As a qualified accountant, Rick Parry is well aware that the numbers aren't stacking up.
The chairman of the English Football League says it needs at least £250m to survive in its current format.
He also warned that if the lower divisions went into 'hibernation' again, they might not get out of it.
Last week a group of fans, ex-players, suits and politicians sent an open letter to the government warning that many of the smaller clubs would soon be unable to meet their payroll obligations and that the league structure that has served English football for over a century is in danger of imminent collapse.
But where do you get a quarter of a billion these days? I doubt if Rishi and the boys at the Treasury have 'EFL bailout' anywhere near the top of their in-tray.
No, the more obvious route would be to go cap in hand to Premier League which doesn't rely so much on 'gate money' and, judging by the telephone number-figures being spent in the current transfer market, still has a lot of filthy lucre sloshing around in this Covid-riven world.
At times like this, the smaller clubs like to think of English football as a holistic pyramid, where the wealth ultimately trickles down.
In reality, it's more like a 1970s Saturn V rocket, where only the tip reaches the stratosphere and the rest is jettisoned to crash and burn.
Thirty years ago, the idea of a slimmer, more lucrative 'premier' league made sense to the Football Association, who had been earmarked to trouser 40% of any future TV deal.
The Premiership, as it was then called, came to pass, as did the big Sky money, but the FA and the lower leagues are still whistling in the wind for their proposed cut.
Now, three decades on, the mega-rich clubs are being asked to "step up to the plate" (in the words of culture secretary Oliver Dowden) and bail out the rest of the "football family".
This is the same "family" they couldn't wait to dump 30 years ago, so why should they care now?
Sorry, but the romantic notion of us "all being in this together" and working for the common good doesn't cut any ice in the world of capitalism, especially now.
Should Northern Ireland's most successful restaurants, for instance, feel obliged to ensure that the country's smaller, struggling cafes also survive?
I doubt if the big boys actually want the little ones to fail, but it's a stretch to suggest they're anything more than indifferent, despite "the world's greatest coach" Frank Lampard telling his disciples in the London media that clubs such as "Frank Lampard's Chelsea" should do their bit to help.
Global TV money which, at 60%, is the main revenue stream, will continue to prop up the Premier League - whose clubs' revenues totalled £5.2bn in 2018-19 - despite the latest calculation suggesting that, collectively, it's haemorrhaging something like £100m a month.
Last week's Zoom meeting between the EPL and the EFL bigwigs produced well-meaning platitudes and promises of more discussions, but not a single penny changed hands.
And despite the Government's suggestion that the onus is on the Premier League to protect the 'pyramid', something similar was mooted - and largely ignored - after the 2019-20 football season was finally restarted earlier this year.
My guess is that the chancellor, Mr Sunak, will eventually cave in to the sound of the rattling tin and offer low-interest loans to help struggling clubs get through this nightmare pandemic, which currently shows no sign of abating.
To be fair to former Liverpool chief executive Parry, he has made a compelling argument on behalf of the lower leagues, whose collective seasonal revenue prior to Covid-19 was around £1bn but who also, worryingly, spent even more than that on wages.
The vastly experienced 65-year-old has also made it clear that the £250m would not be merely to maintain the status quo, but to help prompt a realistic restructuring that would help the ailing patient survive.
But he's at the mercy of the Premier League, which has a reputation of being a tough negotiator. That's why it's the richest league in the world, the envy of all others. That's why it managed, back in early 1992, to land a then eye-watering £304m five-year deal with BSkyB and BBC, a pot of gold which has grown, even beyond exponentially, since.
And that's why, despite the near-catastrophic state of the UK economy in general, its clubs remain confident enough to spend, collectively, over £1bn for footballers who, for the immediate future, will strut their stuff in front of empty stands.
It took a fearless, unblinkingly hard-headed 37-year-old chief executive to put them en route to affluence and jaw-dropping selfishness 29 years ago.
His name? Richard Nicholas Parry...
I didn't invest in the freak show that was Conor McGregor v Floyd Mayweather Jnr.
Didn't care who won either. For me, that would have been like choosing between two nasty diseases.
But history has shown that freak shows pull in the crowds, and the unlikeable Irish cage fighter taking on the equally unlikeable boxer pulled in a huge pay-per-view audience in 2017.
From what I've seen of that Nevada 'fight' since, McGregor did all right, Mayweather was never in any danger of losing and both earned silly money.
Now, three years on, there's talk of another circus rolling into town, this time McGregor v Manny Pacquiao.
Mmm. Pacquiao doesn't play the game the way Mayweather does. There's actually the chance that he might think this is a serious fight.
And unlike 'Money' Mayweather, The PacMan says that, if this thing goes ahead, the bulk of the cash earned will go towards Covid-affected people in his native Philippines.
Pacquiao is now 41, nine years older than McGregor, and hasn't fought for quite a while.
He does, however, have a reputation of taking every bout seriously, even those the dogs in the street know the opponent isn't up to much.
Admittedly I am no aficionado of the finer points of boxing, but I did see what Pacquiao did to Ricky Hatton in Vegas back in 2009.
That was brutal, savage and, thankfully for Hatton, mercifully short. Pacquiao didn't care that two rounds in the Nevada desert didn't add up to much value for the watching millions, and I suspect a similar attitude will prevail if and when 'Notorious' climbs into the ring.
I can't stand the gobby McGregor, but I don't want to see him seriously hurt either.
Surely he doesn't need the money that much?