|
JingleBells posted:Pfft, that's nothing. Try 2356% APR I wonder if they'll give me a loan...
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2010 20:41
|
|
I am the law, but an easily bribed kind of law.
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
Swamp Rapist posted:two relegations and three promotions, kinda the opposite of what they did to even out the prem at 20 back like 15 years ago That's what should happen, but in reality the league and the FA would try pretty much everything they could to keep Portsmouth going, because a club going out of business in anything other than League Two would have the potential to seriously gently caress up promotion and relegation throughout the league. There's never been any precedent on what to do in that kind of situation, which could lead to something like the Football League demanding three relegations and four promotions between the Premiership and Championship, for instance. That's also the reason why the league gave Leeds that massive points deduction a few years back instead of just saying "gently caress this poo poo" and tossing them into oblivion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2010 15:10
|
|
|
Teddy Picker posted:The owners of Derby County at the moment are being very clever, in that they're not spending outside of their means at all, and have reduced the club debt to not much more than the mortgage on the stadium. A lot of fans are getting irate about mediocre players etc, but I think at this rate everyone seems set to go bankrupt and we'll end up in the Premier League regardless. Cardiff are in the news today about rumours they're getting wound up, planning to be the last club standing doesn't seem overly silly now. This is kind of the Ebbsfleet approach, being fan-owned everyone is massively paranoid of debt-induced oblivion so Job One on taking over was to wipe the debts and start over. Of course now there is piss-all money because hey, it's a BSP club and that's hardly the most lucrative position in the world, but if relegation can be avoided in the next couple of seasons the club should come out of it pretty strong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2010 16:43
|
|
|
Calling it now: Man City and Liverpool are tied for fourth going into the last game of the season, Portsmouth is about to enter administration and give Liverpool fourth by discounting the 2 goal differential in our loss to them, so Man City buys Portsmouth, covers their debts and City get the CL spot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
Orange Carebear posted:Calling it now: Man City and Liverpool are tied for fourth going into the last game of the season, Portsmouth is about to enter administration and give Liverpool fourth by discounting the 2 goal differential in our loss to them, so Man City buys Portsmouth, covers their debts and City get the CL spot. hahaha god drat that would be worth City making the CL in that case
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 00:37
|
|
|
Orange Carebear posted:Calling it now: Man City and Liverpool are tied for fourth going into the last game of the season, Portsmouth is about to enter administration and give Liverpool fourth by discounting the 2 goal differential in our loss to them, so Man City buys Portsmouth, covers their debts and City get the CL spot. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work that way, right? If Portsmouth gets relegated due to finances, I thought that just ends up as a massive point deduction. That would only mean the 2 other bottom teams would get bumped out with Portsmouth and one team would get lucky and dodge a bullet. This is assuming, of course, that Portsmouth isn't going to spend the entire season in the bottom 3. That's a big assumption to make given their present situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 01:12
|
|
|
TyChan posted:I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work that way, right? Yeah, people are only talking about Portsmouth's results being erased if they literally cease to exist before the end of the season.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 05:11
|
|
|
after reading this thread and the epl debt report, i kicked back with some coffee, read this and had a good laugh.FC Bayern Munich posted:
What they dont tell you is that Bayern indeed has debts around 220m €. the interests are 19m € per year plus the costs for repaying the debts, ca. 30m € per year. Bayern planned to be debt-free in 2020, but with the new money coming in from audi (90m € in 3 payments till 2011), they will achieve their goal in 2016. Sorry folks, but that is how it's done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 09:41
|
|
|
ephex posted:after reading this thread and the epl debt report, i kicked back with some coffee, read this and had a good laugh. Wait until the retarded management spend £150m in a season for something like "if real madrid can do it so can we". They will then buy terrible choices, fail to qualify for the CL and collapse under that debt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 09:49
|
|
|
Jose posted:Wait until the retarded management spend £150m in a season for something like "if real madrid can do it so can we". They will then buy terrible choices, fail to qualify for the CL and collapse under that debt. They've been dumping players this window to cut down the wage bill, so it's unlikely that will happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 10:40
|
|
|
Oceanbound posted:They've been dumping players this window to cut down the wage bill, so it's unlikely that will happen. thats right, with the exception of the articles theory of franck ribery being sold to lower the wages being complete and utter bullshit. they said that players need to be paid accordingly to their performance, so top players like ribery surely could get a raise if they sign a new contract. and IF ribery wants to stay at munich, they will pay whatever he wants them to. bayern doesnt have to sell their silverware to pay wages 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:31
|
|
|
When was the last time Bayern won meaningful silverwear?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:32
|
|
|
German Championship: 21 (record) 1931–32, 1968–69, 1971–72, 1972–73, 1973–74, 1979–80, 1980–81, 1984–85, 1985–86, 1986–87, 1988–89, 1989–90, 1993–94, 1996–97, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2002–03, 2004–05, 2005–06, 2007–08 DFB-Pokal: 14 (record) 1957, 1966, 1967, 1969, 1971, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008 UEFA Champions League/European Cup Winner (4): 1974, 1975, 1976, 2001 Runners-up (3): 1982, 1987, 1999 European Cup Winners' Cup: 1 1967 UEFA Cup: 1 1996 Intercontinental Cup: 2 1976, 2001 2008 was a good year for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:37
|
|
|
Oh I thought it had been about 4-5 years since they'd actually won the Bundesliga.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:39
|
|
|
Jose posted:When was the last time Bayern won meaningful silverwear? 2001 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:39
|
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:Yeah, people are only talking about Portsmouth's results being erased if they literally cease to exist before the end of the season. And just so we're clear on the likelihood of this actually happening, since the early days of the Football League when clubs were rising and falling every ten minutes, only two clubs have actually gone out of business mid-season - Accrington Stanley and Aldershot, both of whom were lovely Division Four sides with hardly any support. Thinking about it, this whole new "gigantic points deduction rule" is probably there to ensure that clubs can remain in the league, no matter what happens to them financially. Assuming they get relegated and look to be totally screwed financially, a supporter's trust could probably take over Portsmouth, tell all their previous creditors to gently caress off, and they'd still be allowed to start in the Championship next season (albeit on -50 points or something ridiculous).
