| No money 21:39 - Oct 26 with 16718 views | magicdaps10 |
Been told by two people in the last 24 hours that the word from within the club is that there is no money.
They are not seriously that dull or even ignorant to attempt to filter this to the fans!?! |  |
| |  |
| No money on 18:41 - Oct 27 with 1288 views | Wingstandwood |
| No money on 17:27 - Oct 27 by NOTRAC |
Whilst it is true that commercial income and gate money are lower than most clubs, a summary of wages for all years in the Premiership shows worrying Trends.
2012. £34.5m
2013. £48.9m
2014. £56.2m
2015. £82.5m. (Fourteen month period)
2016. £82.7m
There was a massive leap in wages paid from May 14 .Before suggesting this increase corresponded with TV increases it is worth considering total employee numbers.
2012. 192
2013. 208
2014. 246
2015. 307
2016. 361
The 2015 year shows an increase in number of employees of 25%
The 2016 year a further increase of 20%
Compared to the 2014 (verysuccessful year for us) the number of employees rose by 50% in two years.
Why?
What have the benefits been.?
Surely this is n area to enquire into. |
Holy f#cking shit! What an increase in personel.... and despite me emailing the club shop to enquire about a restock of out of stock items on quite a few occasions within that very staffing increase period I never got a single reply. What are these extra staff, ghost-employees?
Worldwide branding and staffing levels but? Isthmian League customer satisfaction, customer-respect, customer relations and responce. But hey our board members filled their back pockets! |  |
| |
| No money on 18:42 - Oct 27 with 1286 views | MoscowJack |
| No money on 18:34 - Oct 27 by Garyjack |
Stewards? in fact all match day staff i would imagine, turn style operators etc. Surely they can't be included in the figures given? If they are then i'd say we are seriously under staffed! |
I've got absolutely no idea what the answer to that is.
There are caterers, bar staff, stewards, turnstile operators, hospitality meet/greet people, ground staff, matchday ticket office, receptionists, etc who should nearly all be outsourced via agencies to minimise exposure if/when the worst happens.
If this number is not including them then I would worry. If it is including them, then the number isn't so bad but potentially not the best way to run an up/down and seasonal (no summer income) business like a football club. |  |
| |
| No money on 19:01 - Oct 27 with 1260 views | NOTRAC |
There will be a heck of a lot of people losing their jobs if we get relegated.
Cardiff's total spend last year was £33m. Total number employed 186. And that was with the parachute payments. | |
| |
| No money on 19:07 - Oct 27 with 1247 views | waynekerr55 |
| No money on 18:05 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Southampton employ 300+ staff as of 2016 which rose by 11% from the year before and expect it to continue to rise as they state they look to continue to grow the business both commercially and on field.
That was the first mid range club I looked at that has had a prolonged period at this level. I don't think I am too concerned with that NOTRAC. |
I don't think we can compare ourselves with Southampton, who've got the Liebherr family backing them. It was a minor miracle that we got to where we are, now that's in serious danger because egos (one in particular) have caused this mess. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:08]
|  |
| |
| No money on 19:18 - Oct 27 with 1228 views | Garyjack |
| No money on 19:07 - Oct 27 by waynekerr55 |
I don't think we can compare ourselves with Southampton, who've got the Liebherr family backing them. It was a minor miracle that we got to where we are, now that's in serious danger because egos (one in particular) have caused this mess. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:08]
|
They are no longer backed by the Liebherr family Wayne, When Markus Liebherr passed away his ownership/shareholding was transferred to his daughter who has absolutely no interest in football. In Aug she sold an 80% holding to a Chinese consortium. |  | | |
| No money on 19:18 - Oct 27 with 1228 views | E20Jack |
| No money on 19:07 - Oct 27 by waynekerr55 |
I don't think we can compare ourselves with Southampton, who've got the Liebherr family backing them. It was a minor miracle that we got to where we are, now that's in serious danger because egos (one in particular) have caused this mess. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:08]
|
Stoke then?
They also employ around 300 staff, not including 71 match-day staff. It also seems to be increasing year on year.
