Swindon Town FC vs Wycombe Wanderers FC Official Matchday Thread

[pauld]

Liverpool aren't a great example - they used to be before the Yanks saddled them with massive debts they're now barely managing to service and constantly scrabbling to restructure. But if you want examples closer to our level, then one league up Scunny consistently turn a profit, one down Exeter and Lincoln both pay their own way. It is possible and over the next few years it's going to become a lot more necessary.

[flammableBen]

Urgh. I need to sleep. Can't really type.

Exeter turn around finances. Helped by ManU games. Shows differences in money. 2 games for lower league club can wipe debts. Something.

[Hammer]

Urgh. I need to sleep. Can't really type.

Exeter turn around finances. Helped by ManU games. Shows differences in money. 2 games for lower league club can wipe debts. Something.

 
 
   Hmmm. How strange ! Sounds like the final utterances of a man with a large diazepam kebab in one hand and an even larger electricity bill in the other.

[Samdy Gray]

Fitton's made it clear that we need to sell players to balance the books each year. That's exactly where [most of] the Cox money went. I don't think we'll see big money signings to the extent that some of you [arriba] want until we start turning a decent profit, whether that be through being in a higher league or just players sales.

In a way we've got the exact opposite situation on the pitch to what we had last season (no defence, great up front). I personally think the current one is the better situation to be in.

[Dozno9]

Fitton's made it clear that we need to sell players to balance the books each year. That's exactly where [most of] the Cox money went. I don't think we'll see big money signings to the extent that some of you [arriba] want until we start turning a decent profit, whether that be through being in a higher league or just players sales.

In a way we've got the exact opposite situation on the pitch to what we had last season (no defence, great up front). I personally think the current one is the better situation to be in.

The table proves that and I would rather not see us lose a 3-0 lead only to draw because we had the Chuckle brothers in defence.

[RobertT]

There's the rub though, isn't it?  We have spent the money (budget) on players who play in other positions, which has made us a better TEAM than last season, if a little less potent.

Arriba - you are going to have a number of years being annoyed I think (to add to those recently) because the money is not going to be splashed by our owners even if they have loads of it.  Their desire was to run a football club and see if they could do it properly, this was not a big Al Fayed extension of themselves, more a long term project like any other business.

I'm personally quite happy with our squad right now, I don't see a need to buy anyone, but it would always be nice if we did.  We are better than last year, to an extent where hanging on the play off coat tails is a possibility - objective achieved I think.

[Riddick]

Took a mate to the game on sat and he described Revell as having one of the worst striking performances he had ever seen! While he got the assist (mainly because he took to long to shoot himself) i reckon we should send him back already. He is not going to score the goals. Get Billy back up front and get McNamee on the one wing with Tope on the other. I see the call to get Tope up top but i think his game is better going at people than with his back to them.

Please can we have a proper striker and then we could have a very good season.

[jonny72]

I thought Fitton's stance was pretty clear and well known - the money is always there for players provided the price is right and we'll never pay more than we need to for the level we're at. Whilst we're in League 1 that means we're not going to be paying much more than £300k for a player and there is no need to, Cox and Theo Robinson prove that. Its just unfortunate they haven't been able to find a striker that fits the bill so far.

All that really matters is whether we are moving forwards and I'd say we are at the moment - the team looks a lot better than it did last season. They're building for the future and as long as they keep building I'll be happy.

[Arriba]

i dont expect massive sums to be spent,but when we clearly need a goalscorer i dont see why the purse strings cannot be loosened a bit.
football clubs are not self sufficient.anyone buying inot a club should be aware of this and expect to use their own money.
nobody forces people to buy football clubs.

i think wilson is a pretty decent manager,but he's no miracle worker,which he'll need to be to take a self sufficient club forward.
our fans are quite demanding, and i think most will be a little frustrated.

[Doore]

We are surely far from alone in needing a goalscorer at the right price though are we?  I think the purse strings would be loosened if Fitton was convinced that a certain player would be capable of putting the ball in the back of the net - there are not many of these players about.  Its not as though every club has a 15-20 goal man.  We've been lucky with Parkin and then Cox - without this, we need the midfielders to chip in with a few more.  You can have success without a 20 goal a season striker.

Just read that back - its a bit rambling and I'm not sure of my point.  It must be Monday-head syndrome, brain still processing beer and thinking in pub rambling mode.

[Simon Pieman]

Parkin cost us £50k didn't he? He was pretty good. Fallon wasn't too bad and cost a similar sum too I think. On the other hand cuntface Cureton was free and he was shit.Selling Cox for £1.5m and buying another for £1m is a false economy.


I think it's harder to get a real gem in these days because football clubs are trying to manage themselves a bit better and the amount of decent players who are available and on the scrapheap are few and far between. It may mean we need to spend some money, but how much is viable? I'm not convinced by the Revell deal but I'll give him a decent chance, he looked good against Colchester without Paynter alongside and Paynter has looked good on his own too. I don't think it means either is rubbish, just that playing them both doesn't work.

I guess the thing that annoyed me most over the summer was the rediculous persuit of a wonder trialist which was never going to happen.

[pauld]

football clubs are not self sufficient.

Except for the ones that are, already quoted in this thread (or maybe one of the others ones where you said this)

[jonny72]

Except for the ones that are, already quoted in this thread (or maybe one of the others ones where you said this)

I think some people have a different definition of self sufficient. To me, self sufficient means they survive without going bankrupt or relying on massive cash injections. Nothing wrong with a club borrowing money from a bank or whoever provided they can afford the repayments and it doesn't mean they're not self sufficient.

Man Utd have massive borrowings but they are easily covered and are in line with a lot of companies borrowings, so for me they are still self sufficient. They also only have them due to the way Glazier financed the take over - he ended up effectively buying the club for about £50m or so in cash.

[Arriba]

i'd see it as the club paying for itself without funds from board members or third parties.

is there anywhere online where i can see clubs incomes and outgoings?

[jonny72]

Deloitte publish annual reports about the state of football finances, you should get some info from a quick Google.

Their last report said that 11 of the Premier League clubs were making a profit, so in theory they at least are all self sufficient. For the others, provided they stay in the Premier League I imagine they'll be fine but if they get relegated they could very quickly be fucked.