Is it possible

I think your posts increasingly remind me of one of the 'Northerners' in the Monty Python sketch discussing hardship!

For the avoidance of doubt, and as I have stated many times I have no 'plan' as such, only an approach which I would prefer the owners to take. It's up to them - it's their choice. It's mine where I spend my money. The approach was described very eloquently in these remarks, which I would wholeheartedly adopt:

I understand exactly what the figures represent, being a Chartered Accountant by profession. I have also previously worked on a finance review for a Championship level club in which I helped draft a business plan for them, and have seen the inner workings of a football club far closer than most, including attending their Board meetings and reviewing player contracts (both eye-opening experiences).

The figures you quoted were largely irrelevant to the post I made, for which the general point was that you don't need to fund continual losses as a Championship club, and describing a model under which our club could be run which would give us the best chance of achieving both aims, which also highlighted where we currently fail in this regard. The points made still stand - if you have limited funds you find ways to maximise the value of your individual investment decisions. We are currently failing to do this and, as you've subsequently pointed out in the discussion re Pinnock, we've also advertised to the outside world that we'll sell a player at pretty much any cost if he's in the final year of his contract and turns down a new deal, thus allowing other clubs to take advantage of this in any transfer dealings. Not exactly an optimal strategy to adopt, IMO. I accept the general logic of trying to get value for players as their contracts expire, but applying a black and white approach in that way, and sticking blindly to it regardless, doesn't result in the best decisions.

Ultimately, managing cashflow is far more critical for football clubs than their reported profits and losses, particularly in the way that player contracts are capitalised and amortised, which means that player trading accounts look very different to the cashflow impact of transfer fees which are paid in instalments. I did a review of the latest BFC company accounts when they were published, which is on here somewhere, and it was actually difficult to work out the status of the recent transfer business from them, although IIRC, the bulk of it was visible in the relative movement of debtors and creditors vs the comparatives.

The two examples I gave you were of clubs who had very obviously managed to get promoted to the Premier League without chucking stupid amounts of money at the playing squads, relative to others, primarily via outstanding coaches getting the most out of limited resources. They currently represent the most recent examples of this type of success. It is entirely feasible for BFC to adopt a similar approach to establish themselves as a stable Championship club and build from there. Look at our relative fortunes compared to Millwall since we beat them in the playoff final for another example of the type of progress I'm talking about.

We've clearly gone backwards as a club under the new owners. In an earlier post you said that we're operating the same model now as the one we had under Patrick Cryne, which is not the case. We've taken than basic model and stripped out the underlying (very fundamental) requirement to attempt to be competitive in the division we're playing in, in favour of an almost entirely formularised approach to generating player profits, broken only once since they took over when they signed Solbauer. In doing so, we've become blind to the fact that the impact of whatever theoretical profits the spreadsheet approach generates for you are diminished when you're content as a club to chuck half your annual income away by surrendering meekly to relegation each time you get promoted.

As for the other question which you are now trying to get people to focus on, the reason no-one answered this is that it was overshadowed by you stating, as fact, the incorrect assertion that an owner had to "be prepared to fund huge losses over a long period of time", which is the point everyone picked out to challenge. The answer to this question for me is that my chosen investment as a supporter of BFC is directly correlated to the expectations I have for the club to try to achieve beyond its means. I can't set a figure on it, as there are a huge amount of variables to this, but I can safely say that a continuation of the misguided management we've seen from the ownership will cut it dead pretty quickly.

I can only provide you with my experience from the current season. After Stendel's sacking, I was so angry that I had no desire to use my season ticket for a number of games (again well documented already on this board). I had started to go back to games prior to lockdown, but my decision on a new season ticket for next season was very much subject to how the Board set the pricing and timing of renewals. I can safely say that if there'd been an early bird renewal window ending in April at similar pricing levels to recent seasons, I would not have renewed because this season has been such an infuriating experience from a Board with zero ambition to compete. As it happened, Coronavirus changed the landscape for everything and the offering of a cheap season ticket for next year was one I felt I could take a chance on. Again, there would have been zero chance of me renewing if I'd somehow let the early-bird window pass and would have to renew at full price.

So currently, my 'price elasticity' as a supporter is as restricted as it has ever been. In fact, I don't think I've ever previously considered whether or not I would renew. It was only ever a question of when and how much. This year, only the discounted price of £250 has kept me as a season ticket holder for another season. As for next season, I have no idea, but I will fundamentally need to see evidence that the ownership have the same ambitions as I do, and at present I'd say we are as far apart on that as it's possible to be.

