|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 8, 2021 19:35:39 GMT
I've got a few theories: 1) some clubs got so much income from DCMS and saved so many costs at the same time that they have a surplus from last year and can confidently commit to players as a result 2) theres a plan to get committed believing the further down the line they are Govt will have to bailout for a second time when they say they can't survive without help (it worked last season!) 3) naive belief that income will quickly come back to levels needed Not sure which one I think is most likely tbh If I was in the shoes of the owners right now I would be one of the quiet ones waiting to see what develops But having said that getting committed early last season was proven to work when I considered it naive Will be interesting few weeks/months ahead 1. There's no surplus. Clubs only got money they could prove was spent. Unless you're suggesting fraud, 1) Clubs only got money they could prove was spent? How could they do this in advance of getting it to spend?
|
|
|
Post by davef on Jul 8, 2021 19:41:30 GMT
From the previous years budgets. From known season ticket sales From known expenses And a requirement to provide documentation. (The receipts).
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 8, 2021 19:49:11 GMT
I've got a few theories: 1) some clubs got so much income from DCMS and saved so many costs at the same time that they have a surplus from last year and can confidently commit to players as a result 2) theres a plan to get committed believing the further down the line they are Govt will have to bailout for a second time when they say they can't survive without help (it worked last season!) 3) naive belief that income will quickly come back to levels needed Not sure which one I think is most likely tbh If I was in the shoes of the owners right now I would be one of the quiet ones waiting to see what develops But having said that getting committed early last season was proven to work when I considered it naive Will be interesting few weeks/months ahead 1. There's no surplus. Clubs only got money they could prove was spent. Unless you're suggesting fraud, 2. Not going to happen. If there's (note spelling) no restrictions, there's (note spelling) no bail out. 3. Merchant of doom. You were proved wrong last time. While there are people who claim they'll never leave the house again, there's plenty who are desperate to go and do something. The BBL is built around family groups. The kids are in school, why wouldn't you bring them to basketball? While some kids at Oaklands didn't return after the final lockdown, not a single parent said it was because they were concerned about safety. 3) Let me focus on my own club We've said season ticket holders don't have to pay this season So theres significant income from the most loyal and reliable fans we won't be getting this year Will be hard to get anybody new to commit to a season ticket in the current world thats for sure We had over 70 sponsors of the club pre Covid I doubt the club has even had chance to speak to most of them yet let alone find out whether those businesses can still sponsor them to previous levels Crowds will come back but I'm sure it will be a gradual process. If you were making cash flow predictions none of the above helps And we just have to hope that lockdowns or self isolation etc don't come back in the autumn or winter So not doom and gloom just realism By the way last season I thought it was mad for clubs to be signing players etc thinking myself we wouldn't be allowed fans etc Not doom and gloom. Proven reality. Only thing I didn't predict correctly in my case was the Govt would fund the season If that ain't happening again in any form (as you predict) then clubs should be tightening their belts and being careful at the moment imo Club survival should be plan A
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 8, 2021 19:55:12 GMT
From the previous years budgets. From known season ticket sales From known expenses And a requirement to provide documentation. (The receipts). So they had to show what they needed to complete the season based on prior year income and expense My theory 1 relies on clubs not spending as much as they did previous year once they got the income We've just seen Raiders owners negotiate rent free deals and expenses only with their venue That wouldnt be in previous years figures for example Shame they didn't even pay the lower figure But clearly what clubs used to get the funding wasn't necessarily what they had to replicate once they had secured the money? Hope that makes sense Prudent clubs might have kept a surplus knowing they might need it?
