Looks like we really have no money

[OzzieMandias]

I agree it's a good post but it fails to take into account the increased revenue from TV rights next season. The lowest club is set to recieve a reported 30m with the top clubs st to gain around 50m. This will do one of two things. Immediately and overnight make our finacial position much healthier and drops the wages to revenue ratio. Shearer off the wage bill will also be a help on that front. The second part and one I'm personally worried about is that it will increase the disposable income of all the clubs to spend on players. We could see player valuations rocketing as a result.

 

It's not all doom and gloom. If the casino deal comes off with MGM then our debt etc will look insignificant.

 

My point is you are looking at the financial health of the club on a right now basis. As long as the club are incresing and opening up new revenue streams then we are perfectly sustainable as a club/business. Unfortunately the business model of football clubs at present seems to be "find a wealthy owner to plow personal fortunes into players" Baring a take-over we don't have that choice, however as long as TV rights grow, overseas sales of shirts etc grow and the club are looking at ways to get investment in i.e. the casino/hotel/ground expansion etc we will be positioned for the future of the club.

 

Unfortunately this all translates to us being skint until the summer

 

 

The point is that football is in the process of taking another step up the economic ladder.

 

Last time there was one of those moments -- founding of the Premier League and the increase in revenue that resulted -- we were taken over by SJH, who understood that investment would bring rewards. Hence the Keegan era, when we partly rocketed ahead of most other teams because we had more money than anyone else and a talented manager to make the most of it. And in the end SJH will make tens of millions out of the relatively (by today's standards) small amount of cash he put in.

 

That era is long over.

 

Now there's about to be another big step up, but we're still stuck with the old guard. SJH wants to sell out, realising his investment

 

It's like the Premier League starting up, but you've still got McKeag in charge. More money coming in, but no investment strategy (no investment possibility, I suppose) to make the most of it.

[Lloydie]

It's true next years TV money changes things a bit. But there are a few things to be cautious about

 

* We might have already earmarked it for paying down some debts

* Every player with a choice will delay contract negotiations till next year and try to get their 'fair share'

 

But mostly, every time there's been a big influx of cash into the game it's not made the clubs more profitable. Yes they've got a lot bigger, but the real winners have been players and agents every single time, plus a handful of executives who have been able to float clubs for massive valuations on the basis of future profits that haven't materialised.

 

Things are further messed up by the fact that some clubs (Chelsea, Portsmouth ...) are backed by individuals who don't care if they make money, leaving those clubs without sugar daddies in the cold. I would guess that if the owners of the two clubs walked away now they'd both be in liquidation within months and that's something that's very hard to compete with.

 

In the medium term if I owned a club I would

 

* Invest in the academy (we seem to be doing this a bit)

* Invest in scouting (we don't seem to have got this bit right)

* Introduce performance related pay across the squad, executives and management team (Martin O'Neill has been talking about this at Villa)

 

As I said elsewhere, the model in terms of stability and investing is probably Bolton, although I don't like their playing style and they do seem to have a lot of veteran players on their books. The model for academies is definantely Ajax - my wife, (who is Dutch and a fan) was moaning last night that they've only had one or two players through the academy this season. In an 'average' season they expect about three....

[sempuki]

Sounds like he's given up!

 

Frustration over failed transfers

 

Jan 28 2007

 

 

 

 

By Neil Farrington, The Sunday Sun

 

 

Newcastle have made failed approaches for up to six would-be buys during the transfer window.

 

Glenn Roeder admits the failure to land any of those half-dozen permanent signings has made January "even more frustrating than I had anticipated".

 

And the United boss, left, also concedes he is gambling his reputation by refusing to consider buying lesser targets before Wednesday's deadline.

 

Though his selection options are still seriously rationed by injuries, Roeder's quality control remains resolute.

 

"It's tough going out there at the moment; even more frustrating than I anticipated" he said.

 

 

"From January 1, we attacked targets we thought we could get in on a permanent deal that would make us a better team.

 

 

"It became pretty apparent within the first two weeks that that wasn't going to happen.

 

 

"There are five or six players who we'd have liked to get here who we've been told are not available in January.

 

 

"Contact has been made with their clubs. The response has been: `Not now.'

 

 

"In the summer, the position could change - and the players I have wanted in January, I will still want in the summer.

