|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 9:17:45 GMT
can anyone tell me what is stokes long term plan because im not buying all this self supporting football club idea where a chairman doesn't support it financially.stoke city made a total of 71m up from 68m the year before the wage bill is 53m up from 47m the year before of our income so over all we made a net debt of 14m loss before tax was 10m..every year good quality players cost more and more there wages go higher and higher we only get gates receipts of 8m a year retail and merchandising came in at 3m..so to keep up with inflation of players values and wages demands weres the money going come from to forefil this crazy idea a club with 27.5 thousands fans can compete with out financial backing of a chairman .it simple cant unless u find a garth bale playing up hanley park every couple of years u sell for 80m and thats the unrealistic dream peter coats has and tony pulis was dead against .to own a premiership club you need be a billionaire times over and prepared to spend a millions and millions on making ur team the best u can and not worry u lose 100m or 200m here or there ..every top club in every european league except the odd few is the club who has the deepest pockets with the richest owners who buy the best players off everyone else the gap between the top clubs in the prem and the likes of us is growing wider and wider .u can say we dont have a massive debt like the likes of man city n chelsea but so what in theory they dont as well man city have a owner worth 20.000m so if man city has a debt of 58m and a loss of 198m thats like u having 20k in the bank and owing the milk man 200 quid in theory ur in debt but its easy payable anytime u choose .peter coats when interviewed said football is about buying n selling players ( something pulis didnt do) in fact its not about buying n selling players its about buying players getting the best years out of them and getting rid when they cant compete at a high level anymore..football is all about who has the most money and buys the best player to try make stoke self running on owe low investments would mean we will always be a small club fighting to stay in the league the fact we would have to sell players like bego to the likes of liverpool and others tells u we will always be a small club untill we have a chairman who can afford to own a club whos prepared to buy the best players and keep ur best players..
|
|
|
|
Post by Bick on Jun 4, 2013 9:22:32 GMT
You're not buying it?
Best tell Dortmund, they're obviously barking up the wrong tree.
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jun 4, 2013 9:28:20 GMT
I think you should be able to.
As Coates said at the press conference, there's no excuse not to be able to break even when you're buried in this much cash.
Clubs have go to stand together on wages to ensure it's possible.
TV money seems to be going up from around £43m-a-season to around £70m-a-season for mid-ranking teams, meaning Stoke's turnover should rise from high £60ms to mid-£90ms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 9:38:53 GMT
I think you should be able to. As Coates said at the press conference, there's no excuse not to be able to break even when you're buried in this much cash. Clubs have go to stand together on wages to ensure it's possible. TV money seems to be going up from around £43m-a-season to around £70m-a-season for mid-ranking teams, meaning Stoke's turnover should rise from high £60ms to mid-£90ms. How on earth could anyone make that business model break even? Its impossible. Best put the ticket prices up to help fund the deficit..... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 10:34:38 GMT
can anyone tell me what is stokes long term plan because im not buying all this self supporting football club idea where a chairman doesn't support it financially.stoke city made a total of 71m up from 68m the year before the wage bill is 53m up from 47m the year before of our income so over all we made a net debt of 14m loss before tax was 10m..every year good quality players cost more and more there wages go higher and higher we only get gates receipts of 8m a year retail and merchandising came in at 3m..so to keep up with inflation of players values and wages demands weres the money going come from to forefil this crazy idea a club with 27.5 thousands fans can compete with out financial backing of a chairman .it simple cant unless u find a garth bale playing up hanley park every couple of years u sell for 80m and thats the unrealistic dream peter coats has and tony pulis was dead against .to own a premiership club you need be a billionaire times over and prepared to spend a millions and millions on making ur team the best u can and not worry u lose 100m or 200m here or there ..every top club in every european league except the odd few is the club who has the deepest pockets with the richest owners who buy the best players off everyone else the gap between the top clubs in the prem and the likes of us is growing wider and wider .u can say we dont have a massive debt like the likes of man city n chelsea but so what in theory they dont as well man city have a owner worth 20.000m so if man city has a debt of 58m and a loss of 198m thats like u having 20k in the bank and owing the milk man 200 quid in theory ur in debt but its easy payable anytime u choose .peter coats when interviewed said football is about buying n selling players ( something pulis didnt do) in fact its not about buying n selling players its about buying players getting the best years out of them and getting rid when they cant compete at a high level anymore..football is all about who has the most money and buys the best player to try make stoke self running on owe low investments would mean we will always be a small club fighting to stay in the league the fact we would have to sell players like bego to the likes of liverpool and others tells u we will always be a small club untill we have a chairman who can afford to own a club whos prepared to buy the best players and keep ur best players..  |
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jun 4, 2013 10:40:11 GMT
I wouldn't worry about it banjoelvis, it's not your problem, it's PC's, and he's got loads of dosh thank goodness. Stoke won't go bust!
