Should I(E) stay or should I(E) go?

[boltonboris]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

[BWFC_Insane]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

Sharon’s point is you can’t run a club the size of Bolton wanderers in league one sustainably. If you lower your playing costs and are less competitive you lower your gate receipts and TV money.

Running a club of this size demands a higher income than league one can provide. Few clubs at this level are sustainable without investment but especially ones trying to sustain our infrastructure

In her own words there was a 5 year plan to get to the championship and we’ve missed it - this will cost her and the investors and frankly I’m concerned what would happen the season after next if we failed again because that financially would potentially be unworkable.

[boltonboris]

Not like you to be concerned mate

[BWFC_Insane]

Not like you to be concerned mate

We will just have to go up. No two ways about it.

[Bertie Wooster]

It's all about 2 or 3 quality signings or loans now for me, because as it stands the squad isn't good enough to get top 3 next season - I could even see them struggling for top 6 with the possible play off hangover.

[Prufrock]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

It's something I don't quite get either. I understand the argument "we need to go up, it's costs too much to stay down here", but the budget is what it is.

If we stay down, Ian gets potted and we have less money (say 10th biggest wage bill) next year, we'll need to go up even more. Does it make it a failure not to go up then? We're sorry you overachieved but not by enough? I mean that is football, so it wouldn't surprise me, but the logic doesn't match up.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

It's all about 2 or 3 quality signings or loans now for me, because as it stands the squad isn't good enough to get top 3 next season - I could even see them struggling for top 6 with the possible play off hangover.

All things are possible in an infinite universe, but there is clearly a big risk of a hangover - among fans, players and management.

There is, however, a bunch of good third-tier players who have proven they can win many more than they lose, and beat most teams. I wouldn't say it's not good enough, because we've very little idea yet how the relegated and promoted teams will retool (barring Rotherham, who've shown their hand early and made some solid signings). There are threats, definitely, but it's very very early to be making judgements on what will happen, rather than what might.

There's always some saying it's now or never, six-pointers in August, etc, but I agree with the general drift that if we aren't promoted this coming season it's exceedingly difficult to see Evatt remaining at the club.

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

It's something I don't quite get either. I understand the argument "we need to go up, it's costs too much to stay down here", but the budget is what it is.

If we stay down, Ian gets potted and we have less money (say 10th biggest wage bill) next year, we'll need to go up even more. Does it make it a failure not to go up then? We're sorry you overachieved but not by enough? I mean that is football, so it wouldn't surprise me, but the logic doesn't match up.

You're applying logic again, when you should be applying WD40 to the casters that the argument's goalposts are on.

[Worthy4England]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

If it was all strictly aligned to expenditure, there'd be no point running a League. Save yourselves the cost and just send us a note in May on how much you've spent and we'll work it out from there.

There would be absolutely no point in having Managers and expensive back-rooms, because apparently they won't make any difference.

I don't think you get an in-year budget report from every Club so it's always going to be a bit of a guesstimate. Whilst there is decent correlation between spend and League placement, I wouldn't be tasking someone with Bolton's budget to do anything other than get promoted.

It's a great selling point for potential investors. Can you chuck us a few quid on the basis we'll probably finish 5th.

[dave the minion]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

Sharon’s point is you can’t run a club the size of Bolton wanderers in league one sustainably. If you lower your playing costs and are less competitive you lower your gate receipts and TV money.

Running a club of this size demands a higher income than league one can provide. Few clubs at this level are sustainable without investment but especially ones trying to sustain our infrastructure

In her own words there was a 5 year plan to get to the championship and we’ve missed it - this will cost her and the investors and frankly I’m concerned what would happen the season after next if we failed again because that financially would potentially be unworkable.

I know its not just you saying it, and our beloved Sharon has also said it, but what makes us such a big club to be too big for League 1 - I just don't get it??? One bit.

We were good/big once or twice before, but we're not now. Fact. You know what they say about investments that past performance is no guarantee of future performance......

OK, we've got a relatively shiny stadium (one which, admittedly, still retains its own character, unusual for the identikit stadium building trend of 20 years ago), and we have a decent fan base given the fact we're the biggest (or one of...) towns in Britain, but a big club that does not make.

Don't forget, its still in very recent memory that we almost went pop.

So why is it any harder to run our club in League 1 than, say, Derby or Portsmouth or Barsnley or Wigan etc etc I might be being stupid (I often am...) but I don't see why our position is so unique and different from half of the clubs in the league?

