Bradford City pay price for cup exits as club explore options to cover shortfall in budget

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Ricky Ravenhill, pictured, Andy Gray, Alan Connell and Caleb Folan could all be heading for the Valley Parade exit door Ricky Ravenhill, pictured, Andy Gray, Alan Connell and Caleb Folan could all be heading for the Valley Parade exit door

City head into next month’s transfer window aiming to recoup the loss from missing out on a cup run.

Mark Lawn revealed that they had hoped to offset an increase in Phil Parkinson’s player kitty for League One with funds raised from the knock-out competitions.

But last year’s Wembley finalists fell at the first hurdle of all three cups – leaving them with a shortfall that the board are now looking to cover. Parkinson will be eyeing January additions to his squad but others have to go.

Joint-chairman Lawn also hinted that City may try to rework long-term structured deals to get them paid early. They are entitled to “add-ons” for the likes of Andre Wisdom when he joined Liverpool as a youngster.

Lawn said: “You’ve got to be realistic. We gave a stretched budget that we couldn’t afford and we did that hoping that we got through the cups.

“We haven’t done that, so we’re going to have to readjust it with something else. There are various options and that’s what we’re working on.

“I don’t know if January is going to be a busy month. But we will certainly have to look at readjusting the budget somewhere along the line.

“That might involve someone that’s not at the club and maybe doing a deal with someone who owes us money. We might be able to do something to get it at a discount rate.

“Or it might well be someone that’s here. We’ve got to look at that but we do it every year.

“When we ask Phil for what budget he wants, we then spell out what will happen when we get to the situation where we are. Everybody knows where they stand.”

The future of Nahki Wells is expected to dominate the next transfer window at Valley Parade but Lawn does not see it as a distraction for the player or the club.

“I don’t think it will be,” he added. “Nahki’s getting his head down because he wants to concentrate on his football and play as high as he can, like every professional.

“We’d like to sign Nahki up for another couple of years but that’s up to him. We’ve wanted to talk to him about it but he’s got to do what he wants.

“If there’s any way we could sign up Nahki for another year or two, I think that would be the best move for Bradford City. But we don’t know where we are at present.”

Northampton are keen to make Ricky Ravenhill’s loan move permanent and others who could leave next month include Andy Gray, Alan Connell and Caleb Folan.

That would make some room in the wage bill, which is nudging the 60 per cent limit of total income imposed by the new financial fair play rules.

Lawn said: “We are right at the upper limits so anyone coming in would depend on who went and how much money that would clear.

“Not having a go at anyone else, but we’ve got to make sure we don’t get in a (financial) situation like the Bulls.

“I think there are quite a few clubs who wish they were in our position. But it’s got to be managed sensibly and that’s down to Julian (Rhodes) and I to do.”

Comments (74)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:10am Sat 7 Dec 13

OLDLAD says...

I thought we were sitting pretty, financially, after last year. Where has all that money gone?
I thought we were sitting pretty, financially, after last year. Where has all that money gone? OLDLAD

7:40am Sat 7 Dec 13

bantam1911 says...

OLDLAD wrote:
I thought we were sitting pretty, financially, after last year. Where has all that money gone?
We can't use that money for transfers and wages as it's not part of the yearly income.
[quote][p][bold]OLDLAD[/bold] wrote: I thought we were sitting pretty, financially, after last year. Where has all that money gone?[/p][/quote]We can't use that money for transfers and wages as it's not part of the yearly income. bantam1911

7:45am Sat 7 Dec 13

PHILISAN says...

Well they did pay Mr Lawn his one mill loan back..maybe they could have had the foresight to mange that a little better,although there was the the saving of the interest payments on that loan to take into consideration.Surpri
sed though,that given that the Board knew of this,that they pushed up tight on player budgets when there would always be the need for necessary adjustments in the January transfer window..With a healthy increase in attendances,one would expect a semblance of revenue streams balancing.What niggles me is the delight of long awaited success,tempered forever with words of caution,which although maybe prudent,just seem to put a shower over our parade..but keep the faith and be thankful,I guess.
Well they did pay Mr Lawn his one mill loan back..maybe they could have had the foresight to mange that a little better,although there was the the saving of the interest payments on that loan to take into consideration.Surpri sed though,that given that the Board knew of this,that they pushed up tight on player budgets when there would always be the need for necessary adjustments in the January transfer window..With a healthy increase in attendances,one would expect a semblance of revenue streams balancing.What niggles me is the delight of long awaited success,tempered forever with words of caution,which although maybe prudent,just seem to put a shower over our parade..but keep the faith and be thankful,I guess. PHILISAN

7:54am Sat 7 Dec 13

bradford321 says...

Here we go again!

I can see PP jumping ship at the next opportunity.

Why on earth did the club decide to give ML his money back so quickly?
Granted it was a loan and duty says that we can into some so maybe he should be first in the queue, but could we have just done half now (after cup run) and half later (depending on how promotion push went)?

Sorry to say but the wheels are coming this bandwagon.

Lets face it. one a league 2 club - always a league 2 club!!
Here we go again! I can see PP jumping ship at the next opportunity. Why on earth did the club decide to give ML his money back so quickly? Granted it was a loan and duty says that we can into some so maybe he should be first in the queue, but could we have just done half now (after cup run) and half later (depending on how promotion push went)? Sorry to say but the wheels are coming this bandwagon. Lets face it. one a league 2 club - always a league 2 club!! bradford321

7:57am Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

If we can only spend 60% of total income on wages then we need to increase income. This means that season tickets and match day prices must be increased next season. It's ok having big crowds but when season tickets are only £200 the actual income isn't that high. I suggest season tickets of £250.
If we can only spend 60% of total income on wages then we need to increase income. This means that season tickets and match day prices must be increased next season. It's ok having big crowds but when season tickets are only £200 the actual income isn't that high. I suggest season tickets of £250. silverbantam

8:02am Sat 7 Dec 13

notpoliticallycorrect says...

'The club'? Mark and Julian are where all decisions lie financially. Nobody else had a say about Lawny getting his dosh back.

I am alarmed as we basically have the same side from L2 and most were still on contracts that we have not changed.

We are up on attendances and I know for a fact that the corporate income is up be 30% on last season. Something is not quite right here.

Anyway, get rid of Ravenhill, Folan, Connell and Gray will save a packet in wages. Oliver or Taylor can go too.
'The club'? Mark and Julian are where all decisions lie financially. Nobody else had a say about Lawny getting his dosh back. I am alarmed as we basically have the same side from L2 and most were still on contracts that we have not changed. We are up on attendances and I know for a fact that the corporate income is up be 30% on last season. Something is not quite right here. Anyway, get rid of Ravenhill, Folan, Connell and Gray will save a packet in wages. Oliver or Taylor can go too. notpoliticallycorrect

8:16am Sat 7 Dec 13

Thee Voice of Reason says...

We are just being softened up for Wells departure.
We are just being softened up for Wells departure. Thee Voice of Reason

8:20am Sat 7 Dec 13

bradford321 says...

Definitely needs to be a clear out of some of the 'fringe' players, although most - it not all - will end up going for free so we will only be saving on wages.

IF Nahki, must go, then I hope we do not blink at the first half decent offer.
We need to hang on to the 11th hour on deadline day so that we can play several offers off against each other and maximise his value!
Definitely needs to be a clear out of some of the 'fringe' players, although most - it not all - will end up going for free so we will only be saving on wages. IF Nahki, must go, then I hope we do not blink at the first half decent offer. We need to hang on to the 11th hour on deadline day so that we can play several offers off against each other and maximise his value! bradford321

9:00am Sat 7 Dec 13

bingleybantam says...

