Lowensda Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apparently in a decade(!) our non-media revenue has grown a whopping 0.05%.meaning our commercial, ticket and sponsorship has not fucking moved. In a year. Bill doesn't wish to sell but seeks "donations". The board currently don't have a business plan. We're not likely to move. Fan expectations can be "managed" by keeping league position just above average league wage spends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apparently in a decade(!) our non-media revenue has grown a whopping 0.05%.meaning our commercial, ticket and sponsorship has not fucking moved. In a year. Bill doesn't wish to sell but seeks "donations". The board currently don't have a business plan. We're not likely to move. Fan expectations can be "managed" by keeping league position just above average league wage spends. yeah was pretty disappointing reading the tweets. at least someone is coming out and saying it and the echo is covering it, hopefully they get bill and elstone to respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apparently in a decade(!) our non-media revenue has grown a whopping 0.05%.meaning our commercial, ticket and sponsorship has not fucking moved. In a year. Bill doesn't wish to sell but seeks "donations". The board currently don't have a business plan. We're not likely to move. Fan expectations can be "managed" by keeping league position just above average league wage spends. One man's opinion though, however "expert" he may be portrayed as; sure the board could bring in another with a totally different viewpoint. His background working for breweries is impressive though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 This thread is like eastenders, you don't need to watch it but every time you tune in there's never a good news story. Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 This thread is like eastenders, you don't need to watch it but every time you tune in there's never a good news story. "Joe keeps referring to David Moyes as a manager in terms of Jurgen Klopp and Diego Simeone. Someone who can elevate a club beyond themselves and help them punch above their weight." Enough said surely, the credibility of the guy is suspect in the extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 "Joe keeps referring to David Moyes as a manager in terms of Jurgen Klopp and Diego Simeone. Someone who can elevate a club beyond themselves and help them punch above their weight." Enough said surely, the credibility of the guy is suspect in the extreme. Lol. The majority of what he said was pretty spot on. This not so much but let's see how he does with sociedad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 One man's opinion though, however "expert" he may be portrayed as; sure the board could bring in another with a totally different viewpoint. His background working for breweries is impressive though. Well, what would the club's financial plan be then? "Let's hope the TV deal keeps getting better" or "Let's hope someone gives us loads of money, no strings attached"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 It really is as simple as this:- If we are growing our TV revenue at the same rate as our opponents - then there are no real advantages. What was a £10m player will become a £15m player - what was a salary of £50k a week will become £80k a week. Yes, we can clear our debt easier - thats a given. But we need to commercially grow as a club. Commercial opportunities:- Kit sponsorship - awful Match day reveneue - outsourced - poor lower table General sponsorship - garbage Ground - Over 20 years with no improvement to capacity or obstructed views Merchandise - pathetic, kitbag and one club shop In short, Richard Scudamore and co are credited with being the people who are keeping this club financially sound. The clowns who run it are a joke. Romey 1878 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c1982 Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 Kenwright not at the game again today... anything in this e.g his health/ change's up coming/ just having a really long holiday! I'd have thought he'd have been there today given the occasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/29/premier-league-finances-club-by-club Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 Embarrassing, absolute joke. Our commercial revenue is pathetic but the man behind it all gets £350k a year??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makis Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Most fans just don't understand what that report tells. For them it's still la-la-land and Kenwright is doing a great job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Embarrassing, absolute joke. Our commercial revenue is pathetic but the man behind it all gets £350k a year??? Who are you talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Who are you talking about? the article said that's Elstone's salary. 350k pounds a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Who are you talking about? the directors got their first pay out in something like 10 years, but the tit in charge has burdened us more than helped us progress. I think thats the long and short of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 the article said that's Elstone's salary. 350k pounds a year. No it doesn't. It says that the highest paid director got £350,000 (and not every year but for that year only and for the first time) and then made it clear that Elstone is not a director. Read it again. "Highest-paid director Directors paid for the first time; Highest-paid £350,000; chief executive Robert Elstone is not a director." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 my bad mike, who is a director then? if they are making 350k, how much is elstone making 500k? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 my bad mike, who is a director then? if they are making 350k, how much is elstone making 500k? Directors are Kenwright, Jon Woods, Robert Earle and (until recently) Phillip Carter as far as I know. Surprised any of them are taking a salary to be honest, they've not in the past so I don't understand the change. Elstone, whatever you think of him, as CEO of a company with £100+ turnover will be on decent wedge. How big that is though is speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Directors are Kenwright, Jon Woods, Robert Earle and (until recently) Phillip Carter as far as I know. Surprised any of them are taking a salary to be honest, they've not in the past so I don't understand the change. Elstone, whatever you think of him, as CEO of a company with £100+ turnover will be on decent wedge. How big that is though is speculation. aha! thanks mike. that makes sense why the percentages didn't add up. it was like we were only 74 percent owned. ha the other 26 or whatever was Sir Philip. I wonder who will buy/inherit those shares? yeah maybe the TV money they all figured they could pinch a little from the kitty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 aha! thanks mike. that makes sense why the percentages didn't add up. it was like we were only 74 percent owned. ha the other 26 or whatever was Sir Philip. I wonder who will buy/inherit those shares? yeah maybe the TV money they all figured they could pinch a little from the kitty. There are shares owned by individuals as well (StevO