English Football League: Clubs 'reliant on owners', says EFL chief

[millertop]

bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48412747

Just how many fans has he just pissed off

[KerrAvon]

How? By telling the truth?

Most clubs are loss making and rely upon funding from their owners. Rotherham United is no exception, despite being run sensibly (in relative terms).

[millertop]

How? By telling the truth?

Most clubs are loss making and rely upon funding from their owners. Rotherham United is no exception, despite being run sensibly (in relative terms).

And there’d be no clubs without fans.

I was thinking of them that have been protesting , do you think some of the owners give a ****e about the clubs? Are those fans over sensitive?

[Pattylallacks2]

I think it would be truer to say there would be very few clubs in the Championship without TV money and one day that little bubble may burst.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Basically it’s a tower block built on sand foundations

[flourbasher]

Stating the obvious really.

He also says we need to be concerned about players wage inflation. Really ?! Well I never. Amazing insight .

Some real gems of information coming out when he's departing.
He'd have more credibility if he told us what inroads he had made to resolving the problems before he left
It comes across as though it's taken him six years to realise the obvious problems and he,s not put in place any strategy or plans to arrest the issues

[Brin]

'The unhappy clubs claimed the £595m five-year agreement with Sky Sports, which was signed in November 2018 and represented a 35% increase on the previous contract, had been done without them being fully consulted'.

Wonder who come out of that contract the more happier person?

[KerrAvon]

And there’d be no clubs without fans.

I was thinking of them that have been protesting , do you think some of the owners give a ****e about the clubs? Are those fans over sensitive?

It would be entirely possible, if a bit pointless, for a club to operate without supporters. If you look at a club like Bournemouth, the funding it receives from matchday revenues is dwarfed by that it receives from broadcasting rights and in loans (which I would imagine are from its owner). They could brick up the turnstiles with very limited impact upon the revenue at the club.

There are bad owners and good owners. There are also owners who get into club ownership with unrealistic expectations and who then find they have bitten off more than they can chew, but who can't find a buyer in order to get out. I would say that most owners, give a shyte to one degree or another or they wouldn’t get into it. Whether protesting fans are justified in their actions, would depend upon the circumstances of the club in question.

I read the line "Fans not happy about the investment that is going into their club. Trust me, without them [the owners], they wouldn't have a club." and thought of some of the postings on here. Essentially, some posters are unhappy that Tony Stewart is not spending enough of his money to meet their aspirations.

[KerrAvon]

'The unhappy clubs claimed the £595m five-year agreement with Sky Sports, which was signed in November 2018 and represented a 35% increase on the previous contract, had been done without them being fully consulted'.

Wonder who come out of that contract the more happier person?

I think it obvious that all owners would be happy at that outcome as it would give them the option of either reducing the losses that they are sustaining at their clubs or maintaining that loss whilst spending more.

[Brin]

Good evening Kerr. Looking at the points you raise, you do have to question who, in our case, actually stoked the fire of expectations when they tell all the media they had a 6 year plan to be in the Premiership.

Fast forward how recruitment failed for whatever reason this January, and then ask your self why fans actually do contest and protest at none recruitment to stabilise our Championship status and alas, see us relegated yet again.