Regionalisation in League 1 and Below

[losesome]

ok what do we do then , sit back do nowt and wait for clubs to go bust and not reform.

 

thats what will happen , so far we have been lucky that the old knight (or arab in most cases) comes flying over the hill to save them.

but one day they wont - then what !!!!!!!

[garcon]

Unfortunately that's exactly what will happen. The impetus for major change simply won't be there until it's too late for some clubs and the rest realise they're in a fatal spiral.

[leeslover]

ok what do we do then , sit back do nowt and wait for clubs to go bust and not reform.

 

thats what will happen , so far we have been lucky that the old knight (or arab in most cases) comes flying over the hill to save them.

but one day they wont - then what !!!!!!!

Clubs don’t go under because they don’t earn enough, they go under because they spend too much. If you doubled the income of every club in the division, they would just go and spend it competing for players and be right back where they started, on the edge of ruin. It’s the same as money coming down from the Premiership, it doesn’t do a thing to make the clubs more secure.

[opinions4u]

Clubs don’t go under because they don’t earn enough, they go under because they spend too much. If you doubled the income of every club in the division, they would just go and spend it competing for players and be right back where they started, on the edge of ruin. It’s the same as money coming down from the Premiership, it doesn’t do a thing to make the clubs more secure.

There is significantly more money in the lower leagues now than there was 20 years ago.

 

It's just that the players get paid more now.

 

Those posts above that talk about part-time/amateur football in the lower leagues are simply repeating exactly what was being said in the 1980s recession. One or two clubs sunk without trace. But most increased their income and increased their wage bill at the same time. They are still there when the final scores are read out at 4.55pm on a Saturday afternoon.

 

Full time professional lower league football is possibly the healthiest it has been for 40 years.

 

Wages of full time players will drop significantly first, before anybody gives serious consieration to semi-professional status.

Edited August 24, 2009 by opinions4u

[losesome]

There is significantly more money in the lower leagues now than there was 20 years ago.

 

It's just that the players get paid more now.

 

Those posts above that talk about part-time/amateur football in the lower leagues are simply repeating exactly what was being said in the 1980s recession. One or two clubs sunk without trace. But most increased their income and increased their wage bill at the same time. They are still there when the final scores are read out at 4.55pm on a Saturday afternoon.

 

Full time professional lower league football is possibly the healthiest it has been for 40 years.

 

Wages of full time players will drop significantly first, before anybody gives serious consieration to semi-professional status.

 

Healthiest in 40 years !!!!!!!

Get real , 95% of lower league clubs clubs are technically insolvent -

Unless the arabs with their oil revenues bail some out then a lot will go to the wall.

 

Clubs can't continue the way they are and unless action is taken over the next few years then part time football at our level is a certainty.

[leeslover]

Healthiest in 40 years !!!!!!!

Get real , 95% of lower league clubs clubs are technically insolvent -

Unless the arabs with their oil revenues bail some out then a lot will go to the wall.

 

Clubs can't continue the way they are and unless action is taken over the next few years then part time football at our level is a certainty.

What does, "technically insolvent," mean? You aren't allowed to trade if you are insolvent. I've no doubt some clubs will go under sooner or later but the existing clubs could easily survive on far less income - so long as they all had cuts rather than just some. Most of a club's expenditure is on player salaries and that's where they compete commercially with each other - more income flows straight through into the players' pockets. Would the players currently at Oldham, Huddersfield, Exeter not play for the wages now going at Rochdale if that was all they could get? Or less? Maybe some wouldn't but most would.

[losesome]

What does, "technically insolvent," mean? You aren't allowed to trade if you are insolvent. I've no doubt some clubs will go under sooner or later but the existing clubs could easily survive on far less income - so long as they all had cuts rather than just some. Most of a club's expenditure is on player salaries and that's where they compete commercially with each other - more income flows straight through into the players' pockets. Would the players currently at Oldham, Huddersfield, Exeter not play for the wages now going at Rochdale if that was all they could get? Or less? Maybe some wouldn't but most would.

 

If you don't know what technically insolvent is then i suggest you take a business lesson on accountancy.