has one) so the board don't own 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Directors are Kenwright, Jon Woods, Robert Earle and (until recently) Phillip Carter as far as I know. Surprised any of them are taking a salary to be honest, they've not in the past so I don't understand the change. Elstone, whatever you think of him, as CEO of a company with £100+ turnover will be on decent wedge. How big that is though is speculation. I'm assuming the additional income allows them to, and considering the fact they've not taken a wage in the past despite not performing as would like, ends up being "fair" (equates to a salary of 35k over 10 years or there abouts). On the flip side, I assume they're taking a payday because we're finally in a position to be financially strong. I expect, as I've said before, a decent transfer budget this summer (before sales). I'll be annoyed if thats not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 There are shares owned by individuals as well (StevO has one) so the board don't own 100%. interesting. how does one acquire one? i wonder how much they go for, maybe ill ask mom for christmas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 interesting. how does one acquire one? i wonder how much they go for, maybe ill ask mom for christmas They're quite expensive and rarely available if I remember correctly, StevO's the man to ask (think his dad has one too). markjazzbassist 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 I'm assuming the additional income allows them to, and considering the fact they've not taken a wage in the past despite not performing as would like, ends up being "fair" (equates to a salary of 35k over 10 years or there abouts). On the flip side, I assume they're taking a payday because we're finally in a position to be financially strong. I expect, as I've said before, a decent transfer budget this summer (before sales). I'll be annoyed if thats not the case. It'd be nice if they started putting money into the club now as well. Something else that hasn't happened before either. Matt and markjazzbassist 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddock Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It'd be nice if they started putting money into the club now as well. Something else that hasn't happened before either. Dead fucking right. They've took nothing for a while but have also put nothing in. Seems to me like a slow burning investment, an initial outlay that's now bearing fruit. I'm not savvy at all on this type of stuff so I'm not getting into a debate on it with anyone more so because I can't be arsed but they're certainly on the face of it no martyrs for not taking money. If it's not there they can't take it but whatever their initial outlay was has always been guaranteed back as long as the club has stayed healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Dead fucking right. They've took nothing for a while but have also put nothing in. Seems to me like a slow burning investment, an initial outlay that's now bearing fruit. I'm not savvy at all on this type of stuff so I'm not getting into a debate on it with anyone more so because I can't be arsed but they're certainly on the face of it no martyrs for not taking money. If it's not there they can't take it but whatever their initial outlay was has always been guaranteed back as long as the club has stayed healthy. It's not the role of company directors to put money in (initial investment aside). I'd venture to say that Phillip Carter never put money into the club, though he did a great job as chairman. According to the Institute of Directors their role is to.. determinine the company’s strategic objectives and policies; monitor progress towards achieving the objectives and policies; appoint senior management; account for the company’s activities to relevant parties, e.g. shareholders. The managing director/chief executive is responsible for the performance of the company, as dictated by the board’s overall strategy. He or she reports to the chairman or board of directors. And they'll take a hefty salary for that which our directors haven't. The minted owner putting in millions is a completely different scenario to where we are. Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's not the role of company directors to put money in (initial investment aside). I'd venture to say that Phillip Carter never put money into the club, though he did a great job as chairman. According to the Institute of Directors their role is to.. determinine the companys strategic objectives and policies; monitor progress towards achieving the objectives and policies; appoint senior management; account for the companys activities to relevant parties, e.g. shareholders. The managing director/chief executive is responsible for the performance of the company, as dictated by the boards overall strategy. He or she reports to the chairman or board of directors. And they'll take a hefty salary for that which our directors haven't. The minted owner putting in millions is a completely different scenario to where we are. In a that case they're failing in the roles they are expected to do. I find it hard to stomach that these people will make many millions of pounds when/if the club is sold despite doing nothing to grow the club. The value of the club has grown despite these men, not because of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeO Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 In a that case they're failing in the roles they are expected to do. I find it hard to stomach that these people will make many millions of pounds when/if the club is sold despite doing nothing to grow the club. The value of the club has grown despite these men, not because of them. Fair enough but that's a different discussion from them being castigated for not putting serious money in (which BK for one doesn't have). Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted May 1, 2015 Report Share Posted May 1, 2015 Missread the £350k for elstone, the sickening thing is that it won't be far off. That clown has cost the club millions with his shockingly poor business decisions. I take it Robert Earl gets £350k on top of the ridiculous interest that the club are paying him through the vibrac loan? we have some payday loan with a director of the club (just not directly in his name). Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted May 1, 2015 Report Share Posted May 1, 2015 Fair enough but that's a different discussion from them being castigated for not putting serious money in (which BK for one doesn't have). For not putting any money in, actually. And I've said before, I don't blame BK for that, everyone knows he hasn't got the money but the other board members? That's a different story; they're minted. How do they expect to make progress and achieve objectives if they aren't willing to put anything in to help make that happen? I can only assume their objectives are to achieve absolutely nothing. Then another role of theirs is to appoint senior management - well, if their choice of Elstone (and others that have come before him) are anything to go by then they're completely fucking useless. But, yeah, again, they want to make a lot of money out of this club when/if it's sold. Totally understandable when they've done so much for this club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.