Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
ephex
Nov 4, 2007





PHWOAR CRIMINAL

Taff posted:

Good news, I do indeed. Heres a small portion of the horrors that awaited me when I came to work that day



Some men just want to watch the world burn.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

fat gay nonce
May 13, 2003
actual penis length: |-----------|



Winner, PWM POTM January
plase do not joke about Taff's sexuality in a serious thread

edit: sorry I thought that said bum, please ignore this post

kri kri
Jul 18, 2007

So I guess Stan has gotten another 500 shares, hopefully we can get a takeover, could use that walmart money.

Rollie Fingers
Jul 28, 2002

kri kri posted:

So I guess Stan has gotten another 500 shares, hopefully we can get a takeover, could use that walmart money.

I hope not. There isn't much desire from Arsenal fans in London for either Kroenke or Usmanov to launch a takeover bid. I don't think it's going to happen anyway. Every couple of months for almost two years there are reports of how Kroenke or Usmanov are about to launch a takeover bid when they buy shares, but it never materialises.

I think Arsenal's valuation is far too high for two people who'd only be in it for the money.

Masonity
Dec 31, 2007

What, I wonder, does this hidden face of madness reveal of the makers? These K'Chain Che'Malle?

Quanta posted:

I hope not. There isn't much desire from Arsenal fans in London for either Kroenke or Usmanov to launch a takeover bid. I don't think it's going to happen anyway. Every couple of months for almost two years there are reports of how Kroenke or Usmanov are about to launch a takeover bid when they buy shares, but it never materialises.

I think Arsenal's valuation is far too high for two people who'd only be in it for the money.

I get the impression that Stan's a more traditional form of "in it for the money". He brings expertise in getting Americans to cough up money for sporting teams. Arsenal are WAY under utilised as a global brand. The guy could make us richer, and himself richer, at the same time. Buying up shares will be partly to block Usamov and partly because a richer Arsenal, fully exploiting their commercial markets are worth more than the shares currently trade at.

GutBomb
Jun 15, 2005

Dude?

Masonity posted:

I get the impression that Stan's a more traditional form of "in it for the money". He brings expertise in getting Americans to cough up money for sporting teams. Arsenal are WAY under utilised as a global brand. The guy could make us richer, and himself richer, at the same time. Buying up shares will be partly to block Usamov and partly because a richer Arsenal, fully exploiting their commercial markets are worth more than the shares currently trade at.

When Kroenke bought the Colorado Rapids of MLS he was seen as something of a savior of the team because at the time the team was owned by AEG, an entertainment conglomerate that back then owned like 6 MLS teams (in a 10 team league). I think they owned the Metrostars (Now owned by Red Bull and renamed to the New York Red Bulls), San Jose Earthquakes (who moved to Houston and became the Houston Dynamo and are still owned by AEG. A new ownership group now owns a new incarnation of the San Jose Earthquakes), Los Angeles Galaxy (Still owned by AEG), Colorado Rapids, DC United (Sold to DC United Holdings), and Chicago Fire (Sold to Andell Holdings). Also at the time the Dallas Burn (Renamed to FC Dallas), Columbus Crew, and Kansas City Wizards (sold to OnGoal, and recently rebranded to Sporting Kansas City) were owned by Lamar Hunt, so owners owning multiple teams was not unheard of. Colorado were definitely on the bottom of AEG's priority list and were getting shafted with TV broadcasts of away games, horribly oppressive security, and no stadium plans (they paid rent to play in the Denver Broncos american football stadium). In comes Stan Kroenke with his wife's Wal-Mart billions to save the day... but he really didn't. Costs were cut, ticket prices increased, they brought in cheerleaders, they changed the team colors and crest (to align with the other Denver sports teams that Kroenke owned, the Denver Nuggets of the NBA and the Colorado Avalanche of the NHL), there was a management shakeup that ended up being for the worse. There was talk of renaming the team (to coincide with the new color and crest) to Arsenal Colorado because of his link with Arsenal but Nike owns the rights to the Arsenal trademark in the US when related to soccer and were not willing to let an Adidas sponsored league field a team called Arsenal. Fan-favorite players were sold off, the broadcasting situation became even worse. One season only 6 (of 16) away games were available on TV, and while they did fire the worst coach the Rapids had ever seen up to that point they hired one that would do even worse, and they kept him for 3 miserable seasons before he finally resigned over some spur of the moment tiff with the ownership. They are doing a lot better now, but that's mostly due to luck and the extreme parity of MLS. The Rapids actually won the championship last season (the champion is crowned in a post-season knockout tournament based on where teams placed in the table for the regular season). The Rapids barely made it into the playoffs after being denied entry the 2 previous seasons and were able to get a good run of form during the playoffs and won the title.

