Financial restrictions at the Albion hampering the playing budget?

[Bwian]

You could save thousands in stewarding alone. The biggest thing that struck me last season was the vast quantity of stewards outside the stadium doing absolutely nothing. A large majority of them are a total waste of space.

Totally agree-it astounds me how many stewards there are around the outside of the stadium doing the best part of sod-all. You could reduce the numbers at the Uni car parks by 75% and nobody would miss them-in fact, traffic would probably flow better after games.

 

[Dave the OAP]

I think that the biggest 'unforeseen transport cost' was all of the so-called Albion fans avoiding paying for their travel vouchers, depriving the club of a huge amount of money. And some were on here bragging about not paying. That money would have significantly reduced the transport bills.

i got slated for suggesting that earlier on when it was obvious that some people were travelling for free.

 

[Bwian]

i got slated for suggesting that earlier on when it was obvious that some people were travelling for free.

It was significantly more than 'some'. I don't remember the exact numbers but the club mentioned somewhere how many travel vouchers were sold last season and it was embarrassing how many avoided paying for their travel.

 

[Rookie]

Totally agree-it astounds me how many stewards there are around the outside of the stadium doing the best part of sod-all. You could reduce the numbers at the Uni car parks by 75% and nobody would miss them-in fact, traffic would probably flow better after games.

There are rules how many stewards (as there are with medical staff etc) must be at a game based on the amount of people at a game. I'm not sure of numbers but don't see why the club would go over that number by a huge amount.

Do love that we have 6 pages (so far) of arguments based on nothing but mere speculation. No facts figures or similar have been released and based on the complete restructure of the behind the scenes staff I fail to see how the club can be seen as cutting back

 

[Gordon Bennett]

I’m not sure if El Pres is on a wind up with his original post (he has lit the blue touch paper and stood well back) but even if he is, it’s good to know that as supporters we aren’t just sitting back and letting the good times roll (and forgetting about the past!) and despite the arguments in this thread we are collectively taking an interest in the club’s finances.

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt that the club have either through naivety or calculation under-estimated/downplayed the impact (and cost) of the transport arrangements. This stems from the very first planning application and what at times seems like reluctance to accept the potential size of the impact and issues associated with getting to and from the stadium.

There have obviously been cock-ups during the first season at the Amex and of all the various lines of speculation here, the most likely one to be true is that Ken Brown has paid the price for those mistakes by losing his job.

 

[Uter]

How much higher though? 660,000 from season tickets next year, 165,000 from the uni car park assuming just a 50% uptake. There will be further ticket sales as well. I'm not overly convinced it will fall short.

Clearly it depends on how much money we have agreed to pay Southern and B&H Buses. Southern in particular are in a strong position in that we need them much more than they need us. They could have used this to demand a lot more money than most might consider realistic using the additional stewards and carriages they provide as an excuse (and conveniently forgetting all the extra revenue they receive from supporters living outside the travel zone who still have to buy a ticket for part of their journey). I'd hope they requested and we agreed to a reasonable figure, but who knows? It's possible we could be paying them over the odds.

I was flicking through "We want Falmer" on Saturday and I got angry when I read a passage about how much the University of Brighton wanted for a small strip of land we required for the stadium. At one point over £10M if I remember rightly. Land that was given to them free of charge by the council (so in effect all of us) when they converted to a University. They knew we had to have it and they expoited the opportunity to the max, although the final sum agreed was thankfully much lower.

 

[BRIGHT ON Q]

Talking of stewards,Whats the point of having a load of stewards at the Amex on a non match day?.I have been down a few times in the week and you are greeted with a load of stewards waiting to direct you to a car park.Bloody ridiculous.

 

[withdeanwombat]

Football is somewhat like Alice in Wonderland.

Two and two IS five,and often more.

Sell more beer.

 

[Davemania]

This is why threads go to 60 pages... I heard from a source close to the club that they were astounded by how much revenue they had generated and that the money-making potential at the new stadium far exceeded their original forecasts. The club undoubtedly haemorrhaged cash at Withdean but banking 18,000 season ticket sales and all the ancillary revenue at The Amex (including two decent cup runs and a few televised appearances) had put the club in rude health despite start up costs.

This sounds much more probable, i cant see how all the extra revenue cant easily cover a relatively small wage bill, hardly got a team of over payed superstars yet, a lot of league 1 players, not on fortunes are they?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Just to throw in another suggestion for unforeseen finances, there does seem to have been a complete overhaul of backroom staff. Could it be that contracts/payoffs have been paid?

 

[Biscuit]

Anyone else and I wouldn't believe it, but [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] lives and breathes this stuff..

 

[severnside gull]

I’m not sure if El Pres is on a wind up with his original post (he has lit the blue touch paper and stood well back) but even if he is, it’s good to know that as supporters we aren’t just sitting back and letting the good times roll (and forgetting about the past!) and despite the arguments in this thread we are collectively taking an interest in the club’s finances.

