PDA

View Full Version : Dyche talks money



jamesnulty
06-11-2014, 04:40 PM
I think Sean Dyche nails it and our club is in fantastic hands. If we stay up this season (and I still think we might), then he should be manager of the century, never mind the season.
Quote:
“If I had £30m I would spend it, but we haven’t and if I did do you know what… it would probably ruin the club.

“It’s important to remember the challenge against the realities and here at Burnley Football Club there are some realities that need to be looked after.

“I am custodian of this club and I have to manage get the group to win games, but equally I have to make sure the club is in a very good place. - view external link (ift.tt/1vPmrVm)

Toby1
06-11-2014, 04:48 PM
Common sense with nobs on :star:

harrowclaret
06-11-2014, 05:22 PM
If Dyche is talking about spending £30m and ruining the club he cannot be all that confident of survival having spent next to nowt.

Hipper
06-11-2014, 06:42 PM
I don't see the connection.

royboyclaret
06-11-2014, 07:03 PM
Is anybody advocating spending £30m?

The only guarantee is that spending virtually nothing will ensure relegation. Is that what we want?

Or should we not invest say £12m and at least show the kind of intent that proves we're serious about staying in the Premier League.

texasbrit
06-11-2014, 07:15 PM
so SD is working within a transfer budget that as we all thought and feared is miniscule in modern football terms. So fair play to him he should he applauded for what he has achieved within the resources he has available.

the PL money we have received and will receive this year and over the next few years, assuming we get relegated (and I acknowledge we may not) one thing is very clear we need the PL money for the day to day running and survival of the club which excludes access to a competitive transfer budget, other sources of income are clearly not enough. Without the PL money where would/will it leave the club financially?
Trying not to be too negative for fear of engaging the wrath of the few and castigated by the many.

royboyclaret
06-11-2014, 07:25 PM
" one thing is very clear we need the PL money for the day to day running and survival of the club which excludes access to a competitive transfer budget"


Cobblers.

texasbrit
06-11-2014, 07:30 PM
"cobblers" really well the annual accounts will tell a different tale I'm afraid
if you subtract the money the club receives from the PL you really believe that all other sources of income is sufficient to cover all costs because if this was true the PL money would be spare?

royboyclaret
06-11-2014, 07:39 PM
The accounts to Jun'14 would have reported a breakeven situation before promotion bonuses and PL ground upgrades.

The current financial year the Club are projecting an Operating Profit of £30m.

The Bedlington Terrier
06-11-2014, 08:23 PM
I was in the barbers today and we all agreed - what would blowing ten - twenty million actually achieve? Nowt!

clareturion
06-11-2014, 08:37 PM
I was in the barbers today and we all agreed - what would blowing ten - twenty million actually achieve? Nowt!

Great Claret13552 !!! then don't pi$$ £ 4.5m on Juke and Boyd, concentrate on free transfers, loans and youth and hope for the best.

Current strategy is neither cheap or " giving it a real good go " in other words a typical BFC fudge.

royboyclaret
06-11-2014, 08:44 PM
Who was in the barbers 13552?...

...Barry and Clive?

garfunkal
06-11-2014, 08:49 PM
Not heard him say this before ? Have I missed something ?

Goody1975
07-11-2014, 05:44 AM
"I was in the barbers today and we all agreed - what would blowing ten - twenty million actually achieve? Nowt!"


That was a perfectly correct assumption but investing ten or twenty million in the squad with a structured plan would not only give us the better possibility of staying up it would give the club a long term sustainable model to work from.

Purchasing younger players who not only have the chance to improve but increase in value has to be the model we should be following.

merlin1
07-11-2014, 06:12 AM
We purchased two young players, on loan, and they haven't really played, so we could buy 20 million pounds worth of young players, it doesn't mean it would help us now in the aim of staying up. For a club the size of Burnley the PL dream is a headache.

I would say enjoy it while you can, we have a good manager and board who must have a plan.

spunkybackpack21
07-11-2014, 06:53 AM
I guess they must have a plan. I'm not entirely sure what it is, but there must be one...

moggybfc
07-11-2014, 07:08 AM
Cardiff are a typical example - they spent a lot of money last season and still went down
-ok they had a cr@p manager

Norwich spent a fair bit aswell and still went down.

Two scenarios

Spend 30 million and still go down and club be screwed between 2-3 years time

Work to a budget, still go down, but will provide stability in the club for years to come.

