Ambitious Moonbeams v Virtuous Hard work

TET

TET

Well-known member
Is there anything in what I see as the Moonbeam theory that the Killed Rangers stone dead?

Can that theory of building castles in the sky work?

Or do you need a grounded theory with ambition, tempered by the correct risk factors?

What are these correct risk factors? How do you attempt to quantify them?

Now, lets try and make some fundamental building blocks to see if a better understanding can be achieved. And we will attempt to put out some arbitrary but hopefully realistic and to a certain extent justified set of risk factors based on recent years income numbers. But a certain level of basic quantified numbers that can individually be analysed and discussed and amended if necessary, why, just to come up with some risk factors that should be considered every season, but still remain on the ambitious side of risk without loony tunes excessive gambling.


Some assumptions

these assumptions are basic and can be changed if argued as false

Assumption 1 Winning the treble generates 55m income
Assumption 2 Reaching the Europa League Group generates 25m income
Assumption 3 Winning Champions league Play off match and reach CL group generates a further 25m

Pretty simplistic assumptions but imo pretty decent rule of thumb for building basic risk model

Risk for assumption 1

What ordinary operation cost is correct? to win the 55m maximum ordinary income?
Lets say 10 percent profit is what your looking for from your risk. so 5 million profit is expected ordinary profit from winning treble.
That would mean ordinary operating costs should not exceed 50m which leaves 5m profit as growth for that season.
So operating costs include on simplistic level
Staff wages + other operating costs
lets stick an arbitrary figure of 10 percent of income as other operating costs and wages as 90 percent of operating costs.

that would mean to achieve the expected income we estimate
55m income
45m wages
5m other operating costs

5m profit.

Risk for assumption 2

First off what bonus level is correct for the Bhoys who achieved the title, and earned the right to compete in Europe?
Well we know that bonus needs to be competitive.

So lets say 50 percent increase in the wages if they achieve champions league and 25 percent increase if the achieve europa league group.

So instantly without adding any more players to team the 50 million operating costs has become 63.75 [(45x1.25) 56.25 + (5+2.5) 7.5] This includes wage bonus and rather arbitrary figure set at other operating income

so

if europa league group is achieved

80m income
56.25 wages
7.5 other operating costs.

16.25 m profit

Risk for assumption 3

So lets say 50 percent increase in the wages if they achieve champions league and 25 percent increase if the achieve europa league group.

So instantly without adding any more players to team the 50 million operating costs has become 77.5 [(45x1.5) 67.5 + (5+5) 10] This includes wage bonus and rather arbitrary figure set at other operating income.

if CL group is acheived

105m income
67.5 wages
10 other operating income

27.5 profit



Sounds really good yeah nice profit but thats based on ordinary wages of 45 million and income for treble being 55million

Also club was hoping for 5 million profit from treble alone
So so minus that from Champions league profit under these conditions

And that 50 million windfall from champions league has been reduced to 22.5 profit that can be used to enhance your club.


Still sounds pretty decent right?

But its long way from the MSM income figure quoted and assumed banked by too many.

22.5 million is still pretty decent

So lets tax risks to maximum and see what figures that means are available to build a team.



105 million income for champions league
lets say club only wants 5 million profit any given year

so 100 million is max figure for max ambition
lets say the other operating income figure for champions league is good rule thumb, so 10m

thats wages including champions league set at 90 million

if that 90 million is with 50 percent bonus for achieving champions league then ordinary wages without champions league would be 60 million
Add the ordinary costs not included and 65 million is your operating costs minimum under those extremely risky conditions.

Which would mean 10 million loss if you failed to reach champions league 2.5 million loss if you reached europa league group and 5 million profit if you reached the champions league group.

it would also be much worse than 10 million loss if treble not won

And I suspect in excess of 20million loss if league not won.

so ramping up ordinary wages to the very maximum risk would require treble and champions league in that season just to get 5 million profit.

Seems fool hardy to me.

And that extremely risky level is reached with ordinary wages before bonus set at 60 million for entire club for the year.


So somewhere between the two risk models seems correct but I would suggest never taking ordinary wages beyond 50 million before bonuses. but not below 45 million.


