Playing Budget Scandal

In the lower two leagues there simply isn't huge demand for corporate. TV revenue is relatively sparse. Far and away the biggest indicator of budget should be the attendances you pull. Obviously there will be a few bankrolled Sugar Daddy clubs like Fleetwood that skew that, but in the main clubs at our level operate to a budget highly reflective of their home attendances.

In a season where we've been at the bottom pretty much from Day 1....... we've the 5th best home crowds.

Throw in all the unbudgeted income from last year, and there is absolutely no excuse for Adams not having at the very least a 'play-off' level budget. Instead we are told that the budget is 'mid-table'. You can guarantee that won't be an 'upper mid' budget either, because if it was then Smarmes would be quick to point it out.

The differential is as clear an indicator as you could ever ask for, in terms of where the football falls in the priority list.

Has Brent or Smarmes ever publicly attempted to justify the shortfall?

I asked Brent pretty much exactly that at the recent Q&A.

It's not gone unnoticed by many, the Diarouaga situation would be a good indicator also, he's widely expected to go to a league 1 team and no one seriously expects it to be us, why can't we compete in this league when we are better funded than most of our competitors?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I asked Brent pretty much exactly that at the recent Q&A.

So the answer was?

I tried.

The off mike bits were: "but we aren't competing with Exeter"; there was then something else I forget; "how can all these clubs be running at a loss if they are obeying the Salary Cap Management Protocol?"

I don't see how I could have pressed any harder.

akagreengull wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I asked Brent pretty much exactly that at the recent Q&A.

So the answer was?

Just watch the video. It should start at the right place.

it starts at the beginning for me.

Wind on to about 41 minutes.

Will watch it but I must admit I find it so difficult listening to his bullshit, hearing his stupid voice and watching his quivering lip.
I just wish he would go away.

cheers, that high rising terminal (upspeak) of Brents....

akagreengull wrote:

Will watch it but I must admit I find it so difficult listening to his bullshit, hearing his stupid voice and watching his quivering lip.
I just wish he would go away.

Tis true .......... corporate bullshit.

akagreengull wrote:

Will watch it but I must admit I find it so difficult listening to his bullshit, hearing his stupid voice and watching his quivering lip.
I just wish he would go away.

Agreed Aka just looking at his red soaked nose and appearance makes me want to throw up. Repulsive creature. If he's that minted (and in my opinion hes not) then feckin employ a make up artist before going on public display

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

akagreengull wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I asked Brent pretty much exactly that at the recent Q&A.

So the answer was?

Just watch the video. It should start at the right place.

Clearly Smarmes and Shyster swerved the question.

We all know there is a massive disparity between the income and the playing budget. Brent won't ever try to justify it because he can't. Why some fans still can't (or won't) see this is baffling. The evidence is there for all to see with DA's 'budget' - the terrible signings and the fact we've been propping up the division since August. Akkeron Argo is first and foremost a property speculating outfit with an inconvenient football club bolted on.

BRENT OUT NOW

If he could get rid of the football club, he'd have a nice little business there....

A big part of the MO for Smarmes and Shyster is to refer to Exeter etc when swerving questions about PAFC. One of the standout replies (from memory as I'm not watching it again) was when they stated if all clubs spent the maximum allowed on players' wages many would run at a loss (or words to that affect). In part that's probably true, the remaining 40% for running costs is probably pretty tight for clubs like Oldham, AFC Wimbledon, Walsall etc. It says nothing about our 40% though, which should be more than ample to cover the day to day running costs and if it isn't, why not?

I simply can’t bring myself to watch the video

Coxside_Green wrote:

A big part of the MO for Smarmes and Shyster is to refer to Exeter etc when swerving questions about PAFC.  One of the standout replies (from memory as I'm not watching it again) was when they stated if all clubs spent the maximum allowed on players' wages many would run at a loss (or words to that affect).  In part that's probably true, the remaining 40% for running costs is probably pretty tight for clubs like Oldham, AFC Wimbledon, Walsall etc.  It says nothing about our 40% though, which should be more than ample to cover the day to day running costs and if it isn't, why not?

A good point Coxside. With Argyle having much larger crowds, the actual non football overheads are pretty much fixed for a football club and should be more or less equal across the division. They all have to have a manager, a chairman, coaches, stadium maintenance, keep a pitch tip top etc. So in absolute terms, even more reason to ask where's the money going ?
But then there are a lot of businesses and mouths to feed down here. The dirctors' box is full to bursting every game.

Czarcasm wrote:

I simply can’t bring myself to watch the video

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

I simply can’t bring myself to watch the video

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

I'm with Czarks we all know the stock excuses by heart now, in fan involvement but not as I know it, I refuse to play the game anymore.

Well he asked what Brent and Starnes had said about it and there is the film of them both saying it.

Up to him if he watches it, of course, but if I cared enough to ask the question then I'd probably also care enough to see what they actually said as opposed to somebody else's interpretation of it.

It's not really fair to condemn what you think they may have said, even if they did say exactly what you feared they might, until you actually know for sure that they have said it.

Plymouth Argyle used to be able to compete with any club in the third division, now its Akkeron Aces a bucket Rattling shit sandwich of a club, that cant compete in this league of giants....... Brent Out.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Well he asked what Brent and Starnes had said about it and there is the film of them both saying it.

Up to him if he watches it, of course, but if I cared enough to ask the question then I'd probably also care enough to see what they actually said as opposed to somebody else's interpretation of it.

It's not really fair to condemn what you think they may have said, even if they did say exactly what you feared they might, until you actually know for sure that they have said it.

No that's actually fair comment Franny. I may try and stomach it at some point - if only to annoy myself even more with their undoubted squirmy side-stepping of the actual issue.

Someone could always quote what they said so not everyone has to watch it.

Don't do it Czarky, I haven't. Leave it alone, there is nothing to be gained by listening to the words of someone who stated after 4/5 years, he had never contemplated buying the freehold. That surely tells you something.
You only live once, why infect yourself with such drivel.