Wigan financial woes - up for sale again? p40

Dazzler21

Just a reminder the EFL did not authorise our owner. Therefore for us with the Nimer purchase and the recent change of hands, I believe they are doing their job... Just very slowly 

Addickhead86

roseandcrown said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

MuttleyCAFC said:

stoneroses19 said:

MuttleyCAFC said:

You have FFP to make costs sustainable and then you have the likes of Derby and Sheffield Wednesday abusing the system. These clubs are the problem and those that sought to work around the rules before them that ultimately can only benefit the game. 

Also those who abuse the system often get rewarded by promotion to premier league and then the cycle continues as other clubs see abusing the system as the easiest way to reach the premier league. 

Derby almost at the play offs now, if they get promoted then clubs will all copy there way. 

That is why I would rather see Millwall promoted than Derby and that thought disgusts me. 

Even if derby wheeled out a strike force of Kim Jong Un, Harold Shipman and Josef Fritzl, i'd still want them to get promoted instead of Millwall.

Shipman would be deadly. 

Clinical finisher

Dazzler21

Addickhead86 said:

roseandcrown said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

MuttleyCAFC said:

stoneroses19 said:

MuttleyCAFC said:

You have FFP to make costs sustainable and then you have the likes of Derby and Sheffield Wednesday abusing the system. These clubs are the problem and those that sought to work around the rules before them that ultimately can only benefit the game. 

Also those who abuse the system often get rewarded by promotion to premier league and then the cycle continues as other clubs see abusing the system as the easiest way to reach the premier league. 

Derby almost at the play offs now, if they get promoted then clubs will all copy there way. 

That is why I would rather see Millwall promoted than Derby and that thought disgusts me. 

Even if derby wheeled out a strike force of Kim Jong Un, Harold Shipman and Josef Fritzl, i'd still want them to get promoted instead of Millwall.

Shipman would be deadly. 

Clinical finisher

Would inject some lethality for sure

DRAddick

Obviously can't stand the EFL and they are useless. But don't forget they do have the disadvantage of when they do actually try and do something to sort the football finances out, they get told they can't do it and threatened by the PL. With the full support of the FA. 

balham red

balham red said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cabbles said:

Utrinque_Paratus said:

There should be a safeguard like landlords receive from tenants, a deposit up front. So when a buyer purchases a club, they should be made to pay x amount of millions to the EFL, to stop them just walking away. If owners do right by the club and once they sell they get it back.

Good suggestion 

I have been thinking more and more about practical ways to safeguard the game.  The problem is the wages that are paid to players. It’s okay for the few elite teams that play in the CL and have global brands.  They can sustain the 200k a week salaries.  

The market has spiraled out of control.  Because the top players can demand half a million a week, the not so top players can find themselves being paid £70k a week.  That then means the top end Championship sides and those in lower half of the Prem start paying big big money for not very good players and aren’t able to sustain it.

Even some of the players that play for us, despite probably being lower earners in the grand scheme of things, are probably being paid more than we can afford.

it can’t go on.  I’m all in favour of people earning as much money as they can if they work hard and I know footballers have short careers, but not at the expense of mine or other’s football clubs

I also think a rule should be in place where owners don’t lend the clubs money (still within the ffp requirements).  They accept that the money they put in is equity.  There’s no loans, no interest payments.  You are simply allowed to increase your equity.  If the shit hits the fan then you lose your investment, end of.  Dutchatelet is a prime example and it seems like the blokes at Wigan were in a similar boat.  Loaning the clubs money to be paid back at a rate of interest over time.  It’s bollocks.  

I am not so sure they have that short careers.  There are 100s of league 1 and probably some league 2 players that earn well over 100k year.

In a 15 year career that's over 1.5 million, probably more like 2.  Plus sponsorship deals, plus bonuses, plus signing on fees.  

Then no student loans, no professional exams to pay for etc etc.  Also MOST don't live in London.   Can afford to buy houses in their early 20s so no wasted rent etc etc.

