Things dont quite add up regarding our budget/ finances and decision making in my opinion

TEL

You know sometimes you read these soundbites from the owner and quotes from various sources claiming certain things surrounding the finances of the club.

One thing that keeps bubbling to the outer surfaces of my now ageing and perhaps slightly decrepit memory are the claims regarding our budget in league one.

So The owner (God bless him, but I wish he'd put a sock in it regarding tactics) has said more than once that our budget in league one was in the top three....
The first time it sounded like a "boast" to me earlier in the season.

Well I cant for some reason come to terms with that claim.....we have been told that Ipswich and Wigan blew us out of the water on wages....so, are we saying then that our wage/budget was larger than the likes of Sunderland and Sheffield Wednesday (both with a huge infrastructure to maintain as well as championship wages for the latter) and recently relegated Rotherham and Wycombe who's players must have been on similar terms to other Championship clubs.

Therefore, what on earth were we paying our underperforming rabble? Our recruitment was and remains suspect due to the nature of forming a decision based upon a committee......Steve Gallen, according to the owner is an awesome negotiator. However, that begs the question of why weren't we in for players of the ilk of if not Ipswich and Wigan, but certainly those who played for the other top 6-8 clubs, seeing as we had so much money to fling around?

Furthermore, today we hear that the likes of some of our out of contract players are expected to re-sign....Matthews, Purrington, Washington, Inniss and JFC are all mentioned in this category by the owner in a Cawley interview. Questions then springs to mind, whos making that decision, Thomas?

It certainly doesnt take into account what a new manager or coach would want within his squad, and then how do we attract new players and who decides without the input of a coach or manager? Its been said that Adkins didnt want certain players we signed, Dobson being one.

Lastly you have to wonder if Jacksons outright reluctance to play the lads from Spurs and Chelsea was because these players were forced upon him? I seem to recall Bowyer refusing to play some of the signings although I cant remember who.

Am I the only person to think that all this is beginning to sound just a little bit bonkers?

Over to you lot to set me right....

sammy391

Would imagine transfer budget refers to the budget/spending we have to bring players in/buy them rather than their wages after.

we could definitely be top 3 transfers budgets, but be leasing willing to spend much on wages

se9addick

God knows, but however much the budget is, we aren’t spending it well 

shirty5

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

TEL

shirty5 said:

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

He also said he expected our budget this season to be in the top three. What are to believe?

AFKABartram

I think it’s probably based on how competitive we are being in the market. Ie. Last summer Ipswich and Wigan when in the market for new players were offering the most in fees / contracts, we were positioned roughly next highest in that . Which feels right with the signings of Stockley and others who would have attracted other interest. 

The wage bill was published in the accounts released recently and I don’t think any of us could say it was insignificant for this level and should be more than enough to be competitive at the top end. It’s been managed badly.

UEAAddick

I think he got a complete shock when he saw Wigan and Ipswich spending the money they did, I don't think he expected it.

Sorry but that is proper naive and is the main reason we are where we are under Sandgaard.

Considering they had just been taken over and like him they had new owners who had bought a club. Did he expect them to not spend anything? That's what people bar crooks like ESI do when they buy a football club as they want to put a marker down.

iainambler

AFKABartram said:

I think it’s probably based on how competitive we are being in the market. Ie. Last summer Ipswich and Wigan when in the market for new players were offering the most in fees / contracts, we were positioned roughly next highest in that . Which feels right with the signings of Stockley and others who would have attracted other interest. 

The wage bill was published in the accounts released recently and I don’t think any of us could say it was insignificant for this level and should be more than enough to be competitive at the top end. It’s been managed badly.

So, basically, we've had the money to spend on players which we didn't have under Roland/ESI but it hasn't been spent on the right players.

Question is where was the problem with this?  Was it issues inherited from Roland/ESI, was it a poor choice of Ged Roddy (why else was he let go?) or was it the longer serving backroom staff?

This may explain why TS has been so bold at the end of the season - he knows that the money is there to theoretically do well, just needs the right people?

golfaddick

TEL said:

shirty5 said:

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

He also said he expected our budget this season to be in the top three. What are to believe?

