdogs - we are good at fighting and have given great support to the team - keep it up - SE will find the right people at the right price - Taylor for example was a great move when it became obvious that Bowery and Derbyshire are not dynamic enough to fulfil the no. 10 role - Bowery is Rev's back up and Derbyshire is what he has always been - a great sub to bring on when defenders are tired - the squad is still taking shape - Evan's mantra - the second half of the season will be better than the first.

riccallmiller
22-08-2014, 09:46 AM
if we stay up we will have done very well. spending big money does not automatically bring success. Stick with em all season. Most fans did not rate Agard when he arrived and we have just got good money for him.

leedsmiller
22-08-2014, 09:57 AM
Of course many of us will be a little disappointed that, from a financial perspective, we can't compete effectively in this league, that we can't attract the bigger players but we temper that with the knowledge that it comes with the territory. We chose to support Rotherham United, for most of us our home town team, rather than chase elusive dreams by marching behind the banner of Rotherham Owls, for example.

Some simple maths, if we raised wages across the board by 2,000 a week, a relatively small amount in footballing currency, it would cost the club an extra 2.5m a year. A drop in the ocean for some teams but a very high percentage of our budget. In other words if we tried to compete on salaries we would have a very difficult task keeping the Administrators from the door. So, do we play the high risk game and try to buy success, however tenuous, or do we live within our means where success is that much sweeter because we've had to work that much harder to achieve it...

JohnLeedsMiller
22-08-2014, 09:58 AM
Wages. It's all about wages.
Totally agree. With the amount of free or loan players out there and players like Smallwood coming in for 175k its not about transfer fees, its about the wage structure.

tony260674
22-08-2014, 10:09 AM
I expect our turnover will be in the region of 6 to 7 million. This is based on about 2.5 million for season tickets and 1.5 million for non- season ticket holders in the league games. Be generous and add a million for cups, a million for merchandise and a million or so for tv revenue.


Not being funny Heman, but your figures are way off.

PeteWaller
22-08-2014, 10:14 AM
IF the right talent can be found then we will splash out e.g. Stevie May - we know what happened there.
The club will take a risk e.g. Bowery but we then criticise them when the risk doesn't come off e.g. going to Bury jibes.
The club know what they are doing - they understand value and wage structures and won't be manipulated by agents - if sustainable finances keeps us in a relegation battle then so be it - we are Rotherham - the underdogs - we are good at fighting and have given great support to the team - keep it up - SE will find the right people at the right price - Taylor for example was a great move when it became obvious that Bowery and Derbyshire are not dynamic enough to fulfil the no. 10 role - Bowery is Rev's back up and Derbyshire is what he has always been - a great sub to bring on when defenders are tired - the squad is still taking shape - Evan's mantra - the second half of the season will be better than the first.

G

PerigordMiller
22-08-2014, 11:11 AM
Call me old fashioned but I d prefer it if we were top third L1 bottom third Championship and solvent than chase top half championship and bust. There is no financial return on the investment (except the prospect of spending still more to maintain it).

In that sense I would resist a campaign pushing the chairman to spend. It may just back him into a corner and might become disillusioned with the whole thing (as happens all too often in the football world).

What a sensible post.
Am I in the wrong place ?

DavidR__9
22-08-2014, 11:26 AM
Bit of context. Bournemouth, 2012-13 accounts, the season they got promoted out of League One. They're a good comparison for us, because whatever Dean Court's called these days is about the same capacity as NYS.

They made a loss of over 15m. Their wage bill went up when they joined this division. Their losses this year are going to be astronomical. That's the sort of difference between incomings and outgoing that a club of our size has to fund if it wants to compete with the bigger/richer teams in this league.

We don't have that sort of money. We don't have anyone willing to lend us that sort of money. We don't have assets to secure a loan of that sort of money. We have no way to fund a loss of that kind (accrued in one season; they'll have a similar loss to fund this year - that's 30m in two seasons to find).

So, in that context, raking in 1m for Agard? Almost irrelevant!

Heman
22-08-2014, 12:10 PM
Okay - what are the correct figures.

If we are not a selling club, did we give ALF, Grabban, Taylor, Agard away?

millermanic
22-08-2014, 12:38 PM
Bit of context. Bournemouth, 2012-13 accounts, the season they got promoted out of League One. They're a good comparison for us, because whatever Dean Court's called these days is about the same capacity as NYS.

They made a loss of over 15m. Their wage bill went up when they joined this division. Their losses this year are going to be astronomical. That's the sort of difference between incomings and outgoing that a club of our size has to fund if it wants to compete with the bigger/richer teams in this league.

We don't have that sort of money. We don't have anyone willing to lend us that sort of money. We don't have assets to secure a loan of that sort of money. We have no way to fund a loss of that kind (accrued in one season; they'll have a similar loss to fund this year - that's 30m in two seasons to find).

So, in that context, raking in 1m for Agard? Almost irrelevant!

Begs the question . why bother?

Rothbiz
22-08-2014, 01:29 PM
The finances in the Championship are a ticking time bomb as some clubs take the risk to reap the massive rewards of promotion.

David Conn's analysis in The Guardian highlights how many clubs were spending more than they were earning in 12/13.

There's more money around now (parachute payments, 2.6m each in solidarity payments from the prem, 1.5m each in TV rights) but the spending on transfers and wages will have gone up too. - view external link (www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/22/club-by-club-guide-championship-finances-2012-2013)

tony260674
22-08-2014, 01:30 PM
Okay - what are the correct figures.

If we are not a selling club, did we give ALF, Grabban, Taylor, Agard away?

Agard's sale guarantees the turnover for 2014/15 will be over 10m. Its still a pittance at this level though.
Had we got Agard and Le Fondre on longer deals then we would have got much more for them. Personally I never suspeted that Grabban would become as good as he has given the season he had with us and with respect to Ryan Taylor, the 300k we got for him looks good business now although hopefully he will come good.

UpTheMillers_Wrighty
23-08-2014, 08:42 AM
I honestly cannot believe what im reading.
Does no1 remember the wholse Save the Millers campaign and the prospect of no football in Rotherham.
Disappointment in the spending, this is a joke, who do we think we are?!?!

Stability is key, and for a club with soooo much financial uncertainty, stability is always the main priority.

I dont understand the comparisons with Wolves and Brentford, both teams play in the 2 biggest cities in England. Even on a bad day they will still get a good crowd.
When people call us the toy-town of South Yorkshire, we still are...2 promotions doesnt make us MASSIVE!
Keep the faith, In Evans We Trust!!! UTM

rolymiller
23-08-2014, 09:21 AM
What people have failed to mentiom in this thread is the importance of home grown talent. That is the way forward. We can't model ourselves on clubs who are spending a lot of money on players be it wages or transfer fees. We n eed to model ourselves more on teams like Crewe producing a stream of home grown players and then using these to sustain our place in this division. It disturbs me to think that we stil have no obvious talents coming through from the academy or even that we can measure how well the academy is doing however this is the way forward for us so maybe this is perhapds the area to invest in rather than spending millions on established players. Just a thought...

ida
23-08-2014, 09:30 AM
That's a great though Roly, but why ain't everyone doing it as successfully as crew? We have clearly invested in our academy each of the last 3 seasons. Like everything these days the competition for young lads signature in football is fierce and with several larger clubs within an hours drive of our academy I imagine the cream tends to rise to the top based on environment and choice.

TOM_RUFC
23-08-2014, 09:37 AM
Not saying I disagree with the advantages of having a productive youth system, however not sure about modelling ourselves on Crewe as a football club.

They're in a lower division and just got beat 2-5 at home by Rochdale.

uttis
23-08-2014, 10:44 AM
Just read this thread and have to say there are some really sensible posts on it, i hope the club hierarchy read it some really good points.
on a personal basis |i too am enjoying the roller coaster as SE always calls it but i too would not want us to chase the dream, ambition is all very well but we are a small fish in a big ocean as as various people have pointed out on this thread, stability is the key, don't know abut anyone else but i would sooner support my local team in League 1 knowing it was financially sound (if there is such a thing in league football nowadays) than top end Championship chasing the Holy Grail

Rothbiz
23-08-2014, 11:00 AM
Southampton seems to be the best exponent of a successful youth system in recent years but I'm not sure it will end well.

Imagine where they would be if they could have hung on to Shaw, Bale, Lallana, Surman, Walcott and Oxlade-Chamberlain (apart from being 100m+ worse off).

I like to think that Swansea is the model that should be followed with 20% owned by a fan's trust.