|
Crewe?
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Scikar posted:Crewe? I doubt it. Crewe have been in a steady decline for a few years now. Mainly because any money they have made from selling young promising players have gone straight into the directors pockets rather than investing in the club.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
pimpslap posted:I'd be interested to hear what others think of this hypothesis. Assuming his argument is valid, I'd say that not only Arsenal are part of "Football 3.0", but Aston Villa, Wigan, and West Ham in the PL are all on the same path (albeit to varying degrees). What about other examples of the "smaller clubs" he mentions reemerging from Championship or lower? First off I'm not convinced, it all reads like "I think Arsenal are running things the right way and here's how they do it". Teams could very well be moving towards greater financial responsibility but I don't think it's happening right now. Plus I don't know why you suggest that Wigan and West Ham fit this pattern. The latter have been destroyed by previous overspending, while Wigan would not exist without Dave Whelan pouring in countless millions to cover their losses. They may be signing lots of players from traditionally undervalued parts of the world, but their survival is still purely based on unsustainable finances.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
Oceanbound posted:First off I'm not convinced, it all reads like "I think Arsenal are running things the right way and here's how they do it". Teams could very well be moving towards greater financial responsibility but I don't think it's happening right now. Plus I don't know why you suggest that Wigan and West Ham fit this pattern. The latter have been destroyed by previous overspending, while Wigan would not exist without Dave Whelan pouring in countless millions to cover their losses. They may be signing lots of players from traditionally undervalued parts of the world, but their survival is still purely based on unsustainable finances. Admittedly, the author's blog is hyper-critical of the finances of Arsenal's rivals, but I don't think what I posted comes across as Arsenal back-patting. And in the article he posits that some clubs continue to operate at 1.0 or 2.0 methods, so he's not suggesting that in 10 or 20 years all clubs will be on this model. Wenger had a quote from a few weeks back summarized as "I believe there's another model for success (other than huge debts and sugar daddies)". The qualifier I made regarding Villa, Wigan, and West Ham perhaps should've been elaborated. Villa I think are closest, Wigan and West Ham have strengths in one or two areas mentioned, but are sorely lacking in others. Obviously West Ham has a strong academy, and should they crash financially, they may have an easier path to adopting 3.0 (or new method, whatever, I'm just using the terminology from the article) by rebuilding from their academy. Wigan have an attractive style and have brought in players from around the world, two things which are not sustainable themselves. However, if they continue to scout worldwide, they could move away from big transfer fees. With the number of clubs on the brink of financial ruin, I just think it's an interesting exercise to consider how they might rebuild if they did collapse financially. Would they attempt to climb back up the ladder using a borrow and spend method? Or would they try something new? Would some clubs currently facing financial ruin under 2.0 be better positioned to make the jump to 3.0?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:27
|
|
new home, old colors, same Arsenal
|
Spurs are probably the club that is run best in terms of finance, yet it always seems to be Arsenal that is brought up as a shining example.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:32
|
|
|
Spurs will be a better example the other side of the stadium build.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:35
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Spurs are probably the club that is run best in terms of finance, yet it always seems to be Arsenal that is brought up as a shining example. Yes because you see during the George Graham era...
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:41
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Spurs are probably the club that is run best in terms of finance, yet it always seems to be Arsenal that is brought up as a shining example. Because winning is still everything. The article is bogus on that count. I know they dont want to say it but Arsenal was certainly helped by the millions of foreign plastics who started supporting the club in the early oughts. It pains me to say it as a Hammer but local academies won't save you at this point either. The pure physical demands of the english game mean there is simply diminishing odds someone will grow up to meet the increasing height and weight requirements for certain vital positions on the park.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 04:54
|
|
|
I would rather Liverpool win a game 1 - 0 than lose tie it 5 - 5 if the article is supposed to be implying otherwise
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 05:36
|
|
|
tbp posted:I would rather Liverpool win a game 1 - 0 than lose tie it 5 - 5 if the article is supposed to be implying otherwise Please try to make sense. "lose tie it 5-5" what the christ are you on about?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 05:59
|
|
|
Bovine Delight posted:Please try to make sense. "lose tie it 5-5" what the christ are you on about? Ah whoops, mistyped. Was originally going to put 'lose 5 - 4' but realized anyone would rather their team win..