Come end of season and we are still in Premiership then maybe we could spend 30 million

SAM_WELL
07-11-2014, 07:33 AM
Cardiff spent 35 million last year and sold players worth 25 million this year. We didn't need to spend 35 million but we needed to sign players we could sell should (when) we get relegated. We haven't done that. No one will buy any of our signings next summer.

jamesnulty
07-11-2014, 08:05 AM
And I know there's another David Baldwin thread, but his interview from 10 minutes on is bang on. Exactly the situation that we might face: just about surviving but then running the risk of over-stretching ourselves. That's why I'm so pleased we have some sensible heads in charge of our club.
Patience is what's needed, that's all.

Quicknick
07-11-2014, 08:17 AM
To SamWell: which means we should be strong if we go down, I suppose.

NottsClaret
07-11-2014, 08:19 AM
"Or should we not invest say £12m and at least show the kind of intent that proves we're serious about staying in the Premier League."

We have invested £12m, if you include wages etc.

Or do you mean another £12m on top?

yorksclaret
07-11-2014, 08:22 AM
So Cardiff spunked £10 million on players who got them relegated within one season.

That's the model to follow.


Here we have our manager spelling out the reality of our finances and how securing the future of the club must be the priority, yet folks on here still think they know better. :?

Jamb0MackemClaret
07-11-2014, 08:29 AM
Is getting relegated without buying players really better than getting relegated after buying players?

CC_Claret
07-11-2014, 08:38 AM
Yawn.

clareturion
07-11-2014, 08:43 AM
Are you serious moggy ?. I would suggest the following scenario.

Spend 30 million and still go down, but with at least giving it a shot and club be screwed between 1-2 years time

Spend 8 millionish, go down with a whimper and be screwed in 3-4 years time.

To think this club would be in a position of strength in the championship on parachute payments is delusional imo. You only have to consider our position at the start of last season ( after 4 parachute payment years ). Selling our prized asset at a cut price and looking likely to struggle, hoping for a miracle that fortunately occurred.

What's gonna be different this time around ?

NottsClaret
07-11-2014, 08:52 AM
Probably not much will be different clareturion, but I personally don't want much to change.

We've been watching 2nd tier football since 2000, and it's fairly good. Plus we've had a couple of sojourns into the top flight.

You need to try and get enjoyment from that, because for a club our size it won't get much better in the long term.

lotty1
07-11-2014, 09:02 AM
" Is getting relegated without buying players really better than getting relegated after buying players "?

Doesn't that rather depend on how much they cost and the amount they're on salary wise ?

lotty1
07-11-2014, 09:06 AM
" Is anybody advocating spending £30mill "?

I may be wrong Roy and if I am then I apologise but didn't you say on a thread recently that we should maybe buy or have bought a couple of £10 mill players and pay them £25k a week ?

claretspice
07-11-2014, 09:08 AM
Why in Christs is the fact that Cardiff, owned by a megalomaniac and a source of instability throughout last season, spent badly, relevant to the debate?

The point made - which is valid - is that whilst Cardiff spent a lot of money last season, they got an awful lot of it back this summer. That a club who were in such disarray ended up with a net spend of £10 million, demonstrates amply to me that when you spend money on good players, that money isn't gone for good, its just invested.

Of course, wages is a different point and is clearly why we were never going to be in the market to spend £35 million pounds. But the principle that sensible investment in players with their best years' ahead of them could and should far from squandering our funds have actually enhanced them in the longer run is central to this debate.

lotty1
07-11-2014, 09:14 AM
Those players have to be available and at a realistic fee with a realistic salary .
SD says that the prices quote last summer were way above what we could afford so it comes down to whether folks believe him or not .

Cardiff lost 10 mill on the players they bought according to what's posted on here but if that were Burnley this forum would implode with the blame culture right out there .

JohnMcGreal
07-11-2014, 09:28 AM
one thing is very clear we need the PL money for the day to day running and survival of the club

So without being promoted every 5 years, the club wouldn't be able to function day to day? We would struggle to survive without a massive influx of PL cash? How do other clubs manage?

yorksclaret
07-11-2014, 09:28 AM
Is getting relegated without buying players really better than getting relegated after buying players?

Well obviously. Every relegated club will tell you that.
The small fact that we aren't relegated and haven't spent nothing makes the question about as relevant as one about Albanian geology though.



The good players' Cardiff bought got them relegated. And cost them £10 million (plus wages).
That's not investment - for a club like ours it's the road to ruin.

