The 'Model'

[The Norton Cat]

Thats my take on the approach we will take as well (Once there have been a couple of sales), a mixture of signings for short, medium and long term.

The problem with the summer and January windows has been in my opinion where we have bought with the future in mind and not the short or medium term needs of the team. This may well stand us in a better position next season as the players from this seasons transfer dealings are a year further on in their development.

I have an interesting train of thought, that the focus is on a much longer term "project" with eyes on the full Sustainabilty rules that hit in 2025/26. I have pasted the wording of whats coming in 25/26 and my interpretation of how that COULD affect us

As part of The Squad Cost Rule spending on wages (players and head coaches), transfers and agent fees will be capped at 70 per cent of a club's revenue. This will be assessed over a calendar year and not a season, so spending in the summer transfer window will be included in the calculations.

For a club like us if you base it on what our anticipated turnover is of £35 million excluding players sales. Players sales are then added onto the income figure so (as an example) in the summer we sell 3 players for £50 Million - Total Income 85 Million, that still only gives us £38.5 Million to play with, that has to cover incoming transfers and wages for players and playing staff.

If you took an average playing side salary of £15k a week with a 25 man squad and 5 playing staff thats £23.4 million per year in wages alone, which would only leave £15 million for transfer fees.

At current rates thats what? 2 Championship players? but we have sold 3 to get that figure so we are a potentially a player short.

If i have mis-interpreted the rules, then hopefully someone will point it out and set me on the right track.

That's really interesting. Sticking to those rules is going to be quite a challenge for some clubs. Without knowing all of that, my gut feeling and interpretation of the approach KLD is taking has always been that its a long term thing and not necessarily something that's going to start showing its benefits to their full extent within only a season or two. So I think you may well be right that their strategy is intended to develop perhaps more slowly than people might want.

 

[Chunksafc]

That's really interesting. Sticking to those rules is going to be quite a challenge for some clubs. Without knowing all of that, my gut feeling and interpretation of the approach KLD is taking has always been that its a long term thing and not necessarily something that's going to start showing its benefits to their full extent within only a season or two. So I think you may well be right that their strategy is intended to develop perhaps more slowly than people might want.

As i have said previously i find it all quite interesting, guess thats due to my figures based work background. The strange thing is these rules have had their name changed by the powers that be from FFP to Profit and Sustainability Rules, Financial Fair Play hints at it being fair and still allows smaller clubs to compete, these are aimed at clubs being sustainable, no mention of competing.......

 

[TopCat.]

Thats my take on the approach we will take as well (Once there have been a couple of sales), a mixture of signings for short, medium and long term.

The problem with the summer and January windows has been in my opinion where we have bought with the future in mind and not the short or medium term needs of the team. This may well stand us in a better position next season as the players from this seasons transfer dealings are a year further on in their development.

I have an interesting train of thought, that the focus is on a much longer term "project" with eyes on the full Sustainabilty rules that hit in 2025/26. I have pasted the wording of whats coming in 25/26 and my interpretation of how that COULD affect us

As part of The Squad Cost Rule spending on wages (players and head coaches), transfers and agent fees will be capped at 70 per cent of a club's revenue. This will be assessed over a calendar year and not a season, so spending in the summer transfer window will be included in the calculations.

For a club like us if you base it on what our anticipated turnover is of £35 million excluding players sales. Players sales are then added onto the income figure so (as an example) in the summer we sell 3 players for £50 Million - Total Income 85 Million, that still only gives us £38.5 Million to play with, that has to cover incoming transfers and wages for players and playing staff.

If you took an average playing side salary of £15k a week with a 25 man squad and 5 playing staff thats £23.4 million per year in wages alone, which would only leave £15 million for transfer fees.

At current rates thats what? 2 Championship players? but we have sold 3 to get that figure so we are a potentially a player short.

If i have mis-interpreted the rules, then hopefully someone will point it out and set me on the right track.

Surely 70% of £85m is £59.5m rather than £38.5m...or am I missing something?

 

[Lucky19672]

Surely 70% of £85m is £59.5m rather than £38.5m...or am I missing something?

Just about to point the same out.

 

[Chunksafc]

Surely 70% of £85m is £59.5m rather than £38.5m...or am I missing something?

