danwlufc Posted July 21, 2018 Share Posted July 21, 2018 Why can’t the board action the request for expanding the stadium or improving facilities when you have the money in your account. (Taking the funds out of the account there and then and paying contractors) Eg In October there is 15 million in the bank account and the board agree to expand the stadium in the summer at a cost of 5 million, this is crucial for future revenue and is in everyone’s interest at the club. As we all know the money isn’t taken there and then In October it is taken at the end of the season and if you have 2 million in your account the board are going to say we have no funds and you’ll see those horrible words stadium plans shelved. The worst thing about this is no matter how quickly you can get these funds together you are gonna have to wait a year for the board to action this request again after the cancellation. I understand the reasons why this can be considered the player’s own fault but why would the board cancel something everyone can agree is guaranteed revenue, crucial for the future of the club yet on the other hand approve a purchase of a new player when there is no funds in the account. In such instance if you had the transfer budget available which is often the case when no funds are actually in the bank account you could purchase a new player that can put the club in the red of 60 million. A transfer like this for a club with only 2 options for revenue would effectively get the club kicked out of Europe due to FFP and bankrupt the club within a year of no action. The two situations seem a contradiction. If you are already in a situation where the expansion was crucial to garner extra revenue, particularly when trying to get a team from a poor nation to compete with the multi million pound teams in the champions league, a year is an enourmous amount of time. The only 2 revenues are selling off wonderkids that have outgrown the team (apart from the ones you persuade to stay year on year by some miracle) or champions league group stage money. Beyond that you may get to the odd quarter final but without having at least a 30,000 seater stadium it is going to be very hard to mount a bid to win it every year with an income 200 million below your European rivals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
月光下告白 Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 good idea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeHughes Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 18 hours ago, danwlufc said: Why can’t the board action the request for expanding the stadium or improving facilities when you have the money in your account. (Taking the funds out of the account there and then and paying contractors) Eg In October there is 15 million in the bank account and the board agree to expand the stadium in the summer at a cost of 5 million, this is crucial for future revenue and is in everyone’s interest at the club. As we all know the money isn’t taken there and then In October it is taken at the end of the season and if you have 2 million in your account the board are going to say we have no funds and you’ll see those horrible words stadium plans shelved. The worst thing about this is no matter how quickly you can get these funds together you are gonna have to wait a year for the board to action this request again after the cancellation. I understand the reasons why this can be considered the player’s own fault but why would the board cancel something everyone can agree is guaranteed revenue, crucial for the future of the club yet on the other hand approve a purchase of a new player when there is no funds in the account. In such instance if you had the transfer budget available which is often the case when no funds are actually in the bank account you could purchase a new player that can put the club in the red of 60 million. A transfer like this for a club with only 2 options for revenue would effectively get the club kicked out of Europe due to FFP and bankrupt the club within a year of no action. The two situations seem a contradiction. If you are already in a situation where the expansion was crucial to garner extra revenue, particularly when trying to get a team from a poor nation to compete with the multi million pound teams in the champions league, a year is an enourmous amount of time. The only 2 revenues are selling off wonderkids that have outgrown the team (apart from the ones you persuade to stay year on year by some miracle) or champions league group stage money. Beyond that you may get to the odd quarter final but without having at least a 30,000 seater stadium it is going to be very hard to mount a bid to win it every year with an income 200 million below your European rivals. One of the things that’s annoyed me for a while on fm. Just take the cash while it’s there we need this expansion. I also don’t like it when a project gets cancelled and you have to redo it all again, so 11 months down the line building new training facilities and it’s gets cancelled so we’re does the buildings training pitches disappear to?? It’s would be more realistic and that’s what SI are after if instead of being shelved being postponed until further funds were found. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Neil Brock Posted December 31, 2018 Administrators Share Posted December 31, 2018 Reviewed so locked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.