Now you may say this model is too simplistic, or you may decide I have missed out key figures.

I possibly have.

Im looking for the best risk model for the club.

Not crazy moonbeam models based on 60 million from champions league with no costs incurred.

Have you got a more suitable model?

do you have better figures than my arbitrary assumptions that imo seem bout right?


feel free to add your thoughts

even if its to say ya nutter

Absolute straw

moonbeams are better than your straw man garbage.

Or even better you think im reading all that shite, I want a team that can win the champions league and your realistic approach to football is depressing, Lennon is a backward step. AVB would have been better, even though him alone probably chews up most of the max max max operating wages of 60 million.
 
TET, I would love to offer an intelligent response, but unfortunately my brain is currently enduring trauma as it tries to absorb all that.

Moonbeams are for daydreams.......I leave that for the non-serious stuff, like life in general.

I'll go with virtuous hard work, as that is something I do NOT apply to the non-serious stuff and only to the things that really matter......like football, for instance.

By the way........nutters are the new black (or should that be coloured?)
 
I would love to hear from any of the more ambitious supporters and their thoughts on this model.

I would love to hear alternative economic theories that fit the James Forrest (being doing a great impression of Morelos in recent months, got that petted lip perfect) ambitious model

What sort of wage should manger be getting?
What sort of ordinary operating expenses is ambitious?
What sort of bonuses on these ordinary expenses are ambitious?
What sort of profit motive should club be setting?

Can these budgets be sustained?
If yes how?
 
TET said:
I would love to hear from any of the more ambitious supporters and their thoughts on this model.

I would love to hear alternative economic theories that fit the James Forrest (being doing a great impression of Morelos in recent months, got that petted lip perfect) ambitious model

What sort of wage should manger be getting?
What sort of ordinary operating expenses is ambitious?
What sort of bonuses on these ordinary expenses are ambitious?
What sort of profit motive should club be setting?

Can these budgets be sustained?
If yes how?
Click to expand...
The only way we can sustain such a budget TET is qualify for the CL 2 out of every 3 seasons, and there is no guarantee of that mate. Alongside this I would think we need to be very lucky in the transfer market, gems like VVD and Moussa don't come around very often, so we have to get the scouting right, it would be nice to keep producing our own and hopefully increase the numbers coming thru, we are good in this area but need to keep improving.
A big plus for us as a club is that we can attract young players from the continent who know that if they prove themselves they can get a move to a bigger league (not club), this keeps much needed pennies coming into our club and hopefully a wee bit for new players each season.
 
TET said:
I would love to hear from any of the more ambitious supporters and their thoughts on this model.

I would love to hear alternative economic theories that fit the James Forrest (being doing a great impression of Morelos in recent months, got that petted lip perfect) ambitious model

What sort of wage should manger be getting?
What sort of ordinary operating expenses is ambitious?
What sort of bonuses on these ordinary expenses are ambitious?
What sort of profit motive should club be setting?

Can these budgets be sustained?
If yes how?
Click to expand...
don't think there will be much of a debate TET!
 
TET said:
Is there anything in what I see as the Moonbeam theory that the Killed Rangers stone dead?

Can that theory of building castles in the sky work?

Or do you need a grounded theory with ambition, tempered by the correct risk factors?

What are these correct risk factors? How do you attempt to quantify them?

Now, lets try and make some fundamental building blocks to see if a better understanding can be achieved. And we will attempt to put out some arbitrary but hopefully realistic and to a certain extent justified set of risk factors based on recent years income numbers. But a certain level of basic quantified numbers that can individually be analysed and discussed and amended if necessary, why, just to come up with some risk factors that should be considered every season, but still remain on the ambitious side of risk without loony tunes excessive gambling.


Some assumptions

these assumptions are basic and can be changed if argued as false

Assumption 1 Winning the treble generates 55m income
Assumption 2 Reaching the Europa League Group generates 25m income
Assumption 3 Winning Champions league Play off match and reach CL group generates a further 25m

Pretty simplistic assumptions but imo pretty decent rule of thumb for building basic risk model

Risk for assumption 1

What ordinary operation cost is correct? to win the 55m maximum ordinary income?
Lets say 10 percent profit is what your looking for from your risk. so 5 million profit is expected ordinary profit from winning treble.
That would mean ordinary operating costs should not exceed 50m which leaves 5m profit as growth for that season.
So operating costs include on simplistic level
Staff wages + other operating costs
lets stick an arbitrary figure of 10 percent of income as other operating costs and wages as 90 percent of operating costs.

that would mean to achieve the expected income we estimate
55m income
45m wages
5m other operating costs

5m profit.

Risk for assumption 2

First off what bonus level is correct for the Bhoys who achieved the title, and earned the right to compete in Europe?
Well we know that bonus needs to be competitive.

So lets say 50 percent increase in the wages if they achieve champions league and 25 percent increase if the achieve europa league group.

So instantly without adding any more players to team the 50 million operating costs has become 63.75 [(45x1.25) 56.25 + (5+2.5) 7.5] This includes wage bonus and rather arbitrary figure set at other operating income

so

if europa league group is achieved

80m income
56.25 wages
7.5 other operating costs.

16.25 m profit

Risk for assumption 3

So lets say 50 percent increase in the wages if they achieve champions league and 25 percent increase if the achieve europa league group.

So instantly without adding any more players to team the 50 million operating costs has become 77.5 [(45x1.5) 67.5 + (5+5) 10] This includes wage bonus and rather arbitrary figure set at other operating income.

if CL group is acheived

105m income
67.5 wages
10 other operating income

27.5 profit



Sounds really good yeah nice profit but thats based on ordinary wages of 45 million and income for treble being 55million

Also club was hoping for 5 million profit from treble alone
So so minus that from Champions league profit under these conditions

And that 50 million windfall from champions league has been reduced to 22.5 profit that can be used to enhance your club.


Still sounds pretty decent right?

But its long way from the MSM income figure quoted and assumed banked by too many.

22.5 million is still pretty decent

So lets tax risks to maximum and see what figures that means are available to build a team.



105 million income for champions league
lets say club only wants 5 million profit any given year

so 100 million is max figure for max ambition
lets say the other operating income figure for champions league is good rule thumb, so 10m

thats wages including champions league set at 90 million

if that 90 million is with 50 percent bonus for achieving champions league then ordinary wages without champions league would be 60 million
Add the ordinary costs not included and 65 million is your operating costs minimum under those extremely risky conditions.

Which would mean 10 million loss if you failed to reach champions league 2.5 million loss if you reached europa league group and 5 million profit if you reached the champions league group.

it would also be much worse than 10 million loss if treble not won

And I suspect in excess of 20million loss if league not won.

so ramping up ordinary wages to the very maximum risk would require treble and champions league in that season just to get 5 million profit.

Seems fool hardy to me.

And that extremely risky level is reached with ordinary wages before bonus set at 60 million for entire club for the year.


So somewhere between the two risk models seems correct but I would suggest never taking ordinary wages beyond 50 million before bonuses. but not below 45 million.


Now you may say this model is too simplistic, or you may decide I have missed out key figures.

I possibly have.

Im looking for the best risk model for the club.

Not crazy moonbeam models based on 60 million from champions league with no costs incurred.

Have you got a more suitable model?

do you have better figures than my arbitrary assumptions that imo seem bout right?


feel free to add your thoughts

even if its to say ya nutter

Absolute straw

moonbeams are better than your straw man garbage.

Or even better you think im reading all that shite, I want a team that can win the champions league and your realistic approach to football is depressing, Lennon is a backward step. AVB would have been better, even though him alone probably chews up most of the max max max operating wages of 60 million.
Click to expand...

Your talents are wasted, TET.
 
