• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

I have always thought this whole thing is the wrong way round anyway, why on earth would the council let a huge supermarket be built at RH given the awful congestion that already occurs now without it, surely FF would be a better site for them ? Maybe Ron should play top trumps with them for swapsies ?
 
One thing in my mind why give Barnard any deal whatsoever after all he must be on 100k maybe more!

Put it this way this club every season has around 130,000 customers yet it still loses over a million per year!

Strange.
Here we go again.....let's just have a team of 11 Jason Williams on £50 a week shall we ?
 
One thing in my mind why give Barnard any deal whatsoever after all he must be on 100k maybe more!

Put it this way this club every season has around 130,000 customers yet it still loses over a million per year!

Strange.

Didn't you complain we lost out on Holman because we werent prepared to offer him a good enough long deal?
 
I strongly believe clubs only make losses because it suits their need !

Southend have been apparently losing money hand over fist with the debt topping over £10,000,000..Why???

If I owned this club I would look at every income stream and pay salaries accordingly so maybe the club would earn zero but never rack up more insane debt.

...and what standard of player do you get for £12.50 per week ?
 
One thing in my mind why give Barnard any deal whatsoever after all he must be on 100k maybe more!

Put it this way this club every season has around 130,000 customers yet it still loses over a million per year!

Strange.

whats strange? football clubs run at a lose , it would be 'strange' if we actually ran at a profit on a regular basis. as has been suggested take a look at the accounts . google anything that you don't understand or ask the accountants and guys who work with numbers for a living questions on here . It will then become clear that this is not 'strange' at all
 
Writing off a development (i.e. not continuing) is completely different to writing off money that may well be legally owed to them.

totally correct . And seeing as none of us now any of the fats and are purely speculating I will throw this into the mix ---------breach of contract. None of us know the terms of the deal, if Sainsburys do decide to pull out who is to say that we can not sue them? Yes I know they can afford expensive lawyers etc and will have a 'watertight' contract etc , but the fact is none of us have a scooby do on this subject and everything is just speculation without having sight of the contract , and any subsequent agreements where Sainsbury or ourselves has breached the contract
 
I strongly believe clubs only make losses because it suits their need !

Southend have been apparently losing money hand over fist with the debt topping over £10,000,000..Why???

If I owned this club I would look at every income stream and pay salaries accordingly so maybe the club would earn zero but never rack up more insane debt.

Football clubs lose money because they earn less than they spend.

It is easy to avoid spending more than you earn of course. But if you spend less then you generally (not always such is the joy of football) have to sacrifice quality on the pitch. And as the playing talent gets poorer and results suffer so attendences fall which cuts your budget still further.

It isn't hard to see how we - and others - lose money. You just need a pen, paper and calculator.
 
totally correct . And seeing as none of us now any of the fats and are purely speculating I will throw this into the mix ---------breach of contract. None of us know the terms of the deal, if Sainsburys do decide to pull out who is to say that we can not sue them? Yes I know they can afford expensive lawyers etc and will have a 'watertight' contract etc , but the fact is none of us have a scooby do on this subject and everything is just speculation without having sight of the contract , and any subsequent agreements where Sainsbury or ourselves has breached the contract
It seems strange that we *appear* to be paying our staff and bills on time and even paid for a fee for a player. Makes you wonder exactly what the financial relationship is beyond the £5M already received.
 
I strongly believe clubs only make losses because it suits their need !

Southend have been apparently losing money hand over fist with the debt topping over £10,000,000..Why???

If I owned this club I would look at every income stream and pay salaries accordingly so maybe the club would earn zero but never rack up more insane debt.

Wow, you should set yourself up as a Consultant to football Clubs, as I reckon 80% (minimum) are losing money in football. You make it sound so simple ....,funny that all other Owners, Chairman etc think and/or act differently, they must be kicking themselves that they dont access this forum :Worthy:
 
Last edited:
I strongly believe clubs only make losses because it suits their need !

Southend have been apparently losing money hand over fist with the debt topping over £10,000,000..Why???

If I owned this club I would look at every income stream and pay salaries accordingly so maybe the club would earn zero but never rack up more insane debt.
If you apply that concept then players would be paying the club a fee to come here, still credit due for thinking outside the box :stunned:
 
Sarcasm aside, you are right Mrs Blue. That's how a business should be run. It's just sad that football is run with spiralling debts at present.
 
Last edited:
I hope these threads don't affect the performances on the pitch ? If they do, I'd suggest our beloved chairman actually comes clean with the latest goings on, to ease the concerns of his players, staff and paying customers. Am I asking too much ?
 
I hope these threads don't affect the performances on the pitch ? If they do, I'd suggest our beloved chairman actually comes clean with the latest goings on, to ease the concerns of his players, staff and paying customers. Am I asking too much ?

Yes.......
 
I hope these threads don't affect the performances on the pitch ? If they do, I'd suggest our beloved chairman actually comes clean with the latest goings on, to ease the concerns of his players, staff and paying customers. Am I asking too much ?

He cant come clean if what I heard is true and we are still waiting for the answer from Sainsbury.

When that decision is made is the time for updates.
 
The problem with football is the quest for the Holy Grail - The Premiership - causes Championship clubs to overstretch themselves to the point where the AVERAGE Championship Club spends over 100% of it's turnover on wages.

It's absolute madness and unsustainable. But it keeps happening over and over and over.

L2 clubs have to pay a decent amount to attract the players.

These days, FL clubs have to use the whole stadium to generate income and cannot rely on gate receipts and TV money. Most lower league clubs can't do that and so run at a loss.

It's not by choice. Gone are the days when businessmen used to run their business as a tax loss. HMRC want businesses to make profits.
 
Back
Top