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 09:49 AM
"So without being promoted every 5 years, the club wouldn't be able to function day to day? We would struggle to survive without a massive influx of PL cash? How do other clubs manage?"

we'd find it difficult at championship level - the fact that we were likely to be in trouble had we not been promoted both in 2009 and this year should tell people that.

making profit on players would be the only real way for us to keep surviving, making it difficult to build a team.

its a balancing act for the club, one that i think is probably more difficult than it is easy.

theclaret57
07-11-2014, 09:50 AM
The sad thing is some posters seem to be happy that as BFC can't compete with bigger clubs we should just use the money to keep us going, rather than trying to build a scouting network, for example.

Even that seems out of our grasp at the moment.

In 3-4 years time we will have nothing to show for our latest promotion.

royboyclaret
07-11-2014, 09:53 AM
"
I may be wrong Roy and if I am then I apologise but didn't you say on a thread recently that we should maybe buy or have bought a couple of £10 mill players and pay them £25k a week ?"

Lotty...trying to be realistic here and accepting the cashflow problems of the summer I always thought that a spend of between £12m and £15m was possible. One marquee signing of say £8m, as with Ulloa, and then something similar again in total on two more players.

I think the post you refer to was my response to others suggesting that such signings would be crippling to the Wages bill. Look at it this way we are on course to target a £30m Operating Profit this season which includes a Wage bill of £30m/£32m. Those additional signings may add another £3m to the Wage bill but in reality that makes no more than a small dent in the Operating Profit.

To me it had to be that middle ground approach as opposed to spending virtually nothing which pretty much guarantees relegation. However, whilst there are d

RogerEliHatTrick
07-11-2014, 09:53 AM
Dyche seems to be mentioning money specifically more than ever before. I am not sure whether he is frustrated by it ( where the market is and budget) or is just trying to lower expectations from fans.

I think there is some middle ground. If we had spent say 10 million and also invested in some up and coming player with lower wages and future sell on values I am sure it wouldn't have broken the club. Nobody is advocating the Cardiff model. One of their problems though was replacing Mackay with someone who wasn't good enough/too inexperienced.

It makes you wonder if so much of the PL windfall had to be invested in the team (say a percentage) whether the board would prefer us not to get promoted. They might see this as the road to ruin.

JohnMcGreal
07-11-2014, 09:59 AM
making profit on players would be the only real way for us to keep surviving, making it difficult to build a team.

The fact that we seem to have strayed away from our previous policy of investing in promising young players like Austin, Trippier, Mee, Ings etc, in favour of signing old, average players who we're very unlikely to make any money on is a worry.

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 10:07 AM
"trying to be realistic here and accepting the cashflow problems of the summer"

royboy, didn't you say the other day that there were no cashflow problems and we had £12m to spend in the summer?

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 10:15 AM
"The fact that we seem to have strayed away from our previous policy of investing in promising young players like Austin, Trippier, Mee, Ings etc, in favour of signing old, average players who we're very unlikely to make any money on is a worry."

i don't disagree but i think, in a way, thats more a strategy that works better in the championship. and its all relative to money again.

for example, assombalonga cost forest £5.5m, hit the ground running and is now struggling. its a big enough jump from championship to PL, never mind league 1 to PL so its a real gamble to spend that kind of money. so if thats how much a top young league 1 player cost, you can perhaps imagine how much a top young championship player would cost.

its a difficult business.

jojomk1
07-11-2014, 10:18 AM
Dyche does always make an issue of money/budgets restricting our strength in the transfer market.
Burnley FC are his employers so he is hardly going to criticise them for this but is this also a subtle way of deflecting any blame from himself.
Yes - we have not been able to land any of our reported top targets but let's be honest, none of his summer signings have made a significant contribution so far. Additionally, to have a guy, reported to be on £30k per week, sat on the bench for 80 minutes of every game seems a bit of a waste to me.
I don't expect much money to be spent in Jan and if, as everyone outside Burnley suggests, we do get relegated will we go down with a stronger side
I don't think so

Walton
07-11-2014, 10:29 AM
A hell of a lot of people talk as though a club has never gone up and stayed up, when actually 3 of the current top 6 in the Premier League were relatively recently in the Championship.

