Wensdeh, looking into Furloughing players

They can’t furlough players, as the players can perform their normal everyday duties without impact, and have most of the season.

To furlough them now, would be fraudulent.

Same applies to the back-room staff too in the main.

 

It just shows how well and fair our club has been during this period.

It’s the reason I bought a season ticket last season despite knowing I wouldn’t see a game - but the price reflected that. And the same reason I renewed again this year.

We’ve been open, transparent and lowered ticket costs accordingly where we could.

 

you can furlough employees if those employees fit the legal requirements. Morally is very different

 

I can’t see how they fit the legal requirements.

They are all able to work - even more so in the close season, as their work = holiday, rest and personal fitness.

Not sure on what grounds they could be furloughed….

 

If they have been given a training plan and told to keep in contact over the summer then they are working, it's as simple as that.

 

Bet massives are the first league team to get a points deduction for furlough fiddling..........then agen the government would stand 80% of the points penalty and the EFL would half the rest on appeal..

 

Have them redesignated as taxi drivers. Sorted.

 

I thought the same but I looked into it yesterday and training is allowed while on furlough. Even if the employer tells you what to do training wise. They could also part time furlough them and have them train for an hour a day or whatever and furlough for the rest of the time.

I also saw a few people say things like “why do the footballers have a say in it? Normal people wouldn’t be able to decline being furloughed” but it seems that’s not the case. Furlough amounts to a temporary change of contract that has to be signed. The only difference is that ‘normal’ people would just be made redundant if they refused.

 

What was transparent about the owners, who are reportedly billionaires, claiming they were taking nothing out of the club when they actually repaid a debt to the previous owners, who are reportedly millionaires, with three quarters of a million pounds that was taken out of the club's finances?

 

I think Wednesday will claim their players can’t perform the normal everyday duties expected of a footballer and cite in evidence moist of their performances last season.

 

I don’t agree that it’s a ‘debt’.

Surely it was an incentive payment based on success.
If the owners had been expected to pay that out of their own pockets, that would mean that the price they paid for the club had increased due to their successful management. I’m struggling to see how that’s logical or to think of another business where that’d be expected.

Surely if I bought a business from you, it’d be acceptable for you to expect a future bonus payment if the business succeeded, but that would rightly come out of the business rather than my pocket.

OTOH if I took money out of the business to cover outstanding ‘debt’ owed to you, that’d be shady

 

Goes to show how little togetherness there is between the fans and the board. That's quite some percentage of those who bought one. I imagine ours will have been extremely low.

 

Something that's owed is a debt. The club didn't make the deal, the owners did.

I can't believe you think it's OK, particularly after your eloquent post in the political thread that argues vehemently against exactly this sort of thing.

 

I'll just add to this. The contract was between two parties who now jointly own the club. I recall the "bonus" was a contractual up front agreement between these parties that was later negotiated down to a fixed amount because it looked like we'd get promoted, but it wasn't guaranteed. Almost like cashing out on a bet if youre winning with 15 minutes left. The pair of respective owners also have their holding in an offshore company (Hong Kong). Which is not transparent. If the "company" is successful, they can draw dividends if there are retained earnings to do so.

It just so happens the clubs retained earnings have dwindled in 3 years of accounts from +£3m to -£600k. This ahead of a very uncertain period where no fans were seen in stadia and revenues were suppressed, both through scope of selling players at good value, and general matchday revenues.

 

Hello, hello, we are the Wednesday boys! We all furlough the Wednesday!

 

It wouldn’t have been owed if the conditions weren’t met (so it’s not a debt, but a conditional bonus payment). And neither of us had sight of the contract, there’s assumptions both ways here.

But as the accounts show that it was money paid by the club to the Cryne family, I believe my assumption that the contract demanded that scenario stands. Otherwise, the Crynes, who own 20% of the club wouldn’t be agreeing to pay a bonus to themselves.

 

Sounds like you're not only happy with the situation but are prepared to argue the case for the millionaires and billionaires who are taking money out of the club.

I'm most definitely not happy about it.

 

I didn’t say I was happy, but the Cryne family put a lot of money into the club and for them to take a post sale performance bonus is something that all the parties agreed to at the point of sale (as detailed by DWLC).

In an ideal world, the club would be owned by a co op, but instead it’s owned by a bunch of millionaires, who so far appear to be managing it prudently and also mostly appear to understand the clubs values. I can’t think of a better realistic alternative.

I know next to nowt about running a football club and don’t pretend otherwise. But it seems to me that our club is better run than almost every other club I can think of.

 

I don't know, but it makes sense to me that the additional payment was due to the potential change in the value of the club as a result of promotion/relegation and as such was part of the initial sale and should be paid by the purchasing party.

The money also wasn't paid directly to the Crynes from BFC from my understanding, but was taken out of the club to the investment company who then paid the Crynes from there.

 

while ever crowds aren’t allowed in they can probably do it. Not sure beyond that.