With a bit of discontent appearing with most posters taking Dyche's side.
You decide how much we should spend?

Say we have 130m for next season. Put your amounts in the 3 different categories.

Wage bill 90m
Transfer fund 20m
Running cost/improvements 20m

Is about right for me, I don't want the club racking debts up

I can’t manage my own finances, never mind a multi million pound organisation.

I believe both parties want the same thing for Burnley Football Club but it sounds to me that some assurances haven’t been kept. Hopefully is just a bump in the road and we will continue to move forward.

Though Dyche has made a come and get me plea to clubs who might want to take him, however his feet are firmly under the table at Turf Moor, no other manager in the Premier League has it as good as Dyche.

It isn’t the first time he has dropped very loud hints in the press but this time I’m getting more concerned.
As for the finances I’ll leave that to Chester, Royboy and other regulars on the Magic Money Tree thread.

Quickenthetempo wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:08 pm

With a bit of discontent appearing with most posters taking Dyche's side.
You decide how much we should spend?

Say we have 130m for next season. Put your amounts in the 3 different categories.

Wage bill 90m
Transfer fund 20m
Running cost/improvements 20m

Is about right for me, I don't want the club racking debts up

£8m of your transfer spend committed on outstanding payments for players already at the club, potential of £3-£5 on conditional transfer payments depending on how the season turns out - not much left is there

Sean’s hints are loud and clear, he’s calling MG’s bluff and putting himself out there at the same time ( understandable on both counts )

Coronavirus throws a huge amount of uncertainty into the equation. A second outbreak could bankrupt many Clubs. So many criticising Mike Garlick and the Board but honestly if they get it wrong the results would be disastrous.

I’m sureSean knows that. Hopefully he will stay, get a few signings and see us through another venture into Europe.

Aren't we roughly making £10m a year out of being in the PL? Anyone could see we need a cautious approach

Need to pay the agents a bit more moolah if we want to sign some decent players or get the existing ones to sign new contracts

huw.Y.WattfromWare wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:26 pm

It isn’t the first time he has dropped very loud hints in the press but this time I’m getting more concerned.
As for the finances I’ll leave that to Chester, Royboy and other regulars on the Magic Money Tree thread.

A lot are taking the managers side, so I thought it would be interesting to see where they would increase the budget for Dyche?

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:28 pm

£8m of your transfer spend committed on outstanding payments for players already at the club, potential of £3-£5 on conditional transfer payments depending on how the season turns out - not much left is there

I've probably underestimated the running costs too.

Quickenthetempo wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:08 pm

With a bit of discontent appearing with most posters taking Dyche's side.
You decide how much we should spend?

Say we have 130m for next season. Put your amounts in the 3 different categories.

Wage bill 90m
Transfer fund 20m
Running cost/improvements 20m

Is about right for me, I don't want the club racking debts up

OK, I'll give it a go.

1) £130 million income - less £20 m shortfall because of covid-19, so £110 m income;

2) Wage bill - it is possibly already £95 million for the season to 30-Jun-2020, but we've already let some "high" wages leave ("high" is relative to Burnley's budget), so £85 million next season;

3) Transfer Fund - hmm... 5 incoming on free transfers and all within our wage structure, maybe £10 million to spend, but I'd rather it was used to keep Tarks, Dwight and Nick happy and any other key Jun-2021 under 30s ooc players;

4) Club running costs, including absolutely essential maintenance - whatever is required to balance budget. I'd expect running costs will be higher next season because of covid-19...

So, my budget £110 m income and £85m + £10m + £15m spend = £110 m.

Quickenthetempo wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:38 pm

I've probably underestimated the running costs too.

Overestimated by about £5m (current spend) - but that could be eaten up
- the renewals of contracts (possible increases and agent fees)
- additional non playing staff and Academy costs (I was shocked by the increases in the last accounts and I suspect even more this season - there are almost a 100 in the Academy, which should be Cat 1 by August)

The thought process at the start of the PL journey used to be that Burnley would become stronger financially the longer that we managed to stay up and that we would then be able to compete on more of a level footing. That has never manifested itself in being able to spend more on transfers with our net spend over the last few windows remaining about the same. That will always be the case when we are basically just relying on the Sky TV money. Covid19 has thrown a spanner into those workings.

