What I can't understand

[palexander]

I have thought about this for a long while and I haven't really come up with a solution so I thought I would put it on here.

I realise that the way a number of the players / management have been treated is far from ideal, but I am struggling to think of an alternative (other than magicing money out of thin air) of rapidly dealing with the problem of an excessive wage bil which needed cutting immediately in order to stabilise the bottom line and secure the nessecary financing for the future.

The players were well paid and were happy to take the money, they couldn't have been transferred , Francis for example, turned down Peterbro' in the January window, therefore costing us a further 6 months of his salary in addition losing the 150K transfer fee (if he's on 2K a week and assuming Sankofa would have stepped in thats 200K we could have used to pay HMRC or other players wages), but no bids came in. (Brentford and Franno aside, there were no rumours until the players had decided that they wanted out).

Given the lack of cash in the club, I think relegation was inevitable (I certainly think RM thought so) , true we may have got enough points to stay up if we had paid the players, but I think that administration would have been forced by those who would not have been paid and we were not good enough to get that many points.

So how could RM have dealt with this better ? lets avoid the sniping and slagging off of other posters and think, what actually could he have done differently , given the need to massively reduce the wage bill....

This is exactly what I have been saying, thank you! :)

As Glasgow says, relegation clauses for one.

I think the buck of course stops with Ron Martin, but he hasnt been a chairman before - and as a club we have never had such a period as the 'Eastwood era' (to coin a Ron phrase!).

So naive money management has definitely been our downfall - large contracts, stupid terms (4 years for Barrett), and no relegation clauses.

At the end of the day, most of us wouldnt have wanted it any different. We were all on the crest of a wave and calling for Ron to spend to keep us up and you could see he was carried away with that.

Where it all went wrong (and sorry Tilson fans), is some of the buys in the CCC were not good enough and perhaps Tilson himself was not up to the job. Again, perhaps Ron bowing to appease the fans in giving Steve a new contract when we were going down was another naive mistake.

All of the problems we have, can really be looked back on with the benefit of hindsight and things we shouldnt have done.

I really do hope that Martin has learned his lesson and now we have the big earners off the books, we can 'start again' and do things the right way. And ultimately that will need us to move if we are ever going to compete at that level again.

 

[palexander]

Perks of the job :p

Oh & I put another bit on my last post too, upon contemplation.

Thanks, I agree. I dont want a major beef with anyone - I only have 1 person on ignore because I appreciate everyone elses views, even if I get carried away myself at times :)

All is good in da hood as Sean Clohessy would know doubt 'holla... dawg'.

 

[GBJ]

Can we just have one thread about all protesting, hatred, negativity because personally I am bored to the back teeth of constant new thread starting.

Don't read it then? You're not being forced to

 

[Firestorm]

After removing John Main, he should have stuck with the belief that the club cannot have someone in charge who would put the fairytale of football ahead of the business sense.

After all he was the negotiator of the players contracts not Tilly. He should not have sacrificed stability over success.

As a fan i maybe in the minority here but give me stability over success any time.

That was 10 years ago, I am talking about what he could have done in the very recent past.

 

[fbm]

Relegation clauses on contracts for one.
I know people have said do these exist in "real world" and not just on Football Manager but take Burnley for example a lot of their guys were on relegation clauses for their (inevitable) fall out of the PL. It's been confirmed by Chris Eagles not moving to Rangers as the pay cut he would have to take to move there was less than when his clause kicks in on his Burnley contract.

The thing about contracts is that they are entirely negotiable. Picture the scene...

Southend recover well under Sturrock and return to the lofty heights of the Championship. We are still at Roots Hall due to further delays with the stadium... Sainsburys are hopping mad but still waiting for some piece of legislation to go through so that the compulsory purchase of the pizza shop can be completed and the block demolished. However, that is still some months away. They are still bankrolling us.

Therefore we are still trying to compete in a decrepit ground with limited income and certainly not any more than a potential 9,000 fans. The whole Ron/Tilson debacle has left about 1,000 absolutely determined never to give RM another penny of their hard earned dosh and have boycotted Sainsburys for Morrisons.

We therefore cannot compete on wages with the Championship clubs who pay 3-4 times per week for squad players than what we could afford for our top earner. However, Sturrock pulls a few strings and gets a few startlingly decent pro's to come and have talks with the club.

PS - "Sorry, guys, the club is (still) on the verge of great things, stadium in the wings, all looks rosy, but we can only afford £1500 per week."

Players agent - "Then there had better be a lumpy signing on fee".

PS - "No chance, the clubs skint. But we can offer a 3 year contract which, at this players time of career, will give some added security for him and his family."

