|
|
Post by webbo on Sept 30, 2023 12:46:52 GMT
Strangely my issue with Methven is influenced by my experience of Southall.
probably been traumatised by it all and trust nobody.
|
|
|
|
Post by AndyB on Sept 30, 2023 13:58:59 GMT
Strangely my issue with Methven is influenced by my experience of Southall. probably been traumatised by it all and trust nobody. Like a lot of us mate ! |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Sept 30, 2023 19:18:48 GMT
Strangely my issue with Methven is influenced by my experience of Southall. probably been traumatised by it all and trust nobody. That makes sense and we might say that about all owners. Ultimately it's all about results; which in turn are driven by XG; and that in turn is driven by coaching, fitness, decision making and tactics. Plus who we sign. We've had ten years where there's been a lack of congruence between what's started by board and management, and what happens in the pitch. Give it another month and we might make a valid comparison between Sandgaard, Gallen and Garner compared to SE7 Partners and Appleton. |
|
|
|
Post by coloradocafc on Oct 2, 2023 15:17:05 GMT
Thanks for suggesting this. I'm two episodes in and it's excellent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Oct 3, 2023 10:17:57 GMT
Another episode today. Haven’t listened to it yet. If there’s anything I think might be interesting I’ll share.
|
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Oct 3, 2023 12:37:08 GMT
Another episode today. Haven’t listened to it yet. If there’s anything I think might be interesting I’ll share. Another good episode. Talking about the leaked (I've not seen it) proposal from Premier league to settles the money distribution before the regulator comes in. Very weighted in favour of Championship. Hopefully it doesn't get approved if it is proven to be accurate. |
|
995632
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 362
|
Post by 995632 on Oct 3, 2023 13:15:27 GMT
Another episode today. Haven’t listened to it yet. If there’s anything I think might be interesting I’ll share. Good listen. Interesting that an unaffiliated person who is an expert in the field agrees with the ideas and sentiments from Methven; it's almost like he actually knows about this stuff and understands the current state of football governance and finance. The guest contributer doesn't just ignore what he says or flatly argues against him because of the Sunderland documentary or a pair of salmon trousers! "This week, Adrian and Charlie are joined by Niall Couper of Fair Game to discuss the proposed New Deal For Football, details of which have been leaked in the last few days. If the plan goes ahead, overseas TV rights would be negotiated collectively for the first time since the Premier League was created in 1992. EFL clubs will receive an £88 million bonus payment from the Premier League this season, and it's anticipated that 'solidarity payments' would double. One sticking point, though, is that Premier League clubs would retain parachute payments…" |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Oct 3, 2023 13:36:11 GMT
Another episode today. Haven’t listened to it yet. If there’s anything I think might be interesting I’ll share. Good listen. Interesting that an unaffiliated person who is an expert in the field agrees with the ideas and sentiments from Methven; it's almost like he actually knows about this stuff and understands the current state of football governance and finance. The guest contributer doesn't just ignore what he says or flatly argues against him because of the Sunderland documentary or a pair of salmon trousers! "This week, Adrian and Charlie are joined by Niall Couper of Fair Game to discuss the proposed New Deal For Football, details of which have been leaked in the last few days. If the plan goes ahead, overseas TV rights would be negotiated collectively for the first time since the Premier League was created in 1992. EFL clubs will receive an £88 million bonus payment from the Premier League this season, and it's anticipated that 'solidarity payments' would double. One sticking point, though, is that Premier League clubs would retain parachute payments…" As soon as the parachute payments stop the teams in the bottom half of the table will stop spending and trying to stay up. They won't be able to take the gamble of what happens if they sign a load of average players on big money and long contracts that they won't be able to, literally, give away if they go down - just like we did! This will make many more of the top vs bottom games so one sided that the TV audiences won't want to watch them. At the moment the big clubs are on the TV many more times, a season, than there are teams worth watching them play. That can't be allowed to get worse if the Premier League are going to continue to be the most popular league in the world. |
|
|
|
Post by manikin on Oct 3, 2023 14:38:08 GMT
Good listen. Interesting that an unaffiliated person who is an expert in the field agrees with the ideas and sentiments from Methven; it's almost like he actually knows about this stuff and understands the current state of football governance and finance. The guest contributer doesn't just ignore what he says or flatly argues against him because of the Sunderland documentary or a pair of salmon trousers! "This week, Adrian and Charlie are joined by Niall Couper of Fair Game to discuss the proposed New Deal For Football, details of which have been leaked in the last few days. If the plan goes ahead, overseas TV rights would be negotiated collectively for the first time since the Premier League was created in 1992. EFL clubs will receive an £88 million bonus payment from the Premier League this season, and it's anticipated that 'solidarity payments' would double. One sticking point, though, is that Premier League clubs would retain parachute payments…" As soon as the parachute payments stop the teams in the bottom half of the table will stop spending and trying to stay up. They won't be able to take the gamble of what happens if they sign a load of average players on big money and long contracts that they won't be able to, literally, give away if they go down - just like we did! This will make many more of the top vs bottom games so one sided that the TV audiences won't want to watch them. At the moment the big clubs are on the TV many more times, a season, than there are teams worth watching them play. That can't be allowed to get worse if the Premier League are going to continue to be the most popular league in the world. In a nut shell. |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Oct 3, 2023 15:10:17 GMT