The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls!
The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls! bingleybantam

9:04am Sat 7 Dec 13

Freddy says...

*
Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' .
*
We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era.
During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction.
*
So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration.
*
I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn.
We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family.
*
I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!.
TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!.
*
I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate
ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!.
*
Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City.
*
* Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' . * We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era. During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction. * So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration. * I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn. We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family. * I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!. TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!. * I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!. * Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City. * Freddy

9:21am Sat 7 Dec 13

Freddy says...

*
I was an advocate of going out of this Season's Cup Matches. I thought the Club had sufficient revenue from last Season.
*
Going out of the Cups, meant City could concentrate wholly on the possibility of --QUOTE--" BACK TO BACK PROMOTION".(Julian Rhodes)
*
There would be less matches to play---and less injuries occurring .
*
WHY DOES THE JOINT BOARD NOT TALK TO WELLS ?. Why is this autocratic attitude, of not speaking to/or approaching the player prevalent, from this joint board.
WHY ARE WE NOW BEING TOLD THEY WERE RELYING ON CUP REVENUE --THIS SEASON???. This is very suspicious.
*
* I was an advocate of going out of this Season's Cup Matches. I thought the Club had sufficient revenue from last Season. * Going out of the Cups, meant City could concentrate wholly on the possibility of --QUOTE--" BACK TO BACK PROMOTION".(Julian Rhodes) * There would be less matches to play---and less injuries occurring . * WHY DOES THE JOINT BOARD NOT TALK TO WELLS ?. Why is this autocratic attitude, of not speaking to/or approaching the player prevalent, from this joint board. WHY ARE WE NOW BEING TOLD THEY WERE RELYING ON CUP REVENUE --THIS SEASON???. This is very suspicious. * Freddy

9:23am Sat 7 Dec 13

bhuna156 says...

Probably best if we sell Wells and get rid of the fringe players on high wages. Should get a few mil for Wells and the clubs financial situation is far more important than any player.

I'd keep Connell though and give him more of a chance with Hanson, and maybe Yeats could play up-front? and there's McBurnie who certainly has the potential to be better than Wells.
Probably best if we sell Wells and get rid of the fringe players on high wages. Should get a few mil for Wells and the clubs financial situation is far more important than any player. I'd keep Connell though and give him more of a chance with Hanson, and maybe Yeats could play up-front? and there's McBurnie who certainly has the potential to be better than Wells. bhuna156

9:43am Sat 7 Dec 13

BantamMark says...

Strange this one as in a recent interview for the fantastic width of the post Mr Baldwin stated the club budgeted to be out of the first round of each cup. He also stated that has we had big games against the dog botherers and mr Evans's mob it gave us bigger than expected pay days due to the large crowds. This is clearly to soften the departure of Wells but the board must get their stories straight to avoid confusion to some very concerned fans.
Strange this one as in a recent interview for the fantastic width of the post Mr Baldwin stated the club budgeted to be out of the first round of each cup. He also stated that has we had big games against the dog botherers and mr Evans's mob it gave us bigger than expected pay days due to the large crowds. This is clearly to soften the departure of Wells but the board must get their stories straight to avoid confusion to some very concerned fans. BantamMark

9:48am Sat 7 Dec 13

radiobantam1 says...

Every season we are told (specifically by Dave Baldwin) that w always do a budget based on going out of all the cup's in the first round.

This year we did go out of them all in the first round.

Now it's panic stations.

Where is the truth as both statements can't be correct!!!!!
Every season we are told (specifically by Dave Baldwin) that w always do a budget based on going out of all the cup's in the first round. This year we did go out of them all in the first round. Now it's panic stations. Where is the truth as both statements can't be correct!!!!! radiobantam1

9:55am Sat 7 Dec 13

spearmint wino says...

Do you not wish Lawn would just keep his fat gob shut! As someone said why not talk to Wells instead of saying 'he hasn't knocked on our door' Make him feel wanted, invite him to a meeting, make him feel important, flatter him, it's all part of man management, but then Lawn never was any good at that.
As for budgets and income from cup runs, this should be seen as a bonus only, not part of the main budget.
Seems very much like they are inviting offers for Wells, NOT THE RIGHT MESSAGE MR LAWN.
Do you not wish Lawn would just keep his fat gob shut! As someone said why not talk to Wells instead of saying 'he hasn't knocked on our door' Make him feel wanted, invite him to a meeting, make him feel important, flatter him, it's all part of man management, but then Lawn never was any good at that. As for budgets and income from cup runs, this should be seen as a bonus only, not part of the main budget. Seems very much like they are inviting offers for Wells, NOT THE RIGHT MESSAGE MR LAWN. spearmint wino

9:56am Sat 7 Dec 13

BCFC1234 says...

bingleybantam wrote:
The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls!
Bradford City have been bailed out by a few councils over the years. Including the re building of the ground after ther fire.
[quote][p][bold]bingleybantam[/bold] wrote: The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls![/p][/quote]Bradford City have been bailed out by a few councils over the years. Including the re building of the ground after ther fire. BCFC1234

10:02am Sat 7 Dec 13

tyker7745 says...

in the budgeted figures they could not have included two big windfall games in gate money nor the Coventry television money. o what the heck is going on.

Tis is all very odd and smoke and mirrors tactics are being deployed.

Await usual defence of the club from the usual places
in the budgeted figures they could not have included two big windfall games in gate money nor the Coventry television money. o what the heck is going on. Tis is all very odd and smoke and mirrors tactics are being deployed. Await usual defence of the club from the usual places tyker7745

10:04am Sat 7 Dec 13

Waynus1971 says...

Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read?

Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with.

To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early.

As for 'notpoliticallycorre
ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson.

Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference.
Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read? Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with. To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early. As for 'notpoliticallycorre ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson. Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference. Waynus1971

10:12am Sat 7 Dec 13

OLDLAD says...

What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,
What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost, OLDLAD

10:39am Sat 7 Dec 13

tinytoonster says...

OLDLAD wrote:
What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,
exactly.
if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season?
decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND!
like the rhodes family as done.
thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out.
obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it.
[quote][p][bold]OLDLAD[/bold] wrote: What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,[/p][/quote]exactly. if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season? decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND! like the rhodes family as done. thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out. obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it. tinytoonster

10:55am Sat 7 Dec 13

BigFigure says...

We're doomed
We're doomed BigFigure

11:00am Sat 7 Dec 13

nowt fresh says...

Waynus1971 wrote:
Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read? Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with. To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early. As for 'notpoliticallycorre ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson. Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference.
Fair comment Waynus but as markbantam pointed out in Dave Baldwin's interview to WOTP he stated "we don't budget past the first round" yet Mark Lawn states "Lawn said: “You’ve got to be realistic. We gave a stretched budget that we couldn’t afford and we did that hoping that we got through the cups" would you not think before coming out with totally different statements on the clubs finances/budgeting they would "sing from the same hymn sheet" especially a day after Julian's piece in the T&A re Nahki Wells? any wonder fans are asking questions, is the possible transfer of Nahki been brought up because we are facing a potential £200,000+ fine for Mark Stewart plus possible court costs, I'd say from reading Mark Lawns above comments we did not put any of our financial wind fall from last seasons Cup run on one side to pay this fine and maybe we (the club) already know the outcome of that court case.
[quote][p][bold]Waynus1971[/bold] wrote: Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read? Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with. To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early. As for 'notpoliticallycorre ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson. Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference.[/p][/quote]Fair comment Waynus but as markbantam pointed out in Dave Baldwin's interview to WOTP he stated "we don't budget past the first round" yet Mark Lawn states "Lawn said: “You’ve got to be realistic. We gave a stretched budget that we couldn’t afford and we did that hoping that we got through the cups" would you not think before coming out with totally different statements on the clubs finances/budgeting they would "sing from the same hymn sheet" especially a day after Julian's piece in the T&A re Nahki Wells? any wonder fans are asking questions, is the possible transfer of Nahki been brought up because we are facing a potential £200,000+ fine for Mark Stewart plus possible court costs, I'd say from reading Mark Lawns above comments we did not put any of our financial wind fall from last seasons Cup run on one side to pay this fine and maybe we (the club) already know the outcome of that court case. nowt fresh

11:22am Sat 7 Dec 13

tinytoonster says...

council, bulls, bradford city.
does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless?
and they wonder why we are negative on here!!!
council, bulls, bradford city. does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless? and they wonder why we are negative on here!!! tinytoonster

11:43am Sat 7 Dec 13

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap.
Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap. Prisoner Cell Block A

12:43pm Sat 7 Dec 13

tyker7745 says...

reference is made to Wisdom:was any loan fee aid by Derby to Liverpool for this player nd ,if so, are we not due a cut as in the cleverly case.

