There are broadly two approaches that promoted clubs can adopt to the Premiership. One is to spend and hope that they can establish themselves as a Premier League club. Unfortunately, that approach looks like it is not going to work for Hull City. Another approach is to spend prudently, the calculation being that even if the club is relegated it will be in a stronger financial position, particularly given the expected increase in the size and duration of parachute payments. Wolves have spent prudently and have stayed up; Burnley have spent prudently and b
There are broadly two approaches that promoted clubs can adopt to the Premiership. One is to spend and hope that they can establish themselves as a Premier League club. Unfortunately, that approach looks like it is not going to work for Hull City. Another approach is to spend prudently, the calculation being that even if the club is relegated it will be in a stronger financial position, particularly given the expected increase in the size and duration of parachute payments. Wolves have spent prudently and have stayed up; Burnley have spent prudently and been relegated.
Some years ago I went to a match at Burnley and remember reading a comment by the chairman in the programme that one year in the Premiership would set the club up for ten years. One of the steps that Burnley is using its additional funds for is to upgrade the ground into a stadium. As it is, it simply does not generate enough revenue while match day revenue is necessarily limited given the club’s catchment area, even though it does very well in attracting crowds.
£20m is being spent on upgrading the ground, £15m on replacing the David Fishwick or Cricket Field stand. The new facility will include a 60 bedroom hotel, a banqueting suite and an exhibition hall. This is good forward thinking: my only reservation would be whether the local economy will generate enough use for these facilities.