Look Out There Are Llamas
Llamas ._.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2015
- Messages
- 4,407
- Reaction score
- 1,778
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Buckhurst Hill
- Supports
- Leyton Orient
The problem in itself is not the concept of parachute payments. It's the disparity in income between Premier League sides and everyone below. The gulf in revenue is ridiculous and a disgrace but no one in charge of English football has the guts to challenge this monopoly. The Premier League sides take far too much of the Sky TV money and don't give anywhere near enough to lower league sides.
What is it for this season, 70m basic for every Premier League side, 10m basic for every Championship side. Say for example the outgoings of a team getting relegated is 60m and they make a profit of 10m, they're spending within their means and cutting the cloth accordingly as is the expression used by a few on here. Without any form of parachute payment how in the space of about 8 weeks can a team be expected to cut their expenditure down from 60m to 10m? It's just not feasible, without parachute payment, pretty much every side to get relegated would go straight into Administration. If a Premier League side was getting 50m basic and a Championship side 30m basic etc then there would be no need whatsoever for parachute payments.
Also it takes time for a club to realistically be able to trim their expenditure to lower league levels minus parachute payments, that's why it's spread over 4 years. Peoples livelihoods are at risk when budgets are trimmed and it's the smaller none playing staff that suffer the most.
Wigan made a profit in the last 3 Premier League seasons in a row and regularly sold young players on for big profit to be a self sustainable model. We have made a profit in the last 2 seasons despite being in the Championship. We're on course to make a profit again this season in League One, we're a very well run club. We sold about 8m worth of players this Summer and reinvested 4m of that. We have halved the wage bill this Summer as we ensure we are spending within financial fair play and being self sustaining. We've signed a lot of talented youngsters capabale of playing at a higher level, which we can sell on for big fees, once parachute payments run out.
But we've been like that prior to our Premier League days, we sold Roy Carroll to Manchester United for 2.5m in 2001 and that was reinvested in the signings of Lee McCulloch, Nathan Ellington and Jason Roberts. We had one of the smallest wage budgets in the Championship the season we went up, we built our success on youth players like Leighton Baines, bargains like Bullard for 200k and a number of shrewd free transfers. Yet you have clubs like Blackburn, Derby, Middlesbrough, QPR, Fulham etc spending 5/6m+ on players, some 10m+ and spending well over their means. Yet we're always perceived as the main protagonists.
Excellent first post.