<Players agent and player confer>.

Agent - "Make it 3 year with an option on a further year at players request."

PS - "Should be ok. But I will have to include a relegation clause."

<BANG>

(Sound of door closing as player and agent hastily leave...)

It probably isn't going to happen. When we punch above our weight we need to try and get players here using any means at our disposal. We can't compete with the Coventrys, Leicesters, Derbys, Southamptons, Burnleys, Hulls... all with new or redeveloped stadia, bigger support, better facilities. That's why they were on long contracts in the first place! They wouldn't have come here if it was only a year or if we put a relegation clause in!

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

Firestorm isn't asking what he could have done historically to stop us getting into this position, he's asking what he could have done last season to deal with the problems of a handful of players on contracts which the Club couldn't afford to honour.

Not how it read to me.
I took it as what went drastically wrong and if we get out of this, what can be done to prevent further complications. I see I'm not alone in a wish for better contract provision but then again no doubt the excellent "due dilligence" we will exercise is going to cover this.

We're not in this position due to one bad year, this has been coming for 4 or 5 seasons...

 

[Firestorm]

Relegation clauses on contracts for one.
I know people have said do these exist in "real world" and not just on Football Manager but take Burnley for example a lot of their guys were on relegation clauses for their (inevitable) fall out of the PL. It's been confirmed by Chris Eagles not moving to Rangers as the pay cut he would have to take to move there was less than when his clause kicks in on his Burnley contract.

Certainly relegation clauses when we were in the championship would have reduced the impact of relegation but to be honest whilst our wage bill was too much for us to be able to deal with, it wasn't stupidly high. Our income was stupidly low for a championship team and TBH was not that large for league one considering some of the teams that have been there of late (Charlton, Southampton, Forest , Leeds Norwich etc) . Had there been a 10% wage reduction relegation clause , we would still have lost over 2M in our first season back in league 1......

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

But FBM, Burnley did it & one assumes so are Blackpool as we speak (& you would imagine PL wages need to be far higher than adjusting Championship to L1). They know they're not in that league for the long-term and anything other than a season in the limelight is a bonus.

With that scenario you paint out (& considering how ex PL teams are finding themselves in trouble at the bottom of Championship or marooned in L1), then a club with the structure/funding/facilities of SUFC is going to find getting back to the 2nd tier harder than it ever was.

I'm not saying it would be easy to state relegation clauses are a must but at some point there will be a chance to include them in negotiations.

 

[canveyshrimper]

Certainly relegation clauses when we were in the championship would have reduced the impact of relegation but to be honest whilst our wage bill was too much for us to be able to deal with, it wasn't stupidly high. Our income was stupidly low for a championship team and TBH was not that large for league one considering some of the teams that have been there of late (Charlton, Southampton, Forest , Leeds Norwich etc) . Had there been a 10% wage reduction relegation clause , we would still have lost over 2M in our first season back in league 1......

Wouldn't the Eastwood transfer fee been accounted for in our first season back in League 1? He was sold the summer after our jaunt in the CCC.

 

[Bob Cratchitt]

That was 10 years ago, I am talking about what he could have done in the very recent past.

No it is not, he only changed his ways when we were marching up the leagues which was 5 years ago, I was just pointing out what he said 10 years ago and that if he had stuck to that, we would not have been in the mess you describe which is attributable to players wages and contract terms.

 

[Firestorm]

Not how it read to me.
I took it as what went drastically wrong and if we get out of this, what can be done to prevent further complications. I see I'm not alone in a wish for better contract provision but then again no doubt the excellent "due dilligence" we will exercise is going to cover this.

We're not in this position due to one bad year, this has been coming for 4 or 5 seasons...

Apologies Rich, it was meant say "How else could RM dealt with the severe cash flow issues and massive expenditure this year" .
Going any further back prompts too much hindsight to be honest, we can all tell RM what he should have done 4 years ago when we think he actually had viable alternatives, and whether those options were available to him at the time have been lost in the mists of time.

 

[Firestorm]

Wouldn't the Eastwood transfer fee been accounted for in our first season back in League 1? He was sold the summer after our jaunt in the CCC.

It hit the accounts two weeks before the end of the "Financial" season, (31/7) so it was included in our Championship year account and meant that we posted a profit that season

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

Certainly relegation clauses when we were in the championship would have reduced the impact of relegation but to be honest whilst our wage bill was too much for us to be able to deal with, it wasn't stupidly high. Our income was stupidly low for a championship team and TBH was not that large for league one considering some of the teams that have been there of late (Charlton, Southampton, Forest , Leeds Norwich etc) . Had there been a 10% wage reduction relegation clause , we would still have lost over 2M in our first season back in league 1......