There can't be many other mass employment that means at 35 your likely to be debt and mortgage free with cash in the bank. 

Football league players are paid well over thier economic value. 

Agreed, football wages are well OTT. And when people talk about short careers, why should an average footballer earn enough so that they can be comfortable for life at 35? You have one career from 18-35, then you get another job

People talk about our players only earning £5000 a week, that's £260k a year! How many jobs pay you that as a base salary? 

How many jobs are you no longer able to perform in after you mid thirties?

You get another job then

10 years at £260k a year, will give you a massive nest egg to buy a decent house and have plenty of savings if you don't blow it.

Then you can get a "normal" job (say £30-50k a year) plus top ups from any football related work you get (media, hospitality, after dinner speeches)

Don't think you can single out footballers on 5K a week for that though, many other industries pay higher than that, investment banking, stock broking, high end recruitment etc. I agree that footballers being on hundreds of thousands a week is ridiculous but £5K a week in the championship is about right to me. I think a cap should be brought in, say £20K a week in prem, £5K in champ and £3K in league one etc. this would make everything a far more level playing field.

It will never happen though because of the ridiculous amount of sky money generated by the huge global audience. Supply and demand as they say.

5k per week may be do-able.

Let's say a squad of 20 on 5k per week = 5.2m per year

15,000 season tickets at 300 each = 4.5m

Throw in some EFL and TV payments and you'd think it could just about balance, although the other expenses would probably stack up to a fair amount.

If the first 11 were on 5k and the rest of the squad around 3k then I think it looks fairly reasonable.

But in any case, it's not just clubs that are chasing promotion that buckle and pay too much. All the clubs who want to cling on in the division are forced to spend over the odds too.

Salary cap, player draft, and equal share of TV payments across the football league pyramid and everything would be fair and rosy.

This just came up. 5k is do-able for most champ clubs. This table shows the avg salary that each champ club last season needed to break even:

Cafc43v3r

RolandsOut said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cabbles said:

Utrinque_Paratus said:

There should be a safeguard like landlords receive from tenants, a deposit up front. So when a buyer purchases a club, they should be made to pay x amount of millions to the EFL, to stop them just walking away. If owners do right by the club and once they sell they get it back.

Good suggestion 

I have been thinking more and more about practical ways to safeguard the game.  The problem is the wages that are paid to players. It’s okay for the few elite teams that play in the CL and have global brands.  They can sustain the 200k a week salaries.  

The market has spiraled out of control.  Because the top players can demand half a million a week, the not so top players can find themselves being paid £70k a week.  That then means the top end Championship sides and those in lower half of the Prem start paying big big money for not very good players and aren’t able to sustain it.

Even some of the players that play for us, despite probably being lower earners in the grand scheme of things, are probably being paid more than we can afford.

it can’t go on.  I’m all in favour of people earning as much money as they can if they work hard and I know footballers have short careers, but not at the expense of mine or other’s football clubs

I also think a rule should be in place where owners don’t lend the clubs money (still within the ffp requirements).  They accept that the money they put in is equity.  There’s no loans, no interest payments.  You are simply allowed to increase your equity.  If the shit hits the fan then you lose your investment, end of.  Dutchatelet is a prime example and it seems like the blokes at Wigan were in a similar boat.  Loaning the clubs money to be paid back at a rate of interest over time.  It’s bollocks.  

I am not so sure they have that short careers.  There are 100s of league 1 and probably some league 2 players that earn well over 100k year.

In a 15 year career that's over 1.5 million, probably more like 2.  Plus sponsorship deals, plus bonuses, plus signing on fees.  

Then no student loans, no professional exams to pay for etc etc.  Also MOST don't live in London.   Can afford to buy houses in their early 20s so no wasted rent etc etc.

There can't be many other mass employment that means at 35 your likely to be debt and mortgage free with cash in the bank. 

Football league players are paid well over thier economic value. 