 

 

"But in terms of being able to bring someone in permanently now, that is looking very difficult."

 

 

Many fans would see Roeder lower his sights in order to plug the gaping gaps in his squad.

 

 

But the manager fervently believes the long-term benefits of being choosy will far outweigh the immediate impact to be made by mediocre signings.

 

 

"Quality players are not there - or rather, not there in abundance - to buy in January. This year, there doesn't seem to be quality available even abroad.

 

 

"And I hate it when people say: `We need a body.' A body is no good unless Newcastle can use him to good effect.

 

 

"The whole point is I'm trying to get the average age of the squad down to just under 25; I'm trying to buy players who will increase in value. Like Oba Martins.

 

 

"That's my policy. That's what I want to do. It is a big gamble for me, but I'm prepared to make that gamble.

 

 

"If I do that, I know we will come out of the other side in two years' time with a better team."

 

 

That said, the transfer activity of several top-flight rivals this month has piled yet more pressure on Roeder.

 

 

"There are Premiership managers - naming no names - who live their lives successfully going from window to window to window," he added.

 

 

"Yes, they survive, but with old players - players that I don't want to work with. Players that have had their shelf life and are past their sell-by date.

 

 

"The way I think Newcastle should be managed is as a buyer of younger talent that will increase in value and help Newcastle get where it should be in the long term."

 

 

[Cajun]

If its true we offered £1.5m for Colocinni and they want £2.7m then we must be pretty skint!

[Unbelievable]

He can put a nice spin on it as much as he likes, but considering our depleted squad and his own managerial (dis)abilities it's far from certain that we will be staying up. It could be a very costly mistake to be so arrogant as to not consider stop gaps because they might not do us any good in the long run..

[Guest toonbaz]

im getting sick of hearing about this need to bring in younger players and bring the average age of the squad down, we are desperate for some experience at the back not for some young kid who is goin to move newcastle on in the future.

[Cronky]

I'm a supporter of several years standing myself, and for most of that time the club was run by a group of committed local people who were convinced that they were the only ones who could run the club. Unfortunately, they weren't able to make the kind of investment that other clubs were making, and we slipped behind. It took a lot of effort and determination to get these people out.

 

Looks to me like history is repeating itself.

[Howaythelads]

If its true we offered £1.5m for Colocinni and they want £2.7m then we must be pretty skint!

 

 

If we think he's worth £1.5m it would be pretty bloody stupid to cough up almost twice that much, no doubt you'd then slag the Board for paying over the top in transfer fees.

 

Is this the way you run your personal finances? You think something is worth £15 but instead you offer to pay £27 for it just because you've got the cash? If so, you're a mug.

 

I've got a digital camera that I reckon is worth about £150 on the secondhand market, but just for you I'll let it go for £270. What do you reckon? Do we have a deal?

[Cajun]

£2.7m, over the top transfer fee

 

If Freddy thinks he is only worth £1.5m then he is the mug, tbh! The lad is an Argentine international. If he is only worth £1.5m then we obviously don't rate him that highly so why would we be after him!?

[Turnbull2000]

No disrespect to Roeder, but is he really the sort of manager that will give a player the belief he is making the right move?

[Guest Darth Toon]

I've got a digital camera that I reckon is worth about £150 on the secondhand market, but just for you I'll let it go for £270. What do you reckon? Do we have a deal?

 

If I desperately needed a camera, say perhaps because my job depends on it and the only cameras I've got at the moment are either shite or broken,  and if yours was the only camera available, then yes, I would probably go for it.

[Guest elbee909]

£2.7m, over the top transfer fee

 

If Freddy thinks he is only worth £1.5m then he is the mug, tbh! The lad is an Argentine international. If he is only worth £1.5m then we obviously don't rate him that highly so why would we be after him!?

 

Fred would be a crap poker player.  Doesn't know when to make his plays.  And if you're constantly harping on to the media etc. everyone knows what your cards are and how much you have to play with... can't play hardball all the time (to mix sporting metaphors)

[Cajun]

You watch though, the genius will pass up on this and sign Anton Ferdinand for £6m! Or a player in a position we dont really need like SWP for £10m!

[James]

If its true we offered £1.5m for Colocinni and they want £2.7m then we must be pretty skint!

 

 

If we think he's worth £1.5m it would be pretty bloody stupid to cough up almost twice that much, no doubt you'd then slag the Board of paying over the top in transfer fees.

 

Is this the way you run your personal finances? You think something is worth £15 but instead you offer to pay £27 for it just because you've got the cash? If so, you're a mug.

 

I've got a digital camera that I reckon is worth about £150 on the secondhand market, but just for you I'll let it go for £270. What do you reckon? Do we have a deal?

 

Footballers aren't digital cameras.

 

Footballers are all unique, while digital cameras are mass produced in factories so there are many identical items available all over the place. Also, digital cameras are only as good as the person who uses it. The same does not apply for a footballer.

 

As there is no possible comparison, only the owner of the player's playing registration can know the true value. Not Shepherd.

[Cajun]

At the end of the day its £2.7m FFS! What does that buy you these days? Birmingham paid more for Rowan Vine!!

[Howaythelads]

If its true we offered £1.5m for Colocinni and they want £2.7m then we must be pretty skint!

 

 

If we think he's worth £1.5m it would be pretty bloody stupid to cough up almost twice that much, no doubt you'd then slag the Board of paying over the top in transfer fees.

 

Is this the way you run your personal finances? You think something is worth £15 but instead you offer to pay £27 for it just because you've got the cash? If so, you're a mug.

 

I've got a digital camera that I reckon is worth about £150 on the secondhand market, but just for you I'll let it go for £270. What do you reckon? Do we have a deal?

 

Footballers aren't digital cameras.

 

Footballers are all unique, while digital cameras are mass produced in factories so there are many identical items available all over the place. Also, digital cameras are only as good as the person who uses it. The same does not apply for a footballer.

 

As there is no possible comparison, only the owner of the player's playing registration can know the true value. Not Shepherd.

 

Good spot.

[NE5]

I'm a supporter of several years standing myself, and for most of that time the club was run by a group of committed local people who were convinced that they were the only ones who could run the club. Unfortunately, they weren't able to make the kind of investment that other clubs were making , and we slipped behind. It took a lot of effort and determination to get these people out.

 

Looks to me like history is repeating itself.

 

correction Bob. They didn't want to make that kind of investment or take risks on the back of the clubs potential support. A big difference.

 

 

[NE5]

£2.7m, over the top transfer fee

 

If Freddy thinks he is only worth £1.5m then he is the mug, tbh! The lad is an Argentine international. If he is only worth £1.5m then we obviously don't rate him that highly so why would we be after him!?

 

once again, you show that you either don't understand how football works or simply moan at the board for anything you feel like whinging about. It is the manager who assesses the players professional competence, not his chairman.

 

If the money isn't there, then it isn't there, and in our position, paying over the odds is foolish and as HTL says, I'm sure you would slate the board for doing it, having also slated them for not doing it.

 

 

[NE5]

No disrespect to Roeder, but is he really the sort of manager that will give a player the belief he is making the right move?

 

Why don't you ask Duff and Martins ?

 

 

[Cajun]

What was really stupid was paying £5m for Duff.

 

So Roeder tells Freddy how much to pay for a player? hmmm..

[Guest Sniffer]

Exactly NE5. The difference is that the old boards could but chose not to make investments. Or only went half way but judged it enough to keep the fans interest and attendance up.

 

Like you and HTL and a few others on here, I've been around a few years and I remember the classic example. When we signed Wyn Davies fgrom Bolton we actually wanted to do a double deal for a relative unknown called Francis Lee. Lack of ambition meant we only signed the Leap. Money was there but the pirate chose not to do it. That one player alone could've transformed us in the late 60's early seventies as he was that good.

[NE5]

Exactly NE5. The difference is that the old boards could but chose not to make investments. Or only went half way but judged it enough to keep the fans interest and attendance up.

 

Like you and HTL and a few others on here, I've been around a few years and I remember the classic example. When we signed Wyn Davies fgrom Bolton we actually wanted to do a double deal for a relative unknown called Francis Lee. Lack of ambition meant we only signed the Leap. Money was there but the pirate chose not to do it. That one player alone could've transformed us in the late 60's early seventies as he was that good.

 

an outstanding and perfectly true example.

 

 

[Cajun]

Bravo

 

[NE5]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

[Mick]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.