Treasurer Jonathan Fischer's Perspective

There are numerous obstacles for Seattle United to overcome as it strives to achieve critical mass.

One of the most pressing concerns is the proposed program’s start-up cost; $150,000 to $250,000 prior to the first tryout.

The Seattle United Steering Committee has yet to disclose specifics. However, it intends to hire an Executive Director and a Coaching Director prior to 2010 tryouts, according to the planning documents. These experienced positions are expensive to fill, even in today’s economy.

Plans for Seattle United lack significant differences when compared to the administrative structure of Emerald City FC. In fact, given the 30-year gap in experience, the Seattle United proposal redundantly and perhaps inferiorly duplicates the same organizational model. The past 30 years of ECFC existence have yielded invaluable learning experiences for members, parents and leadership alike; starting from ground zero will present an unnecessary burden and divert attention from player development.

Alternatively, these same funds could be applied to the continually rising costs of field rentals and financial aid, either of which more 'kid centric' then more administrative costs.

Below are a number of additional points to consider when reviewing the proposed budget for the 2010 season of Seattle United.

It is unlikely that Seattle United will be able to achieve economic viability without the conscription of Emerald City’s U11 - U13 boys and girls teams. Although many players fall within the middle-tier categories, they do not generate sufficient revenue to provide for the full administrative model that we have already successfully achieved at Emerald City. Hence Seattle United’s imperative drive to absorb Emerald City teams.

Furthermore, there exists no provision in the 2010 budget for Seattle United to recoup the start-up costs discussed above. During the next 5-10 year “recovery” period, the expenses would need to be dispersed across family membership fees.

Jonathan Fischer

Another area of concern is the proposed cost of Seattle United administration. Vertically-integrated organizational models contain many more “moving parts” than their compartmentalized peers. Thus, even when taking into consideration the budget allowances set forth in the Seattle United plans, actual costs may overshoot estimates.

Overall, the 2010 season poses the most significant budgetary risk to Seattle United and its members. This is partly a result of an assumption that all players from Westside, Shoreline, and the Emerald City teams will actually join Seattle United, with no attrition.

In reality, Seattle is anything but “united” over this proposal and there may be significant relocations as players recognize other options. Even the “best case” scenario for Seattle United (every player joins) means a break-even on annual expenses, without recouping any start-up costs. However, since Seattle United has no financial reserves (indeed, the organization begins in a deficit), it becomes incapable of weathering an overly-optimistic projection of player support. The only option at that point is to reduce service.

Throughout the past generation, Emerald City has been able to amass the financial reserves that solidify its existence today. These carefully-stewarded funds finance working capital needs and provide the financial flexibility necessary to withstand difficult financial years, such as 2009, while remaining capable to participate in opportunities for field development (i.e. – Magnusson Park donation).

Please review the proposed Seattle United budget and give these concerns careful consideration.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Fischer

Treasurer

>>> Return to Additional Perspectives >>> U-11 through U-13 >>> U-14 through U-17 >>> U-10 and younger