Southend United On The Brink.

[essex canary 496]

41 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Brentford owe Matthew Benham £60m

https://swissramble.substack.com/p/brentford-finances-202122

Their Net Debt went down though when in the Premier League. Is that normal? (that question ought to be for Zoe).

[duke63 542]

45 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Brentford owe Matthew Benham £60m

https://swissramble.substack.com/p/brentford-finances-202122

They might well do so but they are not insolvent and they have assets that will cover  all their debts. Every other EPL team, bar Arsenal, does not and are are only surviving because their wealthy owner has not asked for their money back. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,929]

32 minutes ago, duke63 said:

They might well do so but they are not insolvent and they have assets that will cover  all their debts. Every other EPL team, bar Arsenal, does not and are are only surviving because their wealthy owner has not asked for their money back. 

Sorry, but I never claimed they were insolvent. Someone suggested Brighton and Brentford were good examples of clubs run properly. They're not, they have very large debts and have got where they are because of the financial support of one person in each case. 

You are quite right about Arsenal. It has been run very carefully over a long period and has only recently started to spend a lot of money on players. 

[Badger 2,405]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Latest accounts show the Brentford debt is £62m.

The problem with clubs the size of Brentford, Brighton and Norwich is what happens when they are relegated. That will almost certainly happen eventually. The other problem is what happens when the benefactor dies, as with Leicester City. 

The Brighton debt is absolutely ridiculous for a club of its size. It won't end well. 

As far as I know, Tony Bloom is a good guy and not "a chancer." I believe he is in it for the love of the club and not the money; he is a generous donor to a number of good causes and gives his time to Charity. However, he is "only" worth about 1.3 billion and could not continue to support the club at the levels he has - hence the "player trading model" that they have adopted. As a maths graduate, who made his fortune out of gambling, it is something that he is capable of doing very well, so this is their best chance of a sustainable future.

However, I can't think of any clubs of Brighton's size that manage to sustain permanent PL football, and unless he writes off the debt, it could become a big issue at some stage.

[BigFish 1,987]

17 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Sorry, but I never claimed they were insolvent. Someone suggested Brighton and Brentford were good examples of clubs run properly. They're not, they have very large debts and have got where they are because of the financial support of one person in each case. 

You are quite right about Arsenal. It has been run very carefully over a long period and has only recently started to spend a lot of money on players. 

 

13 minutes ago, Badger said:

As far as I know, Tony Bloom is a good guy and not "a chancer." I believe he is in it for the love of the club and not the money; he is a generous donor to a number of good causes and gives his time to Charity. However, he is "only" worth about 1.3 billion and could not continue to support the club at the levels he has - hence the "player trading model" that they have adopted. As a maths graduate, who made his fortune out of gambling, it is something that he is capable of doing very well, so this is their best chance of a sustainable future.

However, I can't think of any clubs of Brighton's size that manage to sustain permanent PL football, and unless he writes off the debt, it could become a big issue at some stage.

In both cases these are clubs that are run properly, to pretend otherwise is a nonsense. Although this does require a definition of properly. Both are underpinned by wealthy fans and neither Bentham or Bloom show any evidence of expecting to see the hundreds of millions of pounds that was required to get them to this point ever again. Much better than the sportswashing of oppressive states or quick buck chancers. That said don't be fooled by any idea of the next level and these clubs reaching it. This only lasts as long as Bloom and Bentham are there. Much like Walker and Blackburn the clubs will revert to their natural level when they are gone. It is a myth to think that player trading alone can keep you at the top end of the EPL forever.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

5 minutes ago, BigFish said:

 

In both cases these are clubs that are run properly, to pretend otherwise is a nonsense. Although this does require a definition of properly. Both are underpinned by wealthy fans and neither Bentham or Bloom show any evidence of expecting to see the hundreds of millions of pounds that was required to get them to this point ever again. Much better than the sportswashing of oppressive states or quick buck chancers. That said don't be fooled by any idea of the next level and these clubs reaching it. This only lasts as long as Bloom and Bentham are there. Much like Walker and Blackburn the clubs will revert to their natural level when they are gone. It is a myth to think that player trading alone can keep you at the top end of the EPL forever.

And how long before English football moves to another level? The entrance of the Saudi league has upped the ante. EPL clubs may well find they are not the big attraction they were two seasons ago. The price they may have to pay can only come from TV money. And what if someone starts a platform for the Saudis?

[duke63 542]

6 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

And how long before English football moves to another level? The entrance of the Saudi league has upped the ante. EPL clubs may well find they are not the big attraction they were two seasons ago. The price they may have to pay can only come from TV money. And what if someone starts a platform for the Saudis?

Saudis already own a number of big TV companies across Europe i believe. The Saudi League is shown live on French TV for example.

[essex canary 496]

3 minutes ago, duke63 said:

Saudis already own a number of big TV companies across Europe i believe. The Saudi League is shown live on French TV for example.

Could be good for pricking the Premier League bubble and provincial English Football Clubs.

[duke63 542]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Could be good for pricking the Premier League bubble and provincial English Football Clubs.

I think that is inevitable. The money the Saudis have makes the EPL look like a Sunday League.

At which point hopefully clubs that have be run on a reasonably sound financial base will prosper and those who haven't, will fail.

 

As pointed out above, investing in a football club relies on the fact that at some point the club will win a trophy and enter Europe and the money moves on to another level. However, it then starts another financial ball rolling that needs to be fed every year.

I have heard that Chelsea have attempted to buck the FFP system by putting players on ten year contracts, but under EUFA Champions League rules, these players will be ineligible to play. I wonder what happens if they qualify this year?

 

[BigFish 1,987]

9 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

And how long before English football moves to another level? The entrance of the Saudi league has upped the ante. EPL clubs may well find they are not the big attraction they were two seasons ago. The price they may have to pay can only come from TV money. And what if someone starts a platform for the Saudis?

 

4 minutes ago, duke63 said:

Saudis already own a number of big TV companies across Europe i believe. The Saudi League is shown live on French TV for example.

We already saw this with the abortive European Super League proposal and could well see an expanded World Club Championship. The Qataris and Emirates have also bought into football in a big way and are unlikely to roll over for the Saudis, so the Saudi League is unlikely to supplant the EPL in itself. What was the Big 6 and is now probably the Big 7 will be OK but there is no global market for Brighton, Brentford and should I say Norwich, for sure.

[duke63 542]

5 minutes ago, BigFish said:

 

We already saw this with the abortive European Super League proposal and could well see an expanded World Club Championship. The Qataris and Emirates have also bought into football in a big way and are unlikely to roll over for the Saudis, so the Saudi League is unlikely to supplant the EPL in itself. What was the Big 6 and is now probably the Big 7 will be OK but there is no global market for Brighton, Brentford and should I say Norwich, for sure.

Qatar and Emirates oil production added together is only half of what Saudi produces, so financially they are not on the same level.

The Arab states know that oil has a limited lifespan so they are trying to promote their Countries in other ways to have an inward money flow in the future.

[BigFish 1,987]

18 minutes ago, duke63 said:

Qatar and Emirates oil production added together is only half of what Saudi produces, so financially they are not on the same level.

The Arab states know that oil has a limited lifespan so they are trying to promote their Countries in other ways to have an inward money flow in the future.

You are missing the point, Qatar and the Emirates provide enough of a bulwark financially to prevent the Saudis getting it all their own way and already own many of the key brands in Global football. You can add China, US & Japan to the list as well. The Saudi League will never be marketable on a global scale but this doesn't prevent it being a nuisance. They are really just the same as Walker, Bentham and Bloom but on financial steroids. The EPL's early adopter advantage ensures that. The real immediate threat is some disrupter  giving the big European clubs an opportunity to break away from UEFA.

Edited August 24, 2023 by BigFish

[Surfer 1,547]

Indeed they are. However the threat to the EPL finances is lack of TV eyeballs. And the key question them is - do TV viewers watch the sport for the players, or the clubs, involved? 

[Badger 2,405]

1 hour ago, BigFish said:

That said don't be fooled by any idea of the next level and these clubs reaching it. This only lasts as long as Bloom and Bentham are there. Much like Walker and Blackburn the clubs will revert to their natural level when they are gone. It is a myth to think that player trading alone can keep you at the top end of the EPL forever.

Agree completely - they may continue to be a success in the short-term but like all the others will decline when the level of subsidy is cut: you can't be an established premier league club with gates around 30,000.

