PL clubs taking furlough payment option

[FATTYFOULKE]

I saw on Sky Sports News that the Burnley chairman has said that if football doesn't resume by August they'll run out of money, so it wouldn't surprise me if we are in a similar position as they are.

I don't expect us to go bust or anything, but it wouldn't surprise me if we had some serious cash flow problems as we've got a bigger wage bill and more importantly spent some big money in the last two transfer windows. A lot of that will depend on when we need to make the next payments for Berge, McBurnie, Mousset etc.

United borrowed money against Premier League income at the beginning of the season. So the money should already be in their coffers.

Our matchday income won’t amount to a lot as we have 25000 season ticket holders and that money is already banked. The only money they’re missing will be pay on the gate and away fans, plus catering etc. Small change relatively.

They’ll get additional money at the end of the season based on final position in the table plus any FA Cup money if that goes ahead.

I can’t see how they’ll have cash flow problems just yet. A year down the line maybe, but not yet. The furlough is our taxpayer money designed to help struggling smaller businesses from going bust and the ordinary man keep a wage coming in.

Not the likes of Liverpool and others who are multi million pound businesses paying a select few hundreds of thousands A WEEK.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

A report in Germany this week said that 13 of the 36 professional clubs (top two divisions) were in danger of going bust.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

Cheeky cunts

 

[Bladesman]

 

[YES Blade]

United borrowed money against Premier League income at the beginning of the season. So the money should already be in their coffers.

Our matchday income won’t amount to a lot as we have 25000 season ticket holders and that money is already banked. The only money they’re missing will be pay on the gate and away fans, plus catering etc. Small change relatively.

They’ll get additional money at the end of the season based on final position in the table plus any FA Cup money if that goes ahead.

I can’t see how they’ll have cash flow problems just yet. A year down the line maybe, but not yet. The furlough is our taxpayer money designed to help struggling smaller businesses from going bust and the ordinary man keep a wage coming in.

Not the likes of Liverpool and others who are multi million pound businesses paying a select few hundreds of thousands A WEEK.

Furlough is NOT to help small struggling businesses, it is designed to help businesses of all sizes retain staff rather than laying them off due to there naturally being no work for them during the pandemic. It will also help the government long term as the employees laid off would, most likely enter the welfare system.

I believe the season will be completed behind closed doors by the end of August, but I’m not running a business where if that doesn’t happen, there will be financial consequences. What if the season is voided? What if we don’t see another Premier League match until the 2021-22 season? So I don’t see an issue with football clubs looking for financial support they are entitled to during these uncertain times. If a company the size of Disney are utilising furlough, I don’t see why football clubs are being singled out as greedy, evil companies robbing the government.

From a PR stand up, there was always going to be a backlash and maybe it would’ve been better to sort out player pay cuts before going down the furlough route. But we’ll see what the public opinion is once the pay cut is agreed.

 

[Akinbiyi]

 

[Bladesman]

'Important we get it right' - Wilder on football's coronavirus response

Chris Wilder tells Football Focus that football must get its response to the coronavirus crisis right, and act collectively to find a solution that works for the whole sport.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Cheesebored]

It will also help the government long term as the employees laid off would, most likely enter the welfare system.

Not having a pop but I don't really understand how this would benefit any government? Surely it's an extra burden?

 

[FATTYFOULKE]

Furlough is NOT to help small struggling businesses, it is designed to help businesses of all sizes retain staff rather than laying them off due to there naturally being no work for them during the pandemic. It will also help the government long term as the employees laid off would, most likely enter the welfare system.

I believe the season will be completed behind closed doors by the end of August, but I’m not running a business where if that doesn’t happen, there will be financial consequences. What if the season is voided? What if we don’t see another Premier League match until the 2021-22 season? So I don’t see an issue with football clubs looking for financial support they are entitled to during these uncertain times. If a company the size of Disney are utilising furlough, I don’t see why football clubs are being singled out as greedy, evil companies robbing the government.

