Sevco Thread

[slippers]

10 minutes ago, Lan_Lad said:

So how much easier would it be if no Scottish team ever qualified for group stages which would mean Scotland being way down that co-efficient ranking? How would that help? 

Rangers have announced a loss of £11.3m for the year ending 30 June, a decrease of £3m from the previous 12 months.  Turnover has risen by 63% to £53.2m, up from £33.6m due to reaching the Europa League groups and ticket sales. 
 

Considering no other team other than the 2 mentioned get into Europe beyond the qualifiers the Coefficient means very little to any other team anyway. 

[Lan_Lad]

1 minute ago, slippers said:

Rangers have announced a loss of £11.3m for the year ending 30 June, a decrease of £3m from the previous 12 months.  Turnover has risen by 63% to £53.2m, up from £33.6m due to reaching the Europa League groups and ticket sales. 

I still don't see how that helps Aberdeen in Europe.

[Tord31]

1 minute ago, slippers said:

Rangers have announced a loss of £11.3m for the year ending 30 June, a decrease of £3m from the previous 12 months.  Turnover has risen by 63% to £53.2m, up from £33.6m due to reaching the Europa League groups and ticket sales. 

£20m sounds about right for last season but 60%-70% of that will be gate receipts for 9-10home matches in europe

 

[Poodler]

They've more heart than us anyway 

probably not a surprise our best player this year is theirs 

[Lan_Lad]

1 minute ago, Poodler said:

They've more heart than us anyway 

probably not a surprise our best player this year is theirs 

i think it's just better quality because they have more money. And they would still have substantially more money even if they weren't in Europe. There's nothing anyone can do about that. And they're always going to attract more good youth prospects such as McCrorie because of their profile and central location. It's a difficult conundrum to overcome.

[torry_battery_ram]

33 minutes ago, Poodler said:

They've more heart than us anyway 

probably not a surprise our best player this year is theirs 

I don't think heart was a problem for us in Lisbon. A lack of quality definitely was. We ain't going to be getting near the group stages until we start spending serious cash. If Cormack really does think we should be a top 100 Euro club then we need to be forking out fees like we did for Hernandez and McCrorie right across all parts of the squad

[Poodler]

McHibs doesn't have the heart to play for a big club.

Same with Ojo

[WesthillWanderersFC]

19 minutes ago, torry_battery_ram said:

I don't think heart was a problem for us in Lisbon. A lack of quality definitely was. We ain't going to be getting near the group stages until we start spending serious cash. If Cormack really does think we should be a top 100 Euro club then we need to be forking out fees like we did for Hernandez and McCrorie right across all parts of the squad

The Europa League group stages will always be very unlikely if your starting X1 has Logan, Taylor & Considine as 3 of a back 5. Players like that will never be good enough to get to that level. 

Unless of course you’re Dundalk - then you get to play a Faroese mob at home in the play off round. 

[strachanmcgheegoal]

Swings and roundabouts.

Or in this case a glass ceiling but the opportunity for a glass floor as well.

[afc1903mad]

19 minutes ago, Millertime said:

Well, it was as it gives us less games to navigate to get into the groups now if we do what we should do, which is finish 3rd

Then we get more money and can improve ourselves 

That was already the case.

The co-efficient is now helping the league champions get straight into the group stages.

The next level after that would mean the Scottish cup winners / 3rd go straight into the EL PO stage, meaning guaranteed group stage football even by losing as it would then drop the tram into the Conference groups

[eddiec]

I don't think it will be nearly as lucrative for either this time due to no crowds as they must comfortably make over £3m for each home game once tickets corporate etc are totted up and they've already spent the money they thought they were getting for son of mattress so hopefully they are still in the shit 

[fine-n-dandy]

11 hours ago, WesthillWanderersFC said:

The Europa League group stages will always be very unlikely if your starting X1 has Logan, Taylor & Considine as 3 of a back 5. Players like that will never be good enough to get to that level. 

Unless of course you’re Dundalk - then you get to play a Faroese mob at home in the play off round. 

Who was our back line & Keeper the last time we made the groups? I forget.

 

main difference for me was the attitude of the manager.

Much as I hated JC at least he had a set of balls v ‘bigger’ sides

[Chewie37]

2 hours ago, Millertime said:

Well, it was as it gives us less games to navigate to get into the groups now if we do what we should do, which is finish 3rd

Then we get more money and can improve ourselves 

People don't like to remember that part, but overall unless we can push ourselves to do it, the "Old Firm" will pull much further ahead again. Hopefully Cormack and the new board see this

[strachanmcgheegoal]

As someone said above I think our model is coat tails in 3rd and see where that takes us.  The problem with that is you can spend a fortune and be runaway 3rd or be frugal and be just 3rd.  Result is the same - you could even argue just 3rd is the bigger crowd draw (See Celtics relative biscuit tin approach for details).