What did Southampton do to get in that position? They augmented a good team (but not squad) with good additions. They signed some promising young lad from a Championship team for £6m, he's done alright and has played for England. Their signings mainly came from smaller clubs, whether at home or abroad, and improved not only the already decent team (which finished 2nd in the Championship having not been considered anywhere near favourites to go up) but also the squad in general, with a mixture of young talent with potential for improvement/resale and experienced heads.

They were a revelation, and have set themselves up for PL football for a good number of years. They've survived their star players being sold. They've survived their talented young manager going.

They did that by improving their 'group'

Jamb0MackemClaret
07-11-2014, 10:32 AM
Southampton's success is built on the back of their academy though, so not a great comparison when Rodriguez is the only unqualified success we've produced in many, many years.

royboyclaret
07-11-2014, 10:34 AM
"royboy, didn't you say the other day that there were no cashflow problems and we had £12m to spend in the summer?"


There was always going to be an element of a cashflow difficulty until the first tranche of PL money arrived in the final week of July.

But that was never going to restrict any potential transfer activity since any of the say three top targets would only involve the outlay of a first stage payment.

Bin_Ont_Turf
07-11-2014, 10:37 AM
'Burnley FC are his employers so he is hardly going to criticise them for this but is this also a subtle way of deflecting any blame from himself'


I really am amazed that there are still fans who question Dyche's integrity.

It was he who in early summer of last year asked the chairmen to tell it like it was because there were unrealistic expectations from some supporters.

So when he says that he was after 3 players who would have cost more than £20 million, what part of that do some folk think is bullsh1t?

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 10:43 AM
"Southampton's success is built on the back of their academy though"

and one bloke's massive fortune.

RogerEliHatTrick
07-11-2014, 10:43 AM
I don't think anyone is doubting what Dyche says. Those three players may well have cost that amount. Where were the back up players in case we didn't land our targets ?

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 10:44 AM
"But that was never going to restrict any potential transfer activity since any of the say three top targets would only involve the outlay of a first stage payment."

depends on how big the first stage payment was, surely.

northeastclaret
07-11-2014, 10:53 AM
'So when he says that he was after 3 players who would have cost more than £20 million, what part of that do some folk think is bullsh1t?'

There is no reason to doubt that eventually became the case , but it also got to that because of what seemed a flawed, in hindsight, approach to transfer negotiations. Rather than be decisive like Derby were with WBA over Thorne when they paid £3m at a relatively early stage in the window we preferred to drag the Dawson transfer out and eventually lost , what may have been just a short opportunity to sign Dawson for £3m, which would we all now know would have been excellent business.

But accepting we missed out on our £20m targets why did we not have 3 other less ambitious targets for £10m , for example Adam Clayton etc who went to Boro.

My biggest criticism is that we did not seem to have a middle ground plan B of alternative signings.

Bin_Ont_Turf
07-11-2014, 10:55 AM
'Where were the back up players in case we didn't land our targets ?'


I presume we got the 'back up' players, or some of them.

moggybfc
07-11-2014, 10:58 AM
Southampton cant be a model they spent 19 million on Gaston and Jay, also they brought in a lot of players

cheshiretony
07-11-2014, 11:00 AM
The board we have not are not up to running a big business,big businesses have to make big decisions,our board are only capable of running a corner shop !!

bpgburn
07-11-2014, 11:07 AM
All I know is I'm glad SD and the board are heading this club and not the know all know nowts of a MB that's for sure.

LancasterClaret
07-11-2014, 11:14 AM
The back up targets, or the back up to the back ups, or the back ups to the back ups to the back ups have been bought.

Are they good enough?

Not at the moment, though it is still early days.

Colburn_Claret
07-11-2014, 11:16 AM
It's frightening to think what would happen to the club if some of the fools on here were free to run the budget.
Thank God for SD and the board.

clareturion
07-11-2014, 11:25 AM
So when he says that he was after 3 players who would have cost more than £20 million, what part of that do some folk think is bullsh1t?

The part where he says spending £ 20m will probably ruin the club. Surely if he backs his own judgement he is likely to triple that investment next year by staying in the PL. Or is he by inference saying the £ 20m targets were a bit $hite really and a bit of a punt ?

God knows where that puts the backup players we got !

chasey39
07-11-2014, 11:39 AM
Chesire Tony: "The board we have not are not up to running a big business,big businesses have to make big decisions,our board are only capable of running a corner shop !! "

Good job our chairmen are both CEOs of companies with combined turnovers of c.£100m.

Not as big as many club owners, but certainly large enough to know how to run a business.

