A Serious Thread....

......Although i'm not quiet sure, a serious intelligent debate could be carried out on here anymore but i'll give it a bash.

Dundalk players have been asked to take a 25% pay cut, having only brought in new players last month.

Stephen McGuinness where are you? Surely this is breaching licencing agreements? Does anyone even care anymore?

Statement on home page of Dundalks website here - http://www.dundalkfc.com/home.asp

EDIT: Just seen the "things that make you go mmm" thread. Mods feel free to merge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hairy Bowsie

......Although i'm not quiet sure, a serious intelligent debate could be carried out on here

---

Down with this sort of thing!:mad:

A shambles yes, a poor way to treat players yes, an example of poor budgeting yes. Not sure how it 'surely' breaches licencing though?

[QUOTE=Hairy Bowsie;1219493]......Although i'm not quiet sure, a serious intelligent debate could be carried out on here anymore but i'll give it a bash.

Dundalk players have been asked to take a 25% pay cut, having only brought in new players last month.

Stephen McGuinness where are you? Surely this is breaching licencing agreements? Does anyone even care anymore?

Statement on home page of Dundalks website here - http://www.dundalkfc.com/home.asp

Where did you see 25%?? (Reported on Oriel Web as 15%)
Anyway its not in breach of licencing if both parties agree.

The pay cut agreed until rest of season is 15%

Not all players are taking a 15% cut, some are not being deducted at all, its only the big earners

Will this be to keep within the budget, due to tightening finances, or a wage cap thing?

If boneym is right, and it is for one of the first two reasons I have listed, it does actually suggest that the Dundalk Board have their heads on, though signing new players when you have to drop salaries is not the right way to go about it, ensuring that no-one loses their job is, albeit at a cost to the higher earners. I would imagine that Cork City fans would be happy with that situation.

However, if it is being done in order to stay within the wage cap, what on earth are they at with money that they essentially do not have. In my opinion, the wage cap is reasonably generous, and for a small club (in financial terms, I mean), 65% of turnover is more than plenty to spend. Indeed, if anything it is a dangerously high amount in a high risk industry.

Are Dundalk currently full time, and if so, is that changing now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebeard

... Are Dundalk currently full time, and if so, is that changing now?

---

Yes, they are full time this year. I've heard nothing about a change yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebeard

Will this be to keep within the budget, due to tightening finances, or a wage cap thing?

---

Dundalk are well within the 65% protocol - it is directly related to balancing the books and trying to avoid an operating deficit

A further more detailed statement from the board is due this evening or tomorow morning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebeard

Are Dundalk currently full time, and if so, is that changing now?

---

Most players are full time, and the voluntary wage cuts will not mean that their training commitments will be reduced - so no change currently from full time. It doesn't automatically follow that lower wages will mean part time players next season either - although the majority of the players only have contracts to November anyway.

the club is well under the 65% rule, as someone posted on another thread they lost money on the Athletico Madrid game and then put all their eggs in the one basket re the Barcelona game. Their was also one player sponsored by a business man who has since renaged on his agreement. The players at the time were signed in good faith but now the club wants to try and reduce the losses that they will incur for the current season.

How can you be under the 65% for the year and making a loss?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by micls

How can you be under the 65% for the year and making a loss?

---

By having your other expenses exceed 35% of your income.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

By having your other expenses exceed 35% of your income.

---

Good point :o

Does this seem very high to anyone else though? What other expenses do ye have that are costing this much? The pitches are making ye money aren't they? And the bar?

the 65% rule is for players only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boneym

the 65% rule is for players only

---

I thought it included backroom staff too? i.e manager etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by micls

I thought it included backroom staff too? i.e manager etc

---

No, it just players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by micls

I thought it included backroom staff too? i.e manager etc

---

No - but I understand that this is the FAI intention for next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

No - but I understand that this is the FAI intention for next season.

---

Ok.

Seems a bit ridiculous that they arent included, how amny players are down as being paid for being a coach or something like

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by micls

Ok.

Seems a bit ridiculous that they arent included, how amny players are down as being paid for being a coach or something like

---

Or barmen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by micls

Ok.

Seems a bit ridiculous that they arent included, how amny players are down as being paid for being a coach or something like

---

I don't know of any apart from Rossiter at Bohs.

If you are asking specifically about Dundalk - definately zero. At a fans forum in earlier in the season the weekly players wage bill, excluding management was confirmed at €12,500. The wage bill has not increased significantly since then.

From memory the percentage of players wages against projected revenue was estimated then at being circa 55%. Complaince with the 65% rule is not the issue at Dundalk - not having an operating deficit is.