There is also the teensy tiny problem of trying to finance a stadium of course!  

[NEM]

Just now, strachanmcgheegoal said:

As someone said above I think our model is coat tails in 3rd and see where that takes us.  The problem with that is you can spend a fortune and be runaway 3rd or be frugal and be just 3rd.  Result is the same - you could even argue just 3rd is the bigger crowd draw (See Celtics relative biscuit tin approach for details).

There is also the teensy tiny problem of trying to finance a stadium of course!  

If there's one good thing to come from this Covid shite it'll be the end to the Westhill white elephant

[The Boofon]

30 minutes ago, NEM said:

If there's one good thing to come from this Covid shite it'll be the end to the Westhill white elephant

Bit harsh calling her that IMO.

 

 

[Fridge]

Yeah but we’re nae going to win the UEFA cup so would be better if those fuckers weren’t getting more cash to spend and giving us less chance of having a shot at the league.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

12 minutes ago, Millertime said:

Uh-huh

And that's only possible because of how well the Glasgow 2 have done

I dont have an issue with what is an unpalatable truth but it is very narrow in its scope.

How far should we take the big 2 doing well in terms of the game at large?  Must them doing well be an accepted pre-requisite for us all?  The list below is by no means exhaustive but for instance...

Should we continue to skew tv deals and schedules to ensure their home crowds remain unaffected?  Should home crowds (away fixtures for them) be allowed to deteriorate as acceptable collateral damage? 

Should we continue to pre-arrange post split fixtures to make sure there are no timings deemed awkward?  All fixtures for that matter - opening day for instance?

Should we return to top loading the prize money so that first and second combined get more than the next 40 "to keep them competitive with each other"?

Should we provide an effective voting veto so that 2 clubs voting together is sufficient to outvote 40 other members?

And of course, should one go bust through excessive leverage, tax malfeasance, authority corruption and illegal deception should we all pretend it never happened and move on for the good of the game (se above for details)?

 

  

[NEM]

7 minutes ago, strachanmcgheegoal said:

I dont have an issue with what is an unpalatable truth but it is very narrow in its scope.

How far should we take the big 2 doing well in terms of the game at large?  Must them doing well be an accepted pre-requisite for us all?  The list below is by no means exhaustive but for instance...

Should we continue to skew tv deals and schedules to ensure their home crowds remain unaffected?  Should home crowds (away fixtures for them) be allowed to deteriorate as acceptable collateral damage? 

Should we continue to pre-arrange post split fixtures to make sure there are no timings deemed awkward?  All fixtures for that matter - opening day for instance?

Should we return to top loading the prize money so that first and second combined get more than the next 40 "to keep them competitive with each other"?

Should we provide an effective voting veto so that 2 clubs voting together is sufficient to outvote 40 other members?

And of course, should one go bust through excessive leverage, tax malfeasance, authority corruption and illegal deception should we all pretend it never happened and move on for the good of the game (se above for details)?

 

  

Great post.  Don't expect MM to grasp it though

[Ten Caat]

2 hours ago, strachanmcgheegoal said:

As someone said above I think our model is coat tails in 3rd and see where that takes us.  The problem with that is you can spend a fortune and be runaway 3rd or be frugal and be just 3rd.  Result is the same - you could even argue just 3rd is the bigger crowd draw (See Celtics relative biscuit tin approach for details).

There is also the teensy tiny problem of trying to finance a stadium of course!  

Being frugal is no guarantee of finishing "just 3rd" though. As we have seen in the past 2 seasons when Killie and Motherwell....teams with roughly half our budget....finished ahead of us (yes not by much and if last season had been completed I suspect we would have made it in to 3rd). Hearts had practically made it to an equivalent budget as us but through rank incompetence at boardroom level and in the manager's office found themselves (harshly if I'm being totally honest...nevertheless GIRFUY jambos) relegated. Hibs haven't quite closed the gap to our financial level but the league table has them ahead of us right now, albeit we have 2 away ties in hand, neither of which we could say we are definite to get anything out of (and one which we are more likely than not to get the square root of hee-haw out of). Hopefully Cormack sees the benefit of speculating to accumulate in a way that Wiggy never did...or more likely actually did see but wouldn't progress it. 

Celtic could hardly be accused of the biscuit tin approach nowadays. I do think they appointed the wrong manager when Brenda left and that might well cost them in this season of all seasons. They haven't had to spend massively more than sevco up till now...sevco are only just becoming a serious threat to them after being a joke in their formative years. 

