|
Ragingsheep posted:Easy choice when its between an American businessman and a i don't pay much attention to management but that's just loving twisted. nobody who supports one club should be allowed to buy a different club. source?
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 19:47 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 20:49 |
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Spending 94% of your turnover on wages is not well off at all. those figures are for their Championship promotion season, when they invested heavily on a promotion gamble. iirc they didn't buy heavily in the summer, the squad that got them up easily was largely the squad that kept them up handily. They'll have spent far less than 94% on wages this season just gone (look at Stoke - who were in a similar position on coming up - infinitely better a year on even with plenty of new signings) and will still have a big chunk of this season's TV money available, let alone the new seasons.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 20:31 |
|
|
w00bi posted:Apparently the Chelsea board is upset at the Guardian article about Chelsea's debt. If they're upset about it they might want to contradict it, what they say is exactly what the article says.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 20:59 |
|
|
w00bi posted:Apparently the Chelsea board is upset at the Guardian article about Chelsea's debt. try reading the article m8, Fordstam Ltd is the shareholder of chelsea. The football club don't owe them any money, however fordstam owe roman £725m so if he wants his money back chelsea need to raise it.
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 21:09 |
|
|
partipo posted:i don't pay much attention to management but that's just loving twisted. nobody who supports one club should be allowed to buy a different club. Not everyone can be owned by a lifelong fan with a internet betting empire 
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 21:16 |
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:try reading the article m8, No I did, but if you look at the frontpage of the football section of the Guardian, it implies Chelsea owes Roman money. I didn't mean to say Chelsea refutes the article, just that an actual statement on the matter usually only happens when the board is genuinely upset. quote:however fordstam owe roman £725m so if he wants his money back chelsea need to raise it. Just curious if anybody knows how this works. If Chelsea paid off its debt to Fordstam, it's still liable for the debt Fordstam owes Roman? Wouldn't it rather be Fordstam will just use Chelsea to pay off the debt, rather than Chelsea obligated to pay their debt?
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 21:22 |
|
|
w00bi posted:Wouldn't it rather be Fordstam will just use Chelsea to pay off the debt, rather than Chelsea obligated to pay their debt? If Fordstam could use Chelsea to pay off the debt then Chelsea are obviously in a position where they're obligated to do so
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 23:14 |
|
|
Since Fordstam own Chelsea (and nothing else it seems), they could/would sell or dismantle the club or remove money from it in whatever way to pay Roman back. There's no mention of a clause that says Roman couldn't do it in a way that would make Chelsea insolvent, which I think is the case in the Liverpool example?
|
| # ? May 19, 2010 23:15 |
|
|
Byolante posted:Not everyone can be owned by a lifelong fan with a internet betting empire gently caress stoke i'm still angry about the ramsey hit
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 02:35 |
|
|
partipo posted:i don't pay much attention to management but that's just loving twisted. nobody who supports one club should be allowed to buy a different club. http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...er_usmanov.html The United supporting thing is something that I've seen tossed around. Might be fake though. e: It's the Sun so take a handful of salt. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...ticle267191.ece Ragingsheep fucked around with this message at May 20, 2010 around 02:46 |
| # ? May 20, 2010 02:43 |
|
|
i'm warming to kroenke a lot more now - i just hope whoever ends up taking on arsenal lets the club keeps letting us manage the club the way arsene likes. we win games, we get into europe, and we don't spend a fortune to do it. i mean i know it's been five years since a trophy but i prefer this spartan frugality over massive debt.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 03:42 |
|
|