It was a sobering reality though to see the team being treated like dirt by it's savior by basically taking what little AEG was doing to keep the team competitive and downsizing on that after making so many promises to the contrary.

Admittedly they did build the Rapids a pretty nice stadium but there was a point last season before they did well in the playoffs that the stadium seemed like nothing more than the shiny part of the polished turd that the Rapids had become over the time that Kroenke took over.

GutBomb fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Mar 28, 2011

Eric Cantonese
Dec 21, 2004

You should hear my accent.
That sounds like what Hicks and Gillett would have done if the credit crunch had not happened, GutBomb.

Are Arsenal really underutilized in terms of branding? I thought the club's marketing department was doing pretty well.

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:

TyChan posted:

Are Arsenal really underutilized in terms of branding? I thought the club's marketing department was doing pretty well.

quote:

By way of example, in the 2009/2010 season whilst Arsenal had total revenues of £224.4m and Tottenham £119.8m, Manchester United had total revenues of £286.4m. Manchester United exceeded the revenues of Arsenal and Tottenham on all three key components: matchday (stadium revenues), broadcasting, and most notably commercial revenue where it generated £81.4m (Deloitte, 2011, page 11) to Arsenal's £44m (Deloitte, 2011, page 13) and Tottenham's £31.5m (Deloitte, 2011, page 20).

I'm going to go with 'yes', based on those commercial revenue figures. I don't think Arsenal should be making the same as United, based on recent success for one, but they should be closer to us than they are to Spurs.

If I recall correctly the order of teams by commercial revenue is United, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, Arsenal, Spurs. I'm pretty sure United have the highest premier league revenues in all 3 categories: the Glazers are utter scum but from a money-making perspective they know what they're doing.

delicious beef fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Mar 28, 2011

Scikar
Nov 20, 2005

5? Seriously?

That does put them closer to us than to Spurs though?

e: Durrr, didn't read that properly, sorry.

Couch
May 16, 2004

COME ON TOT!
How the hell does City make so much?

Does it count renting out the stadium for concerts and that?

sebzilla
Mar 17, 2009

Kid's blasting everything in sight with that new-fangled musket.


Couch posted:

How the hell does City make so much?

There is a special category of ticket for directors/owners which are £100M each. This enables the club to thumb its nose at the UEFA money rules.

Jose
Jul 24, 2007

Adrian Chiles is a broadcaster and writer
Isn't a large part to do with them owning and rejuvenating a massive area around the COMS so that all of it counts as income without it counting towards expenditure or something weird?

hrolf
Nov 28, 2008

by Fistgrrl

sebzilla posted:

There is a special category of ticket for directors/owners which are £100M each. This enables the club to thumb its nose at the UEFA money rules.

Surely they can't get away with that?

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:
Remember this is just commercial activity, doesn't include matchday or broadcasting, it's basically sponsorship/partnership deals.

quote:

Commercial revenue more than doubled to £46.7m (€57.0m) and was the principal driver of the club’s overall revenue growth. 2009/10 was the first year of improved shirt sponsorship and kit supply deals with Etihad Airways and Umbro respectively. The new Umbro deal facilitated merchandising revenue growth of 60% to £7.9m (€9.6m). The club has focussed on expanding its commercial partnership portfolio, revenue from which grew five fold in 2009/10, including deals with the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority, Etisalat, and Aabar all of which are based in the Middle East. Further growth in this area is anticipated in 2010/11 as a result of additional deals, including those with Heineken and Jaguar.

delicious beef fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Mar 29, 2011

Loving Africa Chaps
Dec 3, 2007


We had not left it yet, but when I would wake in the night, I would lie, listening, homesick for it already.

TyChan posted:

That sounds like what Hicks and Gillett would have done if the credit crunch had not happened, GutBomb.

Are Arsenal really underutilized in terms of branding? I thought the club's marketing department was doing pretty well.

it could definitely be better. One thing is most of our current deals were made before the emirates and were front loaded to help pay for it which is why our shirt deal is something like £18m a year when it should be much higher according to most sources i've read

Masonity
Dec 31, 2007

What, I wonder, does this hidden face of madness reveal of the makers? These K'Chain Che'Malle?
Don't forget that we haven't been on any money spinning pre season tours yet. Rumour is we're going to finally do one this year.