Good listen. Interesting that an unaffiliated person who is an expert in the field agrees with the ideas and sentiments from Methven; it's almost like he actually knows about this stuff and understands the current state of football governance and finance. The guest contributer doesn't just ignore what he says or flatly argues against him because of the Sunderland documentary or a pair of salmon trousers! "This week, Adrian and Charlie are joined by Niall Couper of Fair Game to discuss the proposed New Deal For Football, details of which have been leaked in the last few days. If the plan goes ahead, overseas TV rights would be negotiated collectively for the first time since the Premier League was created in 1992. EFL clubs will receive an £88 million bonus payment from the Premier League this season, and it's anticipated that 'solidarity payments' would double. One sticking point, though, is that Premier League clubs would retain parachute payments…" As soon as the parachute payments stop the teams in the bottom half of the table will stop spending and trying to stay up. They won't be able to take the gamble of what happens if they sign a load of average players on big money and long contracts that they won't be able to, literally, give away if they go down - just like we did! This will make many more of the top vs bottom games so one sided that the TV audiences won't want to watch them. At the moment the big clubs are on the TV many more times, a season, than there are teams worth watching them play. That can't be allowed to get worse if the Premier League are going to continue to be the most popular league in the world. A gradual reduction is what is being proposed. I'm not convinced it will have as big an impact as you say. Methven is pushing for one-off payments and not 3 year parachute payments. No doubt the premier league will work out other ways to provide those clubs with more money to encourage investment. Higher prize payments for each finishing position or something. I doubt we will be rid of parachute payments completely but they shouldn't last as long as they do or be as much imo. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Oct 3, 2023 22:39:40 GMT
As 995632 has already said, the latest podcast is another good listen. Charlie Methven clearly knows his onions. I particularly enjoyed the discussion around parachute payments. Unlike most commentators bleating about parachute payments (Kieran Maguire, Tracey Crouch et al), Methven recognised, as kings hill addick has explained, that they play a very important role in ensuring the Premier League is highly competitive, and he even remarked that the Premier League does not want clubs like Luton, this season, or Blackpool under the Oystons, pocketing the money and deliberately fielding an under strength squad. His counter proposal of a one-off payment to enable restructuring might be a sensible way to begin the debate with the Premier League. As I’ve noted previously, the SE7/GFP plan is now clear. My guess is that they’re relatively confident they can win promotion to the Championship, though that may take longer than is ideal if the breaks don’t go our way. However, with one of the largest wage budgets in League One, the right infrastructure (Technical Director, Director of Performance et al), good recruitment, a decent Head Coach and a thriving academy it ought to be no more than a question of time. The challenge, obviously, is what happens when we reach the financial graveyard of the Championship? How do we compete, let alone challenge for promotion. Methven clearly believes that a combination of bigger EPL handouts with enforced financial discipline will mean we will be able to compete AND break even. Niall Couper of Fair Game talked about a ‘fairer distribution’ of Premier League TV money. I must confess I struggle with this. What is ‘fair’ exactly? If an Independent Regulator is forced to intervene here, using the so-called backstop powers, it seems to me entirely possible they’ll be much more cautious than Couper and others are hoping. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Oct 24, 2023 13:11:06 GMT
There have been three “Where’s The Money Gone?” podcasts since the last post on this thread. It’s not my intention to flag them all, but I thought I’d highlight the latest episode.
It’s titled “Multi Club Owners” and though the content is almost all generic there are some interesting references to Charlton. Methven makes it clear that Charlton is not interested in a Multi Club model per se, but he does say that ACA’s ownership of KMSK Deinze in Belgium is potentially very interesting for Charlton and talks a little about how this might work. En passant, he says that ACA own 15% of Charlton. I’m not sure whether we already knew that?
I had to smile to myself as I listened to this podcast. Perhaps I’m just a cynic and maybe even a bit churlish, but it’s now so clear we have an ownership group with a clear grasp of the football landscape, a clear strategy for the football club, including a number of elements with genuine option value (i.e. which may not pay off, but which could be highly rewarding), and, as we’ve discussed, a highly professional approach to execution and yet, CAST and the cynical cognoscenti elsewhere, who were initially very sceptical about the takeover, now have nothing to say.