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 11:44
|
|
|
DaveJB posted:And just so we're clear on the likelihood of this actually happening, since the early days of the Football League when clubs were rising and falling every ten minutes, only two clubs have actually gone out of business mid-season - Accrington Stanley and Aldershot, both of whom were lovely Division Four sides with hardly any support. Maybe. The concern is that no-one seems to know what the ownership situation at Portsmouth really is. Even the past owner (who is still owed money) doesn't even know who he should be talking to now to try and get it. If the club goes under the creditors may go after any assets they can: Players, the land the ground is on etc. Again, the land ownership situation is also completely unknown which is making people nervy. And a common conspiracy theory is that this has all been planned to allow lots of new flats to be built.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 12:23
|
|
|
Mewcenary posted:Maybe. The concern is that no-one seems to know what the ownership situation at Portsmouth really is. Even the past owner (who is still owed money) doesn't even know who he should be talking to now to try and get it. Exactly. It's all a bit murky who owns what, and what the club actually has. If there are no long term assets, it may get to the point where it's not worth keeping the club operating. Also, it's not like the current financial situation's the same as has operated through the decades of the football league.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 13:14
|
|
|
Mewcenary posted:Again, the land ownership situation is also completely unknown which is making people nervy. And a common conspiracy theory is that this has all been planned to allow lots of new flats to be built. Planning permission fr the land is tied to the clubs development. Essentially the club would have to cease to exist before that land can be used for flats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 15:05
|
|
|
I see the Premier League have an interesting way of sorting teams who are owed money out:BBC posted:The Premier League is set to use Portsmouth's share of the latest television monies to pay off the club's debts to other top-flight sides.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 15:32
|
|
|
Seksiness posted:Planning permission fr the land is tied to the clubs development. Essentially the club would have to cease to exist before that land can be used for flats. it will if their property developer owner doesn't put more money in
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 15:51
|
|
|
It would be nice if there was even an atom of light in this plethora of poo to make us feel better. As it is, we're coming up to a year of financial insecurity and boardroom hijinks where the only plus point has been beating Liverpool 2:0 - and even that might be erased from history. Winning the Cup was nice (not to mention it was also a laugh leading against AC Milan 2:0 in a competitive game) but losing the club over it doesn't quite seem worthwhile. Gaydamak can gently caress right off really. He had two options when it came to selling up and he chose Al Fahim, which kick-started the merry go round of awfulness. To complain about the confusion of ownership when he's a pretty significant contributing factor negates any sympathy for his missing £30 mil. A part of me hopes we go into administration sooner rather than later so he can do one. I don't think I've been aware of who our next game is against since the start of the season. There's genuinely no point in having an interest in what's going on on the pitch as it doesn't matter, we're not going to make it to the end of the season.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 15:54
|
|
|
JingleBells posted:I see the Premier League have an interesting way of sorting teams who are owed money out: Interesting. Also debatably legal. It's still money Portsmouth are contractually owned, I'm not sure the PL can legally change the order Portsmouth's creditors get money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 16:05
|
|
|
ephex posted:Sorry folks, but that is how it's done. And then some oval office will buy you out with loans secured against the club and start the process all over again!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 16:05
|
|
|
Dudley posted:Interesting. Also debatably legal. It's still money Portsmouth are contractually owned, I'm not sure the PL can legally change the order Portsmouth's creditors get money. its in the contract that the PL can do this
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 16:10
|
|
|
Oh whoops looks like Ebbsfleet is hosed after all. Turns out part of the initial purchase agreement included a commitment to pay the owners of the training ground a lump sum per year for 13 years, only 20% of which is for actual use of the facilities, the remainder being essentially a repayment on the covering of the purchase cost of the club. It's not a loan, honest, apparently. But if the payments stop the full amount becomes due. Hmm. Bonus: EUFC ownership is split 75% the society and 25% old shareholders. Some of the 25% are also shareholders of the company that owns the training facilities. The 25% also have power of veto on burdening the club with any debt, so the society cannot loan the club money, they can only inject cash. As society policy is not to spend membership fees until they become current (ie. not spending prepaid memberships before the actual membership period) there is no way of securing future membership fees so that they can be used up front, because the society is unable to provide loans to the club. Oh, and the training facilities aren't even used by the club, because they're so poo poo the manager would rather train at the ground instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 16:21
|
|
|
Vando posted:Oh whoops looks like Ebbsfleet is hosed after all. Ahahahaha what a terrible deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:04
|
|
|
Outrespective posted:Ahahahaha what a terrible deal. The best bit is that it seems absolutely noone from the society knew about this until trying to get out of the contract as it's bankrupting the club.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:10