But, outside the championship which is proven to be flawed for salaries, are they paid above their economic value?  Football is an entertainment industry which sells tickets and has other revenue streams.  Whilst I agree some of the figures I have heard in terms of wages are ridiculous (mostly due to relegated teams rather than planning to be in that league) it is still comparable economically to a musician who plays the gig circuit as a professional or a backing dancer in a west end play (who all earn on or around the figures you have quoted).  It's not a fair comparison to 'average salary' earners as they are in an industry that typically pays much higher wages for the demands of the job. 

If you put on a play and pay the cast 100k between them a week but only sell 70k worth of tickets every week how long would your play last?

If a clubs total revenue is less than the wages the players are not providing economic value, are they? 

Dazzler21

Cafc43v3r said:

RolandsOut said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cabbles said:

Utrinque_Paratus said:

There should be a safeguard like landlords receive from tenants, a deposit up front. So when a buyer purchases a club, they should be made to pay x amount of millions to the EFL, to stop them just walking away. If owners do right by the club and once they sell they get it back.

Good suggestion 

I have been thinking more and more about practical ways to safeguard the game.  The problem is the wages that are paid to players. It’s okay for the few elite teams that play in the CL and have global brands.  They can sustain the 200k a week salaries.  

The market has spiraled out of control.  Because the top players can demand half a million a week, the not so top players can find themselves being paid £70k a week.  That then means the top end Championship sides and those in lower half of the Prem start paying big big money for not very good players and aren’t able to sustain it.

Even some of the players that play for us, despite probably being lower earners in the grand scheme of things, are probably being paid more than we can afford.

it can’t go on.  I’m all in favour of people earning as much money as they can if they work hard and I know footballers have short careers, but not at the expense of mine or other’s football clubs

I also think a rule should be in place where owners don’t lend the clubs money (still within the ffp requirements).  They accept that the money they put in is equity.  There’s no loans, no interest payments.  You are simply allowed to increase your equity.  If the shit hits the fan then you lose your investment, end of.  Dutchatelet is a prime example and it seems like the blokes at Wigan were in a similar boat.  Loaning the clubs money to be paid back at a rate of interest over time.  It’s bollocks.  

I am not so sure they have that short careers.  There are 100s of league 1 and probably some league 2 players that earn well over 100k year.

In a 15 year career that's over 1.5 million, probably more like 2.  Plus sponsorship deals, plus bonuses, plus signing on fees.  

Then no student loans, no professional exams to pay for etc etc.  Also MOST don't live in London.   Can afford to buy houses in their early 20s so no wasted rent etc etc.

There can't be many other mass employment that means at 35 your likely to be debt and mortgage free with cash in the bank. 

Football league players are paid well over thier economic value. 

But, outside the championship which is proven to be flawed for salaries, are they paid above their economic value?  Football is an entertainment industry which sells tickets and has other revenue streams.  Whilst I agree some of the figures I have heard in terms of wages are ridiculous (mostly due to relegated teams rather than planning to be in that league) it is still comparable economically to a musician who plays the gig circuit as a professional or a backing dancer in a west end play (who all earn on or around the figures you have quoted).  It's not a fair comparison to 'average salary' earners as they are in an industry that typically pays much higher wages for the demands of the job. 

If you put on a play and pay the cast 100k between them a week but only sell 70k worth of tickets every week how long would your play last?

If a clubs total revenue is less than the wages the players are not providing economic value, are they? 

I'd try to make more than 30k in interval sundries. 

Cafc43v3r

balham red said:

balham red said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cabbles said:

Utrinque_Paratus said:

There should be a safeguard like landlords receive from tenants, a deposit up front. So when a buyer purchases a club, they should be made to pay x amount of millions to the EFL, to stop them just walking away. If owners do right by the club and once they sell they get it back.

Good suggestion 

I have been thinking more and more about practical ways to safeguard the game.  The problem is the wages that are paid to players. It’s okay for the few elite teams that play in the CL and have global brands.  They can sustain the 200k a week salaries.  