Without additional outside investment difficult to see SD being given a pot of gold this summer.

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:34 pm

Aren't we roughly making £10m a year out of being in the PL? Anyone could see we need a cautious approach

I think it was £4 million in 2018-19 season. Since then, we've spent more money and covid-19 has taken money away from us.

Burnley are where Burnley always have been, we only "make money" when we sell players - and then, it's not really making money for the club, it's just raising the money to pay the wages of all the other players.

All that Premier League tv money has done is shift the decimal place across so that the players (and their agents) take more money out of the club.

Working on Quickenthetempo's figures of
Wage bill 90m
Transfer fund 20m
Running cost/improvements 20m

I'd say the wage bill is a tad high given our turnover as I think
running costs/improvements might be also.
In terms of transfer funds I'd suggest 40-50m to hopefully
bring in 3 or 4 decent players possibly one or two more.
That might put us in a financial position which Garlick
may not be too happy with but it wouldn't bankrupt us.

And Garlick knows that it could all go seriously pear shape especially if Dyche leaves
and/or we struggle next season then we'll still got quite a few players/assets that
could bring us serious money even if none of them leave this summer.
If per chance some do then (I'm thinking McNeil or Tarkowski) depending on who it is then
we'll have another 20-30m in the coffers.
I suspect if Dyche left we may well also lose a few players too.
Team spirit would probably collapse and need serious re-building too.
Not too mention getting a new manager in and still needing 4 or 5 players in.

Dyche does seem as if he's setting out his stall both with the manager and Rigg.
He seemed to be suggesting that we're now ready for the European market.
He's building up expectations as much as making reasonable points.

I mean what if we maintain 8th position and qualify for Europe again?

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:49 pm

Overestimated by about £5m (current spend) - but that could be eaten up
- the renewals of contracts (possible increases and agent fees)
- additional non playing staff and Academy costs (I was shocked by the increases in the last accounts and I suspect even more this season - there are almost a 100 in the Academy, which should be Cat 1 by August)

That's the problem, the academy cost should be an investment, the production of young players saves on transfer fees and the odd sale helps pay wages. It isn't an investment at the moment, it's a liability. I have said on other threads that I cannot understand giving contracts to players in their 20's and just loaning them out to some god forsaken lower league team, when there's not a cat in hell chance of them being given a chance in our first team.

jurek wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:09 am

Working on Quickenthetempo's figures of
Wage bill 90m
Transfer fund 20m
Running cost/improvements 20m

I'd say the wage bill is a tad high given our turnover as I think
running costs/improvements might be also.
In terms of transfer funds I'd suggest 40-50m to hopefully
bring in 3 or 4 decent players possibly one or two more.
That might put us in a financial position which Garlick
may not be too happy with but it wouldn't bankrupt us.

I think if we could afford a transfer kitty that big our manager would not appear to be on the point of leaving.
I’m expecting us to show a loss for June 20 accounts and a bigger loss for June 21.
Our income for this year and next season will be reduced as a result of Covid.
The losses will I assume be able to be covered by our reserves built up from previous retained profits.

The out of contract players we have lost should reduce the wage bill to between £75m and £80m (from I guess around £90m to £95m in June 20)

I think we have some room to get the wage bill back up to around £85m and possibly spend around £10m to £20m on transfer fees which we will pay for over 3 or 4 years.

I may be being a bit optimistic here and the situation and impact of Covid could be much worse on our finances than I’m assuming.

My assessment is that the current divide is because SD has been left with a transfer budget which could fund one decent player when he knows he needs 3 or 4 at least. Rigg is coming up with nothing on the European or domestic front. And MG has said this is the way it is - look at the numbers etc....the only option is to live with it or sell one of our prize assets.

