A Serious Thread....

[Umberside]

Complaince with the 65% rule is not the issue at Dundalk - not having an operating deficit is.

Well good luck on that anyway.

[pineapple stu]

Good point

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?

You can download Cork's 2008 (I think) accounts from the CRO; they show what was spent between player wages and other costs. Ditto Bohs. You'd be surprised how quickly other stuff'll build up. To be honest though, I'd say if you are spending 35% of your turnover as one of the larger clubs in the league, you've got problems anyway.

[Schumi]

Good point

Does this seem very high to anyone else though? What other expenses do ye have that are costing this much?

Repaying old debt possibly. That was a part of the FAI's rationale for bringing in the rule as far as I remember.

[CF1989]

there were always going to come into some sort of financial trouble singing a whole new team, singh, turner, burns,mansaram all on big wages

[Candystripe]

Does groundsmen count as well as youth team coaches?

[John83]

Does groundsmen count as well as youth team coaches?

Nope. Will. Don't.

[Ezeikial]

there were always going to come into some sort of financial trouble singing a whole new team, singh, turner, burns,mansaram all on big wages

There probably should be some sort of rule about signing 4 former Sligo players alright!

[eamo1]

A piece in Yesterday's Star Newspaper said 8 Cork players are still owed money from July and the players are threatening strike action again.The players have been assured they will be paid on Friday though.

[micls]

A piece in Yesterday's Star Newspaper said 8 Cork players are still owed money from July and the players are threatening strike action again.

August's money was due yesterday too

The players have been assured they will be paid on Friday though.

I'm sure they've never heard that one before.....Would be shocked if they get full payment Friday

[brianw82]

......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

Is it coincidence that the players have been asked to take this pay cut after Dundalk lost the chance to win any trophies after going out of the cup? Am I just being a little bit cynical here?

Sorry, I don't mean to jibe when I say that. What I mean is, were the players going to be asked to take this cut anyway, even if Dundalk had still been in with a shout of winning the Cup (and associated prize money)?

[Ezeikial]

Is it coincidence that the players have been asked to take this pay cut after Dundalk lost the chance to win any trophies after going out of the cup? Am I just being a little bit cynical here?

Sorry, I don't mean to jibe when I say that. What I mean is, were the players going to be asked to take this cut anyway, even if Dundalk had still been in with a shout of winning the Cup (and associated prize money)?

It's hard to know, as the club have not quantified the current potential shortfall.

Although it is obvious that if Dundalk were still in the cup, the additional revenue would help, and may have avoided this action. The fact that the wage cuts have only been proposed since elimination from the cup suggests that this may have been the case.

[Schumi]

Would this explain why Sean Connor was so happy with a draw against Bohs in the first game in the cup?

[Ezeikial]

To be honest though, I'd say if you are spending 35% of your turnover as one of the larger clubs in the league, you've got problems anyway.

I would be interested if you could expand on this - how much do you think is reasonable in the context of expenditure, excluding players, to operate a "large" club?

Hpyothetically, if a club had a revenue of say €800,000 - 35% would equate to €280,000. Lets say management/coaching/physio/medical staff costs were €125,000 leaving a balance of €155,000 to cover all the operating costs.
Is this sufficient or extravagent?

Any opinions on typical costs of
Match day operations
Promotions
Travel
Administration
Light / heat
VAT

What are the other major expenditures typically?

I presume that the 65% rule cover is based on gross income and not net of tax obligations. Can anyone clarify?

[pineapple stu]

Here's a part of Bohs' accounts from last year; it shows all the expenses outside of the basic playing side of things (i.e., it shows the 35%). You'd have to imagine all that expense isn't necessary. By way of contrast, UCD run a Premier Division budget of about E500k all in. Obviously, if we could spend more money, I'm sure it'd be beneficial to us, but you'd imagine the "ideal" spending would lie somewhere in between.

It gives an idea of what's involved anyways.

[Ezeikial]

Here's a part of Bohs' accounts from last year; it shows all the expenses outside of the basic playing side of things (i.e., it shows the 35%). You'd have to imagine all that expense isn't necessary. By way of contrast, UCD run a Premier Division budget of about E500k all in. Obviously, if we could spend more money, I'm sure it'd be beneficial to us, but you'd imagine the "ideal" spending would lie somewhere in between.