 

The only thing that keeps a lot of clubs going is the banks/crediters not closing them down , yes they can survive on much less income - how- PART TIME PLAYERS =

 

So back to the original argument !!

Edited August 24, 2009 by losesome

[opinions4u]

Healthiest in 40 years !!!!!!!

Compare incomes now to incomes at any time in the last 40 years. There's possibly a period when ITV Digital existed that saw higher incomes. No other time in the last 40 years though.

 

Get real , 95% of lower league clubs clubs are technically insolvent

They certainly live to their means. But if income remained the same and players received 30% less in wages then most would be running at a nice profit. And players would, on the whole, still be earning a living wage.

 

Unless the arabs with their oil revenues bail some out then a lot will go to the wall.

You will get administrations. You will get Phoenix from the Flames setups like Oldham Athletic 2004 Ltd. You will get the odd club that vanishes forever. But they will be very much the exception to the rule.

 

Clubs can't continue the way they are and unless action is taken over the next few years then part time football at our level is a certainty.

Cut wage bills as and when contracts are renewed and part time football at our level will absolutely not happen. Players will not starve.

 

The debate about part-time/semi-professional football at this level has been had before. It didn't happen then, club incomes have steadily risen (and I make reasonable allowance for inflation with that statement). How, with that set of circumstances can you claim "part time football at our level is a certainty"?

 

Big wage costs can be cut before the playing staff have to go part time.

Edited August 24, 2009 by opinions4u

[leeslover]

If you don't know what technically insolvent is then i suggest you take a business lesson on accountancy.

 

The only thing that keeps a lot of clubs going is the banks/crediters not closing them down , yes they can survive on much less income - how- PART TIME PLAYERS =

 

So back to the original argument !!

I'll have you know I'm a failed Chartered Accountant!

 

I meant a bit deeper - the fact is that pretty much all clubs, as we know are bankrolled - ie they spend consistently above their income, bankrolled by the owners. It's one of life's ironies that we all want our clubs to be safe but deep down we all also want our owners to spend more than we earn. We all actually WANT to be technically insolvent. What else is the Corp after? What I'm saying is that we could over-spend by just as much but all on half the money and it wouldn't make much difference.

[Dave_Og]

Kings Lynn play in the Conference North. They must clock up some miles.

At the end of last season my local side, Bishop's Stortford, 32 miles North of London were one club away from having to join Conference North. Regionalisation can throw up some very strange anomalies.

[Corporal_Jones]

I'll have you know I'm a failed Chartered Accountant!

 

I meant a bit deeper - the fact is that pretty much all clubs, as we know are bankrolled - ie they spend consistently above their income, bankrolled by the owners. It's one of life's ironies that we all want our clubs to be safe but deep down we all also want our owners to spend more than we earn. We all actually WANT to be technically insolvent. What else is the Corp after? What I'm saying is that we could over-spend by just as much but all on half the money and it wouldn't make much difference.

 

 

 

And can you point out where I advocate that the club becomes 'technically insolvent?'

[boundaryblue80]

I just wonder why people think regionalisation is such a good idea and "the way forward" when the powers that be totally disagree with them. Shown by the fact that leagues were regionalised...and then, hey, they're not...the way forward WAS de-regionalisation!

 

Wow...I wonder how the Americans cope with such travelling distances in football...

 

By the way...here's a question...who will have been the happiest fans in the country at 5pm on Saturday? I'd wage a bet it'll have been the handful that travelled from Exeter to Carlisle to see their team win!

Edited August 24, 2009 by boundaryblue80

[Corporal_Jones]

Those posts above that talk about part-time/amateur football in the lower leagues are simply repeating exactly what was being said in the 1980s recession. One or two clubs sunk without trace. But most increased their income and increased their wage bill at the same time. They are still there when the final scores are read out at 4.55pm on a Saturday afternoon.

 

 

 

Just because something didn't happen at a particular time, it doesn't mean that it never will. A lot depends on whether this recession turns out to be roughly the same as the one that happened then. That the causes this time around are entirely different, and that the effects of it have been to a large extent masked by methods that we're all going to be paying for for perhaps decades to come, suggests that it isn't going to be. Plus, the stifling of the worst effects of the current financial implosion might mean that further shocks have been merely postponed or are being ignored once more, with ominous implications for the future. And all that's if you leave aside matters such as the possibility that peak oil may be close at hand, and so on.

 

Within football there has probably never been a bigger gulf between the lower divisions and the one above. You're right in saying that most lower division clubs increased their income from the 1980s onwards, but this was largely done through charging admission prices that are only just within the reach of most people's budgets. All it takes is for a certain percentage of those who have been regular attenders season upon season to decide, as the economy fails to recover sufficiently, that enough is enough and many clubs are in trouble. This is especially the case for those clubs under pressure to achieve and paying out relatively big wages in order to do so, the choice being to get out of the lower divisions and grab a share of the substantially larger revenue floating around at Championship level, or else be left stranded where the long-term financial implications do not look at all good. And at the moment Latics appear to be stranded.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Corporal_Jones

[rudemedic]

In the top flight that is regionalised (the Northern version of at any rate) there is one fixture that really really stands out Blyth Spartans v Gloucester. A journey that is probably approaching 6 hours even with average traffic (i.e. no major hold ups). Just having a quick look I think there may be 19 teams either currently in Leagues 1 and 2 or a bad/good season (i.e. a promtion/relegation) away from joining it who are further North than us (especially if we move to Failsworth). Given a weird set of results we could play in Div 2/3 (or whatever it gets called) SOUTH. We had this discussion not that long ago and I kept pointing out just how far North Norwich is. Regionalisation works up to a point and then it breaks down- the fairest way is to keep the status quo and maybe teams that want a regionalised system at this level in order to reduce spenditure should maybe get their maps out first and then look at other ways of cutting spending before voting for something which will suit some clubs more than others.

[leeslover]

And can you point out where I advocate that the club becomes 'technically insolvent?'

Every single post where you advocate that we build seats on the basis of, "ambition," even though nobody would sit in them and therefore generate compensating income, and ask that our owners spend more on the playing budget in the hope of future higher income. Specifically, all of those posts. Every one of them.

[Corporal_Jones]

Every single post where you advocate that we build seats on the basis of, "ambition," even though nobody would sit in them and therefore generate compensating income, and ask that our owners spend more on the playing budget in the hope of future higher income. Specifically, all of those posts. Every one of them.

 

 

 

So I've said that the only way to do is by making the club 'technically insolvent', have I?

 

Or have I suggested that the only way to break out of the stagnation that will only deepen if we move into a small stadium designed for permanent lower division football is to somehow find a way of making the club viable on the basis of progressing up the league-the proven method of getting people into seats in any stadium.

 

When did we reach such a sorry state that we began to believe that the choice for the club is between hoplessness and bankruptcy?

Edited August 24, 2009 by Corporal_Jones

[nzlatic]

I don't really understand the argument against regionalisation on the basis that you will get the odd anomalie regarding midlands clubs. Yes, there would be the odd 1 or 2 big journeys but that is an improvement on having half the teams in our league way down south.

 

In fact, why not go a step further, make the championship 18 teams, then have a div 1 north, midlands and south. Each with 18 teams in. That should cut down the anomalies and you could have an end of season tournament for promotion and relegation involving teams at the top and bottom of each league. Say the champions go up automatically and the next 4 from each league play off for 1 remaining place in the championship. The bottom 3 from the champ go down automatically and the 4th bottom team joins the play off tournament.

[oafc1955]

I don't really understand the argument against regionalisation on the basis that you will get the odd anomalie regarding midlands clubs. Yes, there would be the odd 1 or 2 big journeys but that is an improvement on having half the teams in our league way down south.

 

In fact, why not go a step further, make the championship 18 teams, then have a div 1 north, midlands and south. Each with 18 teams in. That should cut down the anomalies and you could have an end of season tournament for promotion and relegation involving teams at the top and bottom of each league. Say the champions go up automatically and the next 4 from each league play off for 1 remaining place in the championship. The bottom 3 from the champ go down automatically and the 4th bottom team joins the play off tournament.

 

The thing is if we do nothing at all then within a year or two clubs will fold. This recession is nowhere near over and whilst regionalisation might not be the perfect solution, anything that will cut costs and increase revenue no matter how small has to be given full consideration.

 

Some huge companies and household institutions have gone to the wall over the last few months and a few proffesional football clubs are almost certainly going to join them in the not too distant future.

 

By all accounts we are down on season ticket sales by about £130,000 and unless we are challenging for promotion will be averaging 4500 at best , another £120,000 drop from pay on the day punters. That's at least £1/4M over the full season!!!!

 

The pinch me seasons of the early nineties, and what followed, were just about the best things that ever happened to this club, certainly in my lifetime, but as a result, the gradual decline that has transpired with two disastrous relegations, and the best forgotten Chris Moore era, has plunged the club into a seemingly endless downward spiral with, as yet, no real sign of recovery.

 

Once fans stop going to games for a couple of seasons it will be almost impossible to get them back without delivering success on the pitch.

 

TTA have kept the club afloat for the last 5 or 6 years and for that we should be eternally grateful, however, they have failed in their main aim of a 5 year plan for promotion to the Championship and it is, almost entirely, for this reason that we are struggling so badly, to hold on to our dwindling fanbase.

 

I fear absolutely nothing else, not even a shiny new stadium in Failsworth, will save us from further stagnation and decline.

 

I am sure that TTA are now having regrets about ever buying into this club and a quick fix and hurried move to Failsworth, for all the wrong reasons, will enable them to leave with their heads held high sure in the knowledge that they will have left the club in a far healthier position to the one they inherited.

 

I hope I am wrong but although the club is desperate for state of the art facilities I feel a move to Failsworth, especially after TTA have gone, could be the final nail in the coffin for this club.

Edited August 25, 2009 by oafc1955

[losesome]

I'll have you know I'm a failed Chartered Accountant!

 

I meant a bit deeper - the fact is that pretty much all clubs, as we know are bankrolled - ie they spend consistently above their income, bankrolled by the owners. It's one of life's ironies that we all want our clubs to be safe but deep down we all also want our owners to spend more than we earn. We all actually WANT to be technically insolvent. What else is the Corp after? What I'm saying is that we could over-spend by just as much but all on half the money and it wouldn't make much difference.

 

 

Glad you don't do my books ??????

[Corporal_Jones]

The thing is if we do nothing at all then within a year or two clubs will fold. This recession is nowhere near over and whilst regionalisation might not be the perfect solution, anything that will cut costs and increase revenue no matter how small has to be given full consideration.

 

Some huge companies and household institutions have gone to the wall over the last few months and a few proffesional football clubs are almost certainly going to join them in the not too distant future.

 

By all accounts we are down on season ticket sales by about £130,000 and unless we are challenging for promotion will be averaging 4500 at best , another £120,000 drop from pay on the day punters. That's at least £1/4M over the full season!!!!

 

The pinch me seasons of the early nineties, and what followed, were just about the best things that ever happened to this club, certainly in my lifetime, but as a result, the gradual decline that has transpired with two disastrous relegations, and the best forgotten Chris Moore era, has plunged the club into a seemingly endless downward spiral with, as yet, no real sign of recovery.

 

Once fans stop going to games for a couple of seasons it will be almost impossible to get them back without delivering success on the pitch.

 

TTA have kept the club afloat for the last 5 or 6 years and for that we should be eternally grateful, however, they have failed in their main aim of a 5 year plan for promotion to the Championship and it is, almost entirely, for this reason that we are struggling so badly, to hold on to our dwindling fanbase.

 

I fear absolutely nothing else, not even a shiny new stadium in Failsworth, will save us from further stagnation and decline.

 

I am sure that TTA are now having regrets about ever buying into this club and a quick fix and hurried move to Failsworth, for all the wrong reasons, will enable them to leave with their heads held high sure in the knowledge that they will have left the club in a far healthier position to the one they inherited.

 

I hope I am wrong but although the club is desperate for state of the art facilities I feel a move to Failsworth, especially after TTA have gone, could be the final nail in the coffin for this club.

 

 

 

 

Now that is what you call a common sense post.

[leeslover]

Glad you don't do my books ??????

I certainly am!