Welldaft Mk1 Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 In the Evening Times that Motherwell were paid £1.7m for finishing 3rd last year. Table as follows: Celtic £3.06m Rangers £2.7m Motherwell £1.71m Aberdeen £1.53m Dundee Utd £1.44m Hibs £1.35m Falkirk £1.26m Hearts £1.17m Inverness CT £1.08m St Mirren £990k Kilmarnock £900k Gretna £810k Did not read the whole article but I thought that we got £60k for each league placing which meant a sum of £600k approx. Where has the extra £1m come from? Note also that the Gers in 2nd place got a full £1m more than the Well whilst we only got less than £200k more than the Dons!! Bit of a stitch up that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Compare that to c£20 million received by our UEFA Cup opponents Nancy for a similar placing... punched well above our weight and will continue to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhitepele Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 If these are accurate then anyone like me ,want to know where this money went? Pretty sure we made a good profit last season going by this.Where was the cash spent ,wasnt on the playin squad thats for sure................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modernist Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Evening Times Smaller squad...... Higher wages...... Better players..... (some) Lucky with injuries........ Maintenance to the 'Ark' ect ect ect...... We should be saving a fortune though, given that the 'N' Division bill must have reduced drastically, due to the 'No Show' of 'Mould Firm' fans in the games between us....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Kerse Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Prize Money (Difference from place ) Celtic £3.06m Rangers £2.7m (360K) Motherwell £1.71m (£1 Million) Aberdeen £1.53m (£180K) Dundee Utd £1.44m (90K) Hibs £1.35m (90K) Falkirk £1.26m (90K) Hearts £1.17m (90K) Inverness CT £1.08m (90K) St Mirren £990k (90K) Kilmarnock £900k (90K) Gretna £810k (90K) This is an ABSOLUTE stitch up designied to maintain the Duopoly of the Old Firm!! Look at the increments. Celtic £3million odd to Rangers' £2.7m, an Increment of just over three hundred grand, you would expect the same 'difference' between 2nd and third - Nope! 1 Million of a difference!!! Then back to 200grand of a difference between third and fourth before finding some steady ground with drops of around 100K! Absolute scandal of the highest order!!! It is the fact that there is a million of a difference between 2nd and third to keep the team finishing third at bay while there is practically a nominal difference between the top two so the Old Firm finishing first won't have an 'unfair advantage' over the other with more money to spend, thus ensuring as competitive a league between them two as possible the next season!!! Disgusting!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modernist Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 This is an ABSOLUTE stitch up designied to maintain the Duopoly of the Old Firm!! You surprised at this ?????? Honestly !!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Preaching tae the converted, fella Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 It's not exactly a stitch-up though. It's the entire basis of the SPL which all the member clubs are happy to entertain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 That's a fucking joke but nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to the advantages afforded to the top two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhitepele Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 How about we get back to where the money went,if this is accurate 1.7 million was not what we had in mind for the budget for this season, given that their was very little improvement made to the playing staff,just where did this extra income go.Im certain it didnt go on pitch improvements.Think we should be asking our beloved owner some hard questions....if these are accurate............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rab_mackinnon Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 With the sale of porter then that's 2.1 million and as mark mcghee stated he was able to use chris's wages to strengthen the squad but no more. We won't go out and purchase players anymore those days are long gone. We had a big scare with administration a few years back and as long as that money is being used correctly to insure the longevity of the club i won't grumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 How about we get back to where the money went,if this is accurate 1.7 million was not what we had in mind for the budget for this season, given that their was very little improvement made to the playing staff,just where did this extra income go.Im certain it didnt go on pitch improvements.Think we should be asking our beloved owner some hard questions....if these are accurate............. There's absolutely no point in speculating about our finances, as most folk on these Boards have little or no idea what our income is & how it is comprised; and what our expenditure is let alone how that is comprised. Much of that will only become known when the accounts are published prior to the AGM. I'd add that most folk haven't a clue about the costs a football club incurs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well-army Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 How about we get back to where the money went Fat Boab malcolms wages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 It's not exactly a stitch-up though. It's the entire basis of the SPL which all the member clubs are happy to entertain. It's always been a stitch up wee yin, every decision made to change the leagues about, distribution of TV cash, voting rights etc etc, everything suits them two otherwise it wouldn't get through the process. Problem is the diddy clubs hanging onto their coat-tails scavenging for scraps if they decide to leave any. Oh for a set of chairman with balls collectively standing firm against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCC Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Oh for a set of chairman with balls collectively standing firm against them. And the 5% surcharge this season was the perfect time for everyone to stand up to both the old scum. Falkirk had the balls to do it and whilst our location in Central Scotland meant it should have been easy for us to do the same as Falkirk, we went brown-nosing the arses of both of them. Cant see the rest of the SPL ever getting a better chance to stand together on an issue so we better get used to them taking all the cash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 There have been opportunities before, remember the Diddy 10 were supposedly standing firm until it came to the crunch and they backed down, was it league reconstruction issues? This is what we have but it seems it's only the fans of the diddy clubs who recognise it. I'm that used to it I expect nothing more, resigned to it I think is the term. Nothing will change in Scottish fitba' until that happens so gnashing and wailing won't change a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 It's always been a stitch up wee yin, every decision made to change the leagues about, distribution of TV cash, voting rights etc etc, everything suits them two otherwise it wouldn't get through the process. Problem is the diddy clubs hanging onto their coat-tails scavenging for scraps if they decide to leave any. Oh for a set of chairman with balls collectively standing firm against them. But that's my point. Every club involved in the SPL knows exactly what is going on and willingly accepts it. If you enter the agreement in full knowledge of the situation, there is no "stitch-up". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 My point though is the fans don't accept it but it's way out of our hands, the folk that run clubs do nothing to change it so yes they willingly accept it. we're probably agreeing but coming at it from different angles actually Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Half Man-Half BearPig Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 This is an ABSOLUTE stitch up designied to maintain the Duopoly of the Old Firm!! Look at the increments. Celtic £3million odd to Rangers' £2.7m, an Increment of just over three hundred grand, you would expect the same 'difference' between 2nd and third - Nope! 1 Million of a difference!!! Then back to 200grand of a difference between third and fourth before finding some steady ground with drops of around 100K! Absolute scandal of the highest order!!! It is the fact that there is a million of a difference between 2nd and third to keep the team finishing third at bay while there is practically a nominal difference between the top two so the Old Firm finishing first won't have an 'unfair advantage' over the other with more money to spend, thus ensuring as competitive a league between them two as possible the next season!!! Disgusting!! its not 3 millon odd, its 3.6 compared to rangers 2.7 which is just under a million, whilst rangers are getting 2.7 to your 1.71, which again is just under a million, its done pretty fairly fot the top 3, 900k per place, what is ther to moan about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightdodgyman Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 its not 3 millon odd, its 3.6 compared to rangers 2.7 which is just under a million, whilst rangers are getting 2.7 to your 1.71, which again is just under a million, its done pretty fairly fot the top 3, 900k per place, what is ther to moan about? its 3.06 mil, no 3.6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daver Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 So, is it £3.6m or £3.06m (as per the article) for the winners? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Half Man-Half BearPig Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 if it is only 3.06 then thats an epic fail on my behalf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Kerse Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 if it is only 3.06 then thats an epic fail on my behalf yup I'll call you a taxi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Half Man-Half BearPig Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 fair enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 The figures also show we are £1 million better off than we thought we should still be if we budgeted for finishing 11th. Still cannae afford to sign anyone though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.