Sheriff, Saturday at 1:26 PM Report
#156 Unlike Reply
You, Exile, KamikazeCo-Pilot and 12 others like this.

 

You presume wrongly

 

Do I now? Must have been an honest oversight on your part to forget to reply to him then

 

No, I didn't forget either.

 

Well, if you have no plan, we will just have to agree that it is just hot air.

 

Hahaha.

 

To an extent, almost all of what is posted on here is hot air. But I prefer having an approach rather than having fixed thinking and a rigid plan. You will then most likely have an emergent strategy. If your rigid plan fails - which to some degree the Board's did this season - then you will have to switch to an emergent strategy anyway. Your rigid 'plan' would have done well to predict the Wigan situation, or Stendel's departure, or Bambo's failed drugs test.

And when are you going to address Sheriff's comments? They are far more erudite than mine!

 

As the euphoria of staying up gradually fades, along with my monumental hangover the question I still have no clue to the answer is why?

Why a group of international investors wish to own Barnsley Football Club? For all the ‘not doing anything stupid’ what is their objective?

Wednesday night was fantastic and one I’ll never forget but I still think the success we all want as fans, and that is not always about spaffing money but building a team, is not aligned with our owners.

Again, another transfer window opens for us to get a better idea of what their plans are at a time when they are adding another club to their portfolio.

 

Their aim is the Premier League, the cash cow of world football and once there they have got a saleable asset - it's the only logical explanation. They've probably seen the likes of Burnley, Watford, Bournemouth etc.

They're slowly getting a squad together with long contracts so that the spine of the team can be kept, players that excel with be sold and more players brought in to the strengthen the squad. Gradually the calibre of player will increase year on year until we have a squad ready to compete.

They're building up a host of clubs, probably to develop players for their main team at the head of their football investment, us. All of these clubs are quite small and have no real return for them unless they can develop players and move on, theres no money in the Belgium first division with a team who's stadium holds 8,400.

I think this worked with Nice sooner than expected (they would have been their main team) and they were sold on for a profit. It's taking a lot longer with us and they're made big mistakes but we'll have a clearer picture at the start of next season.

 

He won't reply.

He'll ignore it, then come back on in a week's time posting the same thing.

He's like Hemsworth Tyke with a thesaurus.

 

So if they manage to get a "bigger" club again like Nice we become a feeder club? No thanks.

 

I'm also very interested in your response to Sheriffs post and have been surprised that you havent responded so far; particularly given how keen you are for debate on here (quite rightly).
I do hope that you are developing a response.

 

I can't understand this philosophy. Either you buy a season ticket to watch your team or you don't. You're not investing in some stock or other, you're paying to see football every other Saturday and some Tuesday nights.

 

This is the fundamental crux of it all.

Objective. I shan't retread the steps of what I've outlined several times before about sense and reason, but it all hinges on objective.

The purpose of a plan is to meet an objective, and there are a series of plans that underpin an objective thats developed into strategy and its sub strategies. But in any business, it still needs agility to change tack and not be held victim to a plan that is failing to meet the objective.

What disappoints me most is that many herald "the plan".... what is the plan? I see no plan, because their is no evident objective. Just a few americanised "would like to haves" with nothing behind it. The "spreadsheet" is claimed to be the plan. A piece of software, filled with data is not a plan. It's a tool. Its a system. That system fits into a process. That process has a purpose. That purpose underpins a strategy which is in place to deliver an objective.

What is the objective of the football club and what are the objectives of the owners? And why are we owned by a vehicle in HK which the accounts and true ownership are invisible to a Uk audience?

To pretend their objectives, both club wise and personal are known, and that there is a plan to achieve them is pure entrenched dogma.

 

The English team will always be the head of their investment.

 

PMSL

 

I think this may be my favourite post, ever.

 

Nail, head, hit.

 

Surely the board have already shown clear evidence of tweaking their plan, in effect admitting that mistakes were made. Previously they refused to sign loan players, yet signed Ludewig on loan in January. They signed Ritzmaier and Sollbauer in January, both experienced professionals who have had an impact on the team's performance, despite previously having a policy of signing players under the age of 25.

They made mistakes, they underestimated the strength of the Championship and the ability of a young squad to compete in it. They rectified that as best they could and stayed up. Just.

There's no evidence yet to show they're lining their own pockets with wads of cash, so until that happens I'll back them. Indeed I applaud their policy of being a club that refuses to spend beyond its means and call out the cheats who break the rules.

 

Not sure that would have been case with NICE in portfolio, unless by some miracle they got us into the PL then maybe.