Printable View
Surely there is really two seperate, if related, issues here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalymountrower
Medium and long term it's about getting financial stability and trying to make the club viable - obviously there is a lot of factors that influence this, not least of which is the Danniger / Albion issue.
Short term, it's about getting under the 65% cap, to avoid the stated sanction of relegation. How can Bohs achieve this?
Yes, they are seperate issues, financial re-strucuring wil be needed to deal with both short and medium term issues. I would be confident enough that the 65 % cap can be sorted out this year, but for succeding years capital will be required through realising a sale of the ground. If this hasn`t been sorted by 2012 NAMA or the IMF will be running the club!
I can't keep up with all these Bohs hoolie firms. Last I remember the BSS were getting vored and the BSC were getting old... Now these NAMA and IMF crowds are in?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalymountrower
How?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalymountrower
Increasing revenue - how can this be done?
Reducing costs - how can this be done, other then hope Uk clubs are interested in players?
From the club statement in that article in the Independent -Am I wrong in translating this to mean that if things don't improve, Bohs will just say that the value of a certain asset has increased - an increase with no basis in reality, and done just to make the books look better?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezeikial
Will League of Ireland clubs ever take the steps Norway did in the 70'-80's like developing infrastructure or do they feel the boat has been missed?
The boat was sold to pay wages.Quote:
Originally Posted by irishultra
Hope for an historic champions league run to increase revenue and accept any bids for the top earners at the club nothing else they can do in the short term .Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezeikial
In the short to medium term the boat has sailed. No Premier division club has developed infrastructure before players. Don't know how they funded in Norway but Irish government funding will be limited in the coming years...Quote:
Originally Posted by irishultra
Not picking on Drogs or Shels (I sure we would have done the same if had money) but for the money they spent on players they would nearly have built new stadiums.
:):):)
NAMA are the new firm oke - Need Anger Management Advice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
This is from a Dave McWilliams article a good few years back now, just before Shelbournes run in Champions League.
Quote:
There was no advertising of the game, no sponsorship, no clubs, and, more egregiously, the FAI reacted to falling gates by putting its head in the sand and ignoring its own market. Contrast this with what was happening in the face of the similar marketing domination of English clubs, in countries like Norway.
The Norwegians, who had a smaller fan base than us, responded to the blanket coverage of English football by increasing the local interest with advertising campaigns, match-related giveaways and a well-orchestrated marketing campaign in the print, on local radio and on national TV.
Smaller stadia in Oslo were upgraded at a time when the owners of Shamrock Rovers were selling Milltown to property developers. As a result, the Norwegian league has a top side in Rosenborg. It regularly qualifies for the Champions League, reinforcing both the financial and psychological virtuous cycle.
A few bits on Norwegian football:
Population of Norway: 4.8m
Wikipedia has a list of average attendances for the Tippeligaen over the last twenty years. Unfortunately, there's no source for it so I don't know how reliable it is.
The Tippeligaen had 12 teams who played each other twice between 1985 and 1994 (132 games a season for ten seasons). It went up to 14 teams who played each other twice in 1995 (182 for 14 seasons) and then went to 16 teams who play each other twice for this season (240).
In recent years, the LOI has jumped between 198 games a season and 180. The changes I can remember are this year (12 down to ten) and 2005 (ten up to 12).
The differences in how the league is organised (more teams, less repetitiveness) and how infrequently it's changed could possibly be one part of it's success.
I've always said infrastructure is the key. Even if the quality of play is not great comfortable surroundings can make up for it. Bigger crowds make average players play better too. Infrastructure is still terrible in this country & will take decades to improve - mainly I think because so difficult to build anything.
Mainly because clubs have no money.
A decent stand will now cost €3million to build.
True but the Drogs stadium was 10m or so on green field site. Across all sports there have few if any greenfield sites. Croke Park & Lansdowne would not have got planning in greenfield site. Somehow planning restrictions (e.g. parking) are very restrictive for stadiums yet huge concerts are allowed in basically the middle of nowhere (Slane) with few restrictions. Not saying concerts should have happen just the different rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
The differences in how the league is organised (more teams, less repetitiveness) and how infrequently it's changed could possibly be one part of it's success.[/quote]
Good comparison, plus with less league games per team there wouldn't be any need these stupid midweek games and you would have plenty of time for the FAI Cup and League Cup, who says we should play 30+ league games per year, is it because thats what they do it in England and Scotland? We Irish really have to realise we're not Brittish and stop thring to copy them.
Surely if clubs stopped spunking away more money than they earn on wages and put half the money in a pot some where they would soon have the finances to build stands/infrustuctureQuote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Not really. Wages might be high, but the savings on them wouldn't buld a ground...Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
To be fair to Shels (and regular readers know how much it pains me to ay that...)
They did re-develop Tolka to a point, and certainly at one stage they had transformed the place. Let it slide somewhat but initally they had developped the ground
Only thing with the Tippeligaen - and Norwegian football in general - up until a few years ago (when the TV deal with Canal+ was signed to give the Tippeligaen more coverage) - teams other than Rosenborg (who had the luxury of spending the cash gotten from the Champions League campaigns) had to sell their best players abroad (mostly to England) to survive.
Last season Lyn nearly had their license revoked (which would have meant automatic relegation) thanks to the whole Obi Mikel mess - they only survived thanks to an investor coming in and the banks helping out with loans - in fact, they're having to reduce their loan draw down from the banks by 10% (some €3 million) thanks to the recession.
I'd settle for reaching the point where the losses on wages wouldn't cost a ground.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge