Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: the vicar on May 22, 2014, 05:45:44 pm
-
2 million, so what can we get for that? if we have to pay fees for players and wages not much, but if we get free agents then it goes a lot lot further depends what is out there just have to wait and see
-
Where has this figure come from?
-
club today
-
Is that the total budget? Down a bit from the £7-£8m or whatever last season? Or the £4m the last time we were in this division?
Or is that the money PD has for recruitment? With or without players resigning?
-
Thought the budget hadn't been decided upon before the Board meeting with PD tomorrow
-
Has our man of the clothe been on the communion wine again?
-
I assume were still around £3M. So £2M would get us about 5/6 players on £5K a week. Which would include the re-signing of Turnbull, Coppinger, Cotterill, etc. Which would probably take up around £1m.
-
Is that the total budget? Down a bit from the £7-£8m or whatever last season? Or the £4m the last time we were in this division?
Or is that the money PD has for recruitment? With or without players resigning?
with or with out
-
Is that the total budget? Down a bit from the £7-£8m or whatever last season? Or the £4m the last time we were in this division?
Or is that the money PD has for recruitment? With or without players resigning?
with or with out
Are you correcting my grammar? Or your information?
-
Perhaps we should save a bit of money and get Gary Woods back instead of Turnbull. Why spend more on a proven goalkeeper like Turnbull? What if he gets injured? Too risky!
-
2 million, so what can we get for that? if we have to pay fees for players and wages not much, but if we get free agents then it goes a lot lot further depends what is out there just have to wait and see
I think somebody is feeding you duff information.
-
well it came from someone at the club so I cant say who as I don't want to get them in trouble
-
well it came from someone at the club so I cant say who as I don't want to get them in trouble
Which proves my point.
-
2 million, so what can we get for that? if we have to pay fees for players and wages not much, but if we get free agents then it goes a lot lot further depends what is out there just have to wait and see
Are you the guy on the Facebook page who is saying we have signed Turnbull up as well?
-
nope I don't use such shit sites and SM the guy has never given me shit information befor
-
Doubt the source is reliable.
-
nope I don't use such shit sites and SM the guy has never given me shit information befor
To be honest I've never seen you post anything that has been remotely accurate. During the so called takeover you posted quite a few things that were completely the opposite. I'm not doubting your sincerity, but I am doubting the individuals who are passing that information on to you.
-
The wage bill will be twice that next year.
-
I think your claim on the player budget is about as accurate as your username
-
Its from that pile of shyte,the Free Press,they have a "source" unnamed, & they believe Rovers will operate next season on a much lower wage bill than last time in League One,there i've saved anyone wasting their money,vicar could've done the same
-
Rovers have denied that they will operate with a considerably smaller playing budget next season than their last year in League One.
Sources informed the Free Press that Paul Dickov will be handed a £2m budget to tackle the third tier next term, a reduction of more than 40 per cent from the pot from which Dean Saunders worked two years ago.
But a club representative insists the budget has yet to be determined with Dickov set to meet the Rovers board today, armed with a last of targets.
A spokesperson said: “On Friday, Paul Dickov is presenting his target list of acquisitions to the board.
“The brief has been made clear, in that it has to be a promotion chasing team.
“On Friday, the board will discuss Paul’s targets and will work with Paul to set a budget that is capable of achieving the brief.
“As last season, Paul will have the support from the board to achieve the targets that have been set for the team.”
While the budget will be determined by Dickov’s list of targets, it is certain to be reduced.
This is a result of a drop of more than £6m in funding following relegation, a desire from the directors at the club to run a sustainable business and financial fair play restrictions in League One.
It will ensure out of contract players such as James Coppinger and David Cotterill will be offered reduced terms to remain at the Keepmoat.
Rovers revealed last week they are set to offer new contracts to eight players whose deals will expire this summer.
First team regulars Ross Turnbull and Paul Keegan, along with Coppinger and Cotterill, are among the group who will consider new terms.
Rovers face a battle to hold on to these players given the restrictions on wages which can be offered.
Coppinger in particular is understood to have been offered a considerable reduction in his weekly pay.
Abdoulaye Meite and Gabriel Tamas were not offered extensions to their short term deals while Billy Paynter was also released.
A total of 13 players remain under contract with the club following this summer, though it is understood several have clauses which will allow them to leave the club with little resistance following relegation.
Average League One wage budgets are said to range between £2-£3.5m.
If that's average then there must be higher and lower figures, some poorly attended matches for some clubs at home then ( to comply with FFP ).
So if DRFC are at top end of that average, that's looking for AVERAGE attendance to be around 10K, at average cost £25.
-
£2-£3.5m? Thought it would be more than that. If that is true it makes Sheff Utd look a joke having a reported £16m budget.
What was our budget under DS £6m?
-
Nah, in order for 16 million to be true , for FFP Compliance. SU would need 24000 spectators paying 50 quid a game , for every game.
-
Bournemouth had a 10 million wage bill to finish second to tlod last time round.
-
Finances aren't based purely on attendance, sponsorship and other revenue systems are taken into consideration which is why it's great news that the KM is making a profit.
-
I know that DVR, but MOST is from attendances, even if SU were getting half from "Other sources" they would still need 24000 spectators at 25£ a throw.
-
It depends WR, if there owners sponser the stadium/ shirts etc.. For over inflated fees then the attendance figure isn't as important which is how some clubs get around the ffp
-
Just out of interest,does anyone know the running cost of the club before players wages are budgeted for.Iwould imagine the costs would be high when you take into account staff wages and insurance etc.
-
due to the fact the rovers and the dons now share backroom staff, I wonder if some of the staff could be officially put on the dons wage bill for FFP reasons
-
Just out of interest,does anyone know the running cost of the club before players wages are budgeted for.Iwould imagine the costs would be high when you take into account staff wages and insurance etc.
Whatever they are, they'll be £6m higher this season due to the loss in revenue following relegation.
-
Just out of interest,does anyone know the running cost of the club before players wages are budgeted for.Iwould imagine the costs would be high when you take into account staff wages and insurance etc.
Whatever they are, they'll be £6m higher this season due to the loss in revenue following relegation.
Surely if we have the same operations (outside player wages) then how will those costs be higher, let alone by £6m?
The revenue to support all our costs may be lower, but your point that running costs would be £6m higher is misleading surely?
-
Just out of interest,does anyone know the running cost of the club before players wages are budgeted for.Iwould imagine the costs would be high when you take into account staff wages and insurance etc.
Whatever they are, they'll be £6m higher this season due to the loss in revenue following relegation.
Surely if we have the same operations (outside player wages) then how will those costs be higher, let alone by £6m?
The revenue to support all our costs may be lower, but your point that running costs would be £6m higher is misleading surely?
I think I've worded it just really badly - what you said is what I was meaning to say.