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt that the club have either through naivety or calculation under-estimated/downplayed the impact (and cost) of the transport arrangements. This stems from the very first planning application and what at times seems like reluctance to accept the potential size of the impact and issues associated with getting to and from the stadium.

There have obviously been cock-ups during the first season at the Amex and of all the various lines of speculation here, the most likely one to be true is that Ken Brown has paid the price for those mistakes by losing his job.

Good post.

It worries me that people want to kill speculation on our financial stability and viability ..... I'm guessing they joined the bus after Archer/Bellotti and are most definitely not "plastic" ex-Portsmouth supporters

 

[Barnham Seagull]

As some of you will know, NSC obtained a set of the annual accounts which revealed the Albion lost £140,000 a week in the last season at 'The' Withdean

https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?240689-The-Albion-LOST-%A3140-000-a-week-in-the-last-season-at-Withdean/page6&highlight=Albion+accounts


I appreciate I am a bit of a finance bore, but I have heard from more than one source that the Albion's accounts for the first year at Amex, in spite of the amazing season ticket and pie sales, have been very disappointing.

The reason for this is that expenditure has spiralled out of control, as budget holders assumed that Tony Bloom would write out a cheque to cover every spend and TB is VERY unhappy with what has happened.

As a consequence budgets have been slashed for 2012/13, with the exception of the infrastructure projects (increased stadium capacity and training facilities), and these budgetary constraints MAY have impacted upon the playing budget given to Gus, restricting the club's ability to offer competitive salaries to players, and we have lost out on the signings of Mattocks and others.

Alternatively I may have put two and two together to make five, which is something I regret to have seen too often marking exams this summer to date.

Would'nt be that supprised many of the senior management from what I could see got a bit billy big balls with the new stadium and did not take up offers of good advice on procurement etc and were rather steared a little to much by the architect etc.

This is obviously my view from what I could see, so not supprised to much by your statement.

 

[ManxSeagull]

The energy costs for one would have been ridiculous. Through the roof. Then there's all the non playing admin staff etc.

If energy costs are through the roof, better roof insulation is required

 

[Aadam]

Does anyone know how and/or when the repeated net losses that were experienced at the Withdean are met? Last year the net loss was nearly £7m, and losses were made, presumably, through most of the time at the Withdean. Was this all absorbed and covered by TB and rolled up into the current directors loan, or are they still trying to claw back to a positive bank statement following these losses?

travel costs... how can they be tracking this reliably? i get that people havent purchased vouchers as expected, many using the train are buying a ticket or eligible to travel on their rail season tickets. i dont know how buses are working, presumably you still have to pay not just show a ticket?

The buses stopped asking to see vouchers. Of the two times I travelled by bus (and paid) I wasn't asked for it. Many people used the transport for free. I'm guessing each bus that goes to the stadium has a cost associated with it. The less people pay to travel, the more the Albion have to subsidise.

This is the worst type of guess work. TB always seems in a good mood when I see him.
I can see no reason to double GUESS what is going on with finances. Pure speculation

To be fair I'm always in a good mood when I see the minions below me at work. When I'm back behind my desk getting pelters from the shit hitting the fan, I'm not so happy. People are not always representative of their real moods when you see them.

HOWEVER, Gus's biggest moan all season was that "we gave League 1 players a chance" and "we have a relatively low playing budget" with "players still on League 1 wages" etc. Not being able to compete at the top of the Championship in terms of wages seems to indicate that we are not actually overspending (or at least not massively so) in relation to the season before. I am sure someone can tell us what are the percentage costs for player/management budgets compared to other salary and wage costs but my instinct says that the likely areas of added cost are the least expensive relatively speaking.

The accounts for the year ending 2011 show that £6,416,040 was paid in salaries to 115 employees (and 300 odd part time for match day etc.) but this isn't split between players and staff of which, 51 were players (including youth) and 64 management and administration.

 

[leigull]

Hearing a rumour from Wales that Gus is almost a done deal to join Swansea and reading this thread this morning isn't the most fun.

I am glad the finances are being scrutinised so heavily though, we musn't get carried away and if the surge for Prem footy has to wait a few more years, so be it.

Would be a real shame if it has put Gus off staying with us, even though he said he was happy with the budget.

Personally still believe and hope Gus is going to be here next season.

 

[severnside gull]

Hearing a rumour from Wales that Gus is almost a done deal to join Swansea and reading this thread this morning isn't the most fun.

not even the sniff of a rumour anywhere connecting Gus with Swansea except on here and Laudrup still the bookies' favourite (think they have that wrong) with Gus remaining at number 4 where he has been for the last week or so. Hoping it stays that way.

 

[Acker79]

So, reading what El Pres wrote I'm getting:

-costs were higher than expected ... I don't think this is something to worry over. They've realised it and are acting to rectify
-some people in the club expecting TB to cover all costs ... I'm a little upset with that attitude, TB has given so much to the club it's wrong to just assume he's a bottomless pit. But that too is being addressed.
-to address the higher costs and the 'tony will cover it' attitude, some budgets have been cut. ... fair enough.