Jollzwhin
Oct 13, 2004

Just like watching Brazil

hrolf posted:

Surely they can't get away with that?

We can't. Remember we have one of the largest stadiums and it's generally 95% or more filled so we get significantly more matchday revenue than Everton or even Liverpool.

The Big Taff Man
Nov 22, 2005


Official Manchester United Posting Partner 2015/16
Fan of Britches

Jollzwhin posted:

We can't. Remember we have one of the largest stadiums and it's generally 95% or more filled so we get significantly more matchday revenue than Everton or even Liverpool.

Pretty empty for cup matches tho?

MrBling
Aug 21, 2003

Oozing machismo

Jollzwhin posted:

We can't. Remember we have one of the largest stadiums and it's generally 95% or more filled so we get significantly more matchday revenue than Everton or even Liverpool.

Does the club get all the ticket revenue or does the city get some of it?

Midnight-
Aug 22, 2007

Pain or damage don't end the world, or despair, or fuckin' beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man - and give some back.

Jollzwhin posted:

We can't. Remember we have one of the largest stadiums and it's generally 95% or more filled so we get significantly more matchday revenue than Everton or even Liverpool.

This isn't true at all.

Liverpool turnover £43m a year from matchdays, compared to £24m for City.

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:

Jollzwhin posted:

We can't. Remember we have one of the largest stadiums and it's generally 95% or more filled so we get significantly more matchday revenue than Everton or even Liverpool.

Pretty sure Everton make about £22m in matchday, City about £25m and Liverpool around £40m.

Edit: sorry midnight-, awful app didn't load your post.

Jose
Jul 24, 2007

Adrian Chiles is a broadcaster and writer
Newcastle posted an edited version of their accounts up to June 2010

Newcastle posted:

Operating loss including transfers: £17.1m (£15.2m)
Operating loss not including transfers: £33.5m (£37.7m)

Turnover: £52.4m (£86.1m) made up of:
Season tickets: £11m (£15.6m)
Matchday tickets: £6.5m (£5.5m)
Corporates: £2.8m (£6.7m)
Broadcast revenues: £16m (£37.6m)
Sponsorship/commercial: £15.4m (£19.4m)

Operating costs: £74.4m (£98m): 141% of turnover
Wage bill: £47.5m (£71.1m)
"Other" expenses: £26.9m) (£26.9m)
Wages to turnover ratio: 90.6% (82.6%)

Overall level of debt unchanged at £150m
Mike Ashley interest free loan now at £139.8m - with a further £13m "advance" for transfers. That's separate to a claimed £286m original purchase price and subsequent cash input to cover club commitments.

So this was before the PL money is added, wonder what this years accounts look like.

Whats interesting to note from the local paper article is this

Newcastle Journal posted:


The board have been trying to make savings wherever they can, whether it is sensors rather than switches to operate lighting or switching off the escalator leading up from main reception.

The club has saved more than £250,000 in utility bills over the last 12 months, while the drilling of a bore hole at the training ground will help save money which has been used to pay for the installation of undersoil heating at their Benton base.

Thats pretty loving major savings on something so basic. I wonder if other clubs have tried similar things.

chuggo is BACK
Jul 1, 2008




"Chuggo"

PWM POTM December 2014
liverpool ceo ian ayres says they're looking at naming rights partners for the stadium (which seems to confirm they're going to build a new one?)

MoPZiG
Jun 6, 2006

Championship really should try to negotiate a better TV deal.

Xabi
Jan 21, 2006

Inventor of the Marmite pasty

Chuggo posted:

liverpool ceo ian ayres says they're looking at naming rights partners for the stadium (which seems to confirm they're going to build a new one?)
Probably just having a look at the market.

Cuban Chowder Factory
Jun 3, 2002
The Sun could afford a cheeky £200m bid for the rights.

Masonity
Dec 31, 2007

What, I wonder, does this hidden face of madness reveal of the makers? These K'Chain Che'Malle?

Cuban Chowder Factory posted:

The Sun could afford a cheeky £200m bid for the rights.

Or they could just make sure that it's filled to the rafters with home fans every 2 weeks...