[duke63 542]

1 hour ago, BigFish said:

You are missing the point, Qatar and the Emirates provide enough of a bulwark financially to prevent the Saudis getting it all their own way and already own many of the key brands in Global football. You can add China, US & Japan to the list as well. The Saudi League will never be marketable on a global scale but this doesn't prevent it being a nuisance. They are really just the same as Walker, Bentham and Bloom but on financial steroids. The EPL's early adopter advantage ensures that. The real immediate threat is some disrupter  giving the big European clubs an opportunity to break away from UEFA.

I would say the European Super League would be the best thing to happen to English football and possibly even more so to us as Norwich supporters. 
In the short term it may well cause a lot of financial problems but at least it might become proper English football again where all teams can win the League. 
All the best games I have watched this season on TV have been championship matches. The EPL is increasingly a bore fest and the games I have watched have been very dull and I haven’t watched til the end. 
I wonder what sponsors and advertisers make of that? Or are English fans just a nuisance in the money making scheme of things? If I could pay to watch the Championship but not the EPL, I would. 
 

And how long before big clubs are playing ‘home’ games in Arab states or Asia? It’s already been mooted once. 

[Google Bot 3,278]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

And what if someone starts a platform for the Saudis?

DAZN already doing that, they putting trailers out for the Saudi season between all their other shows.  Pushing quite hard.

[Nuff Said 5,142]

18 hours ago, Newtopia said:

Football is in a bad way, supporters drive for continuous improvement and seek owners who pay (gamble) for that improvement.  Whilst it is actually smoking mirrors with only the top few sides having any realistic chance of winning anything tangible.

 

What on earth is a smoking mirror?

[BigFish 1,987]

1 hour ago, duke63 said:

I would say the European Super League would be the best thing to happen to English football and possibly even more so to us as Norwich supporters. 
In the short term it may well cause a lot of financial problems but at least it might become proper English football again where all teams can win the League. 
All the best games I have watched this season on TV have been championship matches. The EPL is increasingly a bore fest and the games I have watched have been very dull and I haven’t watched til the end. 
I wonder what sponsors and advertisers make of that? Or are English fans just a nuisance in the money making scheme of things? If I could pay to watch the Championship but not the EPL, I would. 
 

And how long before big clubs are playing ‘home’ games in Arab states or Asia? It’s already been mooted once. 

I don't think you are alone in that @duke63 and I wonder what financial model (the rump left behind that is) it could settle on. I would worry about the social, cultural and economic impacts the the end of the pyramid would entail though.

[chicken 2,625]

6 hours ago, essex canary said:

Brilliant sentence!

Geoffrey Watling was right that Clubs should have a broader base than dominant individuals and families. Exeter lead the way. Then again I had better ask @chicken for his view.

 

My view is that you are still a self obsessed privilaged twazzok that continues to try and manipulate people into agreeing with you despite you not caring one iota about them.

I say try, because as hard as you persist in bending topics to be about your vendetta, to date, no one appears to be joining you.

Before you retort, perhaps you'll think twice about asking for my view in future it'll only become more unkind as I lose even more patience waiting for you to actually bring something relevent to a thread.

[chicken 2,625]

1 hour ago, duke63 said:

I would say the European Super League would be the best thing to happen to English football and possibly even more so to us as Norwich supporters. 
In the short term it may well cause a lot of financial problems but at least it might become proper English football again where all teams can win the League. 
All the best games I have watched this season on TV have been championship matches. The EPL is increasingly a bore fest and the games I have watched have been very dull and I haven’t watched til the end. 
I wonder what sponsors and advertisers make of that? Or are English fans just a nuisance in the money making scheme of things? If I could pay to watch the Championship but not the EPL, I would. 
 

And how long before big clubs are playing ‘home’ games in Arab states or Asia? It’s already been mooted once. 

Nah. If the super league happens football as we know it could well implode. Without the top end money that those clubs do bring to the game, it's likely we'll see more clubs fold.

Grass roots has already been haemoraging clubs faster than victims in a slasher horror movie.

We could well be looking at a much smaller professional game as a result.

It's about time that a stand was taken and all this nonsense was sorted out. Ball is at the feet of the FA/FIFA IMHO, and they need to dome heavy lifting to get trust back.

[essex canary 496]

2 minutes ago, chicken said:

My view is that you are still a self obsessed privilaged twazzok that continues to try and manipulate people into agreeing with you despite you not caring one iota about them.

I say try, because as hard as you persist in bending topics to be about your vendetta, to date, no one appears to be joining you.