partipo posted:i'm warming to kroenke a lot more now - i just hope whoever ends up taking on arsenal lets the club keeps letting us manage the club the way arsene likes. we win games, we get into europe, and we don't spend a fortune to do it. i mean i know it's been five years since a trophy but i prefer this spartan frugality over massive debt. Based on how he's acted with his American teams, he's not a meddling owner at all.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 03:55 |
|
|
w00bi posted:Wouldn't it rather be Fordstam will just use Chelsea to pay off the debt, rather than Chelsea obligated to pay their debt? Semantics, assuming the article is accurate (and the weasly refuting from Chelsea suggests it was) they can simply put the $736m of debt straight back onto the club much like the Glazers did buying Man Utd, requiring Chelsea to go try to borrow it or indeed on a legal ultimate basis to be sold for scrap just like Portsmouth. This would be somewhat unlikely because if it so happened that Roman DID suddenly decide to grab his cash, he'd get a lot more by going long term than he would be selling assets, the assets of most football clubs aren't worth huge money. To be fair though, it's no different to any other owner of 100% of a club, they can all take money out in any amount any time they like, really the only place it becomes relevant is if the companies go out of business, Roman would have a big call on Fordstam's assets before say, Tax men and airlines. He'd get ~$70m whereas as just an owner he'd get $0. Dudley fucked around with this message at May 20, 2010 around 07:27 |
| # ? May 20, 2010 07:24 |
|
|
guardian posted:It really is incredible but since the Glazers took over they have wasted £437m in fees and interest, more than the total ticket revenue (£398m) for the full five-year period of their ownership," said a MUST spokesman. "Every single penny we've spent on our tickets over their five-year ownership has been wasted. Or to put it another way, every one of us could have attended every match free of charge for the last five years and on top of that the club could have given every season-ticket holder £700 each – and would still have been no worse off." Didn't realise man utd were quite so hosed. Also that they'd rejected £1bn and £1.5bn bids from the middle east. Football is absolutely loving broken, I wish everywhere resembled the german leagues now. Bacon of the Sea fucked around with this message at May 20, 2010 around 07:51 |
| # ? May 20, 2010 07:46 |
|
|
It sucks Newcastle aren't planning on spending any money this season for the PL campaign but considering they expect to break even by the 2015/2016 season assuming we don't get relegated again at least we're on fairly secure footing.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 07:52 |
|
|
luvd posted:http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/...league-finances 100m/season in matchday revenue? now that's gangsta  also, i genuinely feel sorry for Utd and Liverpool fans. genuinely. besides the cunty ones, and Gary Neville.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 10:40 |
|
|
someone rebuy as :arsenalfanwhenanyfinancialscomeup: because
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 10:42 |
|
|
it's why it makes me so angry when people want wenger out
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 10:44 |
|
|
luvd posted:it's why it makes me so angry when people want wenger out my brother genuinely wants arsenal to take out £200m in loans to buy loads of players to win the CL and it doesn't matter if we'd end up in administration "because it'd be worth it"
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 10:47 |
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:my brother genuinely wants arsenal to take out £200m in loans to buy loads of players to win the CL and it doesn't matter if we'd end up in administration "because it'd be worth it" NOBODY HERE IS DOING A LEEDS i would rather see more years of trophy drought than see us buy a trophy, especially with UEFA's new fair play rules we've never failed to advance in the champions league in ten years, never placed lower than 4th in the league and never finished behind spurs so i have no big gripes. we always look good to make a run for the league, and consistently, consistently, if we fail to do it it's not on arsene wenger, it's usually pointless nonsense injuries that assault the first team i'm not saying arsene is completely perfect but i'd rather have him than any other manager in the world.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 12:11 |
|
|