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 11:43 AM
"The part where he says spending £ 20m will probably ruin the club. Surely if he backs his own judgement he is likely to triple that investment next year by staying in the PL. Or is he by inference saying the £ 20m targets were a bit $hite really and a bit of a punt ?"

given that virtually all our known targets were players with little premier league experience, then they were all going to be a bit of a punt as they were on a par with our current squad.

point being that £20m wouldn't necessarily improve us enough.

Bin_Ont_Turf
07-11-2014, 12:03 PM
Since when has the transfer fee been the only number to look at anyway?

royboyclaret
07-11-2014, 12:11 PM
"Since when has the transfer fee been the only number to look at anyway?"


B_O_T...Think you'll find the wages element is covered in post#35.

MrLegend
07-11-2014, 12:24 PM
£13m on Gaston Ramirez
£11m on Mane
£12.5m on Wanyama
£8m on Pelle
£10m on Forster
£8.5m on Lovren
£15m on Osvaldo

I'm not sure where you are drawing these comparisons of "framework" from, but Southampton are in a completely different universe to us.

Even prior to promotion they had much more financial clout than we did (£1.8m on Danny Fox and despicably £1.2m on Wayne Thomas!).

Southampton are a city team, with much bigger gates, much more financial backing (both on transfer fees and wages) and a much bigger pull for top level players.

Many teams have recently thrown millions at Premier League survival and some have been successful i.e. Stoke, Hull, Southampton etc. But people seem to forgot those that were not successful, the likes of Wolves, QPR Cardiff and of course Portsmouth.

spunkybackpack21
07-11-2014, 12:31 PM
The Southampton comparison isn't really the best as they had the good fortune to be taken over by one of the richest men in Europe. They spent millions from League One level onwards on fees and wages (something people forget about the massively overrated Cortese - he pretty much had a blank cheque book).

BUT that doesn't mean we can't follow the same concepts, if you will. The key things being, developing a stronger academy, stronger scouting regimes and buying players with re-sale. People keep mentioning Cardiff, as if there is no in between, and even they, basket case that they are, recouped a lot of their fees. Somebody mentioned that we must have a plan - I don't honestly know if we do. Though we'll know a bit more when the annual accounts are published and after Jan.

clareturion
07-11-2014, 12:40 PM
Thanks quoon for clearing that up it appears neither the board nor our illustrious manager
have sufficient confidence in their own decision making to put their money where their mouths are XD

rammymike
07-11-2014, 12:42 PM
I wonder how many other fan's message boards look at 'club models' and cast a jealous eye over what Burnley have achieved.

I'll hazard a guess at around 72.

lotty1
07-11-2014, 12:44 PM
Whatever we do to improve it won't happen over night despite the obvious impatience of many on here .

Improvements at Gawthorpe I presume at some stage will help us Academy wise although I don't know the club's plans on that .
Turf Moor is being improved .
It's looking as though a foreign scouting network is possibly about to be set up .
Part of any improvement is about the foundations which it seems are being put in place . More positives than negatives in my view but what do I know ?

the_quoon
07-11-2014, 12:45 PM
i think they've got the confidence clareturion, just not the money.

Rileybobs
07-11-2014, 12:50 PM
The comparison with Southampton is just plain daft.

merlin1
07-11-2014, 01:15 PM
You lot are loonies! How can you keep argueing, thread after thread, about the same thing which non of you really have no idea about and base everything on theories (me included).

NottsClaret
07-11-2014, 01:23 PM
Because it beats working, merlin?

DiBraidio
07-11-2014, 01:26 PM
Not forgetting that Southampton were paying 30k per week in the Championship.

morninbob
07-11-2014, 01:37 PM
Its like there's no middle ground, nobody is saying bet the ranch, but unless we bring any players in jan than we have missed the chance to buy the next tripps, ings, austin ect. If we are relegated then tripps, ings and others will want out and teams will want big fees knowing we have para payments so are we back to square one again ?

Espia
07-11-2014, 01:43 PM
How many other PL managers out there talk about being custodians of the club and having the clubs long term future as a priority ?

Most seem hell bent on pumping up their inflated ego's and ensuring their own reputation and career is priority and would be quite willing to spend whatever they could get out of their respective boards.

Credit to SD for this.

For the long term prosperity of BFC I think the club is better off left in the hands of the current manager and board.