You are indeed correct, ****s all my figures up

 

[Chunksafc]

For a club like us if you base it on what our anticipated turnover is of £35 million excluding players sales. Players sales are then added onto the income figure so (as an example) in the summer we sell 3 players for £50 Million - Total Income 85 Million, that still only gives us £59.5 Million to play with, that has to cover incoming transfers and wages for players and playing staff.

If you took an average playing side salary of £15k a week with a 25 man squad and 5 playing staff thats £23.4 million per year in wages alone, which would only leave £36 million for transfer fees.

 

[Sour Patch]

You must log in or register to see media

This is what we are trying to compete with. An £8million player being their 4th choice striker and being left out of the squad

 

[John 11:35]

The thinking behind the "model" is optimistic at best and naïve at worst. Rapidly replacing all your experienced players with kids who have played little or no senior football is a massive gamble.
There have been successes, but also a few failures, or players who are currently miles away from the 1st team. This is impacting our performance this season. but I've said it before - finishing 6th was a massive anomaly and ultimately he worst thing that could have happened in our 1st season in this division. The big test is this summer - when we lose Clarke and possibly Neil/Ballard how we replace them is massive - I don't accept that in Seelt, Mundle, Rigg etc we already have their replacements at the club. We need to move up a level in terms of the players we bring in. £40m for 2 players (for example) should equal 4 signings at £10m each to raise the levels of quality in the 1st team whilst allowing the younger lads to develop.
Imagine signing experienced at quality at CB, CDM, ST, LW for £10m each and creating a real spine to the team whilst the likes of Rigg, Ba, Aouchiche, Mundle, Mayenda etc etc can develop around them? No net outlay, but an overall uplift in quality (despite losing 2 of our best players)
That is how the model was sold, that will be how people will judge.

I'm not sure the model is naive, putting it bluntly the people behind it want it to make money.

Uncle Tony's playoff dash last season must've scared them, for a minute it looked like we had the foundation of a Premier League team that would've needed significant investment had we been promoted.

What we're about to see is closer to the original plan, a few seasons of selling our best players and investing in new ones to build up the club's finances, improve the team then presumably bounce up and down selling players and collecting parachute payments like Burnley under Sean Dyche.

This first cycle is going to be the worst, as we don't have the money to put back into the next set of players.

It will be interesting to see how much of that money is put back into the club, ideally most or all will go into making it easier to cope without our best players.

 

[The Norton Cat]

I'm not sure the model is naive, putting it bluntly the people behind it want it to make money.

Uncle Tony's playoff dash last season must've scared them, for a minute it looked like we had the foundation of a Premier League team that would've needed significant investment had we been promoted.

What we're about to see is closer to the original plan, a few seasons of selling our best players and investing in new ones to build up the club's finances, improve the team then presumably bounce up and down selling players and collecting parachute payments like Burnley under Sean Dyche.

This first cycle is going to be the worst, as we don't have the money to put back into the next set of players.

It will be interesting to see how much of that money is put back into the club, ideally most or all will go into making it easier to cope without our best players.

KLD is worth about £2b. His family own the Louis-Dreyfuss group which was reported as making £800m profit in the financial year prior to Sept 2023. Professional football is a notorious money pit. Surely if all he was interested in was making money, he'd find something more profitable to squander his time and money on?

 

[John 11:35]

KLD is worth about £2b. His family own the Louis-Dreyfuss group which was reported as making £800m profit in the financial year prior to Sept 2023. Professional football is a notorious money pit. Surely if all he was interested in was making money, he'd find something more profitable to squander his time and money on?

You'd think so, but he's a young lad who grew up watching his dad running a football club. He wants to do the same.

I don't think he intends to make his fortune from us, he just wants the club to run a profit. In his mind that'll set him down the path of responsible club ownership. The challenge being how.

He might have £2bn in assets but I suspect we are the equivalent of a goldfish in a bag.

If he can keep us alive long enough he might be allowed to own a Ligue One club one day.

 

[The Norton Cat]

You'd think so, but he's a young lad who grew up watching his dad running a football club. He wants to do the same.

I don't think he intends to make his fortune from us, he just wants the club to run a profit. In his mind that'll set him down the path of responsible club ownership. The challenge being how.

He might have £2bn in assets but I suspect we are the equivalent of a goldfish in a bag.

If he can keep us alive long enough he might be allowed to own a Ligue One club one day.