TJohe market has spiraled out of control.  Because the top players can demand half a million a week, the not so top players can find themselves being paid £70k a week.  That then means the top end Championship sides and those in lower half of the Prem start paying big big money for not very good players and aren’t able to sustain it.

Even some of the players that play for us, despite probably being lower earners in the grand scheme of things, are probably being paid more than we can afford.

it can’t go on.  I’m all in favour of people earning as much money as they can if they work hard and I know footballers have short careers, but not at the expense of mine or other’s football clubs

I also think a rule should be in place where owners don’t lend the clubs money (still within the ffp requirements).  They accept that the money they put in is equity.  There’s no loans, no interest payments.  You are simply allowed to increase your equity.  If the shit hits the fan then you lose your investment, end of.  Dutchatelet is a prime example and it seems like the blokes at Wigan were in a similar boat.  Loaning the clubs money to be paid back at a rate of interest over time.  It’s bollocks.  

I am not so sure they have that short careers.  There are 100s of league 1 and probably some league 2 players that earn well over 100k year.

In a 15 year career that's over 1.5 million, probably more like 2.  Plus sponsorship deals, plus bonuses, plus signing on fees.  

Then no student loans, no professional exams to pay for etc etc.  Also MOST don't live in London.   Can afford to buy houses in their early 20s so no wasted rent etc etc.

There can't be many other mass employment that means at 35 your likely to be debt and mortgage free with cash in the bank. 

Football league players are paid well over thier economic value. 

Agreed, football wages are well OTT. And when people talk about short careers, why should an average footballer earn enough so that they can be comfortable for life at 35? You have one career from 18-35, then you get another job

People talk about our players only earning £5000 a week, that's £260k a year! How many jobs pay you that as a base salary? 

How many jobs are you no longer able to perform in after you mid thirties?

You get another job then

10 years at £260k a year, will give you a massive nest egg to buy a decent house and have plenty of savings if you don't blow it.

Then you can get a "normal" job (say £30-50k a year) plus top ups from any football related work you get (media, hospitality, after dinner speeches)

Don't think you can single out footballers on 5K a week for that though, many other industries pay higher than that, investment banking, stock broking, high end recruitment etc. I agree that footballers being on hundreds of thousands a week is ridiculous but £5K a week in the championship is about right to me. I think a cap should be brought in, say £20K a week in prem, £5K in champ and £3K in league one etc. this would make everything a far more level playing field.

It will never happen though because of the ridiculous amount of sky money generated by the huge global audience. Supply and demand as they say.

5k per week may be do-able.

Let's say a squad of 20 on 5k per week = 5.2m per year

15,000 season tickets at 300 each = 4.5m

Throw in some EFL and TV payments and you'd think it could just about balance, although the other expenses would probably stack up to a fair amount.

If the first 11 were on 5k and the rest of the squad around 3k then I think it looks fairly reasonable.

But in any case, it's not just clubs that are chasing promotion that buckle and pay too much. All the clubs who want to cling on in the division are forced to spend over the odds too.

Salary cap, player draft, and equal share of TV payments across the football league pyramid and everything would be fair and rosy.

This just came up. 5k is do-able for most champ clubs. This table shows the avg salary that each champ club last season needed to break even:

I was just about to post that, I think the price of football is following this thread!

What is also intresting is that Birmingham's players would have to pay to play for them to break even! 

EricBanterna

How is Birmingham City even a viable club to run on that basis

Cafc43v3r

EricBanterna said:

How is Birmingham City even a viable club to run on that basis

If you look at this one you wonder how any of them are, which I think is exactly the point. 

sunbury-addick

Amazing how Brentford have got in that position - top notch management.
EDIT: and Bristol City

killerandflash

balham red said:

balham red said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

killerandflash said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cabbles said:

Utrinque_Paratus said:

There should be a safeguard like landlords receive from tenants, a deposit up front. So when a buyer purchases a club, they should be made to pay x amount of millions to the EFL, to stop them just walking away. If owners do right by the club and once they sell they get it back.

Good suggestion 

I have been thinking more and more about practical ways to safeguard the game.  The problem is the wages that are paid to players. It’s okay for the few elite teams that play in the CL and have global brands.  They can sustain the 200k a week salaries.  

The market has spiraled out of control.  Because the top players can demand half a million a week, the not so top players can find themselves being paid £70k a week.  That then means the top end Championship sides and those in lower half of the Prem start paying big big money for not very good players and aren’t able to sustain it.

Even some of the players that play for us, despite probably being lower earners in the grand scheme of things, are probably being paid more than we can afford.

it can’t go on.  I’m all in favour of people earning as much money as they can if they work hard and I know footballers have short careers, but not at the expense of mine or other’s football clubs

I also think a rule should be in place where owners don’t lend the clubs money (still within the ffp requirements).  They accept that the money they put in is equity.  There’s no loans, no interest payments.  You are simply allowed to increase your equity.  If the shit hits the fan then you lose your investment, end of.  Dutchatelet is a prime example and it seems like the blokes at Wigan were in a similar boat.  Loaning the clubs money to be paid back at a rate of interest over time.  It’s bollocks.  

I am not so sure they have that short careers.  There are 100s of league 1 and probably some league 2 players that earn well over 100k year.

In a 15 year career that's over 1.5 million, probably more like 2.  Plus sponsorship deals, plus bonuses, plus signing on fees.  

Then no student loans, no professional exams to pay for etc etc.  Also MOST don't live in London.   Can afford to buy houses in their early 20s so no wasted rent etc etc.

There can't be many other mass employment that means at 35 your likely to be debt and mortgage free with cash in the bank. 

Football league players are paid well over thier economic value. 

Agreed, football wages are well OTT. And when people talk about short careers, why should an average footballer earn enough so that they can be comfortable for life at 35? You have one career from 18-35, then you get another job

People talk about our players only earning £5000 a week, that's £260k a year! How many jobs pay you that as a base salary? 

How many jobs are you no longer able to perform in after you mid thirties?

You get another job then

10 years at £260k a year, will give you a massive nest egg to buy a decent house and have plenty of savings if you don't blow it.

Then you can get a "normal" job (say £30-50k a year) plus top ups from any football related work you get (media, hospitality, after dinner speeches)

Don't think you can single out footballers on 5K a week for that though, many other industries pay higher than that, investment banking, stock broking, high end recruitment etc. I agree that footballers being on hundreds of thousands a week is ridiculous but £5K a week in the championship is about right to me. I think a cap should be brought in, say £20K a week in prem, £5K in champ and £3K in league one etc. this would make everything a far more level playing field.

It will never happen though because of the ridiculous amount of sky money generated by the huge global audience. Supply and demand as they say.

5k per week may be do-able.

Let's say a squad of 20 on 5k per week = 5.2m per year

15,000 season tickets at 300 each = 4.5m

Throw in some EFL and TV payments and you'd think it could just about balance, although the other expenses would probably stack up to a fair amount.

If the first 11 were on 5k and the rest of the squad around 3k then I think it looks fairly reasonable.

But in any case, it's not just clubs that are chasing promotion that buckle and pay too much. All the clubs who want to cling on in the division are forced to spend over the odds too.

Salary cap, player draft, and equal share of TV payments across the football league pyramid and everything would be fair and rosy.

This just came up. 5k is do-able for most champ clubs. This table shows the avg salary that each champ club last season needed to break even:

Those numbers are heavily distorted by parachute numbers , and transfer income I assume, creating some odd looking numbers, e.g. Brentford and Birmingham.

It does show how horrendous Villa's position would have been if they hadn't gone up!

Covered End

ShootersHillGuru said:

Covered End said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

NapaAddick said:

Sage said:

Even with the points deduction this season, they could still stay up.

All they’ll need is to amount 4 more points than what Hull get between now and the end of the season, same with 3 more than what Barnsley get, and 2 more than what Luton get.