Talk is cheap. No owner or manager is truthfully going to tell you how much they are spending on transfer fees & wages. The "top 3 budget" is just a soundbite for the press & the gullible. The proof, as always, is on the pitch on a Saturday. 

se9addick

golfaddick said:

TEL said:

shirty5 said:

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

He also said he expected our budget this season to be in the top three. What are to believe?

Talk is cheap. No owner or manager is truthfully going to tell you how much they are spending on transfer fees & wages. The "top 3 budget" is just a soundbite for the press & the gullible. The proof, as always, is on the pitch on a Saturday. 

Aren’t the sums that we spend on wages disclosed in our annual report?

Gribbo

iainambler said:

AFKABartram said:

I think it’s probably based on how competitive we are being in the market. Ie. Last summer Ipswich and Wigan when in the market for new players were offering the most in fees / contracts, we were positioned roughly next highest in that . Which feels right with the signings of Stockley and others who would have attracted other interest. 

The wage bill was published in the accounts released recently and I don’t think any of us could say it was insignificant for this level and should be more than enough to be competitive at the top end. It’s been managed badly.

So, basically, we've had the money to spend on players which we didn't have under Roland/ESI but it hasn't been spent on the right players.

Question is where was the problem with this?  Was it issues inherited from Roland/ESI, was it a poor choice of Ged Roddy (why else was he let go?) or was it the longer serving backroom staff?

This may explain why TS has been so bold at the end of the season - he knows that the money is there to theoretically do well, just needs the right people?

Gallen?

Pavoren007

Logically possible - believe we were 5th or 6th highest on wages, so combined with transfer fees (I did not track what the likes of Wednesday, Wycombe etc did over the last two windows), 3rd may be possible. Issue is we were still carrying so much dead wood - Gunter, Watson to name two, we needed to invest a lot more than that…! It is all relative from your starting point. 

charltonbob

TEL said:

You know sometimes you read these soundbites from the owner and quotes from various sources claiming certain things surrounding the finances of the club.

One thing that keeps bubbling to the outer surfaces of my now ageing and perhaps slightly decrepit memory are the claims regarding our budget in league one.

So The owner (God bless him, but I wish he'd put a sock in it regarding tactics) has said more than once that our budget in league one was in the top three....
The first time it sounded like a "boast" to me earlier in the season.

Well I cant for some reason come to terms with that claim.....we have been told that Ipswich and Wigan blew us out of the water on wages....so, are we saying then that our wage/budget was larger than the likes of Sunderland and Sheffield Wednesday (both with a huge infrastructure to maintain as well as championship wages for the latter) and recently relegated Rotherham and Wycombe who's players must have been on similar terms to other Championship clubs.

Therefore, what on earth were we paying our underperforming rabble? Our recruitment was and remains suspect due to the nature of forming a decision based upon a committee......Steve Gallen, according to the owner is an awesome negotiator. However, that begs the question of why weren't we in for players of the ilk of if not Ipswich and Wigan, but certainly those who played for the other top 6-8 clubs, seeing as we had so much money to fling around?

Furthermore, today we hear that the likes of some of our out of contract players are expected to re-sign....Matthews, Purrington, Washington, Inniss and JFC are all mentioned in this category by the owner in a Cawley interview. Questions then springs to mind, whos making that decision, Thomas?

It certainly doesnt take into account what a new manager or coach would want within his squad, and then how do we attract new players and who decides without the input of a coach or manager? Its been said that Adkins didnt want certain players we signed, Dobson being one.

Lastly you have to wonder if Jacksons outright reluctance to play the lads from Spurs and Chelsea was because these players were forced upon him? I seem to recall Bowyer refusing to play some of the signings although I cant remember who.

Am I the only person to think that all this is beginning to sound just a little bit bonkers?

Over to you lot to set me right....

Well if we sign the same shit & injury prone players he can expect the same result. Maybe his brilliant son can work this out some time & advise the old man.

RodneyCharltonTrotta

I've come to the conclusion over past 2 years that what is proclaimed by TS and the actual reality are not always necessarily aligned.

Regardless of our individual circumstances now I've always been curious as to how clubs can make such claims about where their budgets sit in a league table of spending power.  Do all chairman get together on Whatsapp in August and share this info with their rivals. Do owners tell agents exactly how much they have to spend and get the info from 23 other clubs?

