Budget v other League 1 teams

[HPRJohn]

You also have to look at squad sizes (I haven't looked at all BTW). The change to the loan system so that loans can only be made in transfer windows has meant clubs have to have more permanent players on the books. You then have a balancing act of splurge on 11 -14 top quality best available players and hope for no injuries or 18-20 can do a job but not going to set the world alighters... I believe in our case Adams went for the latter but injuries to oscar jervis taylor (and by the look of things on Saturday Luke) as well as suspensions leads to a perfect S**t storm of problems for Adams!

 

[RochdaleGreen]

The problem is that DA has wasted a budget, which I think is probably bigger than for most Third Division teams. We have far too big a squad (even allowing for the need to replace suspended players), which is bound to lead to discontent amongst those getting hardly any game time. Same last season, when he wasted the fans money on players like Nardiello that he had no intention of playing

I've pointed out on another thread that the great Leeds side of late 60's/early 70's got by on about 15 players, who played week in, and week out, in all competitions - Sprake, Reaney, Cooper, Bremner, Charlton, Hunter, Lorimer, Clarke, Jones, Giles and Gray, with Madeley as a utility player who could play in any position if there was an injury. In contrast, DA has no idea whatsoever as to his first choice team.

 

[foreigner]

By the way in answer to the opening post Bury have a massive budget, way bigger than ours.

Okay, this is good. But why? Rich owner presumably?

It is bad- not good.

 

[foreigner]

Either way, its about value for money. Right now, most of teams and their respective manager has used their budget to greater effect. I think Careys delay in decision making has cost us more than we knew at the time, as players such as Lameiras and Ainsworth were signed to help fill the void than didn't need filling. That said, Adams hasn't addressed key areas such as an outfield captain and midfield general. Didn't most posters here spot we were light up top? Plus that was before Taylors injury.

I just don't understand why Carey took so long to make his mind up and why we let him.
How can you plan like that?

 

[foreigner]

The problem is that DA has wasted a budget, which I think is probably bigger than for most Third Division teams. We have far too big a squad (even allowing for the need to replace suspended players), which is bound to lead to discontent amongst those getting hardly any game time. Same last season, when he wasted the fans money on players like Nardiello that he had no intention of playing

I've pointed out on another thread that the great Leeds side of late 60's/early 70's got by on about 15 players, who played week in, and week out, in all competitions - Sprake, Reaney, Cooper, Bremner, Charlton, Hunter, Lorimer, Clarke, Jones, Giles and Gray, with Madeley as a utility player who could play in any position if there was an injury. In contrast, DA has no idea whatsoever as to his first choice team.

I could quote that team off by heart too- my childhood team. You can't really compare like with like, but I take your point.

 

[RochdaleGreen]

The problem is that DA has wasted a budget, which I think is probably bigger than for most Third Division teams. We have far too big a squad (even allowing for the need to replace suspended players), which is bound to lead to discontent amongst those getting hardly any game time. Same last season, when he wasted the fans money on players like Nardiello that he had no intention of playing

I've pointed out on another thread that the great Leeds side of late 60's/early 70's got by on about 15 players, who played week in, and week out, in all competitions - Sprake, Reaney, Cooper, Bremner, Charlton, Hunter, Lorimer, Clarke, Jones, Giles and Gray, with Madeley as a utility player who could play in any position if there was an injury. In contrast, DA has no idea whatsoever as to his first choice team.

I could quote that team off by heart too- my childhood team. You can't really compare like with like, but I take your point.

Thanks Foreigner. Same applies to City - Bell and Lee and Summerbee, and United - Best, Law and Charlton and, dare I say it, Argyle - Mariner, Rafferty and so on. DA needs to get 15 that he is happy with, and ditch the rest in January, with boys filling the rest of the substitute spots

 

[The Doctor]

By the way in answer to the opening post Bury have a massive budget, way bigger than ours.

Okay, this is good. But why? Rich owner presumably?

It is bad- not good.

I meant good as in the kind of info I was hoping to get when I started the thread...