At the recent Fans Forum there was a complaint that through his podcast Methven was making important public statements before telling the club’s fans, but there is nothing stopping the Trust reporting on any relevant content. As far as I can tell they’ve made no attempt to do so though. Much more significantly I’ve seen no discussion elsewhere of the implications of the New Deal for English football which could have profound implications for CAFC.
It’s somewhat ironic, not to say amusing, that for all the pomposity elsewhere and the hard to fathom criticism of ITTV, the defacto editorial bias on this Forum was bang on the money about the dear departed Thomas Sandgaard, aka Captain Bullshit, and then about the legitimacy of SE7 Partners and the positive outlook they promise.
Funny old game sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Oct 24, 2023 17:14:54 GMT
We knew ACA had 5% plus but not the precise 15%. It was also rumoured that the three high net worth investors were taking around 20% each and that (some of) the SMT received x% for putting the deal together.
Elsewhere some are concerned about how Methven presented on Netflix Sunderland, why we're not shelling out £30M+ on buying the assets and why are we not aiming for a Cat 1 Academy.
Those same people have been extremely slow to recognise that Andy Scott is in charge of the Football side, that promotion takes us to a different place and that all the rest is noise!
Add in the proposed new EPL / EFL media deal and that's even more true. In today's world of social media people inhabit their echo Chambers. And they choose how to express their commitment. Failing to read into why Holden was sacked, what Appleton has delivered and how we might have a £30M turnover by 2025 is their choice.
We can but accept them for who they are. And recognise that SE7 Partners don't need to spend too much time engaging with these armchair critics.
Let's see where the XG is at the end of November! 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Nov 7, 2023 14:33:38 GMT
It's happening then.
|
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Nov 7, 2023 20:18:33 GMT
And And And... Power to intervene in media related EFL / EPL discussions as a last resort if an agreement assisting sustainability cannot be found. One step closer to CAFC developing a turnover of £30M. Promotion required obviously. Game changer! |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Nov 7, 2023 21:57:08 GMT
Article on the regulator in today’s Times. Link hereHers’s an excerpt from the article which makes it clear just how political this initiative is, “Ministers have also made it clear that the regulator will not impose any sporting sanctions such as points deductions, or pressurise the leagues or the FA to impose such punishments. The sanctions available to the regulator will range from “naming and shaming”, fines, suspensions of individuals and withdrawal of a licence, but will be aimed to have “minimal impact on fans and players”. Bonne chance I’d say. Don’t know how you can withdraw a licence without impacting fans and players!! Clubs might be happy to pay fines if breaking the rules is advantageous. In any event, the important thing for us is the combination of the leaked increase in EPL handouts with wage controls, as discussed on the “SE7 Strategy, Championship Finances and the New Deal” thread. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Nov 8, 2023 9:06:24 GMT
A follow up piece on the regulator from the Times this morning for anyone interested. Link hereHere’s an interesting paragraph from the article, “The government said the regulator would “have powers to monitor and enforce compliance with requirements in financial regulation” but it is understood that it will not impose spending controls, such as Financial Fair Play, on clubs. Those are set to remain the responsibility of the leagues, which penalise clubs who breach the limits on financial losses. New spending controls are also part of the discussions over a proposed financial settlement between the Premier League and the EFL, which is to be voted on by the 20 top-flight clubs on November 21.” It looks increasingly as if the regulator will be a sham with the EPL and EPL still responsible for all forms of FFP. The good news, as the article notes, is that new spending controls are going to be a part of a new financial settlement between the Premier League and the EFL. As explained in the “SE7 Strategy, Championship Finances and the New Deal”, those new spending controls are required to ensure compliance with UEFA’s Squad Cost Control Ratio. What a wonderful irony that is. |
|
|
|
Post by earlpurple on Nov 8, 2023 11:15:54 GMT
The Times is behind a paywall so I don't link there, I'll make do with your highlights.
The issue in the Championship with financial rules there is the real reason why we ended up down in League One, as our owner at the time, Roland Duchatalet, was not willing to fund such losses (twice, in 2015 and 2019).
However much money we lose each year playing in League One, we were potentially losing a lot more in the Championship. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Nov 8, 2023 11:38:02 GMT
The Times is behind a paywall so I don't link there, I'll make do with your highlights.
The issue in the Championship with financial rules there is the real reason why we ended up down in League One, as our owner at the time, Roland Duchatalet, was not willing to fund such losses (twice, in 2015 and 2019).
However much money we lose each year playing in League One, we were potentially losing a lot more in the Championship. Those two links should get you behind the paywall earlpurple Are they not working? |
|
|
|
Post by earlpurple on Nov 8, 2023 11:50:16 GMT
I clicked the second one and it asked me to sign in
|
|
|
|
Post by wiggyatthebackpost on Feb 4, 2024 1:38:40 GMT
He is the one to blame he put the band of brothers together. If your reading this get rid of Captain Scott
|
|