Of course not (you'd hope not!) so I think it's all speculation and guesswork with very little substance or real knowledge.


Also not sure why you would declare it publicly and show the market and agents your hand beyond a show of bravado because surely it just hikes up prices in negotiations a'la the Peter Ridsdale school of player deals.


If we had the 3rd highest budget last season and ended up with the inadequate and pathetic squad of players that got Jackson booted then serious questions need to be asked about the piss poor recruitment strategy and execution.

Still we're in safe hands now with his son and Gallen running things on the recruitment front so I expect it to all magically turn around this next few weeks despite being manager less and having a potential exodus of contractless players and returning loanees.

Redhenry

shirty5 said:

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

The only was to do that is in prem..

PragueAddick

RodneyCharltonTrotta said:

I've come to the conclusion over past 2 years that what is proclaimed by TS and the actual reality are not always necessarily aligned.

Regardless of our individual circumstances now I've always been curious as to how clubs can make such claims about where their budgets sit in a league table of spending power.  Do all chairman get together on Whatsapp in August and share this info with their rivals. Do owners tell agents exactly how much they have to spend and get the info from 23 other clubs?

Of course not (you'd hope not!) so I think it's all speculation and guesswork with very little substance or real knowledge.


Also not sure why you would declare it publicly and show the market and agents your hand beyond a show of bravado because surely it just hikes up prices in negotiations a'la the Peter Ridsdale school of player deals.


If we had the 3rd highest budget last season and ended up with the inadequate and pathetic squad of players that got Jackson booted then serious questions need to be asked about the piss poor recruitment strategy and execution.

Still we're in safe hands now with his son and Gallen running things on the recruitment front so I expect it to all magically turn around this next few weeks despite being manager less and having a potential exodus of contractless players and returning loanees.

Actually the information very much exists and is shared. The EFL collects the data from each club and shares it wth all the other clubs in that division. “It” being the playing staff wage bill, so somewhat more detailed than what is in the public accounts of each club, and it is provided more quickly too. The idea is that it might encourage clubs to budget realistically. Club owners actively support the initiative, otherwise it would  not happen.

The only reason I know this is thanks to Erik Samuelson the former CEO of AFC Wimbledon when I went to talk to him for a CAST exercise. i wrote it up for an article on their website. He let me see  the actual table in his laptop for a nano-second, but in line with protocol, told me nothing more about the data there ( we were a division higher at the time anyway). He did explain how they used it. They budgeted to come out 4th bottom in the wage bill and told the manager that any finish above that position therefore constituted success.

Of course, big clubs coming down to a given league could upset the figures at the very top, but TS would still have had a very good idea where his budget places us in the league overall.

RodneyCharltonTrotta

Thanks Prague, that's very insightful and I stand corrected.

Callumcafc

I very much believe we are near the top of the spending charts. Problem has been spending it on the likes of Watson and Gunter.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we don’t spend as much money on their replacements and we drop further down the spending table. Hopefully cutting the wage bill will open up more money for transfer fees.

Not saying we haven’t spent money because we have. But to get promoted, it’s going to take more…

killerandflash

Barry Bannon's wages alone would pay for much of our squad!

MuttleyCAFC

We have got some high wage earners who were contributing little or nothing off the wage bill.

Lincsaddick

@TEL makes a lot of sense .. Sandy installing his son into the decision making set up is a big worry for me as is the claim that Sandy Snr is having a big say on retained players, seemingly before the new manager (whoever he may be) has an opinion .. perhaps the intention is to appoint a 'senior coach' who will be subservient to the Sandys when it comes to player retention, selection and tactics.
Whilst I can understand Sandy wanting to know what's always going on at CAFC (is that why his son is in a powerful position?), after all it's his cash being spent.
The fact is that when it comes to English professional football he is really is a naif. He'd do well to appoint quality football professionals to run the playing side of things, and to concentrate on the CAFC finances, running his American company and playing his geetar

shirty5

Redhenry said:

shirty5 said:

Remember he recently said he wants to break even as well 

The only was to do that is in prem..

“So you’ll see a third strategy. I’m going to try and, as soon as possible, of a level of break even while I continue to invest in the club.

“I’m not losing as much money as I did last season. But I’m losing £8m this season, investing, and that obviously can’t continue for a whole lot longer.