They're in trouble, but their form at the moment gives them a chance, even with the punishment.

I bet their players are not being paid. We will see. I think they are done. Hopefully we are not about to enter administration. Would not put it past us. No money coming in.... transfer ban.... ownership issues. Sound like a prime candidate. When I heard on the radio here in the US a few  hours ago that “a Championship club had gone into administration” I started sweating.

I’m not saying you are wrong to be worried but why would Charlton be put into administration when there is a willing buyer already on the scene ? It would make zero sense.

Who is the willing buyer?
There are interested parties, but as far as I know, no one is willing to buy, as in they haven't agreed a deal.

The choice for ESI or whatever they are called this week would under the administration scenario be get nothing back at all or sell to a buyer. Not sure why you think Barclay / Varney are not willing especially holding the whip hand over the sellers of our price or admin. No buyer is ever anything more than an interested party until the deed is done but I think you are just being obtuse.

The reason I think Barclay/Varney are not immediately willing to buy from ESI is because they have said they are not interested in buying from ESI unless they can also buy the freehold from RD.

As RD wants more than £50M and Rick Everitt suggests the freehold values are perhaps £15M, then there is a £35M price difference.

So unless RD drops his asking price by a maximum of £35M, then I don't believe we have a willing buyer.
Otherwise if we're taking no account of an agreement on the price, we might as well say CAFC possibly have thousands of willing buyers.

golfaddick

Addick Addict said:

Don't know whether this has been posted already but Lisa Nandy has written an open letter to the EFL in which she asks the sort of questions that we have been for quite a while:

"I am at a complete loss as to how, given the circumstances which are now coming to light, this ownership could have been approved.

"Can you tell me how this new ownership model came to be approved, what tests were set and why they were deemed to be met?

"Fans deserve good governance that protects them and their club. This has been badly lacking and I am determined to ensure that this is never allowed to happen again."

Full letter here:

https://www.wigantoday.net/news/politics/wigan-mp-blasts-football-league-bosses-over-approving-latics-owners-2901475

The problem is, as we know, that there is no Governance. The EFL cant stop the sale of any club to anyone.  Even their "fit &proper" test carries no weight.......the only people deemed not "fit" to be an owner or a director is someone who has been made bankrupt before. Not really a high bar at all. All the EFL really do is to check whether any new owner has enough funds to sustain the club for 2 years. And if they don't, or can't prove it, then all the EFL do is impose sanctions (which mainly seems to be around the buying of new players). 

As a "Governing Body" they really dont do much at all. You or I could buy Charlton (ie, ESI) tomorrow & do what we like. No one could stop us. Absolutely mad.

Cafc43v3r

golfaddick said:

Addick Addict said:

Don't know whether this has been posted already but Lisa Nandy has written an open letter to the EFL in which she asks the sort of questions that we have been for quite a while:

"I am at a complete loss as to how, given the circumstances which are now coming to light, this ownership could have been approved.

"Can you tell me how this new ownership model came to be approved, what tests were set and why they were deemed to be met?

"Fans deserve good governance that protects them and their club. This has been badly lacking and I am determined to ensure that this is never allowed to happen again."

Full letter here:

https://www.wigantoday.net/news/politics/wigan-mp-blasts-football-league-bosses-over-approving-latics-owners-2901475

The problem is, as we know, that there is no Governance. The EFL cant stop the sale of any club to anyone.  Even their "fit &proper" test carries no weight.......the only people deemed not "fit" to be an owner or a director is someone who has been made bankrupt before. Not really a high bar at all. All the EFL really do is to check whether any new owner has enough funds to sustain the club for 2 years. And if they don't, or can't prove it, then all the EFL do is impose sanctions (which mainly seems to be around the buying of new players). 

As a "Governing Body" they really dont do much at all. You or I could buy Charlton (ie, ESI) tomorrow & do what we like. No one could stop us. Absolutely mad.