Before you retort, perhaps you'll think twice about asking for my view in future it'll only become more unkind as I lose even more patience waiting for you to actually bring something relevent to a thread.

Thank you for that massively enlightening viewpoint. Roots Hall is my third most visited ground so I have some sympathy with your thoughts for the Southend public. Nonetheless as other posters have noted you are out of your depth here. You have just acknowledged that point yourself.

[essex canary 496]

1 hour ago, duke63 said:

I would say the European Super League would be the best thing to happen to English football and possibly even more so to us as Norwich supporters. 
In the short term it may well cause a lot of financial problems but at least it might become proper English football again where all teams can win the League. 
All the best games I have watched this season on TV have been championship matches. The EPL is increasingly a bore fest and the games I have watched have been very dull and I haven’t watched til the end. 
I wonder what sponsors and advertisers make of that? Or are English fans just a nuisance in the money making scheme of things? If I could pay to watch the Championship but not the EPL, I would. 
 

And how long before big clubs are playing ‘home’ games in Arab states or Asia? It’s already been mooted once. 

Absolutely. Who wants to watch all these ridiculous one sided matches in the Premier League and Champions League. In the latter Rangers v PSV the night before last is as good as it gets.

[chicken 2,625]

22 hours ago, Newtopia said:

Football is in a bad way, supporters drive for continuous improvement and seek owners who pay (gamble) for that improvement.  Whilst it is actually smoking mirrors with only the top few sides having any realistic chance of winning anything tangible.

Plenty of sides have gambled and lost after a short period of success.  Bolton, Leeds, Reading, Portsmouth, Leicester, Sunderland, Coventry, Birmingham, QPR, Middlesbrough, Charlton, and Derby, to name a few.

I think this is more accurately said of the top two tiers of football, especially the premier league sides and those looking to get into it. I don't think it is true for the rest of the football league and non league. At least, not as much.

Take Coventry and Rotherham for example. The fans are quite realistic of expectations for their clubs. And there are others in the championship that are similar.

Equally, there are fans of clubs in the premier league that know that they aren't able to spend millions with the risk being implosion upon relegation either. 

I also am inclined to believe that the vast majority of fans would be happy with having a club for say, the next 30yrs than risking it all on the sake of a big gamble on promotion.

As you rightly say, the football league is littered with clubs that have gambled and lost and still sit in lowly positions considering their size and the height they once achieved. I would throw in Bradford, Swindon, Stockport, Notts County, Walsall, Tranmere - all clubs that we once battled in the old Division One during the premier league era. Bradford have tasted Premier League football. Oldham are in the national league and also experienced premier league football. 

The championship table reads like a list of clubs that spent hard and failed to achieve much with the gamble. 

[chicken 2,625]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Thank you for that massively enlightening viewpoint. Roots Hall is my third most visited ground so I have some sympathy with your thoughts for the Southend public. Nonetheless as other posters have noted you are out of your depth here. You have just acknowledged that point yourself.

As I thought, fail. You asked for my view. I gave you the only view I am inclined to give such a charlatan. You can assume all you like but you'll always be wrong. I haven't acknowledged anything, as you well know. But if we talk about points acknowledged by ones self and being out of your depth, dare I mention a thread about a prospective take over and the fact that several, reliable and consistent forum regulars have corrected you on several occasions and yet you still continue to spout rubbish on said thread and they continue to correct you.

You see, I don't profess to be an expert on finances, but I can understand things when they are explained to me. So perhaps you'd be best served by actually respecting posters on this forum a hell of a lot more than you have done so far, stick your trumpet up your behind and listen to those that know rather than continue this, frankly pathetic, tirade that often doesn't even start to stack up, against the club.

[Newtopia 517]

5 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

What on earth is a smoking mirror?

Sorry meant smoke and mirrors

 

[essex canary 496]

1 hour ago, chicken said:

As I thought, fail. You asked for my view. I gave you the only view I am inclined to give such a charlatan. You can assume all you like but you'll always be wrong. I haven't acknowledged anything, as you well know. But if we talk about points acknowledged by ones self and being out of your depth, dare I mention a thread about a prospective take over and the fact that several, reliable and consistent forum regulars have corrected you on several occasions and yet you still continue to spout rubbish on said thread and they continue to correct you.