|
|
|
Vando posted:The best bit is that it seems absolutely noone from the society knew about this until trying to get out of the contract as it's bankrupting the club. You are all Mike Ashley. Robert Peston has a few words on United's debt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:26
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:its in the contract that the PL can do this Doesn't matter what's in the contract if it turns out to be an illegal term though. Although if it's got into a contract like this it probably isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:32
|
|
|
Dudley posted:Doesn't matter what's in the contract if it turns out to be an illegal term though. Although if it's got into a contract like this it probably isn't. All it takes is the TV deal saying 'payments can be withheld to service football debts' and it's legit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:37
|
|
|
As I've mentioned before, my company sponsors Pompey so these are times I'm particularly interested in. It is strangely good publicity though due to the amount of extra coverage the team is getting. As long as none of the financiers admit to kiddy fiddling it should continue to be that way. However, I still want a nice (GENUINELY) rich person to come along and solve all the problems! Looking increasingly unlikely though. PFC are not an attractive bet right now as they are sat nicely right at the bottom of the league staring into the abyss of relegation. Let alone just how twisted the books are...
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
Scikar posted:And then some oval office will buy you out with loans secured against the club and start the process all over again! nope. 50+1 Rule posted:All Bundesliga clubs are organised as eingetragener Verein (eV), which is similar to a Non-Profit Organisation (NPO) in Britain or a Non-Profit Corporation (NPC) in the US – to give you some orientation.In 1999 the DFL (German Football League) acknowledged the growing economic relevance of football and the legal/tax issues coming with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 19:24
|
|
|
Can someone explain Real Madrids finances to me please? Because if they took out all those loans to buy players and pay their wages they have to be one of the most in debt clubs in the world yet Platini says nothing about them. What financial wizardry do they use to make it seem like they have none at all?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 19:28
|
|
|
ephex posted:Bundesliga Finances That is probably the best setup for a football club's finances you will find. Then again Barca's and Read Madrid's setup works well in theory, it would be a lot better imho if all presidential candidates were banned from even thinking about tapping up players. Bhyo posted:Can someone explain Real Madrids finances to me please? Real Madrid has a ton of debt, but they also have millions in assets and revenue to secure that debt. Not to mention the fees for Kaka and Ronaldo more or less are being paid by the extra revenue brought in by having those players in the side. It is really crazy how many jerseys those two players sell. If one of the midtable EPL clubs was smart they would have offered Beckham like 250k a week to turn out for them and probably ended up turning a profit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 19:41
|
|
|
I like how Portsmouth still owes money to Spurs despite selling Defoe, Crouch and Kranjcar to them. It is probably from when they bought Mendes, Davis and Pamarot in 2007. And from the Kaboul deal I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
willkill4food posted:That is probably the best setup for a football club's finances you will find. In RM's case, the city of Madrid is basically their sponsor. They can do stuff like this http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/eu-investigates-real-madrid-property-deal-572010.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
willkill4food posted:Real Madrid has a ton of debt, but they also have millions in assets and revenue to secure that debt. Not to mention the fees for Kaka and Ronaldo more or less are being paid by the extra revenue brought in by having those players in the side. It is really crazy how many jerseys those two players sell. Given their history and obvious ties to the monarchy and the Franco regime, Real Madrid have been able to get away with a lot to say the least (for example, Di Stefano was originally going to sign with Barcelona and the Spanish Football Federation blocked it, many believe due to the Franco regime), and as the de facto "Spanish club team" banks and everyone else bends over backwards to help them be successful (see the "flip" of the Ciudad Deportiva training ground sale alluded to by Orange Carebear). Then the socios provide an extremely consistent stream of revenue and they have a larger than European average stadium, with something like 80,000 total seats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 21:18
|
|
|
When your club's president is in bed with the owners of the largest private bank in Europe, you can get away with a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
The reason Madrid have done what they've done is hardly confusing. The team they had last year was a pile of poo poo. They were signing players out West Ham's reserves, which was insane. They got raped domestically by Barca, and then Benitez made them look like clowns in Europe, which was a big deal for the Spanish press. There's also the fact that the European Cup final will be held at the Bernabeu, and they want to be there. That doesn't change the fact that ultimately they're borrowing money to do this. €200m is hardly going to cripple them, but they haven't just got money to burn forever and ever. We now have a great silly season mechanic where you can link any player to Madrid for €100m, and if that fails, link them to Man City. Madrid can probably afford a couple more players, and then they'll have to work with what they've got. And nobody wants to go to City.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 22:22
|
|