As for the stadium. Fuck knows what will happen now. What I don't want to see is a redeveloped Pittodrie built along the same lines as a Lego structure like New Love Street with a capacity of maybe 13/14k.

[Lencarl]

The thing is how does Aberdeen get to the next level.

Do we settle for 3rd place for ever with the occasional Cup win.

Do we hope to form a winning squad that might gel without having to spend big money.

Do we stay at Pittodrie for years to come.

I think the outlook is bleak for the Dons until we think out of the box.

 

 

[Fridge]

1 hour ago, Millertime said:

They do better in europe, give us less games to go further in europe

We get more money, so we buy better players 

We buy better players, we start narrowing the gap between us and them 

We qualify for the groups again the following year, buy even better players and then overtake them as top dogs

Celtic and "rangers" fans, 15 years down the line, start moaning at how its not fair we win everything and start a campaign for us to move leagues 

Next?

How the fuck are you rationalising that MT. How are we possibly closing the gap if for instance Rangers or Celtic fluke into the group stages and make a mint and we have to go to Latvia or some shit.
 

Coefficient can fuck off.

[Poodler]

Rather Latvia than the border of fucking China!

[afc1903mad]

3 hours ago, Millertime said:

Uh-huh

And that's only possible because of how well the Glasgow 2 have done

WTF is Uh-huh? Is that an agreement?

You're wrong though, its not only possible because of the two cheeks. The countries co-efficient value and ranking is cumulative of ALL Scottish participants in Europe.

Let me put it into perspective for you. Had the co-efficient been based only on the two cheeks results, they would have a co-efficient of 22.8575, ranking the country as 20th overall.

You can therefore categorically state that without Aberdeen's (and the other Scottish participants) efforts the last 5 seasons, there would not be two champions league spots and the scottish cup winners / 3rd place would not go straight into QR3 of the Europa League next year, nor potentially the PO round the year after. 

They benefit just as much from our participation in Europe, if not more, than we benefit from them.

 

[Lan_Lad]

8 hours ago, afc1903mad said:

WTF is Uh-huh? Is that an agreement?

You're wrong though, its not only possible because of the two cheeks. The countries co-efficient value and ranking is cumulative of ALL Scottish participants in Europe.

Let me put it into perspective for you. Had the co-efficient been based only on the two cheeks results, they would have a co-efficient of 22.8575, ranking the country as 20th overall.

You can therefore categorically state that without Aberdeen's (and the other Scottish participants) efforts the last 5 seasons, there would not be two champions league spots and the scottish cup winners / 3rd place would not go straight into QR3 of the Europa League next year, nor potentially the PO round the year after. 

They benefit just as much from our participation in Europe, if not more, than we benefit from them.

 

 

it's not actually as simple as that either. You're for example presenting a scenario of only counting the points accumulated by the Glasgow pair which you say would put Scotland in 20th position. But If they were the only two teams representing Scotland then Scotland would be higher in the rankings than we are now.

The reason for that is the total points would be divided by just 2 not 4. At the end of the Euro campaigns when all teams are out their total points earned are divided by the total teams who competed. Doesn't matter if any go out in the first round. They're still part of the sum at the end.

Thus they would do better on their own. Last season alone they contributed 21 points between them. We have contributed 7.5 over the past 5 seasons combined.

Does that give them valid reason to complain about us dragging them down? What position would Scotland be in if they were only contributing the same amount of points we do? What position would it be if we entirely discounted their contribution?

I don't think we can be playing down their contribution while playing ours up.

[afc1903mad]

Agreed, but the rules are such that you can’t discount the other contributing teams.

If you could, all the leagues could argue similarly.

The point remains that they need our contributions and benefit more than we do.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

There is the rub

“The point remains that they need our contributions and benefit more than we do.“

More accurately they seize the opportunity to benefit more than we do.

[Betty Swallicks]

millermong making a cunt of it again trying to defend his "big" team.

Fucking gleck! 

 

 

[pocrawred]

How the fuck can the huns have a share issue and the share price remains the same?? They have been 20p for ever!

I thought if there are millions more shares in circulation the share price would drop. For what I see the company value has gone up!! ?

[Ten Caat]

2 hours ago, pocrawred said:

How the fuck can the huns have a share issue and the share price remains the same?? They have been 20p for ever!

I thought if there are millions more shares in circulation the share price would drop. For what I see the company value has gone up!! ?

Took a look on follow follow, the shares don't appear to be on sale to the general hunnery. suggestion from reasonably sensible posters is that this is a conversion of the soft loans provided by their directors over the past few years into shares, thus reducing the debt owed by the club fairly substantially. I'm guessing this might be why the company value has risen?