I'm sure he does want to emulate his dad and run a football club. The rest of it is just speculation though. Even if his main aim is to run a club like Marseille, getting us running sustainably and in a good financial position is as beneficial to us as it is to him.

 

[Smug in Boots]

I'm not sure the model is naive, putting it bluntly the people behind it want it to make money.

Uncle Tony's playoff dash last season must've scared them, for a minute it looked like we had the foundation of a Premier League team that would've needed significant investment had we been promoted.

What we're about to see is closer to the original plan, a few seasons of selling our best players and investing in new ones to build up the club's finances, improve the team then presumably bounce up and down selling players and collecting parachute payments like Burnley under Sean Dyche.

This first cycle is going to be the worst, as we don't have the money to put back into the next set of players.

It will be interesting to see how much of that money is put back into the club, ideally most or all will go into making it easier to cope without our best players.

That's absolutely wild mate, what an imagination.

If you really believe KLD only wants to cop the parachute money why would he make a significant investment had we been promoted?

And do you honestly believe he needs to 'prove himself' to a Ligue One club that's half our size and half our income. If he wants to buy one there's nothing stopping him.

 

[John 11:35]

I'm sure he does want to emulate his dad and run a football club. The rest of it is just speculation though. Even if his main aim is to run a club like Marseille, getting us running sustainably and in a good financial position is as beneficial to us as it is to him.

It will be hard for all of us in the short term.

Robert Louis Dreyfus was an extremely successful businessman and marketer before he bought a majority stake in Olympique de Marseille.

Kyril Louis Dreyfus dropped out of a degree in sports and business management at Leeds Beckett University before he bought a stake in SAFC.

 

[John 11:35]

That's absolutely wild mate, what an imagination.

If you really believe KLD only wants to cop the parachute money why would he make a significant investment had we been promoted?

And do you honestly believe he needs to 'prove himself' to a Ligue One club that's half our size and half our income. If he wants to buy one there's nothing stopping him.

I'm sure he would've if Olympique de Marseille were offering

As it was, he had to get his L plates elsewhere

 

[The Norton Cat]

It will be hard for all of us in the short term.

Robert Louis Dreyfus was an extremely successful businessman and marketer before he bought a majority stake in Olympique de Marseille.

Kyril Louis Dreyfus dropped out of a degree in sports and business management at Leeds Beckett University before he bought a stake in SAFC.

Will it? Why?

 

[Smug in Boots]

I'm sure he would've if Olympique de Marseille were offering

As it was, he had to get his L plates elsewhere

He doesn't though, what football experience do most owners of clubs have ... zero is the answer. You could buy a French club if you had the money.

 

[John Wick]

Well put but to simple thinks out, it's essentially the moneyball approach to football business. Sell a player at 10m and then buy 5 at 2m. Rinse and repeat. Hoping to keep improving as you go. It's a big ask and a challenge. Ultimately, it's also cost cutting with anyone on higher wages offloaded, gooch and Prichard. Makes the clubs more sustainable but progress is tough to manage.

That said, should make the balance sheet look better, and look better to anyone who is interested, when a club is going to be up for sale.

The Oakland A's started moneyball and won nothing, Boston copies it and wins the world series 2 years later. They just spent 60 million on 2 players instead of 120 million on one though. lol

 

[Chunksafc]

Despite messing my maths up earlier, it does show how we will have to develop players to sell for profit to even think about being competitive.

How many clubs are going to be one bad window / bad season away from serious penalties when these new rules really bite? Maybe a financial reset is coming for all but the "big 6"

 

[John Wick]

Seen some very interesting comments on this thread about what everyone believe the buzz word Model means. I'm enjoying the read.Hypothetically speaking..... what if the "model" dictates KLD has a time line goal on his ownership here? Is the "model" a short term deal for him, let's say within 5 years? What if KLD wants out? What if he's been listening to offers for the club in the region of let's say 120-30 million for the club from several interested parties? We as fans just see the football side of the players we bring in. Just adding my 2 pennies in. lots of "what ifs" in my post i know, but It could be a very..... interesting summer.

 

[Bazza2310]

Next season is where we will see the model actually start working properly in my opinion. We have assets worth decent money for the first time so this is how the model will have its first effective opportunity to sell for big money and re invest even half of the money on a higher calibre of youth which enables you to kick on.