Orient and FFP

[DearneValleyRover]

Leyton Orient are paying Darius Henderson £12k a week not a recipe for disaster is it.

[GazLaz]

New owners putting plenty of money in. FFP is a joke, if clubs want to get round it they will.

[DearneValleyRover]

Yes you can get around it but how sustainable is it and if it fails and promotion isn't achieved what then?

[The Red Baron]

Yes you can get around it but how sustainable is it and if it fails and promotion isn't achieved what then?

It is a joke as it currently stands because it continues to allow the kind of behaviours it was supposed to prevent- and penalises those clubs who try to operate sustainably via poor results on the pitch.

Knowing our luck, as soon as we do find a tame Russian Oligarch or Oil Sheik who is prepared to pour his money into DRFC the Football League will change the rules again!

[IDM]

In League 1 under FFP wages are limited to 60% of turnover.  Now I don't know if "turnover" includes cash injections from the owners?  It does include player sales so Peterborough should be in a good position for wages this year!

[DonnyNoel]

In League 1 under FFP wages are limited to 60% of turnover.  Now I don't know if "turnover" includes cash injections from the owners?  It does include player sales so Peterborough should be in a good position for wages this year!

Historically there's been ways around cash injections. I read (so could obviously be untrue) that Fleetwood's owner moved his company's offices to the ground and paid £1m rent for the offices, thus increasing Fleetwood's turnover.

[Boomstick]

Leyton Orient are paying Darius Henderson £12k a week not a recipe for disaster is it.

How the f**k can orient be allowed to pay that much, and John Ryan not be allowed to fully take control of a club he has 20 years experience of running successfully.
f**king joke.
Is it biased towards a London club?

[IDM]

In League 1 under FFP wages are limited to 60% of turnover.  Now I don't know if "turnover" includes cash injections from the owners?  It does include player sales so Peterborough should be in a good position for wages this year!

Historically there's been ways around cash injections. I read (so could obviously be untrue) that Fleetwood's owner moved his company's offices to the ground and paid £1m rent for the offices, thus increasing Fleetwood's turnover.

Since posting I read a bit more http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php.  Apparently cash injections are allowed in League 1 as part of turnover for FFP (not loans, as they increase debt).  Problem with that is making cash injections sustainable year on year, which is why I beleive IMHO our owners don't throw cash at our club willy nilly.

Boomstick you are not comparing like with like,  JR not being permitted to take over the club wasn't about FFP.

[bpoolrover]

Yes you can get around it but how sustainable is it and if it fails and promotion isn't achieved what then?

it's not but not many people buy a division 1 club to make money

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

The interesing thing is if they get promoted where they can't then rely on an owner putting cash in as it wouldn't count.  It's a strange mis-match in the system.

As for JR, I would assume this guy who took Orient over proved his cash liquidity, which JR could not.

[GazLaz]

Put money in to get promoted into a division worth millions more in revenue to them then have a go for it I'd say. They will be putting money in in return for shares I would imagine.

[Wild Rover]

The interesing thing is if they get promoted where they can't then rely on an owner putting cash in as it wouldn't count.  It's a strange mis-match in the system.

Not strictly the case, if they get promotion then the club will be allowed a level of "Debt", to get down to which ( think its 6 million currently ) the "Owner" can inject cash to get down to that level.

[DearneValleyRover]

It's about sustainability though, if Orients new owners have the cash to throw at it and don't get bored or stop if it doesn't work fair play, the alternative is massive debt, admin and possible loss of the club. We are aware of the wealth of our board so why aren't they doing this, well one is seriously ill, the other is no spring chicken and there isn't a queue of people willing to invest so if they did do as orient where would that leave us?

[godlike1]

It's about sustainability though, if Orients new owners have the cash to throw at it and don't get bored or stop if it doesn't work fair play, the alternative is massive debt, admin and possible loss of the club. We are aware of the wealth of our board so why aren't they doing this, well one is seriously ill, the other is no spring chicken and there isn't a queue of people willing to invest so if they did do as orient where would that leave us?

Precisely which is why I don't understand people calling for TB to go

Admittedly the way the club have made statements and then not seemingly stuck to them does not help inspire any form of confidence

In principle though the plan if managed correctly could see sustained and sustainable success

We need to get rid of PD mind which would help the plan become successful mind ;-)

[Monkcaster_Rover]

Wouldn't have paid 12k a week for Henderson 6 years ago never mind now.

[bpoolrover]

The last 2 seasons pd has had his hands tied, he is the only 1 who no blame can be attached 2

[silent majority]

The last 2 seasons pd has had his hands tied, he is the only 1 who no blame can be attached 2

How did he have his hands tied last season?

[BobG]

I wouldn't pay 12p a week for Darius Henderson. Never would have either Monkcaster.

BobG

[Mr1Croft]

I also fail see the logic behind the 'TB doesn't want to spend therefore he should sell up' notion that has sprung about recently.

In my opinion both TB and DW have been keen to adapt a long term strategy with DRFC since they have been on board which has been reflected in the amount of money they have pumped into the club on a continuous basis. I admire that, many football clubs always start with a long term strategy and will say so at the beginning of the season and then after a bad run of form the long term strategy is cast aside and more funds put in to try and change the fortunes.

Of course, whilst TB and the rest of the board try to adopt this we as a club have been guilty of this in this past, last season we significantly strengthened the squad in January which would have come as a cost. Despite the best efforts we were still relegated leaving us with increased costs that has lead to an inevitable cut in the budget which has been larger than what it would have been if we had not increased the budget in January, which obviously makes the managers job even harder.

Another example is the 2009/10 season with the 'biggest budget DRFC have ever given to a manager' saw us bring in Sharp, Shackell, JET and others of fine quality who helped us achieve our highest ever finish in the club's history. However this level of funding couldn't continue forever but the owners did at least try to recognise this by funding Billy Sharp, but because we couldn't afford to bring in the likes of JET, Shackell AND Sharp the quality was much lower whereas the funding was possibly the same as the previous season. We limped on and despite recognising holes in the side and funding Killgallon to the club a few injuries left us with one of our worst runs in our history which lead to another change of strategy by sacking SOD bringing in Saunders and the 'experiment' which was supposed to save us money on these superstars but left us with a wage bill of over £10 million at one point which again didn't change on the pitch fortunes, we sold Sharp and was relegated and (as this pre-season) had a massive overhaul of players because we couldn't carry such a wage bill into League One and cuts had to be made.

You would hope then, that these past occurrences has taught our owners a lesson about knee-jerk funding and abandoning the long term business model, it definitely hasn't do us any favours in the past and we have come off worst off as a result. I want to see the club stick to such a long term strategy like the one outlined this pre-season. Of course it isn't going to happen overnight so I don't see the fuss over the odd short term contract here and there, as long as it becomes a thing of the past in a couple of years I'll be happy.

The Board invest what they are committed to investing every season for the foreseeable future, if you think they should sell because they aren't spending what they can't commit too, its quite worrying what you are willing to risk our football club's future on.


If Leyton Orient want to spend £600,000 a year on DH, good luck!