In contrast, West Ham employ 671 staff and that is a mix of full and part time positions. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:26]
|  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 19:30 - Oct 27 with 1202 views | whiterock |
| | | |
| No money on 19:36 - Oct 27 with 1195 views | longlostjack |
| No money on 19:18 - Oct 27 by Garyjack |
They are no longer backed by the Liebherr family Wayne, When Markus Liebherr passed away his ownership/shareholding was transferred to his daughter who has absolutely no interest in football. In Aug she sold an 80% holding to a Chinese consortium. |
The biscuit makers bought for about £15m in 2009 and sold for £220m last year. Kept the club run properly throughout that period fair play. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No money on 20:29 - Oct 27 with 1123 views | Garyjack |
| No money on 19:36 - Oct 27 by longlostjack |
The biscuit makers bought for about £15m in 2009 and sold for £220m last year. Kept the club run properly throughout that period fair play. |
Most definitely LJ, Katharina Liebherr has done that out of a duty to her late father. But since they've entered the Premier League she has not bankrolled them. They've had to be self sufficient hence the sales of top players for top prices. The success of their academy has absorbed this. But either way, as you say, run properly. Could have been us to a degree, but there you go. | | | |
| No money on 20:35 - Oct 27 with 1111 views | Wingstandwood |
| No money on 19:52 - Oct 27 by waynekerr55 |
Bet 365 Peter Coates too 
Although I agree, what ROI have we seen? The club is a shambles and I shudder to think what will happen if we do get relegated, given relegation clauses are now generally the exception and not the rule. |
I should imagine remains from the nice fat juicy PL carcass is going to have rather a lot less meat on it for the Yanks and sell-out/ex-sell-out vultures in the Championship. In fact our club will be well into the midst of an austere cost cutting equivalent of a starvation diet? It is gonna be nearly all bones.....I have watched vultures when things turn nasty because there is not enough meat to go around.
You watch this lot, there will be a free-for-all to get whats left! I would not be surprised if they and turn on eachother... It's not going to be nice.
The parachute payments will not last long when you've got to pay a squad with a fair amount of non-performers on a fat wage. | |
| |
| No money on 21:07 - Oct 27 with 1081 views | MoscowJack |
| No money on 19:18 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Stoke then?
They also employ around 300 staff, not including 71 match-day staff. It also seems to be increasing year on year.
In contrast, West Ham employ 671 staff and that is a mix of full and part time positions. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:26]
|
Peter Coates, owner of Stoke, is one of the richest guys in the country.
I did a bit of research a couple of years ago and our main shareholder then (Martin Morgan) was in the bottom 3 of the Championship in terms of wealth. We're no better off now, so that's basically where we are financially.
West Brom have new(ish) backers, I think, Bournemouth heavily backed.....we're really up against it, but we don't help ourselves by wasting huge money on too many failures. | |
| |
| No money on 21:34 - Oct 27 with 1042 views | E20Jack |
| No money on 21:07 - Oct 27 by MoscowJack |
Peter Coates, owner of Stoke, is one of the richest guys in the country.
I did a bit of research a couple of years ago and our main shareholder then (Martin Morgan) was in the bottom 3 of the Championship in terms of wealth. We're no better off now, so that's basically where we are financially.
West Brom have new(ish) backers, I think, Bournemouth heavily backed.....we're really up against it, but we don't help ourselves by wasting huge money on too many failures. |
Unless they are putting their own money in then it doesn't matter if he is they richest man in the world.
The point being that 300+ staff seems to be the going rate for a club of similar size to ours. Having a rich chairman is irrelevant as it seems to be inbuilt in the spending model for the PL money each club receives. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 21:38]
| |
| |
| No money on 21:42 - Oct 27 with 1031 views | MoscowJack |
| No money on 21:34 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Unless they are putting their own money in then it doesn't matter if he is they richest man in the world.
The point being that 300+ staff seems to be the going rate for a club of similar size to ours. Having a rich chairman is irrelevant as it seems to be inbuilt in the spending model for the PL money each club receives. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 21:38]
|
He's putting in huge amounts. I think he's £100m+ down and doesn't care.
300 staff means nothing - it depends on their roles, salaries etc, but even then it's nothing compared to their playing wage bill which must be quite a bit more than ours. That's were most of the additional funding must go.
They seem like a steady club coz that's what they are....steady. | |
| |
| No money on 21:44 - Oct 27 with 1026 views | Dewi1jack |
| No money on 21:34 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Unless they are putting their own money in then it doesn't matter if he is they richest man in the world.
The point being that 300+ staff seems to be the going rate for a club of similar size to ours. Having a rich chairman is irrelevant as it seems to be inbuilt in the spending model for the PL money each club receives. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 21:38]
|
I suppose that depends on them being cost effective.
If they're the best for the job and being highly paid then fair enough.
If they're just family with a CSE in accounting running the books or similar on higher than average money then...
Beaky didn't become the best in the business in the couple of seasons before the sales.
Yet doubled his wages basically overnight.
Plus bonuses.
Plus dividends when paid
Same with others.