From a PR stand up, there was always going to be a backlash and maybe it would’ve been better to sort out player pay cuts before going down the furlough route. But we’ll see what the public opinion is once the pay cut is agreed.

It IS designed to help struggling businesses, the overwhelming majority whom are likely going to be smaller business. Small or not it certainly doesn’t apply to the likes of Liverpool and Spurs.

It most certainly wasn’t designed to help multi million pound organisations like them who both announced massive profits last year and should be able to soak up a month without football before jumping on the bandwagon and avoiding paying relative peanuts to its staff.

What if this season is voided? It hasn‘t been so a moot point and seeing top PL clubs already taking advantage is disgusting.

If their finances are that bad (which they’re not) that they’re struggling already they should be sacking their finance directors for mismanagement

We don’t have to wait for public opinion, it’s there now. It’s disbelief that they’re doing this and is a PR disaster. Football is already struggling with the image of greed and this adds to it. It’s shameful.

The government doesn’t have a bottomless pit and the likes of them dipping into it is plain wrong. What happens when the money runs out because businesses who didn’t need the money were first in taking their cut?

BTW my reply to your post wasn’t a criticism of anything you’d put just my thoughts on the subject.

 

[sheffielder]

I don’t think you can furlough staff who are on more than 50k

 

[Bladesman]

Wayne Rooney says players face a no-win situation in wage debate

Derby striker Wayne Rooney says the power struggle over how footballers use their wages to aid the coronavirus fight is "a disgrace".

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[YES Blade]

Not having a pop but I don't really understand how this would benefit any government? Surely it's an extra burden?

Furlough is only a temporary measure and I believe the cut off is currently May. Basically if the government wasn’t paying the wages, then there is a good chance the majority of companies would just lay these staff off because there is no work for them to do, very few businesses can afford to pay staff to sit at home. Those staff laid off would have no alternative but to sign up to universal credit which would result in the government paying them anyway, albeit at a lower to the government than furlough but there is the potential for other social issues.

It’s a way for the government to hit the pause button with the economy. Social distancing measures will eventually be relaxed and businesses can resume trading and contributing to the treasury through taxation. There would be a good chance a lot of businesses, including some big names could go bust without these measures.

 

[YES Blade]

I don’t think you can furlough staff who are on more than 50k

You can, but the government will only pay a maximum of £2500 per month. It’s up to the employer whether they wish to make up the shortfall.

 

[Bladezz]

Footballers are being made scapegoats. The media narrative is back about footballers giving them a bad press. Everyone seemingly have forgot about Weatherspoons or Virgin who both made record profits doing the exact same thing.

The higher up the food chain you are it’s easy to look for scape goats.

I believe players should be in discussion to look after there own club. If sufc need £500k to make sure staff all get paid then a discussion should be had.

People such as catering staff / Stewards are at the ground for us supporters. Maybe it should be us contributing?

 

[YES Blade]

It IS designed to help struggling businesses, the overwhelming majority whom are likely going to be smaller business. Small or not it certainly doesn’t apply to the likes of Liverpool and Spurs.

It most certainly wasn’t designed to help multi million pound organisations like them who both announced massive profits last year and should be able to soak up a month without football before jumping on the bandwagon and avoiding paying relative peanuts to its staff.

What if this season is voided? It hasn‘t been so a moot point and seeing top PL clubs already taking advantage is disgusting.

If their finances are that bad (which they’re not) that they’re struggling already they should be sacking their finance directors for mismanagement

We don’t have to wait for public opinion, it’s there now. It’s disbelief that they’re doing this and is a PR disaster. Football is already struggling with the image of greed and this adds to it. It’s shameful.

The government doesn’t have a bottomless pit and the likes of them dipping into it is plain wrong. What happens when the money runs out because businesses who didn’t need the money were first in taking their cut?

BTW my reply to your post wasn’t a criticism of anything you’d put just my thoughts on the subject.