Last edited:
Benignus said:
The only way we can sustain such a budget TET is qualify for the CL 2 out of every 3 seasons, and there is no guarantee of that mate. Alongside this I would think we need to be very lucky in the transfer market, gems like VVD and Moussa don't come around very often, so we have to get the scouting right, it would be nice to keep producing our own and hopefully increase the numbers coming thru, we are good in this area but need to keep improving.
A big plus for us as a club is that we can attract young players from the continent who know that if they prove themselves they can get a move to a bigger league (not club), this keeps much needed pennies coming into our club and hopefully a wee bit for new players each season.
Click to expand...
fully agree with your thoughts

The key problem being good young players moving on at profit having added value to them. The fans who think its viable to keep hold of vvd or Wanyama or Forster having made them better players is the wage to retain them.

Club appears to be trying to hold our best players as long as is possible, but some of the players want the bigger wages. So is selling players we can no longer afford the wages unambitious? Is ramping up the wage bill to compete with low level top tier league wages ambitious? or a recipe for unsustainable short term glory.

And really can you blame them?

take West Ham as example

most of their players are on over 50k er week

some are on 100k per week

And despite getting no champions league or European income can sustain that quite comfortably and make 28 million profit last season

revenue over 150m with no champions league
v celtic 55m treble champions

most of the champions league money swallowed by bonuses to try and compete with West Ham type wages but within reason.

I don't think many West Ham players are better than ours. So there is the crux.

if West Ham can pay 50K for players on ordinary terms and West Ham step into bidding war with celtic for a player.

unless the player willing to play for less and has closer bond to playing with celtic

then West Ham can and will gazzump Celtic

Which means the higher the quality of o player and his pedigree means you have all the top tier clubs to compete with.

And thats a problem trying to be ambitious for champions league quality players.

Without bigger prize money in scotland couple with bigger tv revenue supplementing these wealthier clubs Celtic cannot compete in the elite player markets effectively.

the tv subsidy has made celtic second rate

And every season they get 50M+ more ordinary subsidisation Celtic fall further behind in the wealth leagues, or at least will find it progressively more difficult to compete with subsidised teams.

not impossible but more risky and more difficult every lump sum they get that we don't.

Scottish football and all non subsidised leagues fall behind even faster without sugar daddy.
 
TET said:
fully agree with your thoughts

The key problem being good young players moving on at profit having added value to them. The fans who think its viable to keep hold of vvd or Wanyama or Forster having made them better players is the wage to retain them.

Club appears to be trying to hold our best players as long as is possible, but some of the players want the bigger wages. So is selling players we can no longer afford the wages unambitious? Is ramping up the wage bill to compete with low level top tier league wages ambitious? or a recipe for unsustainable short term glory.

And really can you blame them?

take West Ham as example

most of their players are on over 50k er week

some are on 100k per week

And despite getting no champions league or European income can sustain that quite comfortably and make 28 million profit last season

revenue over 150m with no champions league
v celtic 55m treble champions

most of the champions league money swallowed by bonuses to try and compete with West Ham type wages but within reason.

I don't think many West Ham players are better than ours. So there is the crux.

if West Ham can pay 50K for players on ordinary terms and West Ham step into bidding war with celtic for a player.

unless the player willing to play for less and has closer bond to playing with celtic

then West Ham can and will gazzump Celtic

Which means the higher the quality of o player and his pedigree means you have all the top tier clubs to compete with.

And thats a problem trying to be ambitious for champions league quality players.

Without bigger prize money in scotland couple with bigger tv revenue supplementing these wealthier clubs Celtic cannot compete in the elite player markets effectively.TET

the tv subsidy has made celtic second rate

And every season they get 50M+ more ordinary subsidisation Celtic fall further behind in the wealth leagues, or at least will find it progressively more difficult to compete with subsidised teams.

not impossible but more risky and more difficult every lump sum they get that we don't.

Scottish football and all non subsidised leagues fall behind even faster without sugar daddy.
Click to expand...
even Southampton TET,VVD,Wanyama,left them when a bigger fish came along
 
TET said:
Murray holding company was bank of last resort until it was last resort then he punted his liability to fraudster for 1 pound.

Surely mr king won't try similar fast one being a hardened criminal?
Click to expand...
he must be close to 20 milion earned earned as top man.

he did say he would get his money back.

all that debt sold to Hong Kong fuey for a pound and whoopsie he was duped by a fraudster for 1 pound
 
There must be someone that can explain the financial added value of the theory that the board are not being ambitious enough?