I do also blame RM's decision to give Barrett such a long-term deal, especially at a level of wage which, certainly in my view and probably those who mattered as well, was over and above what he was worth, certainly once he hit 30.

Also, in terms of relegation clauses, IF we had managed to get a good number of the squad on them, you could argue that in the dark days of winter (ignoring all the non-payment issues) that Tilson could have used this as an incentive to fight as hard as possible to stay up?

 

[canveyshrimper]

It hit the accounts two weeks before the end of the "Financial" season, (31/7) so it was included in our Championship year account and meant that we posted a profit that season

Thanks mate, and that's almost certainly been covered before.

 

[Firestorm]

No it is not, he only changed his ways when we were marching up the leagues which was 5 years ago, I was just pointing out what he said 10 years ago and that if he had stuck to that, we would not have been in the mess you describe which is attributable to players wages and contract terms.

I see , That said, it was Ritblat and others from Delancey who engineered RM's removal and their very strict control of the purse strings were largely removed just before the 2nd of the promotions when RM bought their share in SEL.

I agree, however, that had the post RM frugality been maintained we would not be in this mess, we would in all probability still be in this division, but without the rollercoaster of the past 6 years or so.

 

[Norfolkshrimp]

What gets me is how laid back our support seems, had this situation been mirrored at any other club I am sure something would have been done action would have been taken, but time and time again Ron appears with a smoke screen something to dissolve the attitude and the dreamers (and yes I use to be one myself) get taken in once more and mock those who are trying to do something. I hurts when you see people just walking past others who are trying to protest it just feels like nobody cares, you could say the club needs all the money it can get, NO RON needs all the money he can get

We need to be cruel to be kind here the ultimate call for action will be to show the owner i.e Ron that with him running the club Southend is not a returnable investment this is what we need to realise if we get a new ground WE WILL NOT OWN IT!!! now if Ron wanted us to own it why create a separate stadium operating company?

I think some people on here need to take a look at themselves before they harp on about people protesting.

Sums it up perfectly, if we had an empty ground for the first 3 games that can't be ignored even by RM

 

[southend4ever]

Clique above.

 

[Firestorm]

Sums it up perfectly, if we had an empty ground for the first 3 games that can't be ignored even by RM

I agree, the thought of 1 months revenue disappearing would certainly not be ingnored, not just be RM but by HMRC and all our other creditors as well as the players and management who would not get paid, Again.

I can see this plan working ,actually, force Ron Martin out by cutting the income of the club to such an extent that it is no even viable for Sainsburys to Underwrite, The whole lot folds up and Bingo no RM.

A few more ways of reducing the income further might need to be considered as well just to make sure he goes.

 

[Jam_Man]

I do also blame RM's decision to give Barrett such a long-term deal, especially at a level of wage which, certainly in my view and probably those who mattered as well, was over and above what he was worth, certainly once he hit 30.

Also, in terms of relegation clauses, IF we had managed to get a good number of the squad on them, you could argue that in the dark days of winter (ignoring all the non-payment issues) that Tilson could have used this as an incentive to fight as hard as possible to stay up?

All very well with hindsight but at the time Colchester and other clubs were sniffing around Barrett and people on this board were very worried about losing him.

Not many complained he was given a big contract to keep him at the time.

As for it being a long term deal, thats irrelevant when it comes to day to day cash flow, its the weekly wage that counts.

With regard to relegation clauses, firstly we were looking at promotion so they wouldnt have been high on the agenda, but I think if we have given any player such a clause and they had said no thanks Im not signing that would have been another stick to beat RM with.

All the players with relegation clauses in would leave anyway, which is exactly what happened anyway, so not sure what thay would have achieved at this point. Those that had them in the CCC such as Francis etc would probably have left back then and that would have been something RM would have been criticised for.

I dont see relegation clauses being realistic at this level, whats more important is to pay realistic salaries in the first place, and if you are going to pay over the top as a gamble against promotion make sure you have the finance to do so.

 

[Beefy]

As for it being a long term deal, thats irrelevant when it comes to day to day cash flow, its the weekly wage that counts.

Well it is but it's the length of contracts which have crippled us more than the wages themselves. When Barrett signed that contract players were getting paid, because Ron Martin and his companies were in a position to cover any cashflow shortages we'd have. No cash in the bank just before the payroll is due to run? No problems, just move some cash around from elsewhere.

The trouble has been caused by those contracts still being in place long after our income has bottomed out and at a time where there's no cash in any of Ron Martin's other companies to meet any shortfalls that we have.