2024 Season, Arrivals and Departures

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Another Bohemia

You realise you decry relying on European prize money then saying league prize money increase being a solution makes no sense?

Sure increasing the prize money is necessary in my opinion but I think it's somewhat like the first time buyers scheme with houses. It just makes everything within the league more expensive rather than actually solving any problems. Clubs need to look at their own merchandising and maximising that revenue. Increasing season ticket sales and looking to add more to the match day experience than just a 90 min game (better food/coffee options, club bars, entertainment before & after games to keep people on site & spending money in the club) better facilities ties into this. I also think there's a huge area of growth in social media. You look at some of these influencers online who put out some of the most banal and pointless content but make a comfortable living from it. There's certainly money to be made from a league and club level for that.

TL,DR Clubs need to be financially stable regardless of any prize money (domestic or international) to really push on because as we've seen in this league all to often you can win the league one year and in a few years be relegated.

---

I agree clubs should be doing all in their power to be financially stable. However the discussion is about things already getting more expensive, in that fees are being paid where they wouldn't have been before.

And the point about European prize money is that it's concentrated in a few clubs hands, clubs likely already having significant resources, (ok there are solidarity payments), and it's not stable or in any way guaranteed (difference between going out in Q1 vs getting to GS). But realistically this is going to be the main source of outside income that's going to drive domestic transfer fees for the foreseeable.

Meanwhile domestic prize monies are still at level where fees and fines can exceed prize money. I'm not suggesting that clubs should be able to operate based solely on income from the FAI, but that, at a bare minimum, no club should be incurring losses to the association just for competing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Another Bohemia

I think due to the nature of the grounds here it's probably a bit harder to ensure non match day income. Pat's and Shels own their ground (actually unsure about whether Shels completed that purchase) but both grounds have very limited scope for growth from what I can see. They could add a coffee shop or pub/restaurant on site possibly but plenty of these ventures have been failing lately and it's not just because of unpopularity if them but the costs of running them. I don't know if any ground that would be owned by the club and have space for a hotel but open to correction on that.

---

Agree with that, though it is a limiting factor for LoI clubs. Bray have a car park I know. Do other clubs have non matchday income? Are the Bohs/Shels bars open outside of match nights for example?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Agree with that, though it is a limiting factor for LoI clubs. Bray have a car park I know. Do other clubs have non matchday income? Are the Bohs/Shels bars open outside of match nights for example?

---

Bohs open the bars for big events usually, Irish qualifiers on occasion, finals of big tournaments but you are competing against a lot of very nice pubs in the phibsboro/stoneybatter area so it's usually just the usual heads that go. They also host events like communions, 18ths & 21sts on occasion but again you're competing in a very full market for that too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A N Mouse

I agree clubs should be doing all in their power to be financially stable. However the discussion is about things already getting more expensive, in that fees are being paid where they wouldn't have been before.

And the point about European prize money is that it's concentrated in a few clubs hands, clubs likely already having significant resources, (ok there are solidarity payments), and it's not stable or in any way guaranteed (difference between going out in Q1 vs getting to GS). But realistically this is going to be the main source of outside income that's going to drive domestic transfer fees for the foreseeable.

Meanwhile domestic prize monies are still at level where fees and fines can exceed prize money. I'm not suggesting that clubs should be able to operate based solely on income from the FAI, but that, at a bare minimum, no club should be incurring losses to the association just for competing.

---

I think increasing prize money wouldn't add anything to making clubs more financially stable though. It will be like the help to buy scheme where we saw new build prices increase literally overnight by the full grant amount. If you increase the prize money by 10k per team that will quickly be eaten up by the players they sign that offseason either in fees to clubs or agents or wages to the players or a combination of both

Spot on stu re other income sources.

If you take match day revenue at Rovers 6000 x €20 average per punter x 20 games , includ season tickets you generate about 2.4m. Assuming club costs 3.5 to 4m to run, then still a further 1- 1.5m to raise. Similar calculations would apply on other clubs. Thats a fair bit to raise in sponsorship and advertising, and is very dependent on having UEFA prizemoney.

€20 a head would probably include additional spend such as food and programme? It's too high for just ticket money. There's outlay on food/programme of course.

But the gist is correct alright. Compare that to teams in League Two in England who start out with £1.1m in TV rights and solidarity payments from the Premier League. It's a huge gulf.

I think increased prize money would at least help cover the basic operational costs and make clubs slightly more stable that way. They can still find ways of bankrupting themselves of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Another Bohemia

I think increasing prize money wouldn't add anything to making clubs more financially stable though. It will be like the help to buy scheme where we saw new build prices increase literally overnight by the full grant amount. If you increase the prize money by 10k per team that will quickly be eaten up by the players they sign that offseason either in fees to clubs or agents or wages to the players or a combination of both

---

And if that happens then fine. I'm not suggesting it would make clubs more financially viable or stable.

We're talking about the lack of transfer activity or 'unusual' transfer activity and attributing that to longer contracts and paying fees.

Football transfer fees is basically all that trickle down economics bs in action. And if clubs are just about getting by as is then were is the transfer money going to come from? You rely on the clubs that have money to buy players, so the selling clubs have the money to replace them.

The contracts and fees are a positive step. But it's something that's been 'forced' on the clubs. And some clubs were already paying more in participation fees and fines than they were receiving in prize money. I don't think it too outlandish to suggest that hand in glove with minimum contracts should go minimum prize monies.

