Lowest budget in the league.

According to Struber in the Chronicle. Would be shocked if Rotherham. Wycombe or even Millwall. Had more incoming funds. ?

 

Well that's ********, unless we're being incredibly tight (and I accept that's a distinct possibility). There's no way Wycombe, Rotherham and Luton (and probably Cov) have more money at their disposal.

 

If he refers to wage budget I’d bet he isn’t far off.

 

Turnover should be higher than those clubs mentioned above but player budget might be the lowest if £1.3m plus is going on ground rent and maintenance.

 

They don't need to spend as much on legal fees. Our highest earner is probably a QC.

 

They said that when burton was in same league aswell think it was hecky. I didnt buy it then I definitely dont now we share a league with wycombe,rotherham,luton,millwall

 

Nivver, its a computer chip they put in our managers for their pre-season talk. There's Rotherham and Wycombe in our league.

 

Rotherham’s last year in the championship, saw them have a turnover of £14m and payroll of £8m. In the same year BFC had turnover of £7.8m and a payroll of £8.1m.

The big difference in turnover being from the central distribution Rotherham got as a Championship side whilst we were in division one, still paying similar wages.

 

We’ll definitely be “down there” but surely not below rovrum and Wycombe.

 

Unsure about other clubs but our ST’s were much lower this season

 

I imagine every clubs have been I was reluctant to shell out my money (having been a season ticket holder for many years)for 2 reasons 1 been we dont know when fans will be allowed in the ground.

 

I mentioned before. Rovrum have done a £25 priority to buy match day tickets. But have to pay for Ifolow for all games separately.

 

Not our league, but didn’t somebody post on here about Donny’s prices being similar or more than last season

 

Rotherham sold 4 season tickets.

 

Coventry are an interesting case here - as they are the only Championship club to have no home ground. Therefore although they’ll pay rent to Birmingham, they have no maintenance costs and fixed costs from owning their own stadium. That puts them in good order whilst fans are not allowed in stadiums.

 

Would have thought all costs were factored into the rent.?

 

They’ll be an element built-in, but it won’t be a 50/50 split. But without doubt far cheaper than owning their own stadium. It’s a great money spinner for Brum - hence the reason they went for it.

Hence the reason we hosted Man City pre-season Euro qualifiers at Oakwell.

 

Have all the other clubs rebranded to the name of the street that they are situated on?

 

If we’re struggling for cash here’s an idea, start asking for the market value of the players we sell to our direct rivals

 

But don’t forget their loss of revenue from fans. Coventry that is. I Would hazard a guess they’ve lost millions in lost gate receipts .
Take this issue with the reds. If the board decided to groundshare without the commitment to build a ground within the borough of Barnsley. Then that’s 1 season ticket holder they’ve lost.