I love the ambition to climb the pyramid, and as a fan of course I want us to do that, but I just don't see why its any more imperative for us to get promoted as anyone else?

[GhostoftheBok]

So why is it any harder to run our club in League 1 than, say, Derby or Portsmouth or Barsnley or Wigan etc etc

Every club you mentioned makes a loss at this level, which is covered by the owners.

Wigan's budgets were described as "completely unsustainable" by their new owner, who has slashed them massively and wants them down close to Lincoln. Even then it will make a loss and only be remotely viable with ground and staff sharing.

That is despite Wigan having a fully functional academy system that makes and saves them money. Their profitability model assumes player sales.

Posh achieve "sustainability" by selling players, which is really the only way to avoid a loss over a 5-year period and maintain competitiveness in the division. They still make a loss over a 12 month period quite often, but you can't run a football club just hopping from year to year.

If we stay at this level we will have to find a way to become a successful selling club, find richer backers, or go bust.

[BWFC_Insane]

Just playing Devils advocate here, but if we can't (according to some posts) afford to be competitive in League 1, why are we demanding that we should be?

Should we not cut our cloth accordingly? Or can we not just say, with the 5th highest budget we finished 3rd, 2 points off second (or whatever it was), that we actually probably overacheived last season?

Sharon’s point is you can’t run a club the size of Bolton wanderers in league one sustainably. If you lower your playing costs and are less competitive you lower your gate receipts and TV money.

Running a club of this size demands a higher income than league one can provide. Few clubs at this level are sustainable without investment but especially ones trying to sustain our infrastructure

In her own words there was a 5 year plan to get to the championship and we’ve missed it - this will cost her and the investors and frankly I’m concerned what would happen the season after next if we failed again because that financially would potentially be unworkable.

I know its not just you saying it, and our beloved Sharon has also said it, but what makes us such a big club to be too big for League 1 - I just don't get it??? One bit.

We were good/big once or twice before, but we're not now. Fact. You know what they say about investments that past performance is no guarantee of future performance......

OK, we've got a relatively shiny stadium (one which, admittedly, still retains its own character, unusual for the identikit stadium building trend of 20 years ago), and we have a decent fan base given the fact we're the biggest (or one of...) towns in Britain, but a big club that does not make.

Don't forget, its still in very recent memory that we almost went pop.

So why is it any harder to run our club in League 1 than, say, Derby or Portsmouth or Barsnley or Wigan etc etc I might be being stupid (I often am...) but I don't see why our position is so unique and different from half of the clubs in the league?

I love the ambition to climb the pyramid, and as a fan of course I want us to do that, but I just don't see why its any more imperative for us to get promoted as anyone else?

Larger clubs have more staff to support, more infrastructure to manage, usually more expensive running costs etc….

I mean it’s not sustainable in football generally. All clubs struggle. But we’ve just lost £5.6M in our last accounts which don’t account for a lot of last season. Thats the cost to the ownership of running us in league one. You can argue we just lower the playing squad costs but as I’ve outlined that will reduce your income so it might make a small difference in terms of saying we will just have to accept being 10th in league one for the foreseeable but of course your revenue drops and therefore the losses might reduce a small amount…

The clue is Sharon is diverting all resources into enhancing the first team - we aren’t doing the infrastructure stuff we are just putting it all into trying to go up. She could have said this summer, we have to cut our cloth accordingly but has effectively said that although she believed that was possible she now having experienced it does not.

I don’t think it is different for some of those clubs you mentioned but all rely on owners or investors continually sinking money in. And if you have an ED you can go for as long as he will write the money off. If you have investors then you can go for as long as they remain happy without return…and what constitutes a return may be financial…or may be success on the field. Some investors in football, are after the exposure and success attached to their name more than a monetary return. We don’t know what ours are after but either way….one assumes they expected like Sharon to be in a league higher by now. These clubs are all losing money. I doubt many as much as we are, Portsmouth probably were as were Derby. Wigan have a similar type of owner to us now at the start of his football journey who is trying to go the cheap and minimal loss route I think but probably will find that doesn’t work out too well.

[BWFC_Insane]

So why is it any harder to run our club in League 1 than, say, Derby or Portsmouth or Barsnley or Wigan etc etc

Every club you mentioned makes a loss at this level, which is covered by the owners.