You see, I don't profess to be an expert on finances, but I can understand things when they are explained to me. So perhaps you'd be best served by actually respecting posters on this forum a hell of a lot more than you have done so far, stick your trumpet up your behind and listen to those that know rather than continue this, frankly pathetic, tirade that often doesn't even start to stack up, against the club.

Perhaps I can comment on Southend United in relation to Cambridge United since I effectively swapped one for the other as my second team in 2016. During that time the 2 clubs with similar profiles in terms of stadium and support etc have essentially moved in opposite directions. Cambridge spent 9 seasons at fifth tier level up until 2014. They had their troubles to and survived then progressed. Of course they could regress again or perhaps they could become the next Brentford?  Southend on the other hand are in their third season in the fifth tier but are apparently on the brink. We should feel sympathetic to the Southend fans. Perhaps we should expect the top of the football spectrum to do more. Equally Southend's top brass also needed to have taken responsibility and to have created more resilience not least to be fair to Cambridge.

Is there really anything egotistical or abusive about that?

[essex canary 496]

11 hours ago, duke63 said:

Brentford does not have any net debt. 
 

I trawled through most of the EPL clubs on Companies House the other day. The only two EPL clubs that are solvent that I could find were Arsenal and Brentford. 
All the others are effectively insolvent and only propped up by their wealthy owners. 
Chelsea net debt will surpass £1 billion when their next accounts are filed. 
 

It’s a disaster waiting to happen. 

What assessment did you arrive at with Burnley? They have positive shareholder funds of over £100 million on account of earning more than £250 million per year than NCFC during continuous top 22 finishes in the past 10 years whilst having a similar wage bill to ourselves offset partially by typically a net £15 million a season in transfers. In the Sky documentary relating to last season, Vincent Kompany refers to them as the only profitable club in the Championship.

[Duncan Edwards 2,237]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Perhaps I can comment on Southend United in relation to Cambridge United since I effectively swapped one for the other as my second team in 2016. During that time the 2 clubs with similar profiles in terms of stadium and support etc have essentially moved in opposite directions. Cambridge spent 9 seasons at fifth tier level up until 2014. They had their troubles to and survived then progressed. Of course they could regress again or perhaps they could become the next Brentford?  Southend on the other hand are in their third season in the fifth tier but are apparently on the brink. We should feel sympathetic to the Southend fans. Perhaps we should expect the top of the football spectrum to do more. Equally Southend's top brass also needed to have taken responsibility and to have created more resilience not least to be fair to Cambridge.

Is there really anything egotistical or abusive about that?

Who is your “first” team, it’s confusing.

You have a free season ticket at Norwich but pay for one (some?) at Cambridge and Southend used to be (?) your second team.

But it seems that you’ve promoted Cambridge to position 1, you happily spend your groats and oats there. But they usurped Southend. So are Southend now 2? Or did Cambridge jump from 3 to 1. (We did that under Lambert).

You also rate Burnley. It’s all very confusing. Maybe you should take up golf? I think you can have 14 in your bag and if you put your Norwich City one in the middle, all the others could knock it with minimal effort from you. 

 

 

[Greavsy 2,415]

4 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Who is your “first” team, it’s confusing.

You have a free season ticket at Norwich but pay for one (some?) at Cambridge and Southend used to be (?) your second team.

But it seems that you’ve promoted Cambridge to position 1, you happily spend your groats and oats there. But they usurped Southend. So are Southend now 2? Or did Cambridge jump from 3 to 1. (We did that under Lambert).

You also rate Burnley. It’s all very confusing. Maybe you should take up golf? I think you can have 14 in your bag and if you put your Norwich City one in the middle, all the others could knock it with minimal effort from you. 

 

 

I think he supports 

Cambendlyich cited.

They sound more Welsh that I intended.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

10 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Who is your “first” team, it’s confusing.

You have a free season ticket at Norwich but pay for one (some?) at Cambridge and Southend used to be (?) your second team.

But it seems that you’ve promoted Cambridge to position 1, you happily spend your groats and oats there. But they usurped Southend. So are Southend now 2? Or did Cambridge jump from 3 to 1. (We did that under Lambert).

You also rate Burnley. It’s all very confusing. Maybe you should take up golf? I think you can have 14 in your bag and if you put your Norwich City one in the middle, all the others could knock it with minimal effort from you. 

 

 

You have not been paying attention Dunc as Exeter got a mention yesterday and don't forget Luton have risen in prominence since their promotion.