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 06:07
|
|
|
MoPZiG posted:Because winning is still everything. The article is bogus on that count. Yeah, that's really the biggest flaw in the article. Arsenal is going on 5 years without a trophy while still playing (most of the time) entertaining football, and seemingly half the fans think Wenger should spend 50 million every transfer window to win one. The article is certainly idealistic, but I thought it was an interesting take on football finances. So, I guess another question is, if he's got what "Football 3.0" is wrong, then what are alternative possibilities for what it could look like? Certainly the 2.0 model is unsustainable and can't last. pimpslap fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Jan 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 06:10
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Spurs are probably the club that is run best in terms of finance, yet it always seems to be Arsenal that is brought up as a shining example. Spurs ownership would swap their position for Arsenals in a second because Arsenal are better placed in every aspect. Bigger stadium, higher revenue, more valuable squad, better youth set-up, far superior historical achievements.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 06:39
|
|
|
Flayer posted:Bigger stadium, higher revenue, more valuable squad, better youth set-up, far superior historical achievements. fans prone to typing lots and lots of words...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 07:18
|
|
|
I meant in the strictly financial sense, it is more impressive to me that Spurs can be profitable while chasing Top4 year on year compared to Arsenal just coasting on Champions League money and not really having to do much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 08:16
|
|
|
Transatlantic Gulp posted:fans prone to typing lots and lots of words... I'm waiting for football 5.0 whereby Arsenal and Spurs are awarded trophies by convincing FACup Ltd they have the best business case.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 14:25
|
|
|
MrBling posted:I meant in the strictly financial sense, it is more impressive to me that Spurs can be profitable while chasing Top4 year on year compared to Arsenal just coasting on Champions League money and not really having to do much. I was going to post this exact same thing but I'm not sure if their numbers are before or after transfers. Selling players and buying them back later in the season for cheap is a great bit of business.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 15:22
|
|
|
DickEmery posted:I'm waiting for football 5.0 whereby Arsenal and Spurs are awarded trophies by convincing FACup Ltd they have the best business case. Duncan Bannatyne ensures no trophies are won by anyone for five years straight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 15:37
|
|
|
Vando posted:Duncan Bannatyne ensures no trophies are won by anyone for five years straight. You may have the largest attendance in the league, but frankly your Chicken Balti pies are rubbish - and for that reason I'm out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 15:59
|
|
|
Football 5.0 is actually a pitch on Dragon's Den as to why they should buy your club. The club with the biggest investor wins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 16:33
|
|
|
Is there a particular reason the Spanish fan ownership model has not caught on in England or other countries? It seems to be a big part of why Real Madrid and Barca have been able to exercise a lot of financial power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 16:50
|
|
|
Portsmouth are hosed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8468078.stm Tax appeal fails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:14
|
|
|
Jollzwhin posted:You may have the largest attendance in the league, but frankly your Chicken Balti pies are rubbish - and for that reason I'm out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:20
|
|
|
Dudley posted:Portsmouth are hosed. To be honest i hope they go into administration while in the premier league, if they do then hopefully it prevents many more fans from seeing their club crumble because of finances rather then football. If they stave it off till they get relegated i doubt anyone would learn a lesson. Also http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/w/west_ham_utd/8468159.stm West Hame apparently owed over twice as much as their owners declared when it was put up for sale. Looks like the new owners don't care about sinking money into it though so the fans can probably sleep easier knowing administration is a little further off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:20
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Football 5.0 is actually a pitch on Dragon's Den as to why they should buy your club. The club with the biggest investor wins. Yes that is the joke we just made thank you for that clarification.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:31
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/w/west_ham_utd/8468159.stm quote:Former Birmingham owners Sullivan and David Gold now control the Hammers after buying a 50% shareholding. How depressing, but true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:34
|
|
|