partipo posted:nobody who supports one club should be allowed to buy a different club. This hasn't been pointed at and laughed at enough.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 12:12 |
|
|
Bacon of the Sea posted:Didn't realise man utd were quite so hosed. Also that they'd rejected £1bn and £1.5bn bids from the middle east. Football is absolutely loving broken, I wish everywhere resembled the german leagues now. Seriously. UEFA or FIFA need to set regulations against this sort of poo poo and I'm not saying this just because it happened to United. I'm saying it because 100+ year old clubs that are pillars of their respectable societies shouldn't be turned to milking cows by corrupt assholes. Of course neither will do poo poo.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 14:37 |
|
|
Der Shovel posted:Seriously. UEFA or FIFA need to set regulations against this sort of poo poo and I'm not saying this just because it happened to United. I'm saying it because 100+ year old clubs that are pillars of their respectable societies shouldn't be turned to milking cows by corrupt assholes. Of course neither will do poo poo. Sadly, I think multiple major clubs are going to have to collapse to the financial detriment of their respective leagues before you get any widespread financial reform. People are not going to put in smart, prudent measures until there's a historical example to prove (for at least a little while) that it's not the people implementing the model who were at fault, but the model itself. Otherwise, people will just say "oh, that's Hicks & Gillett's fault" or "not everyone is like the Glazers. What a sad, tragic one-off." This might not be the best example, but the NASL turned into a speculative, financial shitshow that collapsed due to speculation and overspending on ventures whose profitability was limited. This is the main reason why the MLS is so focused on financial stability and sustainability. I suspect the league could probably benefit in terms of ticket revenues and popularity in the short term from spending like the Cosmos did on some aging superstars and famous names, but the memory of what happened to the NASL is what keeps the MLS from potentially self-destructing like that.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 14:51 |
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:my brother genuinely wants arsenal to take out £200m in loans to buy loads of players to win the CL and it doesn't matter if we'd end up in administration "because it'd be worth it" You have to admit, there's a certain amount of frustration in claiming to be one of the top teams, but knowing that your team is setup such that you'll never win anything.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 15:07 |
|
|
Nothus posted:You have to admit, there's a certain amount of frustration in claiming to be one of the top teams, but knowing that your team is setup such that you'll never win anything. I laugh at Arsenal jokes, but from what I can tell watching them play, that team really is only two or three decent transfers away from some trophies. Maybe Wenger is being overcautious or just too stubborn, but it's not like it's hopeless. You have some incredible players at that club and the youth teams you guys field really are something else.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 15:17 |
|
|
TyChan posted:I laugh at Arsenal jokes, but from what I can tell watching them play, that team really is only two or three decent transfers away from some trophies. Maybe Wenger is being overcautious or just too stubborn, but it's not like it's hopeless. You have some incredible players at that club and the youth teams you guys field really are something else. it's far from hopeless. around january i really thought we could take the premiership but injuries and goalkeeping errors lost us points we should have had. the only thing i think we truly need is a keeper and maybe a young centre back.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 17:49 |
|
|
partipo posted:it's far from hopeless. around january i really thought we could take the premiership but injuries and goalkeeping errors lost us points we should have had. the only thing i think we truly need is a keeper and maybe a young centre back. And a plan B when plan A isn't working.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 18:41 |
|
|
GOM posted:And a plan B when plan A isn't working. I wonder how much of the lack of a Plan B comes from not having the players capable of playing in multiple styles. That might change if Arsenal gets the right kind of CB and a new keeper with better organizational abilities?
