Financial issues Raith Rover, Dundee Hibernian, and others etc

Super A

Super A

Well-Known Member
I’m not as up to date as I should be on all this stuff.



My very basic understanding was Thistle and Hearts are contesting the decision to have them relegated with around 22% of the league left to be played.



So, the action is against the authorities SPFL, why then are the individual clubs having to shoulder the costs.

And these clubs in particular?



I have a feeling the answer may be very obvious so go easy on me ….
 
The SPFL award clubs prize money at the end of the season. This money comes from the income. Should the income drop by £10m due to paying Hearts and Partick, there is significantly less to go around.

Very crudely, the new Sky deal is £30m a year. So prize money would drop by a third. This could see clubs income drop by 20%+ in addition to the lack of income from ticket sales. Basically a lot of teams could see revenues halved.
 
Because they decided to have their own lawyer and defend themselves I'm guessing. They are their fighting their own, same case as spfl.

But in reality I think spfl should cover the costs and bring them forward as a "witness" so to speak, thus no legal costs , I think?
 
last minute signing said:
The SPFL award clubs prize money at the end of the season. This money comes from the income. Should the income drop by £10m due to paying Hearts and Partick, there is significantly less to go around.

Very crudely, the new Sky deal is £30m a year. So prize money would drop by a third. This could see clubs income drop by 20%+ in addition to the lack of income from ticket sales. Basically a lot of teams could see revenues halved.
Click to expand...
But that would impact much further down the line

Both clubs mentioned are saying they are out of pocket now
 
BlueSeaOfIbrox said:
Because they decided to have their own lawyer and defend themselves I'm guessing. They are their fighting their own, same case as spfl.

But in reality I think spfl should cover the costs and bring them forward as a "witness" so to speak, thus no legal costs , I think?
Click to expand...

Yes it kind of sounds like that.

I assume both are up for promotion obviously Dundee Hibs are.

But the action is against the SPFL would it not be best just kept with them.
 
last minute signing said:
The SPFL award clubs prize money at the end of the season. This money comes from the income. Should the income drop by £10m due to paying Hearts and Partick, there is significantly less to go around.

Very crudely, the new Sky deal is £30m a year. So prize money would drop by a third. This could see clubs income drop by 20%+ in addition to the lack of income from ticket sales. Basically a lot of teams could see revenues halved.
Click to expand...
It's actually worse than that percentage wise.

The SPFL deduct cost from the income which is generally 5 or 6 mill. That means the money available to the clubs in terms of prize money is circa £25m. A drop of £10m equates to a 40%.

Think last years total payout was circa £22.5 so if that reduced to £15m that would be a drop of 33.3% on last years income.

Add in, as you say, no gate money or other matchday income, and it's a significant hit.
 
1288Bear said:
It's actually worse than that percentage wise.

The SPFL deduct cost from the income which is generally 5 or 6 mill. That means the money available to the clubs in terms of prize money is circa £25m. A drop of £10m equates to a 40%.

Think last years total payout was circa £22.5 so if that reduced to £15m that would be a drop of 33.3% on last years income.

Add in, as you say, no gate money or other matchday income, and it's a significant hit.
Click to expand...
which impacts everyone, and im sure their are teams further down the food chain.

So given this hit may be coming, why would these 2 clubs in particular go in for a potential greater hit.

The case as I understand it is against the SPFL
The SPFL should defend it
If Hearts / Thistle win then the compensation cost is spread over 42 clubs.
Now its spread over 42 clubs but the costs go to these 2.

Dundee Hibs and Raith Rovers may be the clubs that it costs by way of promotion (but thats never happening)

Im missing something here I know
 
I get the feeling the amount the SPFL currently has in its bank account doesn't amount to a row of beans (Doncaster's wopping salary at the end of July probably isn't covered at this juncture).

The desperation to make sure the season actually begins on 1st August to trigger the first Sky payment has been fairly obvious and they are getting very nervous about that with no confirmation coming from the Scottish Government (not even for friendlies).

Right now, legal costs are being incurred with nothing at the SPFL to cover them hence putting the onus on the three patsies who are themselves cash-strapped and having to go out with the begging bowl. If there is any delay to the start of the season in the top flight a real shit-storm is on its way for the SPFL and several clubs.

Even if they get beyond that point intact the lack of spectators this year (maybe even longer) will create another shit-storm. Stadia are set to be empty or have insignificant crowds for quite some time - that's obvious to anyone who has been paying attention.
 
As I said in another thread, in the case of Raith Rovers some of their ITK supporters seem to believe that they will be given assistance with their legal costs by the club from the east end of Glasgow.
 
