Bolton announce administration

ForeverAddickted said:

killerandflash said:

It's really lucky that Bolton aren't playing anyone with something to play for. Imagine the mess if they were due to play Leeds or Sheffield United

Well you could argue that they are

Few extra places for Brentford will mean greater prize money

I'm not sure in the EFL that place generates different prize money.  It is significant in the Prem, but I believe not in EFL

Cafc43v3r said:

The only solution in my opinion is either spread the premier league money more fairly among the 92 clubs (not going to happen) or say that every club must submit a financial forecast every April, for the current season.  If they aren't breaking even, as a mimium they are docked 20 points that season. If they are found to have lied or mislead in this statement they get kicked out the league, no ifs, no buts. 

Almost every club loses money. To require them to break even and then docking 100+ clubs 20 points is going to look pretty silly. If anything, such a requirement just means a lot more clubs going into administration, not less. Because it’s not as much about financial losses in any year but the debt loads already imbedded hanging over the clubs. No league clubs have ever gone into administration because they lost £1 million the previous season.

cafctom said:

There will be a way through it for them. Not sure if it’s just my perception but it feels as though so many clubs have gone through this sort of thing over the past 15 years, yet liquidation never seems to happen unless it’s at non-league level.

It does feel as though Football League clubs are seemingly indestructible, no matter how bad their finances are. Portsmouth for example - I don’t recall a situation as dire as that. There were threats of winding up orders every 5 minutes, but it never actually happens. 

It did actually happen to us in 1984. Wound up and not able to fulfil our fixture at Blackburn.

But I take your point about it never seeming to be the FINAL nail in the coffin. The farce of "Administration" has seen to that......

If you were a player and looked at the goings on at Bolton would you sign for them?

STLeonards said:

If the players are not paid, their contracts are null and void and they can walk. Taking conspiracy theories one stage further, maybe this is the new owners ruse to get him out of potentially ruinous player contracts for next season so he can start afresh within everyone off the books?

The Company/football club would still be liable.  A player can choose to walk for free if not paid but if they are very highly paid poor players who cannot replicate what they have elsewhere they will still be a creditor who the club needs to pay. The club cant just choose to cancel a contract because they are skint

NapaAddick said:

Cafc43v3r said:

The only solution in my opinion is either spread the premier league money more fairly among the 92 clubs (not going to happen) or say that every club must submit a financial forecast every April, for the current season.  If they aren't breaking even, as a mimium they are docked 20 points that season. If they are found to have lied or mislead in this statement they get kicked out the league, no ifs, no buts. 

Almost every club loses money. To require them to break even and then docking 100+ clubs 20 points is going to look pretty silly. If anything, such a requirement just means a lot more clubs going into administration, not less. Because it’s not as much about financial losses in any year but the debt loads already imbedded hanging over the clubs. No league clubs have ever gone into administration because they lost £1 million the previous season.

The first line proves my point.  Someone ITK said that 6k a week was the going rate for a top league one player.  Obviously some will get a bit less, but say you need ten on an average wage of 5k a week, 5 loans (assuming they are free, which they aren't) then another ten on say an average of 2k a week to make up the squad (mixture of youngsters and journey men). That's 3.6 million a year, in wages for the first team squad.  No manager, no coaches, no u23s. 

2018 our match day income was 3.4 million, central income 1.4 million and commercial about the same. Paying just the first team players would leave about 3 million to pay for everything else.  Stadium and training ground, management, academy, gas, electric, water etc.  It is just not possible.

I maybe wrong but I think @Airman Brown said the actual income from a match day ticket was about £8 after tax etc so if you added 6k to every gate of the season you would only raise an extra million or so. 

If you halved the wage bill you would be looking at a much more viable business model.  Obviously you can't do that as you wouldn't be able to field a competitive team.  The only way to do that is to force wages down by making sure everyone else does the same. 

The current system means that 72 someones have to put money, a lot of money, into every club, every year. Its bonkers and I don't think there is another business model like it in the world 

Simonsen said:

iaitch said:

If you were a player and looked at the goings on at Bolton would you sign for them?

Only if I didn't have any other offers from clubs. Or if I didn't have a job.

Or they offered to pay me 6k a week and Stanley only offered me 3?

killerandflash said:

Cafc43v3r said:

NapaAddick said:

Cafc43v3r said:

The only solution in my opinion is either spread the premier league money more fairly among the 92 clubs (not going to happen) or say that every club must submit a financial forecast every April, for the current season.  If they aren't breaking even, as a mimium they are docked 20 points that season. If they are found to have lied or mislead in this statement they get kicked out the league, no ifs, no buts. 

Almost every club loses money. To require them to break even and then docking 100+ clubs 20 points is going to look pretty silly. If anything, such a requirement just means a lot more clubs going into administration, not less. Because it’s not as much about financial losses in any year but the debt loads already imbedded hanging over the clubs. No league clubs have ever gone into administration because they lost £1 million the previous season.

The first line proves my point.  Someone ITK said that 6k a week was the going rate for a top league one player.  Obviously some will get a bit less, but say you need ten on an average wage of 5k a week, 5 loans (assuming they are free, which they aren't) then another ten on say an average of 2k a week to make up the squad (mixture of youngsters and journey men). That's 3.6 million a year, in wages for the first team squad.  No manager, no coaches, no u23s. 

2018 our match day income was 3.4 million, central income 1.4 million and commercial about the same. Paying just the first team players would leave about 3 million to pay for everything else.  Stadium and training ground, management, academy, gas, electric, water etc.  It is just not possible.

I maybe wrong but I think @Airman Brown said the actual income from a match day ticket was about £8 after tax etc so if you added 6k to every gate of the season you would only raise an extra million or so. 

If you halved the wage bill you would be looking at a much more viable business model.  Obviously you can't do that as you wouldn't be able to field a competitive team.  The only way to do that is to force wages down by making sure everyone else does the same. 

The current system means that 72 someones have to put money, a lot of money, into every club, every year. Its bonkers and I don't think there is another business model like it in the world 

The only solution is reducing the 6k a week (or whatever) which is over 300k before bonuses and a crazy sum for 3rd tier football

Due to the "trickle down effect" of madness of the Premier League wages at all levels of football are uneconomic. Even in non league football, I don't see how the National League clubs can afford to be full professional with the gate income at that level.

A quick Google search suggested Lee Gregory was on 8k a week when he signed for Millwall from Halifax so I might have under estimated a bit. 

Seems that the EFL have confirmed that the Bolton v Brentford game wont be played this week...

If Bolton don't play their last two games, which is looking likely, are their results annulled? potentially changing promotion/relegation places?

Valiantphil said:

Think of all the money in football, TV income, Sponsorship etc that goes around and around - where does it actually finish up it's economic cycle ?

Players and agents.
Wages are far too high. I know lads that are currently hoping to get a big club / Prem club who are not interested in the money, just the sense of achievement, but something turns them as they get closer to the football elite and they suddenly become like rabbits in headlights.
The football culture is that the more you get paid must mean the better player you are - and it stings their ego that someone on their team is five quid a week a better player than them.

Obviously on a much bigger scale but isn't that part of the reported problem at Man U right now. Pogba and De Gea both said to be unhappy and wanting pay parity with Sanchez.

In the NFL, NBA and MLB, agents make 4% of the player's contract and usually 10% of endorsements. ALL paid for FROM the player's contract, not on top of it. And certainly nothing like European football, where it is far, far more, and varies from transfer to transfer. Why the big leagues don't just get together and vote that all agent fees must come from the contract and then let the players and agents sort out the payments themselves, is beyond me. All it would take is a majority vote. I think pay to agents is causing more damage at the margin than player wages.

NapaAddick said:

In the NFL, NBA and MLB, agents make 4% of the player's contract and usually 10% of endorsements. ALL paid for FROM the player's contract, not on top of it. And certainly nothing like European football, where it is far, far more, and varies from transfer to transfer. Why the big leagues don't just get together and vote that all agent fees must come from the contract and then let the players and agents sort out the payments themselves, is beyond me. All it would take is a majority vote. I think pay to agents is causing more damage at the margin than player wages.

Uefa and or Fifa could step in and say that too much money is going out of football and enforce this.

clubs are getting transfer bans left and right for over spending and a significant percentage of that is agents fees.