By calling it the Job Center Plus Stadium.

mfcrocker
Jan 31, 2004



Hot Rope Guy
Here is a video of a wanker

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9439080.stm

"I know you have a team like Leeds go up from League One and go straight into contention for a playoff spot in the Championship but that really doesn't happen every season"

League One promotees still in the Championship+:

2009/10: Norwich, Leeds, Millwall
2008/09: Leicester, Scunthorpe
2007/08: Swansea, Nottingham Forest, Millwall
2006/07: Bristol City, Blackpool (now Prem) (Scunthorpe went up here too)
2005/06: Barnsley
2004/05: Hull City (ex-Prem)

But hey, League One and below are worthless. :psyduck:

8raz
Jun 22, 2007


He's Scouse, He's Sound.

Masonity posted:

Or they could just make sure that it's filled to the rafters with home fans every 2 weeks...

By calling it the Job Center Plus Stadium.
Excellent post.

Nis
Feb 21, 2011

:allears:

Masonity posted:

Or they could just make sure that it's filled to the rafters with home fans every 2 weeks...

By calling it the Job Center Plus Stadium.

Maybe it'd be good if we sold a bunch of plastic flags and poo poo too, eh? We need to fill up the entire stadium with plastic fans, after all.

Masonity
Dec 31, 2007

What, I wonder, does this hidden face of madness reveal of the makers? These K'Chain Che'Malle?

Homura posted:

Maybe it'd be good if we sold a bunch of plastic flags and poo poo too, eh? We need to fill up the entire stadium with plastic fans, after all.

Nothing plastic about us Arsenal fans...

We just take our vow of silence very seriously.

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:
Gonna post this here because it's a very very good summary of the big issues in football governance and finance at the moment in England:

quote:

On Tuesday, in the most significant session of the inquiry into football's governance by the House of Commons culture media and sport select committee, the Premier League chairman, Sir Dave Richards, and the chief executive, Richard Scudamore, will give evidence.

Every football fan will have questions they would like the committee to put - post any suggestions below.

Here are 20 questions the MPs might consider asking these two top administrators, based on the remit of the inquiry, to consider whether "football supporters are ill-served by current football club regulations," how to "enhance supporter involvement in decision-making processes" and whether there is a "case for strategic government intervention" – particularly in relation to "the high-profile coverage of Liverpool and Manchester United" and "broader concerns."

Congratulating the Premier League and its clubs, of course, for their great success since its clubs broke away from the Football League in 1992, in increasing their popularity, the achievements on the field and commercial pre-eminence, the committee could ask:

1) Do Richards and Scudamore believe there is any problem at all with the Glazer family's leveraged buyout of Manchester United, which has loaded £522m debt on to the club and cost United around £350m in interests, charges and fees since 2005?

2) If there is no problem, do Richards and Scudamore disagree with Sir Martin Broughton, then the Liverpool chairman, who in the thick of the fight with Tom Hicks to sell the club in October, said: "If you are leveraged, that is bad for a football club?"

3) If leverage is not bad for football clubs, do Richards and Scudamore consider Liverpool are no better off with John Henry's Fenway Sports Group having paid off the £200m debt to Royal Bank of Scotland which Hicks and George Gillett's takeover had loaded on to the club?

4) In October 2008, Lord Triesman, then the FA chairman, warned of the "very grave dangers" posed by the £3bn debt then owed by professional football. In response Scudamore said its clubs' debts were "sustainable." Given the subsequent insolvency of Portsmouth, and the financial crises at Liverpool, Hull City and West Ham United, and the measures the Premier League has since taken to tighten up its financial rules, has Triesman's judgment been vindicated?

5) Is the fact that English clubs are companies, up for sale to the highest bidder, the best way for our football clubs to be set up?

6) What positive proposals do Richards and Scudamore have to meet the government's and inquiry's stated commitment to involve supporters more in the ownership and decision-making at clubs?

7) Should the fit and proper persons test, now revised into the owners and directors test, outlaw buyers of clubs who are doing so with debt, and planning to load the clubs with those debts?

8) Are there lessons to be learned from the case of Thaksin Shinawatra, who was passed as fit and proper to buy Manchester City in 2007 despite having had his human rights record severely criticised by Amnesty International, been charged with corruption offences in Thailand and had his assets frozen in his home country?

9) Is Sven Goran-Eriksson's recall of his conversation with Richards at the time correct, that when pondering whether to accept Thaksin's offer of the City manager's job, Eriksson was told by Richards that Thaksin was: "Absolutely clean?"

10) Does Richards still believe what he told a 2008 conference in Dubai that the Premier League is damaging the England team because its clubs are "lazy" about playing English youngsters and do the "easy thing" of signing too many foreign stars?