Cmon Forrest, you seem to be the antagonist of the going backwards theory of CFC

Why is Rodgers to lennon a Backward move?

Where is the budgets of your ambitious theory?

What are the Board and Lawell failing to take advantage of?

You are sharp to attack Lennon the manager of Celtic by highlighting what you perceive to be his failings, without addressing the massive added value he managed to produce last time.

Notice yet how subjective your rantings are?

Almost as anti Celtic as the MSM these days.

Get one of your many aliases to address your fantastic theory that put Celtic back in the hunt for massive Champions league glory.

Fantastic or fantasy?

That is the Question.

How does your ambitious theory work?

Does it involve glib and shameless lies?

Does it involve attacking the prudent financial health at the club?

Does it promote anxiety?

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

How does it work this wonderful ambitious set up?

Cant believe you cant lay out this beautiful plan?

your absolutely certain its the right thing to do.

But you refuse to explain how it works.

Instead you continue your attacks on the Celtic manager and the Celtic board with no evidence other than malice and contempt.

You even popped on for a second yesterday to spout lies about a very good post.

Then today you launched a scathing attack on Efe Ambrose who is as least as good as any of the rodgers acquisitions for right back. yet you see free being an issue. But no issue with massive wage Gamboa or Toljan?

Why is it you rate McGinn an ex Hibs player who Lennon added massive value, but don't rate the man who made him one of the better Scottish central midfielders?

A player who didn't actually improve the first team, who rejected Rodgers squad status, yet you Balme lawell as skint flint for not paying over the odds for a player who didn't want to come as a squad player.

Why are you asking anonymous people to pump out conjecture on The Celtic blog?

When all it does recently is attack the club and its players?

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

the treble treble champions and you hate the Bhoys who care about the club and demand expensive flops that couldn't care less about the club?

Cmon Forrest I challenge you to back up your hatred of Board with financial figures that prove your club going backwards theory.

Until you do just that nobody can see the fantastic opportunity that the club are passing up by being unambitious.

put some objective flesh and bones on your rantings.

You have a cult following that want your theory put into practise.

To me your theory is the Murray moonbeam theory of how to destroy an institution.

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

He thinks the new King criminal masonic secret theory of ripping off the deluded zombies is a great plan.

Is that what you want for Celtic?

Cmon Forrest. Ill get right behind your theory if it stacks up?

But first show me how it works.

And if you cant?

Get behind Lennon and the board.

Notice the closer we get to history the more rancid your posts get and the vitriolic attacks on the club get more vicious. Thats what Dingwall would do?

Is James Forrest an alias of the deluded Zombie that is Ding a ling a Dingwall, fudge truth so often believes his own tripe. Fuudged so badly its not even close to being objective.

Anybody else who knows how the ambitious plan of Forrest works feel free to expand upon how it works?

I would love an AVB with champions league winning side playing at Celtic.

How do you do it with no subsidy from Sky or massive payments for winning the League or massive subsidy from billionaire or massive scam involving criminals who like to evade tax?

How does it work.

Explain it or get off Lennon and Lawells back.
 
Last edited:
TET said:
There must be someone that can explain the financial added value of the theory that the board are not being ambitious enough?

Cmon Forrest, you seem to be the antagonist of the going backwards theory of CFC

Why is Rodgers to lennon a Backward move?

Where is the budgets of your ambitious theory?

What are the Board and Lawell failing to take advantage of?

You are sharp to attack Lennon the manager of Celtic by highlighting what you perceive to be his failings, without addressing the massive added value he managed to produce last time.

Notice yet how subjective your rantings are?

Almost as anti Celtic as the MSM these days.

Get one of your many aliases to address your fantastic theory that put Celtic back in the hunt for massive Champions league glory.

Fantastic or fantasy?

That is the Question.

How does your ambitious theory work?

Does it involve glib and shameless lies?

Does it involve attacking the prudent financial health at the club?

Does it promote anxiety?

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

How does it work this wonderful ambitious set up?

Cant believe you cant lay out this beautiful plan?

your absolutely certain its the right thing to do.