Are City worrying about the Stewart case. If so why? Surely the award cam in last year's accounting period with a consequence City should have made a specific reserve in their accounts before striking the declared profit. Did they do this ? If not why not? And if they thought they were going to be short of cash why was the loan repaid to Lawn?
reference is made to Wisdom:was any loan fee aid by Derby to Liverpool for this player nd ,if so, are we not due a cut as in the cleverly case. Are City worrying about the Stewart case. If so why? Surely the award cam in last year's accounting period with a consequence City should have made a specific reserve in their accounts before striking the declared profit. Did they do this ? If not why not? And if they thought they were going to be short of cash why was the loan repaid to Lawn? tyker7745

12:49pm Sat 7 Dec 13

nowt fresh says...

Prisoner Cell Block A wrote:
Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap.
Not having a pop PCBA but how can you say " We always budget to exit each cup at round one" when you are quoting exactly the opposite of what Mark Lawn is saying in the artical above, I think your Well's comment may be true but hope as your self we can dictate Nahki's transfer value and that his fee is used on strengthening this squad.
[quote][p][bold]Prisoner Cell Block A[/bold] wrote: Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap.[/p][/quote]Not having a pop PCBA but how can you say " We always budget to exit each cup at round one" when you are quoting exactly the opposite of what Mark Lawn is saying in the artical above, I think your Well's comment may be true but hope as your self we can dictate Nahki's transfer value and that his fee is used on strengthening this squad. nowt fresh

1:19pm Sat 7 Dec 13

macca1969 says...

At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club
At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club macca1969

1:32pm Sat 7 Dec 13

macca1969 says...

If course I expect Wells to be sold anyone with half a brain cell knows this. Butas a club we sshould still be bragging about last season's windfall and how we don't need the money to make watching teams bid higher. By moaning about lack if finance just makes the vultures start the bidding low. Basic business and poor by all concerned
If course I expect Wells to be sold anyone with half a brain cell knows this. Butas a club we sshould still be bragging about last season's windfall and how we don't need the money to make watching teams bid higher. By moaning about lack if finance just makes the vultures start the bidding low. Basic business and poor by all concerned macca1969

2:36pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

bradford321 wrote:
Here we go again! I can see PP jumping ship at the next opportunity. Why on earth did the club decide to give ML his money back so quickly? Granted it was a loan and duty says that we can into some so maybe he should be first in the queue, but could we have just done half now (after cup run) and half later (depending on how promotion push went)? Sorry to say but the wheels are coming this bandwagon. Lets face it. one a league 2 club - always a league 2 club!!
Its not DEADBEAT shaun from Richmond is it? Shaun generously donates money to City, which is gratefully received. I hope you do the same. If you do, thanks very muchly.
[quote][p][bold]bradford321[/bold] wrote: Here we go again! I can see PP jumping ship at the next opportunity. Why on earth did the club decide to give ML his money back so quickly? Granted it was a loan and duty says that we can into some so maybe he should be first in the queue, but could we have just done half now (after cup run) and half later (depending on how promotion push went)? Sorry to say but the wheels are coming this bandwagon. Lets face it. one a league 2 club - always a league 2 club!![/p][/quote]Its not DEADBEAT shaun from Richmond is it? Shaun generously donates money to City, which is gratefully received. I hope you do the same. If you do, thanks very muchly. Peter300

2:38pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

notpoliticallycorrec
t
wrote:
'The club'? Mark and Julian are where all decisions lie financially. Nobody else had a say about Lawny getting his dosh back. I am alarmed as we basically have the same side from L2 and most were still on contracts that we have not changed. We are up on attendances and I know for a fact that the corporate income is up be 30% on last season. Something is not quite right here. Anyway, get rid of Ravenhill, Folan, Connell and Gray will save a packet in wages. Oliver or Taylor can go too.
Can the club get rid of you? I know its not politically correct to ask.
[quote][p][bold]notpoliticallycorrec t[/bold] wrote: 'The club'? Mark and Julian are where all decisions lie financially. Nobody else had a say about Lawny getting his dosh back. I am alarmed as we basically have the same side from L2 and most were still on contracts that we have not changed. We are up on attendances and I know for a fact that the corporate income is up be 30% on last season. Something is not quite right here. Anyway, get rid of Ravenhill, Folan, Connell and Gray will save a packet in wages. Oliver or Taylor can go too.[/p][/quote]Can the club get rid of you? I know its not politically correct to ask. Peter300

2:40pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

Freddy wrote:
* Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' . * We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era. During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction. * So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration. * I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn. We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family. * I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!. TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!. * I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!. * Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City. *
Funny, you didn't ask to see the accounts last May.
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' . * We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era. During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction. * So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration. * I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn. We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family. * I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!. TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!. * I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!. * Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City. *[/p][/quote]Funny, you didn't ask to see the accounts last May. Peter300

2:42pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

radiobantam1 wrote:
Every season we are told (specifically by Dave Baldwin) that w always do a budget based on going out of all the cup's in the first round. This year we did go out of them all in the first round. Now it's panic stations. Where is the truth as both statements can't be correct!!!!!
The only people who are panicing are fans like you on this message board. But isn't that just typical?
[quote][p][bold]radiobantam1[/bold] wrote: Every season we are told (specifically by Dave Baldwin) that w always do a budget based on going out of all the cup's in the first round. This year we did go out of them all in the first round. Now it's panic stations. Where is the truth as both statements can't be correct!!!!![/p][/quote]The only people who are panicing are fans like you on this message board. But isn't that just typical? Peter300

2:43pm Sat 7 Dec 13

What's my name says...