Wigan's budgets were described as "completely unsustainable" by their new owner, who has slashed them massively and wants them down close to Lincoln. Even then it will make a loss and only be remotely viable with ground and staff sharing.

That is despite Wigan having a fully functional academy system that makes and saves them money. Their profitability model assumes player sales.

Posh achieve "sustainability" by selling players, which is really the only way to avoid a loss over a 5-year period and maintain competitiveness in the division. They still make a loss over a 12 month period quite often, but you can't run a football club just hopping from year to year.

If we stay at this level we will have to find a way to become a successful selling club, find richer backers, or go bust.

I agree with all this btw. The selling club model unless you get lucky tends to be problematic as it tends to mean developing players and pushing them into the first team much earlier and arguably isn’t compatible with remaining competitive. I get that you can of course sell some players at times as Portsmouth have done but it relies on the market and investing in players at the right time and then the market being ready to buy them.

I suspect if I’m being brutally honest it’s not a viable business model for us given our geography. Yes we will of course be able to trade and sell players as is natural. But relying on it to cover losses I think for a club with so much local competition and no huge advantages - I’m not seeing it as a consistent model.

[boltonboris]

You think our fans would accept us being a selling club and having other teams buy our better players, in order to remain sustainable? I think many of our fans think we're "too big" for that. Which is probably why we've always been crap at it

[GhostoftheBok]

You think our fans would accept us being a selling club and having other teams buy our better players, in order to remain sustainable? I think many of our fans think we're "too big" for that. Which is probably why we've always been crap at it

Same reason people think we should massively overperform our spending every season.

Being demanding is good. Everyone at the club should demand we do overperform to a certain extent. It has to be based in the real world, though.

Regardless of the level we reach we will have to develop and sell players. Even in the Premier League. The scale is just different.

[Worthy4England]

You think our fans would accept us being a selling club and having other teams buy our better players, in order to remain sustainable? I think many of our fans think we're "too big" for that. Which is probably why we've always been crap at it

I thought that was "the plan" - buy, improve value, sell, reinvest with a larger war-chest?

[boltonboris]

Except the only player we've got cash for, went for a third of the amount his ultimate replacement cost us..

[GhostoftheBok]

Except the only player we've got cash for, went for a third of the amount his ultimate replacement cost us..

If you mean Dapo and Collins then no, that's not right.

With Dapo going up and us not those deals are probably about even right now - it's all speculation, but sounds like there's at most £50-100k in it. We just have to hope they sell Dapo for £10m before we get promoted

[BWFC_Insane]

You think our fans would accept us being a selling club and having other teams buy our better players, in order to remain sustainable? I think many of our fans think we're "too big" for that. Which is probably why we've always been crap at it

Same reason people think we should massively overperform our spending every season.

Being demanding is good. Everyone at the club should demand we do overperform to a certain extent. It has to be based in the real world, though.

Regardless of the level we reach we will have to develop and sell players. Even in the Premier League. The scale is just different.

I think you can present any slant on 'budget vs performance' and I suspect Sharon is presenting it in a favourable way for her staff. If we add up player budget and transfer spend in the season I doubt that puts us 5th - lets see how the metrics actually stack up.

But regardless of that Bolton Wanderers are not paupers and we've just lost more than £5M on the second largest turnover in the league. So anyone who suggests we are overperforming to get out of league one is absolutely kidding themselves.

[Worthy4England]

Except the only player we've got cash for, went for a third of the amount his ultimate replacement cost us..

Sure, not to get into a pissing contest around the actual numbers, I thought the notion was to make significantly more on sales, to fund the improvements.

[GhostoftheBok]

Sure, not to get into a pissing contest around the actual numbers, I thought the notion was to make significantly more on sales, to fund the improvements.

Yup. Doesn't help when your most likely asset does its knee - Johnston last time and Dion this.

As others have rightly said, a selling model can go wrong for some time due to injuries. You're really judging it over 5+ years. We're arguably now in year 2-3.

This summer who is there? Thommo, Vic, Santos, Toal...not so much beyond that for this summer and we (as a club) probably want to keep them all.

Next summer is a bit more promising - Collins, Charles, Johnston, Forrester, CMG, Nludnulu, Morley, etc can all be added to the "Might fetch us a few bob" list. Still need to add more this summer.

As Posh keep showing, the real money is in fast, skilful attackers under the age of 25. We don't really do those, as a football club. Last time we had close to that Posh profile someone gave us about £3m for Clough.