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 8, 2021 19:55:54 GMT
Dp
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 8, 2021 20:01:03 GMT
all those franchises have also joined in the last 20 years (most in the last 10) so saying they have withdrawn is bit misleading Reality is since 1987 the league has had startups and moves anc changes of ownerships and withdrawals. And this is just the continuation of the pattern. Starting a BBL basketball club takes a hell of a lot of work and a commitment to being in it for the long run, for limited rewards. People who are willing to do this are few and far between (Paul, Russ/Kevin, Vince, the MLS guys, etc). They show it can be done. The only club in the list above who give doubt to the concept of the league would be Worthing, because they simply couldn't make ends meet. But they were playing in a leisure centre (in what would be called a small market in the NBA) at the far end of the country with increased travel costs as a result (and the fall out from the Bears debacle a few years no doubt wouldnt have helped with sponsorship). The reality is uni teams are vulnerable to the whim of the uni (durham, Leeds, Worcester). 'Rich man' teams are vulnerable to the whim of the rich man/orgainsation (Mersey, Royals). Foreign owner teams : pretty clear. (Plymouth) Start up teams require long term plans (Essex : which was a Tim lewis vehicle) and Birmingham (where the league overreached for the understandable purpose of getting a team in Brum). A strong 9/10 team league is perfectly sustainable, particularly if we can progress to having 2 or 3 European entrants every year. But the key to that is the people involved, and their commitment to the long term and understanding that profit won't be turned quickly. Belgium has 10 teams and a v strong league. A 12 team league with 3 unstable franchises may appear better to the punter than just one with 9 stronger franchises. But it would be an illusion. The tragedy here is that BE has neglected div 1 to such a degree that we have no realistic prospect of getting any clubs from it who have the infrastructure to compete in BBL. (and that includes Solent who are a cross between the 'rich man' and Worthing situations). The biggest issue in our pro basketball is not the teams from 1-9. Its the gap in organisation, infrastructure, financing etc between team no 1 and team no 15. I would say we could just about get away with a League of 8 well run teams And I say that thinking we might need to be prepared to lose more clubs even if we gain gloucester
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2021 20:24:01 GMT
1. There's no surplus. Clubs only got money they could prove was spent. Unless you're suggesting fraud, 1) Clubs only got money they could prove was spent? How could they do this in advance of getting it to spend? In a world where there was virtually no income, it was pretty easy. Game day costs were virtually static, player costs were provable, away trips were verifiable, as were training costs. We were in arrears for much of it - if you weren't being such a baby and read my blog you'd know how close many clubs were to going under - but if you didn't spend it, you had to give it back. No one got rich on this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2021 20:26:15 GMT
A strong 9/10 team league is perfectly sustainable, particularly if we can progress to having 2 or 3 European entrants every year. But the key to that is the people involved, and their commitment to the long term and understanding that profit won't be turned quickly. The tragedy here is that BE has neglected div 1 to such a degree that we have no realistic prospect of getting any clubs from it who have the infrastructure to compete in BBL. (and that includes Solent who are a cross between the 'rich man' and Worthing situations). The biggest issue in our pro basketball is not the teams from 1-9. Its the gap in organisation, infrastructure, financing etc between team no 1 and team no 15. +1 with bells on to all of this. Especially the middle bit.
|
|
|
Post by raiders92 on Jul 8, 2021 21:19:26 GMT
all those franchises have also joined in the last 20 years (most in the last 10) so saying they have withdrawn is bit misleading Reality is since 1987 the league has had startups and moves anc changes of ownerships and withdrawals. And this is just the continuation of the pattern. Starting a BBL basketball club takes a hell of a lot of work and a commitment to being in it for the long run, for limited rewards. People who are willing to do this are few and far between (Paul, Russ/Kevin, Vince, the MLS guys, etc). They show it can be done. The only club in the list above who give doubt to the concept of the league would be Worthing, because they simply couldn't make ends meet. But they were playing in a leisure centre (in what would be called a small market in the NBA) at the far end of the country with increased travel costs as a result (and the fall out from the Bears debacle a few years no doubt wouldnt have helped with sponsorship). The reality is uni teams are vulnerable to the whim of the uni (durham, Leeds, Worcester). 'Rich man' teams are vulnerable to the whim of the rich man/orgainsation (Mersey, Royals). Foreign owner teams : pretty clear. (Plymouth) Start up teams require long term plans (Essex : which was a Tim lewis vehicle) and Birmingham (where the league overreached for the understandable purpose of getting a team in Brum). A strong 9/10 team league is perfectly sustainable, particularly if we can progress to having 2 or 3 European entrants every year. But the key to that is the people involved, and their commitment to the long term and understanding that profit won't be turned quickly. Belgium has 10 teams and a v strong league. A 12 team league with 3 unstable franchises may appear better to the punter than just one with 9 stronger franchises. But it would be an illusion. The tragedy here is that BE has neglected div 1 to such a degree that we have no realistic prospect of getting any clubs from it who have the infrastructure to compete in BBL. (and that includes Solent who are a cross between the 'rich man' and Worthing situations). The biggest issue in our pro basketball is not the teams from 1-9. Its the gap in organisation, infrastructure, financing etc between team no 1 and team no 15. I would say we could just about get away with a League of 8 well run teams And I say that thinking we might need to be prepared to lose more clubs even if we gain gloucester A league of 8 could work!! But if you pick 8 clubs to compete from the current 11 you've lost arguably in order of clubs have probably lost 2 of your biggest 5!! If your looking at a good solid league of 8 you'd wanna include raiders and wolves as they are big franchises with big fan clubs!! Plymouth I'd argue are up there with the big 4 if you include what we bring to the league ie the most passionate fans in the league, Match day experience foxy and the general game day set up!