Did you know we pay VAT at 20% on all our earnings so we did not make that much. (paid approx £6000,000 VAT on the cup runs)
we are not in trouble or going to the wall loads of clubs would like be like us little or no debts.
players out before players in, of 60% of income.
Nahki Wells is in the driving seat about his future not the club if he wants to go he will.
Did you know we pay VAT at 20% on all our earnings so we did not make that much. (paid approx £6000,000 VAT on the cup runs) we are not in trouble or going to the wall loads of clubs would like be like us little or no debts. players out before players in, of 60% of income. Nahki Wells is in the driving seat about his future not the club if he wants to go he will. What's my name

2:49pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

tyker7745 wrote:
in the budgeted figures they could not have included two big windfall games in gate money nor the Coventry television money. o what the heck is going on. Tis is all very odd and smoke and mirrors tactics are being deployed. Await usual defence of the club from the usual places
And of course attacks on the club come from the usual places. What both Lawn and Rhodes have said is something that a person with average intelligence could disseminate (hope thats spelt right) and understand what they are saying. You are upset because you want to be upset.
[quote][p][bold]tyker7745[/bold] wrote: in the budgeted figures they could not have included two big windfall games in gate money nor the Coventry television money. o what the heck is going on. Tis is all very odd and smoke and mirrors tactics are being deployed. Await usual defence of the club from the usual places[/p][/quote]And of course attacks on the club come from the usual places. What both Lawn and Rhodes have said is something that a person with average intelligence could disseminate (hope thats spelt right) and understand what they are saying. You are upset because you want to be upset. Peter300

2:50pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
We are just being softened up for Wells departure.
Who is 'we'?
[quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: We are just being softened up for Wells departure.[/p][/quote]Who is 'we'? Peter300

2:54pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

Freddy wrote:
* Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' . * We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era. During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction. * So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration. * I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn. We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family. * I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!. TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!. * I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!. * Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City. *
Mr. Lawn has said that won't happen. Presumably you will agree with him. Neither you nor anyone else on here objected when Lawn was paid back the money he lent the club.
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Since I first started with City in 19.54, There has been considerable financial problems . Many funds were spirited away by unscrupulous ' Owners' . * We all remember the 'Rich-Man' (Mond) era. During one past Season, we all collected/donated money (Whilst in the Old Stand)--to save the Club from extinction. * So--here we are again---trying to understand further financial problems. Rhodes did his utmost to keep the Club afloat, -despite administration. * I truly thought that the revenue earned last season, was a major lifeline for City. I do not think I was alone in that thought, until £1 Million went back to Lawn. We did not know what 'Richmond' was doing with the Clubs finances. Nobody checked 'The Accounts'--; Although 'The Directors' were mainly made up of his family. * I feel the Supporters need to see the current Accounts---NOW!!!!. TO DETERMINE JUST WHAT LAWN/RHODES ARE DOING !!!. * I am not happy with the statements made in this article. We need independent Accountants to investigate the Clubs financial situation--immediate ly. Accountants that are not in the Club's pocket!!!. * Lets not return to the historic major financial situations, that I have experienced in the 63 years of Bradford City. *[/p][/quote]Mr. Lawn has said that won't happen. Presumably you will agree with him. Neither you nor anyone else on here objected when Lawn was paid back the money he lent the club. Peter300

2:57pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

Waynus1971 wrote:
Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read? Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with. To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early. As for 'notpoliticallycorre ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson. Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference.
Pensioner Waynus makes some valid points. Whats the situation with James Hanson? Are you still keeping an eye on him when he's out and about?
[quote][p][bold]Waynus1971[/bold] wrote: Do some of you just write rubbish for the sake of it? Do you not read? Mark Lawn's loan, or rather the repayment of said loan, has NOTHING to do with the position we are in. He was repaid for the BENEFIT of the salary cap...! We cannot spend last season's money on wages, but we can use it to clear debts. This means we have less outgoings, meaning we have a larger budget to work with. To suggest there is something amiss, is just plain wrong..! What we did do wrong was to increase budget on the possibility of a cup run. Everyone knows that last season was a one-off, so this should never have been factored in. It appears Lawn is ready to cash in on Wells and is already getting his excuses in early. As for 'notpoliticallycorre ct', how do you know salaries haven't changed? Most players will have a 10, 15, 20% increase written into their contracts following a promotion. Then you have the likes of Davies and Doyle who stayed but on significantly larger salaries. I'm sure Yeates is being paid far more than Atkinson was and de Vita will be much more than Hines was. Same goes for Bates for Nelson. Besides, last season we could spend what we like on salaries etc, but this time we are maxed to 60%. That in itself makes a huge difference.[/p][/quote]Pensioner Waynus makes some valid points. Whats the situation with James Hanson? Are you still keeping an eye on him when he's out and about? Peter300

3:01pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

tinytoonster wrote:
council, bulls, bradford city. does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless? and they wonder why we are negative on here!!!
People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative. It's their outlook.
[quote][p][bold]tinytoonster[/bold] wrote: council, bulls, bradford city. does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless? and they wonder why we are negative on here!!![/p][/quote]People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative. It's their outlook. Peter300

3:07pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

macca1969 wrote:
At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club
Now, now there is no need to suggest that one of the joint-chairmen could not run a welk stall. That sort of comment is clearly below the belt.
Having said that, you never really change your tune do you? Saying clowns run the club.
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club[/p][/quote]Now, now there is no need to suggest that one of the joint-chairmen could not run a welk stall. That sort of comment is clearly below the belt. Having said that, you never really change your tune do you? Saying clowns run the club. Peter300

3:09pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

OLDLAD wrote:
What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,
And when there is no cover for James Hanson you will be the first to criticise the manager.
[quote][p][bold]OLDLAD[/bold] wrote: What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,[/p][/quote]And when there is no cover for James Hanson you will be the first to criticise the manager. Peter300

3:09pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Statler4 says...

tinytoonster wrote:
OLDLAD wrote:
What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,
exactly.
if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season?
decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND!
like the rhodes family as done.
thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out.
obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it.
Mark Lawn has put considerably more money into the club than he has taken out. He joined the board when the club was in a pitiful state and he kept it afloat despite the considerable drain on his finances, time and health. Not to mention his wife's severe ill health. He did that because he is a supporter of the club and has been since 1964. However, he is not a bottomless pit of money and eventually the time came when he decided to loan the club money, instead of simply pouring it in, without a specific time limit on when he would get it back. That is not an unreasonable approach to take.

You say "obviously they are going to flog Wells." Are you suggesting then that Nahki is looking for them desperately trying to sign a new contract and they are avoiding him?
[quote][p][bold]tinytoonster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OLDLAD[/bold] wrote: What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,[/p][/quote]exactly. if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season? decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND! like the rhodes family as done. thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out. obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it.[/p][/quote]Mark Lawn has put considerably more money into the club than he has taken out. He joined the board when the club was in a pitiful state and he kept it afloat despite the considerable drain on his finances, time and health. Not to mention his wife's severe ill health. He did that because he is a supporter of the club and has been since 1964. However, he is not a bottomless pit of money and eventually the time came when he decided to loan the club money, instead of simply pouring it in, without a specific time limit on when he would get it back. That is not an unreasonable approach to take. You say "obviously they are going to flog Wells." Are you suggesting then that Nahki is looking for them desperately trying to sign a new contract and they are avoiding him? Statler4

3:12pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Peter300 says...

tinytoonster wrote:
OLDLAD wrote: What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,
exactly. if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season? decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND! like the rhodes family as done. thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out. obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it.
Somebody somewhere has to run the club. In the face of comments like these I say thank goodness there are people who are willing to run the club.
[quote][p][bold]tinytoonster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OLDLAD[/bold] wrote: What was the point in bringing Folan when rarely used but costs a lot, same as Gray, to now say we want to off load them and that will cost,[/p][/quote]exactly. if parky knew budget was tight why get folan when connell and gray already sat on bench all season? decent owners GIVE money to the club the say they love not LEND! like the rhodes family as done. thats the thing with lawn, wants the glory headlines like walking round wembley pitch with the wife but once it goes quiet takes his money out. obviously they are going to flog wells just scaring us with money issues and throwing in the bulls link so we just go along with it.[/p][/quote]Somebody somewhere has to run the club. In the face of comments like these I say thank goodness there are people who are willing to run the club. Peter300

3:15pm Sat 7 Dec 13

lawsonio123 says...

Finance in trouble does not tie in with past statements however the board will know the true picture still cup matches should NEVER be included I budgets they are games which my never come about. In regard to Wells I note Mr Parkinson does not seem to have had very much to say so far but cannot be very happy as things stand Crowds are higher income is up but this will soon fall if progress is not on going Some players now seem poor buys and need to go if possible. Don't sell Wells why not issue shares I am sure many of us would gladly buy some however this would weaken the boards position something they may not find acceptable but if it means progress then issue the shares BADFORD CITY MUST NOT BE ALLOWED ALOWED TO SLIP BACKWARDS
Finance in trouble does not tie in with past statements however the board will know the true picture still cup matches should NEVER be included I budgets they are games which my never come about. In regard to Wells I note Mr Parkinson does not seem to have had very much to say so far but cannot be very happy as things stand Crowds are higher income is up but this will soon fall if progress is not on going Some players now seem poor buys and need to go if possible. Don't sell Wells why not issue shares I am sure many of us would gladly buy some however this would weaken the boards position something they may not find acceptable but if it means progress then issue the shares BADFORD CITY MUST NOT BE ALLOWED ALOWED TO SLIP BACKWARDS lawsonio123

3:18pm Sat 7 Dec 13

nowt fresh says...

Peter300 wrote:
tinytoonster wrote: council, bulls, bradford city. does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless? and they wonder why we are negative on here!!!
People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative. It's their outlook.
"People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative" good job they do Peter300 or you would have little to reply too :-)).
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tinytoonster[/bold] wrote: council, bulls, bradford city. does anybody know how to be honest to us bradford people or just see us as mugs who pay up regardless? and they wonder why we are negative on here!!![/p][/quote]People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative. It's their outlook.[/p][/quote]"People on here only need the flimsiest excuse to be negative" good job they do Peter300 or you would have little to reply too :-)). nowt fresh

3:40pm Sat 7 Dec 13

realcitygent says...

what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying
what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying realcitygent

3:56pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Plastic Bantam says...

PHILISAN wrote:
Well they did pay Mr Lawn his one mill loan back..maybe they could have had the foresight to mange that a little better,although there was the the saving of the interest payments on that loan to take into consideration.Surpri

sed though,that given that the Board knew of this,that they pushed up tight on player budgets when there would always be the need for necessary adjustments in the January transfer window..With a healthy increase in attendances,one would expect a semblance of revenue streams balancing.What niggles me is the delight of long awaited success,tempered forever with words of caution,which although maybe prudent,just seem to put a shower over our parade..but keep the faith and be thankful,I guess.
Apparently he tried to put it back in however the rest of the board refused as they rather he left..
[quote][p][bold]PHILISAN[/bold] wrote: Well they did pay Mr Lawn his one mill loan back..maybe they could have had the foresight to mange that a little better,although there was the the saving of the interest payments on that loan to take into consideration.Surpri sed though,that given that the Board knew of this,that they pushed up tight on player budgets when there would always be the need for necessary adjustments in the January transfer window..With a healthy increase in attendances,one would expect a semblance of revenue streams balancing.What niggles me is the delight of long awaited success,tempered forever with words of caution,which although maybe prudent,just seem to put a shower over our parade..but keep the faith and be thankful,I guess.[/p][/quote]Apparently he tried to put it back in however the rest of the board refused as they rather he left.. Plastic Bantam

4:12pm Sat 7 Dec 13

What's my name says...

all you moaners do you go to games ?
get behind the team support the directors they have saved this club no one else will put there money where there mouth is.
I would be happy just to stay in this league this season but we can get into the play offs and who knows Wembley again.
wells has not gone yet but he will one day all good players do
all you moaners do you go to games ? get behind the team support the directors they have saved this club no one else will put there money where there mouth is. I would be happy just to stay in this league this season but we can get into the play offs and who knows Wembley again. wells has not gone yet but he will one day all good players do What's my name

4:26pm Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

BCFC1234 wrote:
bingleybantam wrote:
The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls!
Bradford City have been bailed out by a few councils over the years. Including the re building of the ground after ther fire.
Actually the about to be defunct West Yorkshire County Council provided funds for the rebuilding in 1986.

Bradford Council have done nothing for City.
[quote][p][bold]BCFC1234[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bingleybantam[/bold] wrote: The club can only spend 60% of income on players, so they will have to move out fringe players to bring in new faces. The club budgets are set on the amount of money coming into the club every year, can't spend what you haven't got... The council will not bail us out every time, like the Bulls![/p][/quote]Bradford City have been bailed out by a few councils over the years. Including the re building of the ground after ther fire.[/p][/quote]Actually the about to be defunct West Yorkshire County Council provided funds for the rebuilding in 1986. Bradford Council have done nothing for City. silverbantam

4:27pm Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

Just softening up City fans for Nahki leaving in January.

Treating us like idiots !
Just softening up City fans for Nahki leaving in January. Treating us like idiots ! silverbantam

5:09pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Tickertex says...

Calm down people. Although I have only skipped through a few posts, remember selling Peter Jackson to Newcastle catapulted us up the leagues. It was buying him back that was our downfall. Yes, of course we need to keep Wells, but sometimes it works in the clubs favour. Dare I mention Huddersfield Town and the sale of J. Rhodes, of course I can, it worked for them.
The owners have learn't from many mistakes. It's called the learning curve, which unfortunately takes a lifetime if your lucky. For city, it will be the long & winding road. We are getting there.
Calm down people. Although I have only skipped through a few posts, remember selling Peter Jackson to Newcastle catapulted us up the leagues. It was buying him back that was our downfall. Yes, of course we need to keep Wells, but sometimes it works in the clubs favour. Dare I mention Huddersfield Town and the sale of J. Rhodes, of course I can, it worked for them. The owners have learn't from many mistakes. It's called the learning curve, which unfortunately takes a lifetime if your lucky. For city, it will be the long & winding road. We are getting there. Tickertex

5:22pm Sat 7 Dec 13

markthemenace says...

Well's won't be going anywhere in January.............
you heard it hear first...
Well's won't be going anywhere in January............. you heard it hear first... markthemenace

6:06pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Pablo says...

tyker7745 wrote:
reference is made to Wisdom:was any loan fee aid by Derby to Liverpool for this player nd ,if so, are we not due a cut as in the cleverly case.

Are City worrying about the Stewart case. If so why? Surely the award cam in last year's accounting period with a consequence City should have made a specific reserve in their accounts before striking the declared profit. Did they do this ? If not why not? And if they thought they were going to be short of cash why was the loan repaid to Lawn?
The potential liability of £200K+ re Stewart should have been provided in the Trading Account of last years accounts. However, that is in Profit and Loss terms only. Maybe the cash equivalent was set aside. If not, it will have to be found if the case goes against us. The legal fees in defending it will have been considerable.

It was reported Julian Rhodes insisted Mark Lawn's loan was repaid. It was rumoured the interest rate was 9% - thus saving the club £90K per year.

I believe this is a "much ado about nothing" story.
[quote][p][bold]tyker7745[/bold] wrote: reference is made to Wisdom:was any loan fee aid by Derby to Liverpool for this player nd ,if so, are we not due a cut as in the cleverly case. Are City worrying about the Stewart case. If so why? Surely the award cam in last year's accounting period with a consequence City should have made a specific reserve in their accounts before striking the declared profit. Did they do this ? If not why not? And if they thought they were going to be short of cash why was the loan repaid to Lawn?[/p][/quote]The potential liability of £200K+ re Stewart should have been provided in the Trading Account of last years accounts. However, that is in Profit and Loss terms only. Maybe the cash equivalent was set aside. If not, it will have to be found if the case goes against us. The legal fees in defending it will have been considerable. It was reported Julian Rhodes insisted Mark Lawn's loan was repaid. It was rumoured the interest rate was 9% - thus saving the club £90K per year. I believe this is a "much ado about nothing" story. Pablo

8:53pm Sat 7 Dec 13

nowt fresh says...

markthemenace wrote:
Well's won't be going anywhere in January............. you heard it hear first...
If your correct do come back at the end of January and remind us all what you said on 7th December, and if he goes feel free to come back and admit you got it wrong ? :-)), I'm hoping your correct mark !!.
[quote][p][bold]markthemenace[/bold] wrote: Well's won't be going anywhere in January............. you heard it hear first...[/p][/quote]If your correct do come back at the end of January and remind us all what you said on 7th December, and if he goes feel free to come back and admit you got it wrong ? :-)), I'm hoping your correct mark !!. nowt fresh

9:29pm Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

markthemenace wrote:
Well's won't be going anywhere in January.............

you heard it hear first...
Signing a new contract ?
[quote][p][bold]markthemenace[/bold] wrote: Well's won't be going anywhere in January............. you heard it hear first...[/p][/quote]Signing a new contract ? silverbantam

9:33pm Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

Tickertex wrote:
Calm down people. Although I have only skipped through a few posts, remember selling Peter Jackson to Newcastle catapulted us up the leagues. It was buying him back that was our downfall. Yes, of course we need to keep Wells, but sometimes it works in the clubs favour. Dare I mention Huddersfield Town and the sale of J. Rhodes, of course I can, it worked for them.
The owners have learn't from many mistakes. It's called the learning curve, which unfortunately takes a lifetime if your lucky. For city, it will be the long & winding road. We are getting there.
When we sold Peter Jackson in 1986 City were in the Second Division.

When we bought back Peter Jackson in 1988 City were still in the Second Division.
[quote][p][bold]Tickertex[/bold] wrote: Calm down people. Although I have only skipped through a few posts, remember selling Peter Jackson to Newcastle catapulted us up the leagues. It was buying him back that was our downfall. Yes, of course we need to keep Wells, but sometimes it works in the clubs favour. Dare I mention Huddersfield Town and the sale of J. Rhodes, of course I can, it worked for them. The owners have learn't from many mistakes. It's called the learning curve, which unfortunately takes a lifetime if your lucky. For city, it will be the long & winding road. We are getting there.[/p][/quote]When we sold Peter Jackson in 1986 City were in the Second Division. When we bought back Peter Jackson in 1988 City were still in the Second Division. silverbantam

9:38pm Sat 7 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

realcitygent wrote:
what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying
I see Lawn's family are posting on here again.

How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me.

We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments.
[quote][p][bold]realcitygent[/bold] wrote: what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying[/p][/quote]I see Lawn's family are posting on here again. How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me. We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments. silverbantam

12:28am Sun 8 Dec 13

torreyman says...

A few months ago we were all on a high and now look doom and gloom we have a bigger crowd now where is the money going? on players who sit on there bums week after week and do nothing and don't care about B C as long they get there big fat wages every week this is how I feel
A few months ago we were all on a high and now look doom and gloom we have a bigger crowd now where is the money going? on players who sit on there bums week after week and do nothing and don't care about B C as long they get there big fat wages every week this is how I feel torreyman

6:40am Sun 8 Dec 13

tinytoonster says...

silverbantam wrote:
realcitygent wrote:
what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying
I see Lawn's family are posting on here again.

How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me.

We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments.
can't be fleecing us, loves the club his family said! (realcitygent)
[quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]realcitygent[/bold] wrote: what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying[/p][/quote]I see Lawn's family are posting on here again. How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me. We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments.[/p][/quote]can't be fleecing us, loves the club his family said! (realcitygent) tinytoonster

8:00am Sun 8 Dec 13

silverbantam says...

Why did our chairmen take a risk and buy a mediocre player from a Scottish club when the selling club insisted they were entitled to compensation ?

It's easy to blame Archie Christie but it's the chairmen who are ultimately responsible.

If the club have to pay compensation, which looks likely at the moment, I hope the chairmen do the right thing and actually pay from their own pockets and not from the playing budget.
Why did our chairmen take a risk and buy a mediocre player from a Scottish club when the selling club insisted they were entitled to compensation ? It's easy to blame Archie Christie but it's the chairmen who are ultimately responsible. If the club have to pay compensation, which looks likely at the moment, I hope the chairmen do the right thing and actually pay from their own pockets and not from the playing budget. silverbantam

10:29am Sun 8 Dec 13

dannbradfc says...

Bye bye Wells
Bye bye Wells dannbradfc

10:43am Sun 8 Dec 13

dannbradfc says...

Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........
.....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....
Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........ .....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. .... dannbradfc

12:19pm Sun 8 Dec 13

macca1969 says...

dannbradfc wrote:
Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........

.....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....
To be fair a lot of last years profit was used on the resigning of doyle and Davies both on bigger wages. I expected wells to be sold as I'm sure we all did deep down. I just think it's poor to get the begging bowl out as this will surely only entice low bids. If we have to accept losing our biggest assets surely we should be trying to maximise what we achieve so we can maximise our hopeful investment. I agree it is on the whole poor directorship
[quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........ .....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....[/p][/quote]To be fair a lot of last years profit was used on the resigning of doyle and Davies both on bigger wages. I expected wells to be sold as I'm sure we all did deep down. I just think it's poor to get the begging bowl out as this will surely only entice low bids. If we have to accept losing our biggest assets surely we should be trying to maximise what we achieve so we can maximise our hopeful investment. I agree it is on the whole poor directorship macca1969

3:30pm Sun 8 Dec 13

claret or green ? says...

It seems to me the supporters are being taken for mugs, if they are expected to swallow the tale of financial woe due to City's early cup exits. What was Mark Lawn expecting from PP, a run to the FA Cup quarters and similar in the league cup ? Granted, I don't think Parky took the Huddersfield game seriously enough in terms of his team selection, City could have reasonably expected a good run in the Paint Pot Cup but got a woeful display in Monkey Slayersville, but the Rotherham result was little surprise to everyone. But it is reasonable to assume anyway that others should go (Folan,Gray, possibly Connell and one defender (but not McHugh, why is he not getting a look in ?) before they can be replaced with signings which will hopefully bear more fruit. Perhaps Mr Lawn's biggest error is not being more thoughtful before feeding the story out, I.e. no need at all to mention the Cup failures (a modest Cup run would have made little difference to available funds), he should have just stated that fringe players must leave before they can be replaced or reminded supporters of the Flamingo Land Pension Fund/ground rent, because all he will achieve is perhaps annoy PP and make him approachable to other clubs needing a manger (sorry manager, but it is Christmas ! :) )..... unless he thinks PP has taken City as far as he can or is getting too big for is boots ?
It seems to me the supporters are being taken for mugs, if they are expected to swallow the tale of financial woe due to City's early cup exits. What was Mark Lawn expecting from PP, a run to the FA Cup quarters and similar in the league cup ? Granted, I don't think Parky took the Huddersfield game seriously enough in terms of his team selection, City could have reasonably expected a good run in the Paint Pot Cup but got a woeful display in Monkey Slayersville, but the Rotherham result was little surprise to everyone. But it is reasonable to assume anyway that others should go (Folan,Gray, possibly Connell and one defender (but not McHugh, why is he not getting a look in ?) before they can be replaced with signings which will hopefully bear more fruit. Perhaps Mr Lawn's biggest error is not being more thoughtful before feeding the story out, I.e. no need at all to mention the Cup failures (a modest Cup run would have made little difference to available funds), he should have just stated that fringe players must leave before they can be replaced or reminded supporters of the Flamingo Land Pension Fund/ground rent, because all he will achieve is perhaps annoy PP and make him approachable to other clubs needing a manger (sorry manager, but it is Christmas ! :) )..... unless he thinks PP has taken City as far as he can or is getting too big for is boots ? claret or green ?