This is a summer where out of contract players are the ones we really need to be looking at, that and clubs who are struggling financially from Covid in the Championship that aren't exactly awash with cash (Preston, Blackburn, Milwall, Birmingham City etc) that may have some gems that are worth giving a go.

Alternatively, and it's not my preference, one of our big hitters (Tarky, Pope or McNeil) is sold generating around £40m instantly.

Whichever way it's looked at, after the likes of Hart, Lennon and Hendrick have gone our wage bill will have dropped significantly this summer allowing us to sign players without much of a change in expenditure if the fees are low or freebies.

I’m coming to the conclusion that this is the right time to sell one of our big hitters. £35m on Tarky I think would be least damaging. Minus the sell on to Brentford (assume they’ll have 20%) and we’ve then got £28m to bolster whatever budget we’d otherwise have to try and pick up bargains from other teams struggling with finance this summer.

Father Jack wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:59 am

I’m coming to the conclusion that this is the right time to sell one of our big hitters. £35m on Tarky I think would be least damaging. Minus the sell on to Brentford (assume they’ll have 20%) and we’ve then got £28m to bolster whatever budget we’d otherwise have to try and pick up bargains from other teams struggling with finance this summer.

I personally think Dwight would be the least damaging to lose and would possibly bring in almost double what we could get for Tarks.

Our while game is built on being tight defensively and as good as Dwight is I think we could source an adequate replacement somewhere and still build elsewhere with the income he would generate. Hopefully nobody has to go and we get to see him for one more season which includes a glorious Europa cup run.

The last thing we need is to be in the EL. That would be true any season, but the next one is going to be difficult enough without the distraction of an early start with a threadbare squad and the upheaval Sean/MG are causing atm.

The one area we might need to spend on is the medical team.
We seem to have a lot of injuries that take for ever coming back.

Injuries could be down to the indoor pitch they installed that causes impact injuries apparently. It’s on one of the videos of the opening of the new training ground somewhere.

Budget might be nearer £140 million, if we continue to perform till the end of this season i.e. £110 m (TV money; £20 m for finishing, say, 10th in PL; £10 m (other income e.g. sponsorship, ticket sales (assuming we have had the money here and can generate some next season - Covid allowing).

I'd hope we could keep wages to £85 m, running costs £20 m and have the remainder (maybe as much as £35 m - or am I being naively optimistic - transfer kitty). Either way - and Chester/Royboy wil put me right on this no doubt - could we take out cheap loans e.g. £10 m to add to the transfer fund....after all interest rates are extremely low at the mo.....

Dyched wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:09 am

Injuries could be down to the indoor pitch they installed that causes impact injuries apparently. It’s on one of the videos of the opening of the new training ground somewhere.

I went to one of the openings of this where SD gave a presentation to around 50 of us and took us on a tour around the training facilities. He said that the first team squad do not play or train on the indoor pitch because of that reason.
The main training pitch right outside the reception is identical to Turf Moor in terms of size, grass etc

Goddy wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:10 am

Budget might be nearer £140 million, if we continue to perform till the end of this season i.e. £110 m (TV money; £20 m for finishing, say, 10th in PL; £10 m (other income e.g. sponsorship, ticket sales (assuming we have had the money here and can generate some next season - Covid allowing).

I'd hope we could keep wages to £85 m, running costs £20 m and have the remainder (maybe as much as £35 m - or am I being naively optimistic - transfer kitty). Either way - and Chester/Royboy wil put me right on this no doubt - could we take out cheap loans e.g. £10 m to add to the transfer fund....after all interest rates are extremely low at the mo.....

See my post above - think you are quite a bit out and as said if this level of kitty was available there would not be the rift between SD and MG that there is.
In terms of borrowing money - UK Banks pretty much pulled out of lending to this sector more than 10 years ago. I can’t think of a sector where so high a percentage has gone into administration. It used to be no more than a big ego trip for bank executives but the clubs often had them over a barrel. Even when the clubs went into administration and like Leicester left local building contractors going bust by not paying them it was the Bank who was regarded as the bad guys rather than the incompetent board of the club. In reality the directors of the banks and the football clubs were all as deluded and incompetent as each other !!