It gives an idea of what's involved anyways.

The first 3 expenditure items alone (Match day/Away matches/Referee expenses) amount to over €185,000 according to these Bohs' accounts for 2008. While Bohs would hardly be held up as the model for financial prudence, I suspect that these costs can hardly vary dramatically for typical premier clubs. These alone would significantly exceed the 35% of turnover in the hypothetical example suggested!

I'm struggling to understand your earlier statement about clubs spending 35% of revenue on non-player costs being bound for trouble. Is it not inevitable? Can you expand on this?

Hpyothetically, if a club had a revenue of say €800,000 - 35% would equate to €280,000. Lets say management/coaching/physio/medical staff costs were €125,000 leaving a balance of €155,000 to cover all the operating costs.

[pineapple stu]

If you think away match expenses wouldn't vary between clubs, you want to have a word with the Derry board.

Similarly, home match expenses could easily be racked up by, say, renting a hotel room for the day to sequester players. That's just an example; there's ways and means to spend money, and there's ways and means of cutting back on non-essentials. I'd be shocked if we were spending that much on matchday expenses, for example.

[Ezeikial]

Perhaps I was naive in thinking that you might be able to expand on your original statement:

. if you are spending 35% of your turnover as one of the larger clubs in the league, you've got problems anyway.

If you think away match expenses wouldn't vary between clubs, you want to have a word with the Derry board.

It's pretty obvious that travelling expenses will be significantly different for clubs like Cork or Derry, then say the Dublin based clubs - typically more, not less!

I'd be shocked if we were spending that much on matchday expenses, for example.

With respect to UCD, your original reference was to the "larger" clubs. Matchday costs for clubs with small crowds in the first division, will obviously bear little relationship to costs associated with significantly larger gates at these premier clubs.

I apreciate your response, and the link to the Bohs accounts, but really I'm none the wiser about the veracity of your earlier claim.

[Ezeikial]

28 August 2009: DUNDALK FC PLAYERS STATEMENT
The players, management and staff of Dundalk Football Club have accepted a pay-cut until the end of the season following open and frank discussions with the board. We fully accept the club’s current financial position during these difficult times for everyone in the country.

As a squad, along with our management team and staff, we have decided to play our part and work with the board between now and the end of the season. We are fully supportive of the club’s fundraising efforts that will help claw back any financial deficit facing Dundalk FC.

We hope that you, the supporters, will get behind us as we continue our efforts on the pitch. We believe that a strong finish to the season can secure European football for our club. As a squad we are fully united behind our manager and staff and you can rest assured that our ambition and drive will not be affected by the difficult circumstances that we find ourselves in.

We took this decision to enable our manager to keep this squad together next season and beyond. We believe that with the correct investments and efforts on all of our parts we can deliver long-term success to Dundalk Football Club.

Finally, the players would like to thank the fans for your superb support this season. We would encourage you all to please support the fundraising efforts being undertaken by the Board and the DFC Trust for the remainder of the year.

Yours in Sport,
The Dundalk FC Squad.


http://www.dundalkfc.com/news/090828_Statement.asp

[pineapple stu]

It's pretty obvious that travelling expenses will be significantly different for clubs like Cork or Derry, then say the Dublin based clubs - typically more, not less!

But you can make them much more by having overnight stays in top hotels for every game, like Derry supposedly do. UCD, on the other hand (being the example I know of) get a bus straight back after these games. The overnight option is obviously more expensive, and so Derry going to UCD will spend more money than UCD going to Derry. Obviously there's other factors affecting costs like distance, but that still doesn't mean some clubs aren't running up what appear to be excess costs.

My comment on spending 35% of income on non-wage expenses wasn't a claim as you suggest, it was a supposition on my part. You've very selectively quoted me, leaving out the important words "I'd say".

[Ezeikial]

My comment on spending 35% of income on non-wage expenses wasn't a claim as you suggest, it was a supposition on my part. You've very selectively quoted me, leaving out the important words "I'd say".

pineapple stu - apologies if I inadvertently left out those words.

If you are unable or unwilling to expand on why "you say" that, I'll just leave it alone.

I was really hoping that I might learn something from hearing any substance behind your opinion!