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 18:56 |
|
|
Jose posted:It sucks Newcastle aren't planning on spending any money this season for the PL campaign but considering they expect to break even by the 2015/2016 season assuming we don't get relegated again at least we're on fairly secure footing. I'd put money on you getting relegated at some point between now and 2015/16. You can't expect to come up from the Championship, spend no money and stay up. Just ask Burnley or West Brom.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:13 |
|
|
brapbrapbrap posted:I'd put money on you getting relegated at some point between now and 2015/16. You can't expect to come up from the Championship, spend no money and stay up. Just ask Burnley or West Brom. We just plan on spending no money this summer as far as I know. Its to cover the cost of getting relegated in the first place. We'll have lost the highest earners by then. We're definitely going to be midtable at best in that time but eh, its better than getting relegated again and once we're debt free can build from there.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:17 |
|
|
brapbrapbrap posted:I'd put money on you getting relegated at some point between now and 2015/16. You can't expect to come up from the Championship, spend no money and stay up. Just ask Burnley or West Brom. I don't think they're planning on not spending anything until 2016 though, are they? I was under the impression that they aren't spending anything/much this season so they can get a bit of financial stability. I think Newcastle will be fine this coming season. The squad they have is that of a mid-table Premier League team. They only went down because of major gently caress ups with the managers, not because they had a poor squad. Whoever comes up from the playoffs is likely to go back down and given West Brom's recent history, so are they. That leaves one spot between Wigan, Newcastle, Sunderland, West Ham, Bolton, Wolves and Birmingham, some of whom had good seasons last year, but are capable of a poor one this.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:20 |
|
|
I honestly don't think that squad is good enough. There is not one Premiership level striker in the squad and you need at least one of them to stay up. The only Premiership level players they have IMO are Enrique, S.Taylor and Gutierrez. People might say Nolan and Coloccini, but they were both crap the last time they played at Premiership level, why would next season be any different? I also don't rate their manager, think he'll be out of his depth next season. I simply don't believe it's possible for ANY Championship side to come up to the Premiership and survive without spending money, the gap is just too big now.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:30 |
|
|
brapbrapbrap posted:I simply don't believe it's possible for ANY Championship side to come up to the Premiership and survive without spending money, the gap is just too big now. I saw a Match of the 80s episode talking about how Watford really took the 1st Division by storm after getting promoted in 1982-1983 and reached second place. It's sad that kind of thing can't take place anymore.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:34 |
|
|
TyChan posted:I saw a Match of the 80s episode talking about how Watford really took the 1st Division by storm after getting promoted in 1982-1983 and reached second place. It's sad that kind of thing can't take place anymore. Yeah, I think Clough's Derby team in the 70's won the 2nd division and then won the 1st division the next season. Those days are long gone though.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:36 |
|
|
brapbrapbrap posted:I honestly don't think that squad is good enough. There is not one Premiership level striker in the squad and you need at least one of them to stay up. The only Premiership level players they have IMO are Enrique, S.Taylor and Gutierrez. People might say Nolan and Coloccini, but they were both crap the last time they played at Premiership level, why would next season be any different? I also don't rate their manager, think he'll be out of his depth next season. I would say Smith and Barton are Premier League quality. Nolan too. Coloccini, it remains to be seen. He was poor last time and good this season. Not sure if it's that the Championship is his level or he has settled better into English football. I agree that usually, a team has to spend money to stay up, but this is a better squad than usually comes up. I don't think they'll set the league on fire or anything, but there are just so many weak teams in the league that makes me think they'll be fine.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 20:45 |
|
|
brapbrapbrap posted:Yeah, I think Clough's Derby team in the 70's won the 2nd division and then won the 1st division the next season. Those days are long gone though. Reading and Ipswich were both very impressive in their debut seasons.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 21:11 |
|
|
Hull were impressive for half a season too.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 22:49 |
|
|
EC10 posted:100m/season in matchday revenue? now that's gangsta I love how City's 15m match day revenue is smack between relegated Portsmouth's 11m and almost relegated West Ham's 18m.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 23:29 |
|
|
Der Shovel posted:Seriously. UEFA or FIFA need to set regulations against this sort of poo poo and I'm not saying this just because it happened to United. I'm saying it because 100+ year old clubs that are pillars of their respectable societies shouldn't be turned to milking cows by corrupt assholes. Of course neither will do poo poo. what would you suggest? under the glazers utd's commercial deals have surpassed 200m and rising, matchday revenue has gone up so they probably have a pretty good case for saying they are doing fine. I agree with you but i'm just pointing out it would be pretty hard to stop it.
|
| # ? May 20, 2010 23:57 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 20:49 |
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:what would you suggest? under the glazers utd's commercial deals have surpassed 200m and rising, matchday revenue has gone up so they probably have a pretty good case for saying they are doing fine. I agree with you but i'm just pointing out it would be pretty hard to stop it.
|
| # ? May 21, 2010 00:01 |
|