TyChan posted:How depressing, but true. Whats depressing? Today I find my club in safer hands than at least 2 of the big 4. If Sullivan's consortium plan for the remaining shares goes through and the likes of Fernandes buy significant shares we could well on our way to financial sanity and progress on the pitch very quickly. Im much less keen on leaving Upton Park however.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:51
|
|
|
They're not well liked but they did run Birmingham pretty responsibly no? They're not going to dump in 200million but they'll invest just enough to keep the club alive which is a pretty big bonus for West Ham.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 18:09
|
|
|
MoPZiG posted:Whats depressing? Today I find my club in safer hands than at least 2 of the big 4. I was talking about the idea that buying any club in West Ham's situation is not necessarily a good business move, but it's a move you do out of love for a club and the desire to keep it alive. I've said this before, but the more I read about football clubs, the more I'm convinced that they are pretty poor as actual, substantive investments unless you have a diversified set of holdings where the club helps enhance their value or potential.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 18:10
|
|
|
TyChan posted:I was talking about the idea that buying any club in West Ham's situation is not necessarily a good business move, but it's a move you do out of love for a club and the desire to keep it alive. This was kinda how every club changed hands until the last 20 odd years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 18:14
|
|
|
Adnar posted:They're not well liked but they did run Birmingham pretty responsibly no? Aside from when they had the club's offices raided over some financial irregularities and had several board members under suspicion, sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 18:24
|
|
|
Noxville posted:Aside from when they had the club's offices raided over some financial irregularities and had several board members under suspicion, sure. David Gold was interviewed as a witness while they kept sticking Karen Brady under arrest. They never did press any charges and they were linked with none of the transfers from the Stevens report. In fact they made a lot of arrests back then without ever pressing charges and I think it's probably dead in the water by now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 18:59
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:To be honest i hope they go into administration while in the premier league, if they do then hopefully it prevents many more fans from seeing their club crumble because of finances rather then football. If they stave it off till they get relegated i doubt anyone would learn a lesson. Plus they could go into administration in the Premier League and enter the Championship in at least a state that might stay there. Going into administration in the Championship will leave them Southamptoned in no time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:28
|
|
|
TyChan posted:I've said this before, but the more I read about football clubs, the more I'm convinced that they are pretty poor as actual, substantive investments This has always been the case.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:31
|
|
|
Dream Team summed it up best.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:32
|
|
|
Dudley posted:Portsmouth are hosed. I've said it a thousand times but the Premier League have been far too lenient with them. There should have been substantial pressure on them to deal with the money they owed to other clubs - but nah, let's just help them extend their debts. I'm sure if they were put into administration earlier the club could have recovered. We are probably going to see the total destruction of a football club instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
TyChan posted:I was talking about the idea that buying any club in West Ham's situation is not necessarily a good business move, but it's a move you do out of love for a club and the desire to keep it alive. This is a good thing, not a depressing thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:49
|
|
|
Football clubs that look like American businesses get bought by American businessmen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 19:50
|
|
|
Grez posted:This has always been the case. quote:MrL_Jakiri]This is a good thing, not a depressing thing. Scikar posted:Football clubs that look like American businesses get bought by American businessmen. I agree, but what does that say about the ability to make teams more competitive? At some point or another, spending and probably incurring debts in the process) is needed to help break established pecking orders. Unless you can get the money from actual fans, which is rare, the only way you get the necessary funds nowadays is by turning clubs from these "ventures of love" to something exploitable and attractive to businessmen who have different priorities and will run clubs much, much differently than fans would. Unless we get UEFA-wide spending caps, salary caps, luxury taxes, or revenue sharing arrangements, I don't know how that's going to change. A little bit of soul-selling is inevitable and necessary and isn't that just a bit depressing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
pimpslap posted:Wigan, and West Ham in the PL are all on the same path What
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2010 01:48
|
|