But you refuse to explain how it works.

Instead you continue your attacks on the Celtic manager and the Celtic board with no evidence other than malice and contempt.

You even popped on for a second yesterday to spout lies about a very good post.

Then today you launched a scathing attack on Efe Ambrose who is as least as good as any of the rodgers acquisitions for right back. yet you see free being an issue. But no issue with massive wage Gamboa or Toljan?

Why is it you rate McGinn an ex Hibs player who Lennon added massive value, but don't rate the man who made him one of the better Scottish central midfielders?

A player who didn't actually improve the first team, who rejected Rodgers squad status, yet you Balme lawell as skint flint for not paying over the odds for a player who didn't want to come as a squad player.

Why are you asking anonymous people to pump out conjecture on The Celtic blog?

When all it does recently is attack the club and its players?

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

the treble treble champions and you hate the Bhoys who care about the club and demand expensive flops that couldn't care less about the club?

Cmon Forrest I challenge you to back up your hatred of Board with financial figures that prove your club going backwards theory.

Until you do just that nobody can see the fantastic opportunity that the club are passing up by being unambitious.

put some objective flesh and bones on your rantings.

You have a cult following that want your theory put into practise.

To me your theory is the Murray moonbeam theory of how to destroy an institution.

Are you Dingwall in disguise?

He thinks the new King criminal masonic secret theory of ripping off the deluded zombies is a great plan.

Is that what you want for Celtic?

Cmon Forrest. Ill get right behind your theory if it stacks up?

But first show me how it works.

And if you cant?

Get behind Lennon and the board.

Notice the closer we get to history the more rancid your posts get and the vitriolic attacks on the club get more vicious. Thats what Dingwall would do?

Is James Forrest an alias of the deluded Zombie that is Ding a ling a Dingwall lie so often I believe my own tripe.

Anybody else who knows how the ambitious plan of Forrest works feel free to expand upon how it works?

I would love an AVB with champions league winning side playing at Celtic.

How do you do it with no subsidy from Sky or massive payments for winning the League or massive subsidy from billionaire or massive scam involving criminals who like to evade tax?

How does it work.

Explain it or get off Lennon and Lawells back.
Click to expand...

TET why would you not promote Scottish football when it has been shown the customer base is there. Has to be asked asked why SKY props up a shit EPL and ECL.

Smaller nation coming out tops in attendances.
Untitled.jpg
Untitled.jpg
 
boab1916 said:
TET why would you not promote Scottish football when it has been shown the customer base is there. Has to be asked asked why SKY props up a shit EPL and ECL.

Smaller nation coming out tops in attendances.
View attachment 3017
View attachment 3017
Click to expand...
Your right Boab but there must be a reason Eufa and Sky want the football money skewed in favour of some leagues to the detriment of many many historically excellent producers of good football.

Hungarians Polish Scandanavian croatian Serbian clubs used to be able to hold and produce their best talent at their big clubs till the scam artists took control with agents brokers and under the counter secret contracts.
 
TET said:
Your right Boab but there must be a reason Eufa and Sky want the football money skewed in favour of some leagues to the detriment of many many historically excellent producers of good football.

Hungarians Polish Scandanavian croatian Serbian clubs used to be able to hold and produce their best talent at their big clubs till the scam artists took control with agents brokers and under the counter secret contracts.
Click to expand...
The UEFA branch of club football have looked at the NFL franchise model and they want that type of exposure and audience for a flagship competition.

Wall-to-wall continental coverage, draft days for prime young talent, billions of euro being generated.

Clubs like ours become the equivalent of their college system and NCAAA
 
Spherical Planet said:
The UEFA branch of club football have looked at the NFL franchise model and they want that type of exposure and audience for a flagship competition.

Wall-to-wall continental coverage, draft days for prime young talent, billions of euro being generated.

Clubs like ours become the equivalent of their college system and NCAAA
Click to expand...
that's not ambitious enough

We need Super Bowl manager at our college with Super Bowl manager wages to attract superbowl champions to our club.

never mind the finance involved the board must see to it, ambition without prudence, the sevco way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 109 (members: 7, guests: 102)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top