QuoteNot for Bohs.
Just came across this http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2010/0526/uefa.html
Can only be good for LOI clubs who will be looking to play in UEFA competitions.
(apologies if there is another thread on this but couldn't find one)
"U've figured how to work the Google on the internet machine"
Not for Bohs.
How will this affect the top clubs like Man U who even though they get huge income every season have huge debts?
There was a bit in the Metro-Herald this morning (I know!) that no clubs would be allowed lose more than £30m per year or something ludicrous like that. Bohs just about squeak in under that.
It also noted that clubs would have to break even over a three-year spell starting next year, and that sugar daddy contributions (Abramovic/Gannon) wouldn't be counted as income.
Man U have said they're in favour of the proposals, but ultimately huge income is irrelevant if your expenses are bigger.
I think this is aimed more at the bigger clubs. But maybe it'll filter down.
that is genius! Did you come up with that one yorself? Im going to steal that one! Brilliant!!!Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I was wondering where yous get your revenue
I wish i did not know then what I dont know now
30 million ? when does the transfer window open ??
But could ManU not get around it by saying that Wayne Rooney is a £100,000 a week barman?
Hate ManU but it fairness their debt is the money the yanks used to buy the club.
Neale Fenn on retiring: 'I think once you finish you might as well finish rather than making all sorts of comebacks.'
I'm not having a go. Bohs have struggled to live within their means in recent years and it remains to be seen whether the club can sustain anything close to its current rate of spending if and when it fails to win a league title. Fair play to Bohs if they are able to restructure to a more prudent model, but in recent seasons they haven't done that.
I'm not sure how proprietary debt fits into UEFA's calculations, but the club did release a statement yesterday congratulating itself for falling within the requirements, so I guess they're safe.
As stupid as FIFA can be, I really can't see them falling for the old "Wayne Rooney" is a barman trick. Might work in the Airtricity League though.
Last edited by Charlie Darwin; 27/05/2010 at 8:44 PM.
in fairness, you are having a go. We have complied with the FAI SCP since its introduction. We have slashed our wage bill for the last 2 seasons down to something approaching reasonable (still some ways to go though). I know we have debt that will need to be addressed but i believe that our current board can make the right decisions and address it over the next few years.
Anyway, it would be great if this could NOT turn into a Bohs finances thread. The UEFA regulations have far more implications for a club like Fingal.
How am I having a go? You admitted yourself that the club still has plenty of work to do on the wage bill and it's not even a year since the club was punished for overspending on wages. I know there are people around here who get off on slagging other clubs but I was just pointing out that, enforcing squarely, these new regulations will give the club even less leeway than they've had in the past.
Fingal is interesting though. I wonder if the regulations have any exemptions for 'created' teams like that.
surely it will overall be the same for most clubs? Once any club complying with the terms of the SCP then they shouldnt have anything to fear from the regulations. Except the sugar daddy clubs (hello Sporting Fingal!). Though it does say that the rules wont affect domestic leagues that fall under the responsibility of national associations. Not sure entirely what that means for Irish clubs.
we ended up in compliance with the rules at the end of the season. And a lot has changed at Bohs from the beginning of last season to now.it's not even a year since the club was punished for overspending on wages.
Last edited by SkStu; 27/05/2010 at 9:44 PM.
United and the likes are in trouble. I suppose it is good for football but I think Uefa are targeting English clubs unfairly.
It's hardly unfair when English clubs alone account for 2/3 of all club debt in Europe. It will benefit the big clubs more in the short term, but in the long term it will keep clubs like Portsmouth and Hull from destroying themselves.
In fairness, FAI licencing is a sham. You'd have to assume that UEFA requirements will be a little more stringent than the FAI's. Being allowed to compete in a national league and being allowed to compete in Europe are two different things (as other clubs have shown when getting refused UEFA licences).
If you re-introduce the debate about the SCP and Bohs' "compliance" and make other contentious statement surrounding the prudence of Bohs financial model then that is exactly what you are likely to do!
Aw come on man! how can you read into my post that i believe our financial model is prudent!!! All i said is that we complied with the SCP (after a further investigation by the FAI at the end of the season) and that we have made moves in the right direction and that i believe our current board have the right idea. Its hardly a ringing endorsement of our approach over the last few years but it is what it is. and i thought that it was something worth pointing out to counter Charlie Darwins flippant remark in the second post.
I wouldn't bother trying Stu, should know by now people have made up their minds, correctly or incorrectly - you'd be better off going and talking to a brick wall or a group of barstoolers
Kom Igen, FCK...
Hello Stu
............still prefer the dundalk finanacial model (EzeK will be familiar with it) - sign six new players then realise you cant pay them and renege (whoops, renegotiate) on the contracts.
Last edited by marinobohs; 01/06/2010 at 12:05 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks