|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 19:29:25 GMT
I've only been going a few years so a bit in the dark on finances, but see a lot of posts on how we should be doing this and that. Does anyone actually know (roughly) what are income and expenditure are every season and are we actually making a profit? No they don't. Just people spouting a load of guff. If we're to believe what others say about Neil Black just in it for the money, then he's not going to treat it as a passion and put money in just to better the team with no possible sign of return. So on that basis we may be down on players because there purely isn't the money. I guess from a business point of view he likes to make a minimum percentage of profit against turnover, so expenditure may go up and down throughout a season after an initial budget allowance. Sheffield may be different in that the chairman puts in cash for the love of it just to see his team do well. Until someone coughs up the facts we're going to struggle to pinpoint why certain things happen.
|
|
Ghost
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,698
|
Post by Ghost on Oct 18, 2015 19:31:14 GMT
No they don't. Just people spouting a load of guff. If we're to believe what others say about Neil Black just in it for the money, then he's not going to treat it as a passion and put money in just to better the team with no possible sign of return. So on that basis we may be down on players because there purely isn't the money. I guess from a business point of view he likes to make a minimum percentage of profit against turnover, so expenditure may go up and down throughout a season after an initial budget allowance. Sheffield may be different in that the chairman puts in cash for the love of it just to see his team do well. Until someone coughs up the facts we're going to struggle to pinpoint why certain things happen. Braehead don't seem to have the same issue.
|
|
|
Post by dill1015 on Oct 18, 2015 19:34:59 GMT
I fully expect the cage to go into meltdown now. It's not been a good weekend though. If you're serious about winning the league we need to be beating Coventry every game. Without wanting to sound harsh, they've been pretty awful this season and should be free points to the big clubs. Im concerned that we're playing two import d men down and its starting to show. We need to get some cover in for Waugh and the missing slot. This problem is being compounded by Steve Lee having a poor start to this season, not sure what going on with him. Hope its just a blip.
|
|
|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 19:36:30 GMT
I've only been going a few years so a bit in the dark on finances, but see a lot of posts on how we should be doing this and that. Does anyone actually know (roughly) what are income and expenditure are every season and are we actually making a profit? It doesn't actually matter - and no fans actually know exactly what's coming in and what's going out (although we can make informed guesses). The indisputable facts are though that clubs are quite open that their income relies on "bums on seats". We undoubtedly get by far the most people through the door throughout a season, and we've won the league once since 1804 or whatever it is. So they're either making big, big profits, or they're making very, very bad decisions - neither is better than the other really. Of course it matters, it's a business before it's a sport. Agree on bums on seats, but we don't know what the arena costs are, plus wages for players, wages for staff, housing costs, travel costs, admin costs etc. Likewise the same for income. The reason it all matters is that if after the expenditure in a given month there's not a lot of profit, where is the money meant to come from to pay for 'extra' players? As mentioned if Mr Black is purely business he's not going to dip into his own pocket to pay for it.
|
|
|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 19:42:25 GMT
If we're to believe what others say about Neil Black just in it for the money, then he's not going to treat it as a passion and put money in just to better the team with no possible sign of return. So on that basis we may be down on players because there purely isn't the money. I guess from a business point of view he likes to make a minimum percentage of profit against turnover, so expenditure may go up and down throughout a season after an initial budget allowance. Sheffield may be different in that the chairman puts in cash for the love of it just to see his team do well. Until someone coughs up the facts we're going to struggle to pinpoint why certain things happen. Braehead don't seem to have the same issue. Fair point but is Braehead solely owned by Neil Black or is there money coming in from elsewhere? Also and this is a biggy, their rink is inside a shopping centre. If I were the owners of that shopping centre then I'd be open to seriously dropping the rent if the club proposed bringing 3,000 fans to the place 28 times a year. Think of the revenue that generates for the centres retail tenants. The arena doesn't have that luxury so may not cut any sort of deal. Another help Braehead may get is from the council/Scottish government in generating community events etc. in a growing area. Just thoughts, but trying to point out that you can't just say a or b do this so why don't we.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Oct 18, 2015 19:43:28 GMT
It doesn't actually matter - and no fans actually know exactly what's coming in and what's going out (although we can make informed guesses). The indisputable facts are though that clubs are quite open that their income relies on "bums on seats". We undoubtedly get by far the most people through the door throughout a season, and we've won the league once since 1804 or whatever it is. So they're either making big, big profits, or they're making very, very bad decisions - neither is better than the other really. Of course it matters, it's a business before it's a sport. Agree on bums on seats, but we don't know what the arena costs are, plus wages for players, wages for staff, housing costs, travel costs, admin costs etc. Likewise the same for income. The reason it all matters is that if after the expenditure in a given month there's not a lot of profit, where is the money meant to come from to pay for 'extra' players? As mentioned if Mr Black is purely business he's not going to dip into his own pocket to pay for it. If it's a business before it's a sport then the league standings would be decided on profit surely? The rest of your post is exactly my point. If the amount we're paying on all the expenses you've listed is higher than other teams then we're making very, very bad decisions - i.e. we're being very badly run.
|
|
|
Post by flyerpanther on Oct 18, 2015 19:44:03 GMT
I hope the Flyers mgt start to cough up something better soon...we're in meltdoon and we're doomed with the current coaching set-up.
|
|
Ghost
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,698
|
Post by Ghost on Oct 18, 2015 19:45:11 GMT
Braehead don't seem to have the same issue. Fair point but is Braehead solely owned by Neil Black or is there money coming in from elsewhere? Also and this is a biggy, their rink is inside a shopping centre. If I were the owners of that shopping centre then I'd be open to seriously dropping the rent if the club proposed bringing 3,000 fans to the place 28 times a year. Think of the revenue that generates for the centres retail tenants. The arena doesn't have that luxury so may not cut any sort of deal. Another help Braehead may get is from the council/Scottish government in generating community events etc. in a growing area. Just thoughts, but trying to point out that you can't just say a or b do this so why don't we. Have you considered the other option... Maybe CN thinks he doesn't need cover and can coach his way out of it. He's obviously wrong, but wouldn't be surprised. Again, just a thought.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Oct 18, 2015 19:52:43 GMT
If we're to believe what others say about Neil Black just in it for the money, then he's not going to treat it as a passion and put money in just to better the team with no possible sign of return. So on that basis we may be down on players because there purely isn't the money. I guess from a business point of view he likes to make a minimum percentage of profit against turnover, so expenditure may go up and down throughout a season after an initial budget allowance. Sheffield may be different in that the chairman puts in cash for the love of it just to see his team do well. Until someone coughs up the facts we're going to struggle to pinpoint why certain things happen. Braehead don't seem to have the same issue. I think this is a tricky one. Given that Braehead get roughly half our attendance, they're obviously spending lot more than half of what we are - and I think differences in arena rent make very little difference in the bigger picture. But Braehead still haven't won the league despite the advantage they have with their conference. They've got Finnerty as coach for a start - not exactly the result of scouring the globe for the top coaching talent. I reckon even the Panthers team least season would have won the league if they'd been in the Gardner.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
Post by Mozzy on Oct 18, 2015 19:55:03 GMT
That Lawrence banged another two in tonight against the Clan, including the GWG. Five in Three for him now. He's bone idle, or at least looks it, but he knows where the net is. Not too quick on sarcasm eh? Perfectly OK with grasping sarcasm thanks. Thought I'd just let the Lawrence haters know how he went on tonight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2015 19:56:47 GMT
Not too quick on sarcasm eh? Perfectly OK with grasping sarcasm thanks. Thought I'd just let the Lawrence haters know how he went on tonight. There's a thread for that elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 19:57:16 GMT
Of course it matters, it's a business before it's a sport. Agree on bums on seats, but we don't know what the arena costs are, plus wages for players, wages for staff, housing costs, travel costs, admin costs etc. Likewise the same for income. The reason it all matters is that if after the expenditure in a given month there's not a lot of profit, where is the money meant to come from to pay for 'extra' players? As mentioned if Mr Black is purely business he's not going to dip into his own pocket to pay for it. If it's a business before it's a sport then the league standings would be decided on profit surely? No not the case, because different businesses will have different income, expenditure and profits. For example, if steelers spend £100,000 a year on players and Panthers only £50,000 then you could argue that Steelers have got better players, yet because of more income through whatever means both clubs make the same profit in a given year. Plus as I mentioned different owners may pump in cash as a gift just to boost the club.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,484
|
Post by iginla on Oct 18, 2015 19:58:15 GMT
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Corey thought that Jamesphilly,after all he is a very pig headed,stubborn and arrogant man. And if you want to know where that 13th import is,it's in Lacho's wage packet,the now injured Brit we can't replace.....good decision that Corey !!!!!
As for the profit argument,I'm not even going there again,but just take last nights game,it would have grossed £90k ish for one game,the same as the likes of Edinburgh or Dundee might gross in eight or nine home games......go figure !
|
|
Higgy
Les Strongman
Posts: 5,302
|
Post by Higgy on Oct 18, 2015 19:58:49 GMT
Am I the only one who didn't see an issue with the 3rs Blaze goal tonight? Looked to me like Wiikman dropped the puck and Cowley poked in the loose puck...
Regardless we were poor for too much of the game to get the win,didn't create enough and didn't defend well enough.
|
|
Mozzy
Pat Casey
Cracking
Posts: 365
|
Post by Mozzy on Oct 18, 2015 20:03:49 GMT
No they don't. Just people spouting a load of guff. If we're to believe what others say about Neil Black just in it for the money, then he's not going to treat it as a passion and put money in just to better the team with no possible sign of return. So on that basis we may be down on players because there purely isn't the money. I guess from a business point of view he likes to make a minimum percentage of profit against turnover, so expenditure may go up and down throughout a season after an initial budget allowance. Sheffield may be different in that the chairman puts in cash for the love of it just to see his team do well. Until someone coughs up the facts we're going to struggle to pinpoint why certain things happen. I think the two owners are completely different. Black is a businessman first, he wasn't a fan of the club before he bought it. It was an opportunity he saw to make some money and he seems to have done a pretty good job to be fair to him. Smith was a fan who used to sit with the rest of us before he took the club over. He has a different perspective to Neil Black. Whilst Black may be looking to make money, Smith is seemingly more interested in investing any profit into the club he owns. You've been very successful over recent years, when that success dries up a little people start shouting that this is not right, that isn't right. We should know, we've done it ourselves enough times. Having the biggest budget, fan base etc doesn't automatically guarantee anything in sport. You just can't win every year.
|
|
|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 20:04:31 GMT
Have you considered the other option... Maybe CN thinks he doesn't need cover and can coach his way out of it. He's obviously wrong, but wouldn't be surprised. Again, just a thought. I agree, could just as easily be that and any number of things. It's good that we discuss this things as fans but we need to be careful about blaming on one aspect when it could be another or combination of a few. We're just kept in the dark so much and any facts we get are spun so much it's ridiculous.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,484
|
Post by iginla on Oct 18, 2015 20:05:50 GMT
Basically the only difference between teams expenditure is the arena cost. They all have to fly players in,they all have to house them,buy the same equipment,probably replace the same broken equipment,hire similar coach travel,pay the same referees costs......get my drift ? Do the maths,Panthers are making a huge profit and not spending anywhere near what they could !
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
|
Post by Yotes on Oct 18, 2015 20:07:22 GMT
Does anyone really doubt there's been some serious money spent on this year's roster? Our collection of senior Brits, veterans with CVs like Kolnik, Janssen, Moran and now Ling. Must be plenty going out. I think the real discussion is whether the money has been wisely spent.
I didn't see today's game, so can't comment on the performance, but what I don't get is why our pre-season plan to have a defence of 7 (Schmidt, Dimmen, Waugh, Peckham, Lee, Swindler and Oaky) has been thrown out so quick to go with a 6, one of whom is long term injured and one is the utility man. It's as if they've seen how we've started in the goals against column and assumed it'll carry on, which anyone with any memory of last year would say was hopeful at best?
It's just one result of course, and we'll not be the only team to lose in the Skydome this year, but I really hope they know what they're doing with that defensive unit.
|
|
Mark
Randall Weber
Experience has taught me that when it really matters the only person you can rely on is yourself.
Posts: 4,621
|
Post by Mark on Oct 18, 2015 20:07:35 GMT
Money, budgets and other clubs aside the salient fact is that the team currently doesn't look capable of sustaining a league challenge. We've now lost twice to Coventry who, let's be honest are crap. We've also lost three games against what most would consider our main opposition, Sheffield and Belfast, two of those defeats coming at home. Are the club going to act or just make excuses?
|
|
|
Post by allingtonskates on Oct 18, 2015 20:08:53 GMT
Basically the only difference between teams expenditure is the arena cost. They all have to fly players in,they all have to house them,buy the same equipment,probably replace the same broken equipment,hire similar coach travel,pay the same referees costs......get my drift ? Do the maths,Panthers are making a huge profit and not spending anywhere near what they could ! especially when we lost Peckham that would have freed up a lot of salary space
|
|
Ghost
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,698
|
Post by Ghost on Oct 18, 2015 20:10:33 GMT
From Neilson on the OS
'He told Panthers Radio (with Xynomix) his team had dominated all categories apart from blocked shots (because we on the offence so much of the game) and goals.'
Anyone else disagree? Neither PK was good but ours was terrible. There PP was better than ours too.
|
|
|
Post by pantherjack on Oct 18, 2015 20:13:24 GMT
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Corey thought that Jamesphilly,after all he is a very pig headed,stubborn and arrogant man. And if you want to know where that 13th import is,it's in Lacho's wage packet,the now injured Brit we can't replace.....good decision that Corey !!!!! As for the profit argument,I'm not even going there again,but just take last nights game,it would have grossed £90k ish for one game,the same as the likes of Edinburgh or Dundee might gross in eight or nine home games......go figure ! Yep agree roughly on the £90k figure but you have to take into account the midweek games against Capitals and such where it's probably close to £40k. But if for example Neil Black wants say a 40% profit each season to fund his lifestyle then you have to look at a seasons figures and what that means. He may stick rigidly to a player budget and tells Corey to make sure he leaves enough for injuries etc to get cover in, let's say Corey gambles and doesn't and we end up where we are now. It's just not that simple.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Oct 18, 2015 20:18:18 GMT
If it's a business before it's a sport then the league standings would be decided on profit surely? No not the case, because different businesses will have different income, expenditure and profits. For example, if steelers spend £100,000 a year on players and Panthers only £50,000 then you could argue that Steelers have got better players, yet because of more income through whatever means both clubs make the same profit in a given year. Plus as I mentioned different owners may pump in cash as a gift just to boost the club. Sorry, I don't want to sound pedantic, but you've missed my point. You said it's a business before a sport. If it is, then the league standings would be determined by which club made the biggest profits - kinda like the FTSE (although obviously the FTSE is a lot more complicated than that). The fact is that the league standings are determined by who won more points in games against each other. Therefore it's a sport before it's a business. It is ALSO a business, but it's a sport first and foremost. Unfortunately these #bestfans represent a very easy way of making some money.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Oct 18, 2015 20:20:45 GMT
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Corey thought that Jamesphilly,after all he is a very pig headed,stubborn and arrogant man. And if you want to know where that 13th import is,it's in Lacho's wage packet,the now injured Brit we can't replace.....good decision that Corey !!!!! As for the profit argument,I'm not even going there again,but just take last nights game,it would have grossed £90k ish for one game,the same as the likes of Edinburgh or Dundee might gross in eight or nine home games......go figure ! Yep agree roughly on the £90k figure but you have to take into account the midweek games against Capitals and such where it's probably close to £40k. But if for example Neil Black wants say a 40% profit each season to fund his lifestyle then you have to look at a seasons figures and what that means. He may stick rigidly to a player budget and tells Corey to make sure he leaves enough for injuries etc to get cover in, let's say Corey gambles and doesn't and we end up where we are now. It's just not that simple. I think that's the point that most people are making - you're probably absolutely spot on that Black wants 40% (or something) profit. That's the problem.
|
|
Ghost
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,698
|
Post by Ghost on Oct 18, 2015 20:23:07 GMT
Yep agree roughly on the £90k figure but you have to take into account the midweek games against Capitals and such where it's probably close to £40k. But if for example Neil Black wants say a 40% profit each season to fund his lifestyle then you have to look at a seasons figures and what that means. He may stick rigidly to a player budget and tells Corey to make sure he leaves enough for injuries etc to get cover in, let's say Corey gambles and doesn't and we end up where we are now. It's just not that simple. I think that's the point that most people are making - you're probably absolutely spot on that Black wants 40% (or something) profit. That's the problem. You can't fault a guy for wanting a profit out of his business.
|
|