Personally, I don't think that's cost effective management. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| No money on 21:46 - Oct 27 with 1025 views | E20Jack |
| No money on 21:42 - Oct 27 by MoscowJack |
He's putting in huge amounts. I think he's £100m+ down and doesn't care.
300 staff means nothing - it depends on their roles, salaries etc, but even then it's nothing compared to their playing wage bill which must be quite a bit more than ours. That's were most of the additional funding must go.
They seem like a steady club coz that's what they are....steady. |
Fair play to him. If only we could find an owner to chuck money at us and write it off.
If he left tomorrow though, I doubt they would see many, if any, redundancies. The staff figure is similar across the board regardless of owners wealth. I can only imagine his money has been enabling them to sign a higher quality of player as opposed to being able to get more commercial staff on modest salaries. | |
| |
| No money on 21:52 - Oct 27 with 1011 views | Shaky |
| No money on 13:48 - Oct 27 by AguycalledJack |
This years accounts will make interesting reading.
Keep an eye out for the consultancy fees as in my view this the only way the owners can get cash out of the club without sharing a percentage apportionment with the trust. |
There is no cash to take out. That's the whole point. |  |
| |
| No money on 21:58 - Oct 27 with 1008 views | Wingstandwood |
| No money on 21:34 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Unless they are putting their own money in then it doesn't matter if he is they richest man in the world.
The point being that 300+ staff seems to be the going rate for a club of similar size to ours. Having a rich chairman is irrelevant as it seems to be inbuilt in the spending model for the PL money each club receives. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 21:38]
|
Morgan was/is a multi-millionaire, if he was even bank rollling the club with a micro-miniscule fraction of his personal wealth? Why did the supporters have to raise money from out of their own pockets for Britton fund, Robbie James bust, Ivor Allchurch statue and a good few other projects also? Why? Why? Why?
How much of all that was mentioned in sell-outs propaganda/ sell-off marketting tool JTAK hey?
Morgan could have paid for all of the above, it would have been small change to him! But nah, he parasitcally fed from and reaped the end product from SCFC supporters generous efforts. Morgan (and gang) were and still are at SCFC with every intent of doing the complete and utter opposite take, take, take and never gave a fraction of what SCFC supporters gave, zero £'s were given by Morgan and gang would be my own personal guess. | |
| |
| No money on 22:03 - Oct 27 with 996 views | Shaky |
| No money on 17:27 - Oct 27 by NOTRAC |
Whilst it is true that commercial income and gate money are lower than most clubs, a summary of wages for all years in the Premiership shows worrying Trends.
2012. £34.5m
2013. £48.9m
2014. £56.2m
2015. £82.5m. (Fourteen month period)
2016. £82.7m
There was a massive leap in wages paid from May 14 .Before suggesting this increase corresponded with TV increases it is worth considering total employee numbers.
2012. 192
2013. 208
2014. 246
2015. 307
2016. 361
The 2015 year shows an increase in number of employees of 25%
The 2016 year a further increase of 20%
Compared to the 2014 (verysuccessful year for us) the number of employees rose by 50% in two years.
Why?
What have the benefits been.?
Surely this is n area to enquire into. |
Jenkins has discussed this in the past.
As an - aherm - fan owned club, Swansea came to the Prem with a lot of unpaid volunteers in all sorts of positions around the club.
As the league position stabilised it was increasingly felt these people should be paid. Cozy in his role as supporters' liaison is a bad example of that, but it's hard to argue with the underlying principle.
Furthermore, if you look at the total wage bill in comparison to Premier league TV revenues, the proportion is remarkably stable.
Generally speaking there is nothing to see here, although undoubtedly the wage bill did rise when Jenkins went through a phase of signing out of contract plyers on huge salaries in lieu of paying prevailing transfer fees. | |
| |
| No money on 22:06 - Oct 27 with 990 views | E20Jack |
| No money on 21:58 - Oct 27 by Wingstandwood |
Morgan was/is a multi-millionaire, if he was even bank rollling the club with a micro-miniscule fraction of his personal wealth? Why did the supporters have to raise money from out of their own pockets for Britton fund, Robbie James bust, Ivor Allchurch statue and a good few other projects also? Why? Why? Why?
How much of all that was mentioned in sell-outs propaganda/ sell-off marketting tool JTAK hey?
Morgan could have paid for all of the above, it would have been small change to him! But nah, he parasitcally fed from and reaped the end product from SCFC supporters generous efforts. Morgan (and gang) were and still are at SCFC with every intent of doing the complete and utter opposite take, take, take and never gave a fraction of what SCFC supporters gave, zero £'s were given by Morgan and gang would be my own personal guess. |
Because it wasn't his club, he owned 23% of it.