11) The Football Task Force, in its report of January 1999, supported the Premier League to sell its TV rights collectively, against a European Commission challenge, which has made the league billions since. The Premier League agreed in the same report to "make a minimum of 5% of income available primarily for investment in grass-roots facilities and projects." That led to the establishment of the Football Foundation. This season, the Premier League's TV deal alone is more than £1bn, yet its contribution to the foundation is £10m – 1%. Why is this?

12) The Sport and Recreation Alliance includes the Premier League in its list of bodies committing to invest 30% of "net broadcasting income" into grass-roots sport. From the broadcasting income of over £1bn, that would mean more than £300m invested into grass roots sport. How does the Premier League make its 30% figure?

13) Does the fact that there have been 54 club insolvencies in the Football League since the formation of the Premier League in 1992 have anything to do with the fact that so little of the Premier League fortune is shared with the league (except for parachute payments to relegated Premier League clubs)?

14) In 2008, responding to Triesman's speech about the dangers of debt, Scudamore said of the FA: "We are like competitors. We compete for sponsorship and for television rights and we are in the same space." Do he and Richards consider the FA a commercial rival?

15) Do he and Richards accept that the FA is the governing body of English football, with the power to make rules to which the leagues and its clubs must adhere?

16) When there is so much attention on the FA for not having independent non-executive directors on its 12-man board, why is it acceptable for the Premier League's board to be made up of two men, Richards and Scudamore, with no independent directors?

17) The committee is considering whether to recommend a licensing system for clubs, incorporating rules on finance and governance with which clubs must comply, which the FA, as the governing body, would oversee. How do they feel about that?

18) When Richards proposed to the FA board in 2009 that they resolve not to send Lord Triesman's draft proposals on financial governance to the then minister Andy Burnham, and instead send a statement on behalf of the FA that it supported the Premier and Football League's proposals, was that not weakening the authority of the FA, of which Richards is a board member?

19) Is the Premier League satisfied that the average age of a supporter at matches, according to its own fan surveys, is around 44?

20) Does the Premier League see any merit in the German Football Federation's policy statement, explaining why it wanted to retain cheap access to matches, around £12 to stand, compared to Premier League tickets of £30-£50, that: "Football, being a people's sport, should not banish the socially disadvantaged from its stadia, and it should not place its social function in doubt?"

David Conn owns.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2011/apr/04/premier-league-parliament-20-questions

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:
Also holy poo poo 54 insolvencies from teams occupying 72 places since 1992 :psyboom:

Healbot
Jul 7, 2006

very very very fucjable
very vywr very


Yeah, it's kinda expected that mostly oldtimers pay for tickets when they are so expensive, but 44 years average. :psyduck:

Total Meatlove
Jan 28, 2007

:japan:
Rangers died, shoujo Hitler cried ;_;

Healbot posted:

Yeah, it's kinda expected that mostly oldtimers pay for tickets when they are so expensive, but 44 years average. :psyduck:

If every club made a kids matchday ticket a fiver they'd sell out every week. Every club in any league I've seen do it or have a Buy One Child Ticket Get One Free deal has had a massive surge in attendance because parents can go + afford to have kids with them

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:
Yeah, the tickets at United (for an example). aren't utterly ridiculous for an adult imho, but the cost of taking a couple of kids makes it totally unaffordable for families.

Ho Chi Meeeeee
Jun 13, 2008

let me shovel out your brains
hang my image in your skull
so I can be the vision
in your nightmares from now on
Holy loving poo poo. Burn the Prem down. Burn it.

delicious beef
Feb 5, 2006

:allears::allears::allears::allears::allears::allears:
Also the Football League just signed a rights contract for 1/4 less than the last one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/04/football-league-clubs-less-tv-money

Jollzwhin
Oct 13, 2004

Just like watching Brazil

Jose posted:

Thats pretty loving major savings on something so basic. I wonder if other clubs have tried similar things.

Pretty big savings, but the way Newcastle have been run recently (and not so recently), I'm not entirely sure that isn't just the tip of the iceberg.

delicious beef posted:

Also the Football League just signed a rights contract for 1/4 less than the last one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/...s-less-tv-money
Over/under on 54 becoming 80 by the time that contract ends?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Jose
Jul 24, 2007

Adrian Chiles is a broadcaster and writer
These are all basic changes made since Ashley came into ownership. Apparently it was really basic stuff like escalators in the stadium being left on all the time even when they weren't in use for a week or whatever. All hangover stuff from Shepherds loving terrible reign.

  • Locked thread