Super A said:
which impacts everyone, and im sure their are teams further down the food chain.

So given this hit may be coming, why would these 2 clubs in particular go in for a potential greater hit.

The case as I understand it is against the SPFL
The SPFL should defend it
If Hearts / Thistle win then the compensation cost is spread over 42 clubs.
Now its spread over 42 clubs but the costs go to these 2.

Dundee Hibs and Raith Rovers may be the clubs that it costs by way of promotion (but thats never happening)

Im missing something here I know
Click to expand...
There was no real reason for them getting involved or choosing to cost themselves money. The case as you say was against the SPFL and it was for them to defend so while the promoted clubs were named they did not need to get involved.

The only possible reasons being that either they didn't trust the SPFL to properly represent their interests or, alternatively, they were convinced by others (perhaps the SPFL themselves) that their case would be stronger if the clubs added their own defence and sought for the case to be dismissed.

If it's the first of those then that's a sad reflection on those running the SPFL.

If it's the second then it's clearly the SPFL trying to spread the load, risk and cost and ensure that others (the promoted clubs) picked up a share of the defence bill. Also a sad reflection on those in authority.
 
jaws73 said:
I get the feeling the amount the SPFL currently has in its bank account doesn't amount to a row of beans (Doncaster's wopping salary at the end of July probably isn't covered at this juncture).

The desperation to make sure the season actually begins on 1st August to trigger the first Sky payment has been fairly obvious and they are getting very nervous about that with no confirmation coming from the Scottish Government (not even for friendlies).

Right now, legal costs are being incurred with nothing at the SPFL to cover them hence putting the onus on the three patsies who are themselves cash-strapped and having to go out with the begging bowl. If there is any delay to the start of the season in the top flight a real shit-storm is on its way for the SPFL and several clubs.

Even if they get beyond that point intact the lack of spectators this year (maybe even longer) will create another shit-storm. Stadia are set to be empty or have insignificant crowds for quite some time - that's obvious to anyone who has been paying attention.
Click to expand...


But I think the clubs in question are not forced to put up costs.
In fact in legal terms as I understand the action from Hearts/Thistle has fek all to do with them.
They may be the ones who pay the biggest price if relegation/promotions are cancelled mind you.
But the SPFL whether they have the money or not are the defendants

They can choose to defend the action or not.
 
jimbear said:
As I said in another thread, in the case of Raith Rovers some of their ITK supporters seem to believe that they will be given assistance with their legal costs by the club from the east end of Glasgow.
Click to expand...

All Celtic want is their title*, why do other clubs think they care who has to be sacrificed to make this happen. Hearts or United why would they give a shit?

Shafting United and the promoted clubs is a much cheaper option.
 
The relegated clubs have taken an action against the SPFL, asking that the decision to relegate be reversed or failing that a huge compensation package be awarded.

If the decision to relegate is reversed then the clubs due to be promoted would be directly impacted. It is in their interests (the 3 promoted clubs) to be represented legally.
 
Super A said:
But I think the clubs in question are not forced to put up costs.
In fact in legal terms as I understand the action from Hearts/Thistle has fek all to do with them.
They may be the ones who pay the biggest price if relegation/promotions are cancelled mind you.
But the SPFL whether they have the money or not are the defendants

They can choose to defend the action or not.
Click to expand...
My understanding was these promoted clubs were encouraged by the CEO / Executives of spfl to support the action against Hearts and Partick . So escalating and blurring the issues with member vs member actions . Supposedly they raised there own Legal action . And that action costs them money which is where the story comes from .

Are you thinking that this additional action headed by D Utd / Raith / Cove is in fact not accurate and the cases are spfl only ? Were that so then members and the public have again been misled by Media and Spfl Executives I think .
 
If the promoted clubs (Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove) have no legal representation at the arbitration panel there would be nothing to stop the SPFL lawyers agreeing with the Hearts lawyers and declaring that there will be no promotion or relegation this season because the vote taken was not legal.
 
Billiericky said:
If the promoted clubs (Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove) have no legal representation at the arbitration panel there would be nothing to stop the SPFL lawyers agreeing with the Hearts lawyers and declaring that there will be no promotion or relegation this season because the vote taken was not legal.
Click to expand...
Surely it's either legal or not. They can't simply decide between themselves what is or is not legal.

The promoted clubs were named in the relegated clubs submission and, as such, it is, as you suggest, in their interests to have legal representation.

They should undoubtedly seek legal advice regarding the possible implications for themselves but did not need to take the legal steps that they did in terms of their application for dismissal as this was always likely to be thrown out and the clubs left with the cost. Whoever advised them in that respect did them no favours whatsoever.
 
All these clubs claiming imminent bankruptcy - yet we were told by the Cabal that the only way to avoid financial problems was to decide the leagues via email.

How bad would it have been had we held off and actually played football? :rolleyes:
 
Billiericky said:
If the promoted clubs (Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove) have no legal representation at the arbitration panel there would be nothing to stop the SPFL lawyers agreeing with the Hearts lawyers and declaring that there will be no promotion or relegation this season because the vote taken was not legal.
Click to expand...
For Raith and Cove no promotion is highly unlikely to cause them to enter Administration , or worse . They live to fight for the same prize the following season .

Legal action costs coupled with corona really could be a threat to those clubs .

To me it makes little sense for them , particularly given they are part of the umbrella that is spfl and are due protection via them .

Dundee United , they could be another story .
 
these clubs might have the biggest "secrets" that would come out in an independent investigation. they are taking desperate measures.
 
1288Bear said:
Surely it's either legal or not. They can't simply decide between themselves what is or is not legal.

The promoted clubs were named in the relegated clubs submission and, as such, it is, as you suggest, in their interests to have legal representation.

They should undoubtedly seek legal advice regarding the possible implications for themselves but did not need to take the legal steps that they did in terms of their application for dismissal as this was always likely to be thrown out and the clubs left with the cost. Whoever advised them in that respect did them no favours whatsoever.
Click to expand...

The 'promoted' clubs would be foolish to trust the SPFL board and it's lawyers.

The arbitration will be conducted behind closed doors and the only way into the room and to have your voice heard is through legal representation.
 
If 42 clubs start the season, I'm pretty sure that not all 42 will finish it if the no fans situation rolls on for a good while.
 
Billiericky said:
The 'promoted' clubs would be foolish to trust the SPFL board and it's lawyers.

The arbitration will be conducted behind closed doors and the only way into the room and to have your voice heard is through legal representation.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with you in that respect. The fact is that they should be able to trust them to do what is right and what is in the best interests of the member clubs. The fact that a member club doesn't have that trust in the SPFL suggests that we may well have been right all along re their governance.
 
last minute signing said:
The SPFL award clubs prize money at the end of the season. This money comes from the income. Should the income drop by £10m due to paying Hearts and Partick, there is significantly less to go around.

Very crudely, the new Sky deal is £30m a year. So prize money would drop by a third. This could see clubs income drop by 20%+ in addition to the lack of income from ticket sales. Basically a lot of teams could see revenues halved.
Click to expand...
Oh dear oh dear, is that as much as our income dropped when they booted us down.
 
We could've just ended the season.

Paid out the prize money on the positions that teams were in when the stoppage happened then recoup any differences from next seasons prize money if any clubs changed position.

We could then have put the games on PPV (even at £3/4) per game and split the money for all PPV's bought 12 ways.

That would've meant extra cash coming in from the smaller teams to tide them over and no money would've had to have been paid back to BT or Sky.

It would also have meant there would be no legal action and dirty back room dealings.

The SPFL pushed this decision through quickly because Celtic told them to as they need the chance at Champions League cash next season.
 
Chester Loyal said:
We could've just ended the season.

Paid out the prize money on the positions that teams were in when the stoppage happened then recoup any differences from next seasons prize money if any clubs changed position.

We could then have put the games on PPV (even at £3/4) per game and split the money for all PPV's bought 12 ways.

That would've meant extra cash coming in from the smaller teams to tide them over and no money would've had to have been paid back to BT or Sky.

It would also have meant there would be no legal action and dirty back room dealings.

The SPFL pushed this decision through quickly because Celtic told them to as they need the chance at Champions League cash next season.
Click to expand...
All that had to be done was give/load/advance the minimum amount of money based on the lowest a club could finish at the end of the season. The balance would be paid once the season had been completed.

The Cabal were insistent that this was not possible for some yet unexplained reason.
 
Craigie said:
All that had to be done was give/load/advance the minimum amount of money based on the lowest a club could finish at the end of the season. The balance would be paid once the season had been completed.

The Cabal were insistent that this was not possible for some yet unexplained reason.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think we all know the reason.
 
Craigie said:
All that had to be done was give/load/advance the minimum amount of money based on the lowest a club could finish at the end of the season. The balance would be paid once the season had been completed.

The Cabal were insistent that this was not possible for some yet unexplained reason.
Click to expand...
They could even have done the loans on the lowest possible position that you could have finished.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top