|
|
|
|
Post by liathroid on Jun 4, 2013 10:42:03 GMT
You're not buying it? Best tell Dortmund, they're obviously barking up the wrong tree. Dortmund were up shit creek without a paddle not so long ago and Bayern gave them a loan and as they say the rest is history  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 10:42:58 GMT
and are not bayern buying dortmunds best player
|
|
|
|
Post by liathroid on Jun 4, 2013 10:46:05 GMT
and are not bayern buying dortmunds best player players |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 10:48:37 GMT
point proven who has the most cash wins
|
|
|
|
Post by MuddyWoody on Jun 4, 2013 10:51:06 GMT
can anyone tell me what is stokes long term plan because im not buying all this self supporting football club idea where a chairman doesn't support it financially.stoke city made a total of 71m up from 68m the year before the wage bill is 53m up from 47m the year before of our income so over all we made a net debt of 14m loss before tax was 10m..every year good quality players cost more and more there wages go higher and higher we only get gates receipts of 8m a year retail and merchandising came in at 3m..so to keep up with inflation of players values and wages demands weres the money going come from to forefil this crazy idea a club with 27.5 thousands fans can compete with out financial backing of a chairman .it simple cant unless u find a garth bale playing up hanley park every couple of years u sell for 80m and thats the unrealistic dream peter coats has and tony pulis was dead against .to own a premiership club you need be a billionaire times over and prepared to spend a millions and millions on making ur team the best u can and not worry u lose 100m or 200m here or there ..every top club in every european league except the odd few is the club who has the deepest pockets with the richest owners who buy the best players off everyone else the gap between the top clubs in the prem and the likes of us is growing wider and wider .u can say we dont have a massive debt like the likes of man city n chelsea but so what in theory they dont as well man city have a owner worth 20.000m so if man city has a debt of 58m and a loss of 198m thats like u having 20k in the bank and owing the milk man 200 quid in theory ur in debt but its easy payable anytime u choose .peter coats when interviewed said football is about buying n selling players ( something pulis didnt do) in fact its not about buying n selling players its about buying players getting the best years out of them and getting rid when they cant compete at a high level anymore..football is all about who has the most money and buys the best player to try make stoke self running on owe low investments would mean we will always be a small club fighting to stay in the league the fact we would have to sell players like bego to the likes of liverpool and others tells u we will always be a small club untill we have a chairman who can afford to own a club whos prepared to buy the best players and keep ur best players.. Paragraphs are for pussys. |
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Jun 4, 2013 10:55:39 GMT
point proven who has the most cash wins Coates doesn't have the most cash so what IS your point ??? Our plan is to become a long term top flight team. Sustainable within itself without need for constant outside support. |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jun 4, 2013 11:00:04 GMT
point proven who has the most cash wins That's always going to be the case though, isn't it? The 2 Manchesters, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea are all up there at £100m+ wage budgets and operate in a different financial stratosphere. And Spurs aren't far behind. Everyone else is miles behind and acknowledge they're at a different level - and seem to be looking to economise if anything. Even Everton have a wage bill far more comparable to Stoke than the big boys. This new TV deal must surely give 13-14 teams in the Premier League a chance to be self-sustainable if they play their cards right? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 11:05:36 GMT
the point is it cant be sustainable ..unless we bring in players for nothing pay them shit wages and sell everyone who eats up 75% our of income on the wage budget ..football clubs dont make money if u cant afford loose millions u shouldn't own 1 ..coats moaning about spending 85m of his own cash ..he brought it for 15m its now worth 150-170m on the market and its generated nearly 300m since we became in the prem if he sold it now he would double the investment he spent ..its a fantasy u thinking that a club with our fan base can generate funds to compete with top prem clubs ..unless we have 5 Garth bales playing up hanley park and no big club wants sign them
|
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Jun 4, 2013 11:18:22 GMT
With all due respect your talking out of your arse. We've been recently Valued at around 90 Mill so Coates is at a rough break even mark.