So while clubs should be financially stable and live within their means they should be guaranteed at least something like enough to cover one admin salary plus enough to buyout of 1 year of contract at 7k or 20k or whatever the agreed min wage was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A N Mouse

And if that happens then fine. I'm not suggesting it would make clubs more financially viable or stable.

We're talking about the lack of transfer activity or 'unusual' transfer activity and attributing that to longer contracts and paying fees.

Football transfer fees is basically all that trickle down economics bs in action. And if clubs are just about getting by as is then were is the transfer money going to come from? You rely on the clubs that have money to buy players, so the selling clubs have the money to replace them.

The contracts and fees are a positive step. But it's something that's been 'forced' on the clubs. And some clubs were already paying more in participation fees and fines than they were receiving in prize money. I don't think it too outlandish to suggest that hand in glove with minimum contracts should go minimum prize monies.

So while clubs should be financially stable and live within their means they should be guaranteed at least something like enough to cover one admin salary plus enough to buyout of 1 year of contract at 7k or 20k or whatever the agreed min wage was.

---

I understand completely what your saying I just disagree that increasing the prize money will result in what you want. It would probably be better for the FAI/Government to give grants to cover admin costs or FAI reduce the cost of entry to the league if that's what you are looking to improve. I agree both of these things are issues

Players/Agents and in fairness clubs to an extent will see an increase in prize money and immediately think "player budget increase" so the money will likely never hit the areas you want.

Joe O'Brien-Whitmarsh joined Southampton from Cork City.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Another Bohemia

I understand completely what your saying I just disagree that increasing the prize money will result in what you want. It would probably be better for the FAI/Government to give grants to cover admin costs or FAI reduce the cost of entry to the league if that's what you are looking to improve. I agree both of these things are issues

Players/Agents and in fairness clubs to an extent will see an increase in prize money and immediately think "player budget increase" so the money will likely never hit the areas you want.

---

I agree the clubs would do what clubs do with extra money, at least at the top. But this thing is an entirely predictable consequence of introducing minimum wage by the association, and they should be seen to do something about. And increasing the pitiful prizemoney levels would be two birds with one stone (they can then hold their hands up when clubs do as you say)

Whatever about short term positives of longer contracts, the league's not big enough to have everyone tied down. And I worry that we might look back fondly on the days of boom and bust as could be looking at new hegemony with a top 5/6 that's increasingly hard to breaking into forming over the next few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForzaForth

Paddy Power's Division I prices for 2024 have arrived. Cork and Bray, I think, poor value at one to three and sixes. UCD an unknown quantity at 17/2. Wexford and Finn Harps good value at sixteens and ninety respectively.

---

Harps down to 50’s from 90’s yesterday!

That tenner i put on has moved the market

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A N Mouse

I agree the clubs would do what clubs do with extra money, at least at the top. But this thing is an entirely predictable consequence of introducing minimum wage by the association, and they should be seen to do something about. And increasing the pitiful prizemoney levels would be two birds with one stone (they can then hold their hands up when clubs do as you say)

Whatever about short term positives of longer contracts, the league's not big enough to have everyone tied down. And I worry that we might look back fondly on the days of boom and bust as could be looking at new hegemony with a top 5/6 that's increasingly hard to breaking into forming over the next few years.

---

Who do you see as being in that top 5/6? While I can see Shams and Derry being there for a few years I don't see dominance from any of the others. They are all a few bad decisions from falling down the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

That tenner i put on has moved the market

---

And my fiver!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thewhitepele

Who do you see as being in that top 5/6? While I can see Shams and Derry being there for a few years I don't see dominance from any of the others. They are all a few bad decisions from falling down the table.

---

Being in the top 6 isn’t dominance. The top 6 has contained each of rovers, Derry, Pats, Bohs and Dundalk in the last 5 seasons already, with the exception of Derry being 7th in 2020 in an 18 game season. There’s usually 1 more team that pops up in the top 6 sporadically (Sligo, Shels etc.) but those 5 always seem to be there as it is already

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joey B

And my fiver!

---

And my axe!

Dundalk have Togolese international goalkeeper Malcolm Barcola on trial with them. He’d be the 2nd Togo international to play in the league after the infamous Cyril Guedje played a couple of games for pats before being loaned out to Limerick

https://m.independent.ie/regionals/l...768065755.html

I always find the fates of footballing siblings mad, his brother Bradley plays for PSG while he goes on trial at the AUL :D

Clubless since last May, when he played the last of his eight games for Tuzla City, a midtable Bosnian side. Missed five months of the season; not sure why. Soccerway doesn't list unused subs in the Bosnian league so can't tell if he was injured or dropped. Really random one. I'm sure Dundalk will be hoping he's not another Alessio Abibi...!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2 Year Contract

Dundalk have Togolese international goalkeeper Malcolm Barcola on trial with them. He’d be the 2nd Togo international to play in the league after the infamous Cyril Guedje played a couple of games for pats before being loaned out to Limerick

https://m.independent.ie/regionals/l...768065755.html

I always find the fates of footballing siblings mad, his brother Bradley plays for PSG while he goes on trial at the AUL :D

---

Lovely lad but unfortunately was absolutely hopeless.

Is Daithí McCallion fit enough to do preseason with Derry?