I don't blame any of them for not sticking their hand in their own pockets, I don't blame the Americans for not doing it either. It is not how a club should be run in my opinion. Clubs should spend what they earn and that is that.
Chairmen pumping in millions to the game is a big part, along with Sky - of ruining the game. | |
| |
| No money on 22:14 - Oct 27 with 973 views | max936 |
| No money on 21:58 - Oct 27 by Wingstandwood |
Morgan was/is a multi-millionaire, if he was even bank rollling the club with a micro-miniscule fraction of his personal wealth? Why did the supporters have to raise money from out of their own pockets for Britton fund, Robbie James bust, Ivor Allchurch statue and a good few other projects also? Why? Why? Why?
How much of all that was mentioned in sell-outs propaganda/ sell-off marketting tool JTAK hey?
Morgan could have paid for all of the above, it would have been small change to him! But nah, he parasitcally fed from and reaped the end product from SCFC supporters generous efforts. Morgan (and gang) were and still are at SCFC with every intent of doing the complete and utter opposite take, take, take and never gave a fraction of what SCFC supporters gave, zero £'s were given by Morgan and gang would be my own personal guess. |
Jenkins, Dineen, JVZ all owe Morgan a great deal of gratitude, he's probably the one person that put them on the road to the riches they have now, all "earned" from Swansea City Football Club who they all apparently cherish if you listened to all the bullshit spoke on JTAK. |  |
| |
| No money on 22:37 - Oct 27 with 949 views | Garyjack |
| No money on 22:03 - Oct 27 by Shaky |
Jenkins has discussed this in the past.
As an - aherm - fan owned club, Swansea came to the Prem with a lot of unpaid volunteers in all sorts of positions around the club.
As the league position stabilised it was increasingly felt these people should be paid. Cozy in his role as supporters' liaison is a bad example of that, but it's hard to argue with the underlying principle.
Furthermore, if you look at the total wage bill in comparison to Premier league TV revenues, the proportion is remarkably stable.
Generally speaking there is nothing to see here, although undoubtedly the wage bill did rise when Jenkins went through a phase of signing out of contract plyers on huge salaries in lieu of paying prevailing transfer fees. |
As the league position stabilised it was increasingly felt these people should be paid. Cozy in his role as supporters' liaison is a bad example of that, but it's hard to argue with the underlying principle.
Why is Huw Cooze's position as the supporters liaison officer a bad example of that? | | | |
| No money on 22:46 - Oct 27 with 930 views | Garyjack |
| No money on 22:14 - Oct 27 by max936 |
Jenkins, Dineen, JVZ all owe Morgan a great deal of gratitude, he's probably the one person that put them on the road to the riches they have now, all "earned" from Swansea City Football Club who they all apparently cherish if you listened to all the bullshit spoke on JTAK. |
Yeah MM looked after his mates alright Max. Bestest friend ever! Anything else you want to add? ........I hope your not trying to make him out to be a good guy here Max! Because he's the biggest cvnt of em all! | | | |
| No money on 22:58 - Oct 27 with 919 views | xmastree |
| No money on 19:07 - Oct 27 by waynekerr55 |
I don't think we can compare ourselves with Southampton, who've got the Liebherr family backing them. It was a minor miracle that we got to where we are, now that's in serious danger because egos (one in particular) have caused this mess. [Post edited 27 Oct 2017 19:08]
|
To be fair wayne you just hit the nail on the head. Why ?. ' minor miracle that we got to where we are'. It may be by luck or guile but we did it and have remained. One day, like most clubs outside the top 6, we will have a really bad season and might drop. It will happen whether hj is there or not. It's football. Even man u have dropped massively last few years compared to previous 20 years.
We need to stop looking to blame. As there was no 1 person that got us to where we are there is no one person to blame should we get relegated. | | | |
| No money on 23:04 - Oct 27 with 909 views | Wingstandwood |
| No money on 22:06 - Oct 27 by E20Jack |
Because it wasn't his club, he owned 23% of it.
I don't blame any of them for not sticking their hand in their own pockets, I don't blame the Americans for not doing it either. It is not how a club should be run in my opinion. Clubs should spend what they earn and that is that.
Chairmen pumping in millions to the game is a big part, along with Sky - of ruining the game. |
Oi! The Trust also had a shareholding but paid for a storage container for the players to keep training kit and training equipment. I was not asking the sell-outs to go all Jack Walker.
Fund raisers/supporters i.e. REAL SUPPORTERS (you don't like that type of thing?) stuck their hands in their own pockets.... Tony Pennock would have been without his DONATED treatment table/bench if he relied on Morgan and his likeminded lot. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