The problem is that companies that are profitable will soon struggle if the lock down continues for a prolonged length of the time. It’s not a case of companies cheating the system to maximise profits, it’s ensuring survival.

The company I work for are in the process of furloughing staff and have a bigger turnover (about 3x) and bigger profit than United. The public would agree that it’s correct to furlough and protect jobs at the company I work for, but if United did it, it would be seen as them taking the piss out of the system.

Just seems huge double standards to me, when football does so many great things for charities and communities, some people still can’t wait for any chance to stick the boot in (not say you are, more generally the media and government).

 

[Cheesebored]

 

[Rodders]

The problem is that companies that are profitable will soon struggle if the lock down continues for a prolonged length of the time. It’s not a case of companies cheating the system to maximise profits, it’s ensuring survival.

The company I work for are in the process of furloughing staff and have a bigger turnover (about 3x) and bigger profit than United. The public would agree that it’s correct to furlough and protect jobs at the company I work for, but if United did it, it would be seen as them taking the piss out of the system.

Just seems huge double standards to me, when football does so many great things for charities and communities, some people still can’t wait for any chance to stick the boot in (not say you are, more generally the media and government).

I would imagine that your company spends nowhere near the % of turnover on wages that football clubs do.
The players aren't taking the piss IMO, they do loads for charities and I think they probably would do the right thing off their own backs anyway - but the clubs furloughing are taking the piss no question.

 

[Akinbiyi]

Man United and City both paying the staff, including non playing staff, 100% of their wages without government handouts.

 

[Akinbiyi]

Liverpool U-Turn. Twats.

 

[1973Blade]

Given the controversy, wouldn't it be sensible for United to avoid doing this?

 

[Cheesebored]

Given the controversy, wouldn't it be sensible for United to avoid doing this?
View attachment 76205

The thing I don't get about this is " a small number of staff "? Surely it's either all non playing staff or none. Placing a small number of staff on furlough is going to make little to no impact on the clubs finances, surely? PR og this.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

This is going to be the first misstep by Abdullah’s people since taking full control. As with the other clubs to do it, it’ll be hugely disappointing, unnecessary, and embarrassing. I really didn’t think we’d go down this route, particularly having seen how people have reacted.

 

[Harry's Game]

As well as embarrassing it raises concern about the financial health of the club behind the scene, have we taken out loans against expected TV income for this season? ( as well as next ) that now suddenly may not be paid or we have to think about paying back.

Having seen the tsunami of shit poured over Liverpool and Spurs I don’t think the club would have taken this step if it really didnt think it had to.

Worrying.

 

[Robboblade1889]

Disgusting I cannot believe given the furore surrounding Liverpool that united have taken this decision. It’s a PR disaster and they should rethink this immediately!

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Completely agree with the below.

 

[Nelson1889]

Until it's announced by the club I'd hold fire with the slanging and mud throwing.

I wouldn't trust anything the Stir or James Shields has to offer even if it was the sun rising this morning.

Agreed it's a bit of a shit show if it does turn out to be true.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

If The Star have published this it isn’t made up, they’ll have been advised. It’s ridiculous to suggest that James Shield would just make up a story which would deliberately show the club in a poor light. This has either been leaked or even a case of putting the story out there to see the reaction.
The reaction should be strongly against it by fans.

 

[Rodley]

Terrible that from SUFC

 

[Akinbiyi]

Oh ffs

 

[grafikhaus]

Maybe United stand to make a bigger loss than any other PL team?



'Such are the economics of a top-flight division jet-propelled by vast TV money. Sheffield United, another regular loss-maker in recent years, would take a particularly hard TV hit.

This season's new Premier League overseas TV rights deal — which, for the first time, sees the higher finishing clubs paid vastly more than lower ones — means that Chris Wilder's side would lose £38.8m. Norwich, who have already furloughed staff, stand to lose less than any other.'

Link