|
|
|
Post by baldereagle on Jul 8, 2021 21:30:48 GMT
Perhaps Eagles and Riders could offer their arenas as temporary home venues ?
|
|
|
Post by Raidersfan on Jul 8, 2021 21:39:35 GMT
I’m so pleased the pavilions have set things straight, I’m still devastated by the news, I’m sick…. I’ve lost my team!!! But I can not forgive the owners for what they have done!!!! The BBL need to put more in place for new owners so they can’t just run a team into the ground.
|
|
|
Post by davef on Jul 8, 2021 22:37:20 GMT
Such as what?
I didn’t hear anyone in Plymouth complaining when they were splurging their cash last season.
It’s a private company. Their takeover was lauded by everyone, particularly in Plymouth. Are you suggesting the other owners should have refused to permit a takeover by a proven millionaire with basketball links?
|
|
|
Post by drivethebody on Jul 8, 2021 22:47:59 GMT
Such as what? I didn’t hear anyone in Plymouth complaining when they were splurging their cash last season. It’s a private company. Their takeover was lauded by everyone, particularly in Plymouth. Are you suggesting the other owners should have refused to permit a takeover by a proven millionaire with basketball links? Hey fella- his team have just folded and he’s upset- why so negative. Stay classy lad
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 4:25:44 GMT
1) Clubs only got money they could prove was spent? How could they do this in advance of getting it to spend? In a world where there was virtually no income, it was pretty easy. Game day costs were virtually static, player costs were provable, away trips were verifiable, as were training costs. We were in arrears for much of it - if you weren't being such a baby and read my blog you'd know how close many clubs were to going under - but if you didn't spend it, you had to give it back. No one got rich on this. So Hersey do you think Raiders will have given back the money they haven't paid to Pavilions last season? Why on earth would they even bother to negotiate lower venue costs when they will have been given the money based on previous year costs? Haven't they just chosen to spend that elsewhere? Who else will they owe money to or might they have pleaded poverty to? You've mentioned fraud a few times. Doesn't have to be fraud. It can be clever accounting Put it this way some clubs will no doubt have been cleverer than others Was sponsor income something you could claim for? If so -?What if a sponsor normally gave support in terms of product or services - could you claim the cash value of that support? How was that income taken into account? I had a retail business many years ago that was impacted by a road closure for a couple of months We were asked to submit figures to show loss of income I don't know what my accountant did but we got so much cash I wish the road was closed permanently! The quality of players the clubs signed last year suggested to me that they achieved good results from DCMS Didn't some clubs start releasing players early as well once they weren't going to win stuff? I can't imagine a system that could effectively monitor the spend once the clubs had the money There must have been some flexibility once the money was in the hands if the clubs And sounds like some clubs were still negotiating hard to reduce costs from previous year despite getting previous year money Which is understandable providing they went breaking any DCMS rules? Sounds like you've seen the rules. But I'm just trying to speculate why some clubs are able to commit to players whilst other clubs are saying there won't be enough income to be viable at same time?