5:32pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Pablo says...

dannbradfc wrote:
Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........

.....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....
What I cant understand, dann, is the delay in the decision over the Stewart appeal, which was two weeks ago.

I just wonder if there's a realisation that we've lost and have £200K to find. That would be gut wrenching. As we've had to use basically the same players each week, it was probably a good job we lost those cup games in order to keep those players fresh/free from injury, in order to protect our league position.
[quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........ .....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....[/p][/quote]What I cant understand, dann, is the delay in the decision over the Stewart appeal, which was two weeks ago. I just wonder if there's a realisation that we've lost and have £200K to find. That would be gut wrenching. As we've had to use basically the same players each week, it was probably a good job we lost those cup games in order to keep those players fresh/free from injury, in order to protect our league position. Pablo

7:24pm Sun 8 Dec 13

realcitygent says...

tinytoonster wrote:
silverbantam wrote:
realcitygent wrote:
what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying
I see Lawn's family are posting on here again.

How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me.

We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments.
can't be fleecing us, loves the club his family said! (realcitygent)
can you please tell me who else was going to come and lend us million pound ,we cant borrow it on strenth of ground as we dont own it , the rhodes family have put enough of their own money in ,so who do you suggest ,i didnt see all these negative comments when we getting promoted or gettingto wembley, why didnt you speak up then and say dont lend us money because we have to give it back,,where did you think money came from to bankroll promotion ,we had the one of the top wage bills in division ,how do you think we paid for davis to sign new contract, also doyle massive wages for 2nd division football ,and yes i blameparky for a lot very bad signings,most of which dont get a game or not make bench ,wasted lot of money
[quote][p][bold]tinytoonster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]realcitygent[/bold] wrote: what a sad set of people some of you are , mark lawn is city through and through he has been going down to the valley all his life ,so how can you honestly say he is in it for the glory ,why did he keep putting his own money into city went we were nearly going under ,do you believe thats glory hunting, as for bigger crowds that does mean more money ,but going up a division means a lot more in wages ,so we are no better off ,i think parky is to blame for money situation ,he has signed a lot players clearly not good enough,why sign folan not played him ,andy gray ,joke kennedy sunday league player at best, taylor not played when defence is in turmoil, de vita at best a bench player the list goes on,i have had the pleasure to be in mark lawns company whilst having drink all he has is city at heart ,as for taking million pound back last season that was julian rhodes who then decided time was right to pay back the money ,lawn did not ask for it,,so sad to see are directors coming in for stick they have done a great job ,just dont give parky any more cash till he gets rid of excess waste we carrying[/p][/quote]I see Lawn's family are posting on here again. How you can criticise Parky for one or two bad signings is beyond me. We needed to pay Lawn back as he was fleecing us for £95,000 a year in interest payments.[/p][/quote]can't be fleecing us, loves the club his family said! (realcitygent)[/p][/quote]can you please tell me who else was going to come and lend us million pound ,we cant borrow it on strenth of ground as we dont own it , the rhodes family have put enough of their own money in ,so who do you suggest ,i didnt see all these negative comments when we getting promoted or gettingto wembley, why didnt you speak up then and say dont lend us money because we have to give it back,,where did you think money came from to bankroll promotion ,we had the one of the top wage bills in division ,how do you think we paid for davis to sign new contract, also doyle massive wages for 2nd division football ,and yes i blameparky for a lot very bad signings,most of which dont get a game or not make bench ,wasted lot of money realcitygent

7:45pm Sun 8 Dec 13

jamiejoe says...

Peter300 wrote:
Thee Voice of Reason wrote: We are just being softened up for Wells departure.
Who is 'we'?
who is spiteful?
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: We are just being softened up for Wells departure.[/p][/quote]Who is 'we'?[/p][/quote]who is spiteful? jamiejoe

8:34pm Sun 8 Dec 13

lawsonio123 says...

First Mark Lawn was entitled to get his money back good him to loan it If wells need be sold then be it as long as it is in CITY interest for football is cash driven at the end of the day The Directors know what they are doing so just let us now wait and see the outcome
First Mark Lawn was entitled to get his money back good him to loan it If wells need be sold then be it as long as it is in CITY interest for football is cash driven at the end of the day The Directors know what they are doing so just let us now wait and see the outcome lawsonio123

1:03am Mon 9 Dec 13

Bradford1903 says...

Well, there's certainly a couple of areas where savings could be made. Firstly, I think we have got a centre half too many, and hopefully we will be able to persuade someone to take over Gray's contract, although we will pribably still need to contribute to some of his wages.

Basically though you just recoup your losses by selling Wells at the end of the season, if we don't go up. Sell him in January, then you are virtually writing off our season, and it begs the question why did we go over budget in the first place, if it wasn't to try and get promotion?

I think we should also remember what happened last time we got did of our star players in January, selling Johnson and letting Windass go on loan. I know there were financial implications then, but it led to relegation from league 1.
Well, there's certainly a couple of areas where savings could be made. Firstly, I think we have got a centre half too many, and hopefully we will be able to persuade someone to take over Gray's contract, although we will pribably still need to contribute to some of his wages. Basically though you just recoup your losses by selling Wells at the end of the season, if we don't go up. Sell him in January, then you are virtually writing off our season, and it begs the question why did we go over budget in the first place, if it wasn't to try and get promotion? I think we should also remember what happened last time we got did of our star players in January, selling Johnson and letting Windass go on loan. I know there were financial implications then, but it led to relegation from league 1. Bradford1903

9:28am Mon 9 Dec 13

dannbradfc says...

macca1969 wrote:
dannbradfc wrote:
Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........


.....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....
To be fair a lot of last years profit was used on the resigning of doyle and Davies both on bigger wages. I expected wells to be sold as I'm sure we all did deep down. I just think it's poor to get the begging bowl out as this will surely only entice low bids. If we have to accept losing our biggest assets surely we should be trying to maximise what we achieve so we can maximise our hopeful investment. I agree it is on the whole poor directorship
I can see this but the whole thing shouldn't have gone to press. Why it did is conjecture but i'd suggest that its to set us up for Nahki's imminent departure which fans can understand but its ALSO to diminish fans expectations that this money will be reinvested into the squad.......
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........ .....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....[/p][/quote]To be fair a lot of last years profit was used on the resigning of doyle and Davies both on bigger wages. I expected wells to be sold as I'm sure we all did deep down. I just think it's poor to get the begging bowl out as this will surely only entice low bids. If we have to accept losing our biggest assets surely we should be trying to maximise what we achieve so we can maximise our hopeful investment. I agree it is on the whole poor directorship[/p][/quote]I can see this but the whole thing shouldn't have gone to press. Why it did is conjecture but i'd suggest that its to set us up for Nahki's imminent departure which fans can understand but its ALSO to diminish fans expectations that this money will be reinvested into the squad....... dannbradfc

9:52am Mon 9 Dec 13

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

nowt fresh wrote:
Prisoner Cell Block A wrote:
Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap.
Not having a pop PCBA but how can you say " We always budget to exit each cup at round one" when you are quoting exactly the opposite of what Mark Lawn is saying in the artical above, I think your Well's comment may be true but hope as your self we can dictate Nahki's transfer value and that his fee is used on strengthening this squad.
Mainly because David Baldwin gave an interview at the start of this year saying that was our policy. Also, it would be a complete fool to factor in any monies from the future rounds on a wing and a prayer, that is not how a business runs or could run. Finally, didn't Mark Lawn himself tell us numerous times last year that the early rounds of both, CoC and JPT have little or no money in them?