We only need to sell players if we want to invest in expensive players ourselves. Remove the Crouch/palacios deal and we've broke even over the last few seasons without selling anybody.
The only thing that isn't sustainable without a sugar daddy is trying to break into the top 6.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jun 4, 2013 11:20:50 GMT
the point is it cant be sustainable ..unless we bring in players for nothing pay them shit wages and sell everyone who eats up 75% our of income on the wage budget ..football clubs dont make money if u cant afford loose millions u shouldn't own 1 ..coats moaning about spending 85m of his own cash ..he brought it for 15m its now worth 150-170m on the market and its generated nearly 300m since we became in the prem if he sold it now he would double the investment he spent ..its a fantasy u thinking that a club with our fan base can generate funds to compete with top prem clubs ..unless we have 5 Garth bales playing up hanley park and no big club wants sign them One of, perhaps the main reason, for our losses, is that since our arrival in the Prem we have failed to make significant profits on any of our players. Buying players like Crouch and Palacios for £16 million when they will have little or no resale value a year or so from end of their contracts, was always likely to be very much a short term option. Buying younger players who will have resale value and produce a profit some years down the line should be more sustainable. That isn't to say we should sell all our best players - and Coates has said this week that we don't HAVE to sell Bego. But, we do need to get ourselves to the point where we have a greater number of players in the squad who we could sell at a profit if we needed to. Having the third highest NET spend on players of the clubs in the Prem is plain daft for a club of our resources. Plenty of clubs in our peer group have sold players at a profit and it is about time we did the same. If we can, then there is no reason why, with the new TV deals, we can't run at break even or better. The other thing to remember is that buying and developing Clayton Wood has added to our losses in recent years. Once that development comes to and end the losses will decrease to the point where the TV money should more than cover them. |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jun 4, 2013 11:21:42 GMT
They seem to want collectively to ensure that not too much of the TV booty ends up with the players. Wage bill restrictionsClubs whose total wage bill is more than £52m will only be allowed to increase their salaries by an accumulative £4m per season for each of the next three years (2013-14: £4m, 2014-15: £8m, 2015-16: £12m). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 11:27:07 GMT
remove the crouch and palacios deal ok lets do that so that season we had brought no1 and broke even? ..ur words so as club in the premiership u would be happy buy no players to break even? we nearly went down last season because we didnt invest in players we needed and according to you a club that makes 70m a year is only worth 1 years income ????think about it u fool : 13th in league, £71m (up from £68m in 2011)Gate Receipts: £8m
Sponsorship and advertising: £6m TV and media: £46m Conferencing and hospitality: £3m Wage bill: 14th, £53m (up from £47m Wages as proportion of turnover: 75% Loss before tax: £10m (following £6m loss in 2011 Net debt: £14m thats with out spending money on players that is what our club brings in with out spending money on player no u tell me how u can turn that around with buying players and plugging a 14m loss
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jun 4, 2013 11:30:54 GMT
remove the crouch and palacios deal ok lets do that so that season we had brought no1 and broke even? ..ur words so as club in the premiership u would be happy buy no players to break even? we nearly went down last season because we didnt invest in players we needed and according to you a club that makes 70m a year is only worth 1 years income ????think about it u fool : 13th in league, £71m (up from £68m in 2011)Gate Receipts: £8m Sponsorship and advertising: £6m TV and media: £46m Conferencing and hospitality: £3m Wage bill: 14th, £53m (up from £47m Wages as proportion of turnover: 75% Loss before tax: £10m (following £6m loss in 2011 Net debt: £14m thats with out spending money on players that is what our club brings in with out spending money on player no u tell me how u can turn that around with buying players and plugging a 14m loss Any chance of an English translation? Cheers. I think FM has pretty much explained what will happen. If our income increases by, say, £20 million with the new deal and our wage bill can only increase by £4 million under the new financial fair play rules then that makes breaking even very attainable. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 11:56:20 GMT
if we dont buy any1 and just own a ground and car park with no players brought and playing for free we paying 75% of our income on the shit players we have now so to improve the players so will the wages and signing fee and transfer fee for the players..and didnt coats try all this b4 hence everyone at the vic screaming coats out game after game and getting us relegated ..and ur forgetting we was 2 wins away from been sent down this season because of lack of investments in players trying balance the books .its not about surviving its about competing
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jun 4, 2013 12:07:54 GMT
if we dont buy any1 and just own a ground and car park with no players brought and playing for free we paying 75% of our income on the shit players we have now so to improve the players so will the wages and signing fee and transfer fee for the players..and didnt coats try all this b4 hence everyone at the vic screaming coats out game after game and getting us relegated ..and ur forgetting we was 2 wins away from been sent down this season because of lack of investments in players trying balance the books .its not about surviving its about competing Has anyone on this thread (apart from you) suggested that we shouldn't buy anyone? |
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Jun 4, 2013 12:07:56 GMT
the point of your post is what exactly coates has invested to make us competitive but cannot compete with the exaggerated spending of multibillionare chairmen and global brands. therefore is now after the initial inventment trying to establise stability while the new fair play rules are established.to be honest if you not happy with the way hes doing it create a global brand start too earn millions and buy the club off his family then use all your money too attempt too usurp the elite clubs . or just fodtv
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 12:10:27 GMT
if we dont buy any1 and just own a ground and car park with no players brought and playing for free we paying 75% of our income on the shit players we have now so to improve the players so will the wages and signing fee and transfer fee for the players..and didnt coats try all this b4 hence everyone at the vic screaming coats out game after game and getting us relegated ..and ur forgetting we was 2 wins away from been sent down this season because of lack of investments in players trying balance the books .its not about surviving its about competing I'm sure Portsmouth fans would have something to say about your last comment. It's about having a sustainable football club that will be there for generations to come. If that means relegation at some point down the line so be it....... |
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Jun 4, 2013 12:13:41 GMT
remove the crouch and palacios deal ok lets do that so that season we had brought no1 and broke even? ..ur words so as club in the premiership u would be happy buy no players to break even? we nearly went down last season because we didnt invest in players we needed and according to you a club that makes 70m a year is only worth 1 years income ????think about it u fool : 13th in league, £71m (up from £68m in 2011)Gate Receipts: £8m Sponsorship and advertising: £6m TV and media: £46m Conferencing and hospitality: £3m Wage bill: 14th, £53m (up from £47m Wages as proportion of turnover: 75% Loss before tax: £10m (following £6m loss in 2011 Net debt: £14m thats with out spending money on players that is what our club brings in with out spending money on player no u tell me how u can turn that around with buying players and plugging a 14m loss You can't look at income to value a business. You look at assets, NET profits, branding. Coates hasn't said we'll stop spending, but there'll be no more 10 Mill 30yr old signings. It's a waste that only clubs with money to burn can afford. Or as a 1 off for the right player. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 12:20:26 GMT
competitive? we wasn't competing we was surviving and still lost 14m and if we had not won them 2 games in the last 6 of our games you would of been screaming for his head because he didn't invest in the transfer window..to own a premiership club ur got be a billionaire who wants spend and throw away vasts amount of money to make a club u love into a top team..who went watch stoke play chelsea when they only had 12000 at home and man city with a gate of 8000 ..the only difference between what they did and what we did is that some chairman took on the club and threw money at it not worrying if hes going loose a few quid and with that they got better player..better fan base and won things and are now globally known threw out the world ..football is all about money and been prepared to loose money and as for the new direction of buying young players and selling them on for huge money crewe have been doing that for years and look at them ..every top clubs in every European league is the richest thats a fact
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 12:26:09 GMT
competitive? we wasn't competing we was surviving and still lost 14m and if we had not won them 2 games in the last 6 of our games you would of been screaming for his head because he didn't invest in the transfer window..to own a premiership club ur got be a billionaire who wants spend and throw away vasts amount of money to make a club u love into a top team..who went watch stoke play chelsea when they only had 12000 at home and man city with a gate of 8000 ..the only difference between what they did and what we did is that some chairman took on the club and threw money at it not worrying if hes going loose a few quid and with that they got better player..better fan base and won things and are now globally known threw out the world ..football is all about money and been prepared to loose money and as for the new direction of buying young players and selling them on for huge money crewe have been doing that for years and look at them ..every top clubs in every European league is the richest thats a fact So what exactly is your point? That we should just adopt a spend spend spend approach and to hell with the consequences? |
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Jun 4, 2013 12:26:21 GMT
But we aren't a top club and obviously don't aspire to be.