El Pres, has asked with his post if the playing budget is one of the areas facing restriction. He hasn't said it is, he hasn't said he's been told it is. He is simply asking if it is possible.

I would say of course it is possible, but I think it is more likely the cutting of the other budgets is allowing the playing budget to remain untouched.


I would also argue that the nothing El Pres has stated as information (i.e. costs higher than expected, etc) really contradicts the comments silverhatch highlighted about the amount of money coming into the club. (disappointing doesn't really give a figure one man may be disappointed, another may think it exceeded predictions, depends on what each was expecting)

It is entirely possible, and I hope likely, that the club has taken in a lot of money, but also realise their costs are unnecessarily high and they are addressing it now, rather than waiting for income to drop. They are being financially responsible, not wasting money now when we have it, aware that the ebb and flow of football and the economy, and perhaps a drop off in numbers once the novelty of brighton having their own stadium wears off, means we may not have that surplus in the future, and so we need to prepare for that.


But I would like to echo the sentiments that it is good we are taking an interest in the clubs finances. I know some fans say this sort of thing isn't our business, but I think that is wrong, and naive. The long term health of the club is something we all have an interest in, and know from experience how important it is to know these things. Also, if we keep on top of that and look at the long term interests of the club rather than short term success we can maintain our holier than thou attitude over palace and portsmouth and the like.

 

[El Presidente]

I’m not sure if El Pres is on a wind up with his original post (he has lit the blue touch paper and stood well back) but even if he is, it’s good to know that as supporters we aren’t just sitting back and letting the good times roll (and forgetting about the past!) and despite the arguments in this thread we are collectively taking an interest in the club’s finances.

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt that the club have either through naivety or calculation under-estimated/downplayed the impact (and cost) of the transport arrangements. This stems from the very first planning application and what at times seems like reluctance to accept the potential size of the impact and issues associated with getting to and from the stadium.

There have obviously been cock-ups during the first season at the Amex and of all the various lines of speculation here, the most likely one to be true is that Ken Brown has paid the price for those mistakes by losing his job.

I'm not on a wind up. I got off my arse and dug out the accounts from 2011 from Companies House and then summarised them on NSC.

I was surprised at the time that there were no comments from the club about the finances on either seagulls.co.uk (apologies if I missed them BTW) or the Argus.

The success of the Amex in terms of bringing money in has been a revelation, but we need to contextualise things. 22,000 season tickets at an average of £350 (remember the ST price includes VAT, so you have to net that off from the price paid to arrive at the figure received by the club, and then take into account the lower fees paid by concessions) each brings in £7.7 million, add in extras from 1901'ers, corporates and away fans adds let us say another £3 million. The TV deal for the Championship is about another £2 million, giving a total of £13 million in total. Even if with some sponsorship and allied revenue stream we are probably looking at £15 mill max.

Then compare this to a club who has just been relegated from the Premiership, who has a parachute payment of £18 million in the first season, and then £9 million for each of the next two seasons, and it clearly knocks the Albion's negotiating position into a cocked hat.

I'm not being critical of anyone, just trying to look at things from an analytical perspective only.

 

[severnside gull]

So, reading what El Pres wrote I'm getting:

-costs were higher than expected ... I don't think this is something to worry over. They've realised it and are acting to rectify
-some people in the club expecting TB to cover all costs ... I'm a little upset with that attitude, TB has given so much to the club it's wrong to just assume he's a bottomless pit. But that too is being addressed.
-to address the higher costs and the 'tony will cover it' attitude, some budgets have been cut. ... fair enough.

El Pres, has asked with his post if the playing budget is one of the areas facing restriction. He hasn't said it is, he hasn't said he's been told it is. He is simply asking if it is possible.

I would say of course it is possible, but I think it is more likely the cutting of the other budgets is allowing the playing budget to remain untouched.


I would also argue that the nothing El Pres has stated as information (i.e. costs higher than expected, etc) really contradicts the comments silverhatch highlighted about the amount of money coming into the club. (disappointing doesn't really give a figure one man may be disappointed, another may think it exceeded predictions, depends on what each was expecting)

It is entirely possible, and I hope likely, that the club has taken in a lot of money, but also realise their costs are unnecessarily high and they are addressing it now, rather than waiting for income to drop. They are being financially responsible, not wasting money now when we have it, aware that the ebb and flow of football and the economy, and perhaps a drop off in numbers once the novelty of brighton having their own stadium wears off, means we may not have that surplus in the future, and so we need to prepare for that.


But I would like to echo the sentiments that it is good we are taking an interest in the clubs finances. I know some fans say this sort of thing isn't our business, but I think that is wrong, and naive. The long term health of the club is something we all have an interest in, and know from experience how important it is to know these things. Also, if we keep on top of that and look at the long term interests of the club rather than short term success we can maintain our holier than thou attitude over palace and portsmouth and the like.

Exceptional post