 

[PlymOdi]

It's all guesswork of course but it would be amazing and truly unbelievable for anyone to think we are at the bottom of the league of playing budget.

It would be truly unbelievable given the size of our income in addition to the large unbudgeted windfalls over the last 12-18 months, but unless I'm mistaken that's exactly what Adams has told interviewers and the media, and I'd suggest he knows much more than basically everyone on here.

At the PACSA meeting on Tuesday he said something completely different. He also said he was very happy with the way the club was run.

What was said at the PACSA meeting?

 

[jimsing]

So which ones true? Because that's pretty much a u-turn from what he's broadcasting publicly, or has he been told to 'toe the line' a bit more to deflect some criticism being directed at the way the club is being run. The summer recruitment also screams of a squad built on a shoestring.

I've no idea really, like you, I'm mystified.

All I do know is this board will not extend themselves and none of them have ever said they would spend money we haven't got.

I'd be surprised if anybody actually wants the club to overspend beyond our means, we merely want to see a budget that reflects our standing within the league in terms of attendances and unbudgeted income that comes into the club so that we are on a level playing field with other clubs not fighting with a hand tied behind our backs

But we ARE fighting with one hand tied behind our backs.

Other clubs have had the luxury of already being in the first division, and having had the opportunity of purchasing first division quality players already.

We have had to cope with playing with third division players, supplemented with a few first division players that other clubs didn't want.

Attendances are not the guide to how much a Club can spend. We are all governed by a wage cap, but income can be supplemented by sponsorship deals, corporate hospitality and any outstanding transfer balances owed.

Our extra revenue from FA Cup games and transfer money have gone into the infrastructure of the Club, and not into the playing budget, and you could criticise this decision, but our training pitches were abysmal, almost £1m has been set aside to go towards the new roof, which HAS to be done.

Our other extra income streams have yet to come to fruition so we are not ALL playing on the same playing field, are we?

 

[Rob GT4]

So you actually believe that the club has 'set aside' (your words) 1 million pounds from the clubs budget to build a roof on a grandstand that, if it still goes ahead, will be done in say 3 years time?

Sorry, that's just not believable and there has been no evidence from anywhere or anybody to say that's the case either, the 1m will more than likely be financed if and when it comes to it.

 

[jimsing]

So you actually believe that the club has 'set aside' (your words) 1 million pounds from the clubs budget to build a roof on a grandstand that, if it still goes ahead, will be done in say 3 years time?

Sorry, that's just not believable and there has been no evidence from anywhere or anybody to say that's the case either, the 1m will more than likely be financed if and when it comes to it.

Martin Starnes has said that on examination, the grandstand roof needs to be replaced and a sum of about £900,000 has been set aside, on top of the £5m that is being spent on the grandstand refurbishment.

It is Q4 in the Grandstand Q & A - https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2017/june/grandstand-plans-your-questions-answered/

I think Starnes revealed the sum in a Herald piece. I'll try to find it.

 

[signofthechimes]

The Pompey playing budget is supposedly around £3m for the season (compared to £2.4m last term). This is based on information that was fairly well known earlier in the summer.

We were told that our budget was likely to be below average for the division - though if this is a 'mean' average then that is likely to be skewed by the likes of Blackburn and Wigan who have brought fairly substantial budgets down to L1 with them - three or four times what we can spend using an 'eat what we kill' model.

Aside from those clubs I'm not convinced there is massive disparity between most of the rest - there is some money put in by owners but the real investment of that type seems to happen in the Championship where the potential rewards are so much bigger.

 

[Rob GT4]

So you actually believe that the club has 'set aside' (your words) 1 million pounds from the clubs budget to build a roof on a grandstand that, if it still goes ahead, will be done in say 3 years time?

Sorry, that's just not believable and there has been no evidence from anywhere or anybody to say that's the case either, the 1m will more than likely be financed if and when it comes to it.

Martin Starnes has said that on examination, the grandstand roof needs to be replaced and a sum of about £900,000 has been set aside, on top of the £5m that is being spent on the grandstand refurbishment.

It is Q4 in the Grandstand Q & A - https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2017/june/grandstand-plans-your-questions-answered/

I think Starnes revealed the sum in a Herald piece. I'll try to find it.

The quote you've referenced states:

Q4: Roof: will the pillars holding the roof up be replaced so as to improve sight lines and what will happen to the floodlights? Will the roof be translucent?

A4: The roof and the Grandstand floodlights need to be replaced (the Board has agreed that this will be funded in addition to the £5m budget) but they will be replaced with a similar structure to that which already exists (the roof will be extended to cover the disabled seating-see below). This is consistent with the ambition of retaining the Archibald Leitch shape and impressively is the most efficient structure the engineers could come up with. The further extension of the roof over the lower terrace (Stage 2) will be made from translucent polycarbonate and will be supported by the two corner structures.



I'm fully aware that the board has agreed to finance a roof extension when/if the grandstand is built in years to come, however saying that we will be doing the roof of a grandstand due to be finished in around 3 years time is very different to saying 'our budget this year is 1 million pounds short because we've already put the money aside'.

 

[jimsing]

So you actually believe that the club has 'set aside' (your words) 1 million pounds from the clubs budget to build a roof on a grandstand that, if it still goes ahead, will be done in say 3 years time?

Sorry, that's just not believable and there has been no evidence from anywhere or anybody to say that's the case either, the 1m will more than likely be financed if and when it comes to it.

Martin Starnes has said that on examination, the grandstand roof needs to be replaced and a sum of about £900,000 has been set aside, on top of the £5m that is being spent on the grandstand refurbishment.

It is Q4 in the Grandstand Q & A - https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2017/june/grandstand-plans-your-questions-answered/

I think Starnes revealed the sum in a Herald piece. I'll try to find it.

The quote you've referenced states:

Q4: Roof: will the pillars holding the roof up be replaced so as to improve sight lines and what will happen to the floodlights? Will the roof be translucent?

A4: The roof and the Grandstand floodlights need to be replaced (the Board has agreed that this will be funded in addition to the £5m budget) but they will be replaced with a similar structure to that which already exists (the roof will be extended to cover the disabled seating-see below). This is consistent with the ambition of retaining the Archibald Leitch shape and impressively is the most efficient structure the engineers could come up with. The further extension of the roof over the lower terrace (Stage 2) will be made from translucent polycarbonate and will be supported by the two corner structures.



I'm fully aware that the board has agreed to finance a roof extension when/if the grandstand is built in years to come, however saying that we will be doing the roof of a grandstand due to be finished in around 3 years time is very different to saying 'our budget this year is 1 million pounds short because we've already put the money aside'.

I think you may be misunderstanding things. The new roof was going to be part of phase two, but it requires replacing now, when the grandstand is refurbished. I understand that the works will start at the turn of the year, although I do not know at what stage the roof will be replaced.

The Club will put the money aside now, whilst we have it, regardless of when it will be required to be spent, in order to ensure that it is financed, and that it does not impinge on future income.

The extension of the roof was originally planned for phase two, but I do not know whether that will be included in the replacement in phase 1 or not.

Does that not make sense?

 

[Isondil]

We must have the largest travel budget of any team in the division. That'll detract from the playing budget. I think that's fair, so you could easily knock a fair whack off what we do have.

Do not forget, Argyle do not make revenue from sales of beverages under the stadia. That's contracted to a third party.

Argyle has no conference facilities. Argyle haven't had much income from player sales over the past 8 years either.

There is actually very little other than matchday income Argyle get. The odd bit of cup money. Its rare to get tv money.

If you're going to talk about attendance you need to consider that vurses stadium capacity. Seats cost money whether there is a bum in it or not. So empty seats are a financial drain.

We averaged 9652 per game last season with a capacity of 16388. Operating at approximately 60% capacity.

Bristol Rovers average 9219, of a 12296 capacity. Operating 75%. They should therefore clear a lot more cash at the end of a matchday.

I may do some geekery on it. Would be interesting to see how we compare with other teams but would be a decent indication of matchday income cleared.