As I said before, it is a very bad spin attempt at softening us up for the departure of Wells in January, catastrophising our current plight so that sale is seen as a positive in saving the club from financial disaster and not a negative in compounding us to this division and mid table mediocrity.
[quote][p][bold]nowt fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Prisoner Cell Block A[/bold] wrote: Forget last season's cash. It cannot be used for this playing budget. We always budget to exit each cup at round one and those cups, FA cup apart have little value until the later rounds anyway, this is purely an exercise in preparing us for the sale of Wells. If it is to happen please let us get a decent price and not allow someone to steal him on the cheap.[/p][/quote]Not having a pop PCBA but how can you say " We always budget to exit each cup at round one" when you are quoting exactly the opposite of what Mark Lawn is saying in the artical above, I think your Well's comment may be true but hope as your self we can dictate Nahki's transfer value and that his fee is used on strengthening this squad.[/p][/quote]Mainly because David Baldwin gave an interview at the start of this year saying that was our policy. Also, it would be a complete fool to factor in any monies from the future rounds on a wing and a prayer, that is not how a business runs or could run. Finally, didn't Mark Lawn himself tell us numerous times last year that the early rounds of both, CoC and JPT have little or no money in them? As I said before, it is a very bad spin attempt at softening us up for the departure of Wells in January, catastrophising our current plight so that sale is seen as a positive in saving the club from financial disaster and not a negative in compounding us to this division and mid table mediocrity. Prisoner Cell Block A

10:10am Mon 9 Dec 13

Papa Smurfs Wig says...

macca1969 wrote:
At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club
I can't take anyone seriously enough who starts a reply with a cliché with those six words.

My thoughts on the cup games were that City weren't bothered about them. The FA was devalued when Man Utd decided to play in South America for the Coco whatsit and many clubs have followed suit sadly. I used to love the FA Cup and seeing the games on TV after seeing City trying like when we lost to Southampton, the players TRIED.
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: At the end of the day we fans will get no say in if Wells is sold ir not. But this ispoor lleadership of the club by lawn. He might as welk say come get him on the cheap saying how much we need the money. After one good season the clowns are now back running the club[/p][/quote]I can't take anyone seriously enough who starts a reply with a cliché with those six words. My thoughts on the cup games were that City weren't bothered about them. The FA was devalued when Man Utd decided to play in South America for the Coco whatsit and many clubs have followed suit sadly. I used to love the FA Cup and seeing the games on TV after seeing City trying like when we lost to Southampton, the players TRIED. Papa Smurfs Wig

5:09pm Mon 9 Dec 13

pokertee says...

Freddy wrote:
*
I was an advocate of going out of this Season's Cup Matches. I thought the Club had sufficient revenue from last Season.
*
Going out of the Cups, meant City could concentrate wholly on the possibility of --QUOTE--" BACK TO BACK PROMOTION".(Julian Rhodes)
*
There would be less matches to play---and less injuries occurring .
*
WHY DOES THE JOINT BOARD NOT TALK TO WELLS ?. Why is this autocratic attitude, of not speaking to/or approaching the player prevalent, from this joint board.
WHY ARE WE NOW BEING TOLD THEY WERE RELYING ON CUP REVENUE --THIS SEASON???. This is very suspicious.
*
They and no other teams in any League count on cup revenue before the season starts never ever. (Did they think cos we got to a final last season that we would definitely get far this season?) This is just Blah from Lawn cos he's pretty certain wells will be going this January.

By saying this he is also putting the word out that we need money whereas last season it was the opposite so only one bid came in. Wells has obviously said he wants to wait and see and we all know if a big club comes in he will go, Wouldn't any player, and id be the first to wish him well. If he goes we can kiss goodbye to playoffs.

As long as the money is spent on team strengthening fair enough but if not i will be **** off as will most supporters. IM getting a Geoffrey Richmond feeling going on at the moment
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * I was an advocate of going out of this Season's Cup Matches. I thought the Club had sufficient revenue from last Season. * Going out of the Cups, meant City could concentrate wholly on the possibility of --QUOTE--" BACK TO BACK PROMOTION".(Julian Rhodes) * There would be less matches to play---and less injuries occurring . * WHY DOES THE JOINT BOARD NOT TALK TO WELLS ?. Why is this autocratic attitude, of not speaking to/or approaching the player prevalent, from this joint board. WHY ARE WE NOW BEING TOLD THEY WERE RELYING ON CUP REVENUE --THIS SEASON???. This is very suspicious. *[/p][/quote]They and no other teams in any League count on cup revenue before the season starts never ever. (Did they think cos we got to a final last season that we would definitely get far this season?) This is just Blah from Lawn cos he's pretty certain wells will be going this January. By saying this he is also putting the word out that we need money whereas last season it was the opposite so only one bid came in. Wells has obviously said he wants to wait and see and we all know if a big club comes in he will go, Wouldn't any player, and id be the first to wish him well. If he goes we can kiss goodbye to playoffs. As long as the money is spent on team strengthening fair enough but if not i will be **** off as will most supporters. IM getting a Geoffrey Richmond feeling going on at the moment pokertee

6:48am Tue 10 Dec 13

tyker7745 says...

Pablo wrote:
dannbradfc wrote:
Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........


.....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....
What I cant understand, dann, is the delay in the decision over the Stewart appeal, which was two weeks ago.

I just wonder if there's a realisation that we've lost and have £200K to find. That would be gut wrenching. As we've had to use basically the same players each week, it was probably a good job we lost those cup games in order to keep those players fresh/free from injury, in order to protect our league position.
arbitration decisions like this can take up to six months to com through. Why that should be mystifies me but my guess is that Lawn has been given the heads up on the way the appeal went by his legal team. Still this has no bearing on his current statement which seems directly opposite to what Baldwin said. And, in reality, do lower level clubs actually budget beyond the first round? No because it is almost possible to prejudge the draw
[quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Itall feels like a set up for Wells departure. We have barely increased the squad. Spent nowt on transfers. Have larger crowds. Larger merchandise sales. Sold club shop etc etc. ....doesn't add up. .........they are concerned about the Stewart compensation........ .....However they are also in effect blaming pp by citing the cup exit. It's poor director ship that places the lottery of a cup run into their financial budgets. .......pp will walk to another club if he's expected to take the blame for this.........so nahki goes and what then? A couple of token gestures/players in return and the rest swallowed up somewhere. ........its a negative statement again by the chairman and they are in danger of destroying the positive momentum. ....[/p][/quote]What I cant understand, dann, is the delay in the decision over the Stewart appeal, which was two weeks ago. I just wonder if there's a realisation that we've lost and have £200K to find. That would be gut wrenching. As we've had to use basically the same players each week, it was probably a good job we lost those cup games in order to keep those players fresh/free from injury, in order to protect our league position.[/p][/quote]arbitration decisions like this can take up to six months to com through. Why that should be mystifies me but my guess is that Lawn has been given the heads up on the way the appeal went by his legal team. Still this has no bearing on his current statement which seems directly opposite to what Baldwin said. And, in reality, do lower level clubs actually budget beyond the first round? No because it is almost possible to prejudge the draw tyker7745

4:17pm Wed 11 Dec 13

dannbradfc says...

the 60% of income is a set in stone stumbling block. Any cup income would have obviously helped increase this.

My question is by how much in real terms? And we have wasted some of our resources on players who have contributed very little e.g. Gray

Second question is was this (the importance of the cup) relayed to Parky? Cos his team in those games wouldn't suggest so and that his focus was on the league......
the 60% of income is a set in stone stumbling block. Any cup income would have obviously helped increase this. My question is by how much in real terms? And we have wasted some of our resources on players who have contributed very little e.g. Gray Second question is was this (the importance of the cup) relayed to Parky? Cos his team in those games wouldn't suggest so and that his focus was on the league...... dannbradfc

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree