So who are our new owners then? Board looking for new investors p14

.

The Red Robin said:

They haven’t got any money have they. Again. 

All been spent on Rodwell's grooming products.

My view is that the owners agreed among themselves as to how much they would put in and don't want to or just won't go much above that.

A £13m pa loss means that the three big owners, who I was led to believe own 23% each,  cough up just under £3m per year each.

They are rich men but that is still a lot of money especially as they have said that they weren't planning on being promoted last year and they were also "promised" increased commercial income and reduced losses by Methven.

In that context, it makes sense that they are looking for more investors.  What we don't know if any new money is to increase the budget or to spread the cost of the existing budget/losses?   It does seem that both the £20m figure is false, and that always seemed to be a guess by Matt Slater, and that Cal McNair is not involved.

Those £13m losses are despite increased central income, increased ticket sales and increased commercial income.

What hasn't helped is that a lot of spend on players, fees and wages, haven't brought much of a return.  Adhame was £800k and is now back in league 1.   We've seen two more "big money" signings in Tanto and Apter depart and IMHO unless we go down or NJ leaves, I don't thing we'll see them playing for us again.  Kelman has had injuries but hasn't set the world alight either.

But we have made good signings but often the successes have been under the radar.  Ramsay from Harrowgate, Edwards from Scotland, Carey on a free when when fanfare was more about Apter.

Everything that has been said, going back to before Wembley, has been about the club being "sustainable" which to me reads as staying within a set budget and not splashing the cash beyond that.

That doesn't mean the owners are "skint" or "tight" but they're are sticking to a budget.

You could definitely argue that they are being ‘tight’ if they are worth, collectively, billions of dollars but ‘only’ put in £3m a year each. Especially so when our needs in terms of player quality are so acute, and the consequence is very likely to be an avoidable relegation which would set the club back years.

Henry Irving said:

ns9 said:

You could definitely argue that they are being ‘tight’ if they are worth, collectively, billions of dollars but ‘only’ put in £3m a year each. Especially so when our needs in terms of player quality are so acute, and the consequence is a very likely to be an avoidable relegation which would set the club back years.

But our net spend was one of the highest in the division.

That is distorted because other clubs sold players for large fees so while their net spend was lower their total spend was higher.

Some clubs have also had years to build championship squads, we had a few months.

carly burn said:

I'm fine with them having a conservative budget, my issue is that they gave it to the wrong people to spend it.

Or it was just spent badly which is hard to argue against when we're moving on big buys after one window.

But everything is undisclosed. 

I take your point, but the net spend corresponds entirely with the increase in TV money doesn’t it? 

Sword65pf said:

They are rich men but that is still a lot of money especially as they have said that they weren't planning on being promoted last year and they were also "promised" increased commercial income and reduced losses by Methven.

Seems strange that they were so naive if they went only on Methvens spin, considering how successful they have been in business. Surely they would have done their own due diligence? This isn’t a what did or didn’t Methven do for us thing,but to believe a “promise” like that seems a bit absurd.

Yes, I agree that believing what Methven promises is a mistake but maybe that's why he's not still here and why he didn't last long in Jamaica either

ns9 said:

I take your point, but the net spend corresponds entirely with the increase in TV money doesn’t it? 

I think the biggest frustration is that we are owned by a group of incredibly wealthy people who own an asset which operates in a completely bonkers financial environment. It’s laudable that we don’t want to play that game, but at some point not stretching the purse strings is very likely to result in a relegation because the environment is so competitive. If we don’t want to compete properly, then we will go down (which, in itself, is a very costly exercise).

This January is a chance to react to the perilous on-field position we find ourselves in, and there really doesn’t seem to be much forthcoming to improve the team. As an example, we replaced a League One winger (Apter) who hasn’t been playing with a League One winger who hasn’t been playing (Fevrier). It hardly screams any sort of ambition.

And we’ve just been smashed by Millwall, which doesn’t help at all. So I completely understand the frustration from fans, and how seemingly many people have the impression that we are sleepwalking back to League One.

I'm as frustrated as anyone by Saturday and how we've slid down the table.

But the owners don't, rightly, pick the signings. They do however cover the costs of the signings, the good and the bad.

My point is that I believe they have a budget and are sticking with it although since Cody, Dykes, Clarke and Chambers will all be on decent wages, probably at the top end or above what we pay, plus there will be loan fees, maybe the purse strings have been loosened 

What we haven't done, so far, is sell anyone.

Fanny Fanackapan said:

Rather than just listen to basically one main "adviser" wouldn't it have been more sensible for the owners to speak with those who have experience of our unique club , especially during the years leading up to the Prem and during that successful era ? 

Maybe it's not too late ....

Budgeting, ticket costs, commercial as well as the playing/management side of things come to mind but I'm certain there are others where good advice would have proved invaluable. 

Several names come into my old head with Peter Varney top of that list and a certain poster on here...Been there, done it, got the shirt ....

They just might be still listening to the wrong people/person.

Hex said:

The revelation by Gavin Carter (to me, anyway) that we have the 3rd lowest football budget in the Championship was an admission that relegation was likely and the owners were not willing to fund a realistic chance of survival.  That they expected to over perform the budget was merely an attempt at a sticking plaster.

I expected us to have by far the lowest Football budget to be fair

It’s the commercial income they need to work on. Wrexham have absolutely nailed that - yes, their Hollywood owners help, but still - they make an absolute fortune. 

Not sure if this has been covered, but for me the directors Q&A last week worried me.

I thought Gavin Carter looked a bit like a 'rabbit in the headlights'. Public speaking may not be his speciality but as the Chairman of a significant sporting business I would expect him (as a very successful business owner in his own right) to have significantly more confidence and leadership than what he showed, it almost was like he did'nt believe what he was saying himself.

 It looked like weak leadership and that worried me. I'm sure things are not going swimmingly behind the scenes.

However... Roderick can bullshit for England.

 Hope I'm wrong. 

Wanting to become London's 4th biggest club and working to a strict (3rd lowest in the division) budget does not compute. That and carter and rodwell saying the owners have been great and given us everything we've asked for - well that doesn't compute either, otherwise we surely would have bought the sort of quality that we needed not to be in a relegation battle.  

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

Is it not true that Championship clubs receive about 12 million?  With the Wembley windfall it doesn't look like they've pushed the boat out. They are all business men and must have their own teams of accountants and forecasters - surely they had a good idea of what they were in for.

'Sustainable' has different values for different people and they are rumoured to be exceedingly rich.  I reckon they could all afford to lose a little more in the pursuit of my happiness.    

Correct and we spent (wasted) pretty much all of that in the summer.