Accy showing the way

For those who don’t do Twitter this is the latest informative info from an engaging Chairman: Ignore it if you aren’t interested

So we’ve looked at the income side matchday and the massive variance dependant on competition and the size of the following of the club visiting.
What I will do over the coming weeks and months is try to explain in very simple terms the way I look at the finances of our club,..the way rule changes affect us, both positively and negatively. My comments speak only for
@ASFCofficial
and every club is different. They are not designed to criticise the ruling authorities. I want supporters in general to see what I see and understand why I say what I say.

It will be broad brush so don’t try to forensically analyse it, but it will be accurate enough to get a steer.

So...

Matchday costs, salaries and wages.

If our total wage bill for the club is £2.2m and we play:

46
@SkyBetLeagueOne

1
@EmiratesFACup

1
@Carabao_Cup

3
@CheckatradeTrpy
trophy games the cost per game is

£2.2m/51 games or

£43,137 per game in staffing costs alone.

If the number of games goes up, the cost per game falls and vice versa.

I prefer to break it down by games because the number of games by month is so volatile for example there are NO games in June.
This basic logic means that the more games we play the less each game costs. If we play 100 games the cost would be £22,000 per game.

Rule change 1. Scrapping of emergency loans by
@FIFAcom
happened before the ink had dried on my first budget and increased playing budget by £200,000 because we had to have cover, sat around, waiting for injuries and suspensions. This is a disaster because in order to have cover some lads are trapped, neither playing for us or anyone else for the 6 months between transfer windows. I still don’t understand why
@FIFAcom
was that interested in shafting us for £200k in
@SkyBetLeagueTwo

Sticking with player budget, we account to
@EFL
under SCMP rules (I forget what that stands for) which basically limits the amount we can spend on
..our squad to 55% of gross profit (reducing to 50% off memory)
This would be good but for the loopholes that effectively mean you can do what you want as an owner. A billionaire can have a limitless budget in
@SkyBetLeagueTwo
and
@SkyBetLeagueOne
raising costs for everyone which is why I called for some upper limit. A billionaire could fund a
@premierleague
side to compete in
@SkyBetLeagueTwo
as it stands.

If we move on to the number of games, it make sense for our club to play more, cost per game is less; the failed Whole game solution proposed reducing the number of teams per league from 24 to 20 and the number of game played to 38 from 46.

and more games, the authorities want less games and increase our cost by imposing new rules.

If this is boring ignore it!This would reduce the game count by 8 from 51 to 43 and increased our staff costs per game from £43,137 to £51,163. It took away
@EmiratesFACup
replays, along with windfall hopes of an away replay
@ManUtd
as well as the hope of increasing the number of games. This was being done because
@premierleague
stars need a rest! No consideration was give to the impact on Accy.

So, wage costs and number of games. I want lower cost

This guy at Accrington is something of a revolution in terms of football ownership.

Not afraid to criticise the powers above either