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 4:39:15 GMT
I’m so pleased the pavilions have set things straight, I’m still devastated by the news, I’m sick…. I’ve lost my team!!! But I can not forgive the owners for what they have done!!!! The BBL need to put more in place for new owners so they can’t just run a team into the ground. In football they are supposed to have due diligence and fit and proper tests for new owners. It's never worked in reality despite the huge amount of money that no doubt gets wasted on it. Sadly there's always risk with new owners and sports clubs
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 5:13:50 GMT
I've got a few theories: 1) some clubs got so much income from DCMS and saved so many costs at the same time that they have a surplus from last year and can confidently commit to players as a result 2) theres a plan to get committed believing the further down the line they are Govt will have to bailout for a second time when they say they can't survive without help (it worked last season!) 3) naive belief that income will quickly come back to levels needed Not sure which one I think is most likely tbh If I was in the shoes of the owners right now I would be one of the quiet ones waiting to see what develops But having said that getting committed early last season was proven to work when I considered it naive Will be interesting few weeks/months ahead 1. There's no surplus. Clubs only got money they could prove was spent. Unless you're suggesting fraud, 2. Not going to happen. If there's (note spelling) no restrictions, there's (note spelling) no bail out. 3. Merchant of doom. You were proved wrong last time. While there are people who claim they'll never leave the house again, there's plenty who are desperate to go and do something. The BBL is built around family groups. The kids are in school, why wouldn't you bring them to basketball? While some kids at Oaklands didn't return after the final lockdown, not a single parent said it was because they were concerned about safety. 2) similar to Raiders I'm anticipating more owners going public with statements saying their city may lose basketball if more help isn't forthcoming Doesn't mean it will work But I imagine they will try again once they do the maths If you don't ask you don't get. And what do they have to lose? Buys them time with suppliers and helps them negotiate down what they pay players and staff etc at same time as well Anything to help cashflow
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 5:48:49 GMT
I've got a few theories: 1) some clubs got so much income from DCMS and saved so many costs at the same time that they have a surplus from last year and can confidently commit to players as a result 2) theres a plan to get committed believing the further down the line they are Govt will have to bailout for a second time when they say they can't survive without help (it worked last season!) 3) naive belief that income will quickly come back to levels needed Not sure which one I think is most likely tbh If I was in the shoes of the owners right now I would be one of the quiet ones waiting to see what develops But having said that getting committed early last season was proven to work when I considered it naive Will be interesting few weeks/months ahead 2. Not going to happen. If there's (note spelling) no restrictions, there's (note spelling) no bail out. [ Just found this The money BBL clubs received so far was from the first sports survival fund of £300m Theres a new one available for the same amount (£300m) that takes sport through to March 2022 See below: A: The programme is focused on supporting organisational survival through the period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022. That means the majority of essential business operational costs will be eligible. The funding offered will respond to financial need to survive Here's the full link www.sportengland.org/how-we-can-help/coronavirus/funding-innovation-and-flexibility/government-sport-survival-packageThe sports authorities seem to recognise sports clubs will need income support ongoing This could also explain why clubs can commit to signing players with a bit of confidence they will have the cash if they face short term cashflow issues next season
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2021 6:18:41 GMT
Relentless. This isn't your blog
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 6:23:51 GMT
There's an interesting clause in the sports survival funding document below
The money is only available as a last resort
And has to be repaid should a club or sport get a windfall from outside investment
That may actually delay deals such as the Bet 777 deal from happening
It also means Raiders may have suffered from the level of grants or loans etc they could claim due to their new owners and alleged new investment?
Clause below:
There will be certain ‘windfall’ events that trigger a mandatory repayment of the SSP borrowings. (Such events may include significant investment into the Borrower; significant investment into the League; sale of investment assets; and other similar events)
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 6:26:19 GMT
Relentless. This isn't your blog Wow Something as relevant to the survival of the sport as this You don't like the news purely as you had no idea about it You should be thanking me for educating you Hersey! And you should be pleased another bailout is indeed available You were adamant yourself there was no more bailout available and basketball was on its own again ? Clearly you haven't got a clue have you? Very very disappointed in your lack of knowledge of this new support available It's been announced since March as well ? Ps this is the whatsbev forum by the way Don't confuse it with your blog either I know you like to control what gets said on here as well and pretend you are the fountain of all basketball knowledge You post about basketball every day and claim to know what's going on - but never told anybody about the new survival plan? Good job I didn't take you at your word and took a look myself The authorities recognise sports clubs will continue to suffer ongoing. It's not doom and gloom. It's the real world hersey and more support will indeed be available to help clubs survive Try and keep up from now on
|
|
|
Post by Raidersfan on Jul 9, 2021 6:40:30 GMT
Such as what? I didn’t hear anyone in Plymouth complaining when they were splurging their cash last season. It’s a private company. Their takeover was lauded by everyone, particularly in Plymouth. Are you suggesting the other owners should have refused to permit a takeover by a proven millionaire with basketball links? Yeah because when our new owners have cash and spend it, one it’s exciting, and two I personally expect some level of honesty and long term investment / time with the club, not over spending, not taking government money and then not paying local Plymouth companies (pavilions) what’s owed, and certainly not have directors sign off and then leave the club. We all struggled through lockdowns, but this team helped me massively through it, I watched near on EVERY game, their social media presence all helped me stay positive when I was faced with losing my business, sorry if my posts are a little narrow minded, but this situation hits hard
|
|
|
Post by drivethebody on Jul 9, 2021 6:44:37 GMT
Dave F and Hersey not coming across too well here.
It’s an emotive topic - don’t think niggly point scoring or digs at old foes like IRF or Dunkster are helping the case at all Dave- just makes you look bitter about something. You called IRF relentless - which is the most ironic thing I’ve ever read on here given your constant digs at many posters over such trivial things.
Come on lads - it’s been a tough year for all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2021 6:48:12 GMT
Every time DTB - this board' #1 - tells people to be classy, I have a real urge to stick this song on
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Jul 9, 2021 6:48:55 GMT
Dave F and Hersey not coming across too well here. It’s an emotive topic - don’t think niggly point scoring or digs at old foes like IRF or Dunkster are helping the case at all Dave- just makes you look bitter about something. You called IRF relentless - which is the most ironic thing I’ve ever read on here given your constant digs at many posters over such trivial things. Come on lads - it’s been a tough year for all. They don't like their point of views being challenged at all. And struggle with people questioning their point of view. Dave F less so than hersey tbf But thats exactly what forums are SUPPOSED to be about Forum definition: a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged. "we hope these pages act as a forum for debate" As far as I'm concerned I've added to the debate and when challenged I back up my point of view with facts rather than just telling the other poster they are doom and gloom or nuts At which stage it normally gets personal or they just change the subject or stop the debate etc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2021 7:00:21 GMT
I’m so pleased the pavilions have set things straight, I’m still devastated by the news, I’m sick…. I’ve lost my team!!! But I can not forgive the owners for what they have done!!!! The BBL need to put more in place for new owners so they can’t just run a team into the ground. Without being prompted by the freak under the bridge, I was going to say that i feel your pain. I've been there 18 years ago I found out that Leopards were dead. That killed the atmos of the party that night. I think you need to take the Pavilions claims with a pinch of salt. Even The Herald article, much of which was a cut & paste job from an advanced copy of the press release, acknowledged that the price rise effectively priced Raiders out of staging basketball there. The numbers they're talking about are utterly unrealistic for what they're providing. From the outside it looks like the Pavilions have a financial hole to fill and their answer is to bump up the rent because they believe the owners have plenty of cash. The Herald really should have asked some more searching questions as to how this can be justified. What the Pavilions have done well is win the publicity war. But Raiders' ownership have shown little interest in winning that battle. They're not based in the Plymouth area, and they don't care what people think. The harsh reality is they weren't willing to chuck a load of money at the Pavilions and when it came to the crunch, Raiders were expendable.
|
|