PLC: unticking it will save money?

In the editor some teams have the PLC ticked. In my Atletico game I really hated this because after a good financial year the board payed 30 million dividend to shardeholders. Will untick it save me from these payouts? (ofcourse a new game with Man City)

In the editor some teams have the PLC ticked. In my Atletico game I really hated this because after a good financial year the board payed 30 million dividend to shardeholders. Will untick it save me from these payouts? (ofcourse a new game with Man City)

My guess would be no.

Whether a plc or private enterprise, it is not unreasonable that the owner(s) will withdraw some surplus capital.

Why why why start another thread about this. You've already started two or three threads on the exact same issue. In the last one someone asked why you'd started yet another thread about it so why go and start yet another one after that?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neyles:

My guess would be no.

Whether a plc or private enterprise, it is not unreasonable that the owner(s) will withdraw some surplus capital. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem is with all of those clubs that are not in private ownership. And there are a lot of them in the world. Withdrawing capital from such a club would get you in jail for a long long time yet in FMs world this cash just magically disappears.(given to nonexistent shareholders)

The reason why this is in the game is because the financial model isnt exactly great and there would be even more money in the game. We all know there is too much money available while in real life clubs can be happy if they break even.

I dunno, a private (i.e. non-PLC) company has shareholders as well, it's just that the shares aren't publicly traded. If the club's in profit, they're perfectly entitled to pay themselves a dividend legally.

I can't think of any kind of club structure other than a charity, trust or not-for-profit company that could prevent the paying of dividends if that's what the directors decide.

... and even in a charity or non-profit organization excess funds will not be retained long-term as this would defeat the very purpose of generating the income: I.e. the money will be spent on some good deed. This whole discussion is about whether or not it can be called "dividends".

Again, I find it perfectly reasonable that a certain percentage of profits is withdrawn.

Heres the voice of reality guys. Im a banker by trade. I have been a broker for over ten years now. I have a personal relationship with my local Newcastle Jets owner Con Constantine. Im obviously from Newcastle. Here it is. Under almost all circumstances, will owners/boards redirect excess moneys, to other endevours/investments.

Now this being said, with that there are always some ties to club finances. Via reapayments of dividends from these sources. Now I manage 7 teams in the same game atm. Man U being the richest, IFK Hasselholm being the poorest.

Every cent the board take from united they give back instantly. Have a look, dividends go out investments come in. Have a look at other at the bottom of income. Its normal. Its thier damn money they can do what they want with it. You are an employee, dont concern yourself witht the finances run the team..lol.. kidding there.. But yeh its a normal thing for them to take some money out of thier investment.

But for those that dont have much of an idea concerning these things, I could understand why it would be bemusing. The only prob ive foumd with finances, is the cost of ground and match day expenses. Energy Australia Stadium is government owned. The Jets and the Knights pay a pittence toward the upkeep. Certainly not 4mill (AUD) per annum.

Awsesome game though. 09 better be perfect out of the box though..lol..yeh and heaven is real to. Gotta have dreams, as unrealistic as they may be.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by pelicanstuff:

I dunno, a private (i.e. non-PLC) company has shareholders as well, it's just that the shares aren't publicly traded. If the club's in profit, they're perfectly entitled to pay themselves a dividend legally.

I can't think of any kind of club structure other than a charity, trust or not-for-profit company that could prevent the paying of dividends if that's what the directors decide. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. The clubs are not privately owned and are operating as a not-for-profit company. For example here in Slovenia there arent any clubs that are private and i guess its same in many other countries.

Jakobx: What happens if the clubs do make a profit? Surely it can't be retained but rather transferred to a trust or something similar, in which case it's gone anyway. Whether you lose it to a trust or to shareholders as dividends really doesn't matter. Or does it?

Well...they dont really make much profit if any.

If there are any earnings they must be used within the club.