NottsClaret
07-11-2014, 02:14 PM
"unless we bring any players in jan than we have missed the chance to buy the next tripps, ings, austin"

We bought all of the above when we were back in the Championship. We bought Danny Fox and Leon Cort when were in the Prem during that fateful January.

ollyd
07-11-2014, 02:32 PM
How many other PL managers out there talk about being custodians of the club?

Exactly none I hope. The custodians of the club are the Board of Directors, nobody else. The manager is an employee and a pretty short term one at that. But our Sean does love high sounding phrases.

RationalHumanist
07-11-2014, 02:37 PM
“If I had £30m I would spend it, but we haven’t and if I did do you know what… it would probably ruin the club."

So when it comes to it, our long term interests aren't the main thing for him. It's merely what would be best for him. Now I've no problem with that because that is how the sport works, but it makes you worry about what would happen if he did have the money. And also why he puts himself forward as a 'custodian'. I think he's relishing the limelight of being in a position with no expectation and therefore no pressure, a little too much. It's time he stopped banging on about the finances and get some grittier performances out of the lads.

NottsClaret
07-11-2014, 02:47 PM
"It's time he stopped banging on about the finances and get some grittier performances out of the lads."

You don't watch us much do you? One thing you can't question is anyone's commitment or 'grit'. It's the class they lack, but that's what costs the big bucks.

lotty1
07-11-2014, 02:52 PM
Reading some of the comments on here I don't know whether to laugh or cry .

RationalHumanist
07-11-2014, 03:06 PM
"You don't watch us much do you? One thing you can't question is anyone's commitment or 'grit'. It's the class they lack, but that's what costs the big bucks"

I wouldn't say it was grit. Energy I will give you (and I'm proud of them for that and glad they are concentrating on fitness), but we are hardly dominating the 50/50's.

claretspice
07-11-2014, 03:53 PM
"We bought all of the above when we were back in the Championship. We bought Danny Fox and Leon Cort when were in the Prem during that fateful January."

That's true, we did, but of course the signing which started the ball rolling was that of Steven Fletcher, who we signed in summer 09 and promptly sold for double what we paid in summer 10. Austin was (belatedly) brought to replace him in January 11. Safe to say we won't be 'doing a Fletcher' this time around.

As for Dyche's comments, he's a football manager who has laid his cards on the table from day 1 - he's ambitious and Burnley is a stepping stone. I've absolutely no doubt that these comments about what he has and hasn't spend are part of his strategy to make sure the national media, and his future employers, are in no doubt that the position we are in is beyond his control. The 'we've got to be custodians of the club' line is an easy way of relaying that message whilst being respectful.

Nothing wrong in that, and certainly n

ClaretMoffitt
07-11-2014, 05:06 PM
"As for Dyche's comments, he's a football manager who has laid his cards on the table from day 1 - he's ambitious and Burnley is a stepping stone. I've absolutely no doubt that these comments about what he has and hasn't spend are part of his strategy to make sure the national media, and his future employers, are in no doubt that the position we are in is beyond his control. The 'we've got to be custodians of the club' line is an easy way of relaying that message whilst being respectful."


From what I see and hear, I fully agree with this statement about Dyche. I don't mind like, afterall, as he said, the club is in a much better place for him over all.

Notrigsbyscat
07-11-2014, 05:38 PM
bang on re Dyche on PR, and I read higher in the thread with incredulity that we shouldn't have considered it as such.

He's a model employee, does his job beyond expectation, but is careful not to mislead.

As for others commenting on the collective no-knowledge of posters on here, and good stewardship because of Chairmen with joint revenue of 100m, how do YOU know some of us aren't capable of running businesses better? And as for 110m, I watch games with two guys with exactly that level of revenue between them, and I wouldn't let them anywhere near TM!

And then this: "For the long term prosperity of BFC I think the club is better off left in the hands of the current manager and board." Only half of that claim is correct.

Also interesting to note that some are postulating Southampton as a model. Thought there was an embargo on foreign ownership on here?

BlackCountry
07-11-2014, 06:23 PM
Realistically our break even point is lower Championship or upper levels of Div One. That is to say when we have a very modest wage bill.

This year forecast profit is around 30 million. Still for the life of me cannot see why we could not have committed a little more of the budget to invest in the potential of gaining income stability.

If we go down with a whimper there is a huge risk of steady decline and future losses. If we spend too much the grim reaper potentially arrives earlier. Simple truth is no-one can predict it is a question of choice on policy. Some members of our board appear to be extremely cautious.