Can't be arsed go into this any further, banging head against a wall stuff this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 12:29:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Jun 4, 2013 12:32:03 GMT
remove the crouch and palacios deal ok lets do that so that season we had brought no1 and broke even? ..ur words so as club in the premiership u would be happy buy no players to break even? we nearly went down last season because we didnt invest in players we needed and according to you a club that makes 70m a year is only worth 1 years income ????think about it u fool : 13th in league, £71m (up from £68m in 2011)Gate Receipts: £8m Sponsorship and advertising: £6m TV and media: £46m Conferencing and hospitality: £3m Wage bill: 14th, £53m (up from £47m Wages as proportion of turnover: 75% Loss before tax: £10m (following £6m loss in 2011 Net debt: £14m thats with out spending money on players that is what our club brings in with out spending money on player no u tell me how u can turn that around with buying players and plugging a 14m loss Any chance of an English translation? Cheers. I think FM has pretty much explained what will happen. If our income increases by, say, £20 million with the new deal and our wage bill can only increase by £4 million under the new financial fair play rules then that makes breaking even very attainable. I agree with banjoelvis on this and no need for an English translation for me though a Cumbrian one would be very useful(as always)? It is clear Peter Coates has decided to tighten the purse strings(I heard an interview with him the other day). Stoke's wage bill has always been middle table not top three(unlike transfers). So, the previous manager wasn't profligate on wages. In fact, as several players are leaving the club this summer e.g. Delap, Sidibe, Owen, Pennant the wages situation is much, much stronger! So, we have a great leeway on the wages front but we need to replenish the staff with first team players and squad players as the U21s unlike the U15s are not strong. So, a strategy of buying younger players with resale value is better. Providing we don't get a manager in who buys players with the sort of resale value of Cisse, Zamora, Johnson and many of the other 16 players acquired in just two transfer windows! If fans think TP wasted money he isn't in the same league as Mark Hughes! In fact, Stoke have Shawcross, Begovic, Whelan, N'Zonzi, Huth(possibly), Shotton, Wilkinson, Walters and Wilson would all go for more money than we bought them for. Indeed, several are home grown players. I thought TP should go but to criticise his transfer dealings when the Coates family have decided to stop putting in as much money is shabby. Probably, the reason no more money is going in is because as major shareholders and owners of the 'The Brit' and Claytonwood every single penny they have invested will be covered by player sales and parachute payments plus if desired the sale of the club. The reason they aren't putting in extra funds is because any increase in parachute payments, sale of players, sale of the Club wouldn't cover it! They know exactly what they are doing as business people and banjoelvis has called it right! |
|
SCFC1863
Youth Player
Best Championship Team in the Midlands
Posts: 414
|
Post by SCFC1863 on Jun 5, 2013 10:04:30 GMT
Am I not right in saying then if 75% of our income goes on wages etc then out of the £80m this year we will be left with roughly 20m to spend?
If that is the case then I'm sure I'm right in saying we have never spent much more that 20m in a season since being in the premiership have we?
Taking in to account that although we haven't got too many players with a high resale value, we still have some players with a good resale value - although I wouldn't want these to leave - Huth, Begovic, Shawcross, N'Zonzi. I think that someone valuing the club would look at the figures, assets etc and think it is a viable option to make the club self-financing.
|
|