But there are NOT a governing body, they are a competition organiser 

Redrobo

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

Addickted

Redrobo said:

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

They've got less Season Ticket holders than that.

Oggy Red

Redrobo said:

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

That's what I thought too.

I'd like to see the figures broken down, from the CEO to the tea lady and everybody in between.

I mean 600 staff .... that's the entire population of a Cornish village!

RedChaser

Oggy Red said:

Redrobo said:

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

That's what I thought too.

I'd like to see the figures broken down, from the CEO to the tea lady and everybody in between.

I mean 600 staff .... that's the entire population of a Cornish village!

You're not double counting those villagers with two heads are you mate? 😉

killerandflash

Redrobo said:

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

I hate to imagine how many pies they get through a day!

Oggy Red

RedChaser said:

Oggy Red said:

Redrobo said:

Wigan have 600 members of staff. Seems a lot to me.

That's what I thought too.

I'd like to see the figures broken down, from the CEO to the tea lady and everybody in between.

I mean 600 staff .... that's the entire population of a Cornish village!

Your not double counting those villagers with two heads are you mate? 😉

Haha .... no, locals don't have 2 heads, Mr Chaser ..... just 6 fingers on each hand, apparently.
Although I am allowing for half of the village houses being empty, as they'll be unlived in 2nd homes and absent Londoners financial investments. True. No wonder there's a housing shortage and people are desperate to find somewhere to live.

Back on topic, I'm still scratching my head ..... does it really take 600 staff to run a Championship football club?
I mean, in comparison, how many staff are there now at Charlton?


When I was a lad watching Charlton 50 years ago, there was manager Eddie Firmani, coach Theo Foley, Physio/trainer Charlie Hall;
about 15 regular senior players, augmented by a reserve team of young hopefuls and a couple of veterans to pass on their experience; the Charlton Colts youth team on kids' money; someone to cut the grass and mark out the pitch before the game; and the laundry lady to wash the dirty kit.

How many is that?

There was a club secretary to do the paper work and pay the bills. plus a young office girl - that was admin. A couple of ladies to run the tea bar and a couple of bods to sell grandstand tickets on matchdays, plus Robert Lee and a handful of spotty grotty teenagers to man the turnstiles.

The Old Bill did the stewarding. And a couple of cleaners swept up after the game.
Ah ..... the Good Old Days.

I mean, today 600 staff to run a mediocre football club ...... I still can't believe it, can I ?

LargeAddick

Of course the 600 would include match day stewards, waitresses, bar staff etc but still seems excessive.

Wheresmeticket

ValleyGary said:

Out of 30 interested buyers, you can only imagine the percentage that are opportunist wrong'uns.

A never ending cycle of scummy owners awaits far too many clubs.

Cafc43v3r

A £100 million dollar bet has been placed on Wigan to get relegated in the Philippines?!?! 

ForeverAddickted

Cafc43v3r said:

A £100 million dollar bet has been placed on Wigan to get relegated in the Philippines?!?! 

They've surely got shit odds? 

Cafc43v3r

ForeverAddickted said:

Cafc43v3r said:

A £100 million dollar bet has been placed on Wigan to get relegated in the Philippines?!?! 

They've surely got shit odds? 

Not if they put it on Tuesday night. 

EricBanterna

Cafc43v3r said:

ForeverAddickted said:

Cafc43v3r said:

A £100 million dollar bet has been placed on Wigan to get relegated in the Philippines?!?! 

They've surely got shit odds? 

Not if they put it on Tuesday night. 

If they did do that, they either know something considering the amount they put down. 

SantaClaus

Cafc43v3r said:

A £100 million dollar bet has been placed on Wigan to get relegated in the Philippines?!?! 

If that's true (which I doubt) I wouldn't give the punter much chance of a long and healthy life. 

Callumcafc

killerandflash

I'd forgotten that the EFL are based in Preston. A good place for dealing with the football carnage in the area. Bolton, Bury, Macclesfield, Wigan...