|
oystertoadfish posted:but abu dhabi bought manchester city, right? 'abu dhabi united' The real question is, what does a starting XI with both City and Uniteds squads look like? Annnnnnnd GO!
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2010 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 03:32 |
|
|
TyChan posted:Liverpool fans and other curious people might be interested in seeing what Managing Director Christian Purslow has supposedly admitted about the club's finances. Gimme the tl;dr.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2010 02:11
|
|
|
Yes please Indian Sugar Daddy!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2010 05:17
|
|
|
Bacon of the Sea posted:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8522283.stm Manufactured drama to keep people paying above average interest for a few months of the year?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2010 18:42
|
|
|
Dudley posted:I think the theory is to stop clubs buying players from clubs they're about to face in the cup and the like. Hehe "This just in. Ahead of Real Madrid's second leg CL clash against Lyon, facing a 1-0 deficit, Real Madrid have bought the entire starting XI of Lyon!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
Jose posted:Has Peter Storrie had his head in the sand for 3 years or waht? I am going to assume this is a rhetorical question.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 23:08
|
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:Yeah, if Liverpool miss out this season, it shouldn't change that much. They'll be pretty much guaranteed Europa League football at least, if United win tomorrow. They won't get anything like the same TV money, but they'll have multiple home games and an opportunity to protect their seeding coefficient. Something else to consider in terms of securing new investors is the strength of Liverpool's history/fan base as a potential team to invest in. We may not be lucky enough to secure the Chelsea/Man City levels of sugar daddy bankrolls, but Liverpool is a good target for potential investors with a popular and widely recognizable team.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2010 09:22
|
|
|
Iggy Pop Barker posted:Bellamy was pretty much perma-crocked too while he was there wasn't he? At least they were able to sell him on for decent money, but buying him, Dyer and Ljungberg, all made of paper by that stage, so closely together was crazy. I enjoy watching Ljungberg in MLS now hah.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2010 07:45
|
|
|
Big Black Sock posted:Anfeild isn't even at full capacity all the time now, what would happen if for the next x amount of years the team just got worse and worse because all the money was going to the stadium and you couldn't reinforce the squad, you think the fans would all of a sudden start piling in?(Not to mention the raised ticket prices) Actually I'm pretty sure the Pompey game on Monday was notable because it was the first time Anfield's non-away section had not been sold out in like forever. Us playing like poo poo + it being Pompey + Monday night does sort of explain that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 19:56
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:That's more usually called "home" I prefer to talk in the negative, as in non-home (away) and non-away (home). Its more exciting.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 20:03
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Don't you mean non-boring? Touche!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 20:07
|
|
|
Couch posted:He'll rejoin and run them into the ground (purposefully I mean). The real question is how will we ever know if its on purpose or not?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
luvd posted:They do not have two 'world class' keepers. Howard is better than anything England has right now, thassa fact.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2010 19:23
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:No he isn't. He's a decent keeper, but Hart is better. Hart's Senior England squad experience is like 2 friendlies, hes 23 and probably won't play a game. He could end up being a fantastic England keeper but I will take Howard's like 50 caps and international experience blocking a gajillion shots behind our lovely defense.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2010 19:43
|
|
|
Scikar posted:The only reason Hart won't play much at the WC is to avoid burning him out at the future. If you think it's because he's not as good as David James then firstly you're wrong, and secondly there's a huge difference between "better than David James" and "world class". I think we can all agree James is terrible.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2010 22:06
|
|
|
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 21, 2010 00:29
|
|
|
Der Shovel posted:If that's what it takes to get rid of that revolting garden gnome and his subhuman sons, I'll welcome it with open arms. gently caress, I'll take a decade of midtable obscurity if that gets the club better owners. This might be crazy, but what exactly makes you think that United (or Liverpool in a more recent example) would ever be able to rise to the top again? You can't sustain a top club on local academy players anymore, or hell, even players from your own country. Much of their money comes from their global brand and spending a decade in mid table, outside of the CL and with only the occasional cup run to highlight them, would probably cause a huge crash all around their revenue stream (just like it will for Liverpool). Lose the prestige of winning the league and going deep in the CL each year and you lose some of those millions of replica kits sold each year, the 67k person statdium has fewer games and fewer sold out games, lower ticket prices, less demand for luxury/corporate suites, less lucrative sponsorship deals, etc etc. Essentially what I'm saying is if a team like Liverpool or United lost their 5 or 6 best players and then were forced to spend in a financially responsible way, what evidence is there that they would ever win the league or even make the CL again? I'm afraid I don't see any reason that Liverpool will ever be dominant again if we have to sell of Torres/Gerrard to balance the books and then cap our transfer fees at -15m a year.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2010 02:06
|
|
|
Healbot posted:There'll be no real bid at all, H&G will stay on top of their mountain of debts, abandon all hope ye fans of Liverpool.  Midnight- posted:I imagine Huang's sttaement is just hanging on a technicality, and that the first round of 'bids' that Broughton was on about was actually just expressions of interest and detailed proposals. Rather than 'formal' bids. It's frustrating because of the impossibility of a regular fan peering through all the bullshit to figure out if anything positive is actually going on.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2010 18:04
|
|
|
Well, the kit is already red...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2010 00:51
|
|
|
8raz posted:we will truly never wok alone At this point, the only way for clubs to move forward is to give up the best players to Man City and Chelsea, or find their own way to throw truck loads of money around. As an American whose country is already owned by China anyway, I say 'Ni Hao!"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2010 01:28
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:There was a shot on TV during the game in Dublin of a group of fans in the new shirt with green and gold scarves, can't wait to see them on Monday. I wonder what this year's version of "well the season tickets were already bought" will be. IM SO ANGRY AT WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE CLUB, gently caress YOU GLAZERS! HERE IS 800 POUNDS FOR MY SEASON TICKET YOU oval office BAGS!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2010 06:34
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Liverpool made big news about an official statement for today. It must have been worth putting everyone on edge on a Friday night... Heres an  for all the good reporting on our financial situation you have been doing. Got to accept that the real action is behind the scenes and its all speculation until someone actually accepts a bid. I've already come to the conclusion that it won't happen until the window closes 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2010 06:36
|
|
|
I hope he barely sleeps the next 3 weeks, tormented by the growing realization that his financial empire is on the verge of collapse.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2010 23:58
|
|
|
Iggy Pop Barker posted:with no disrespect to Zilina, it's when these players (and probably not McEachran yet as he's an irl babby) get even regular bench spots and cameos in the prem and against decent overseas teams - or even starts against the bad teams - that i'll be a bit more convinced. What reason do Chelsea and Roman have for wanting to slowly/painfully develop youth players? He wants trophies and he wants them, like, yesterday. Why would he give a gently caress about spending a few seasons of being good, but not amazing, so maybe they can develop a couple of solid players, when he can just loving buy whoever he wants? Even if the 'lol monopoly money' days are over at Chelsea, Roman seems comfortable with spending 40-60m a year in net spending if it will ensure him PL title runs and at least CL semi finals.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 22:01
|
|
|
w00bi posted:Well UEFA's new rules will prevent Chelsea from buying replacements just from Roman's personal bank account. Thus you have to look internally as long as you don't make a huge profit. I look forward to Roman getting around that by charging 50k pounds for Chelsea Season tickets, buying them all himself and then reselling them for 1k pounds each.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
w00bi posted:One would hope UEFA somehow prevents this. Haha or what about Roman getting a rich Chelsea fan to pay the club 10m for John Terry to show up at the fans birthday party and then Roman hooks him up with a sweet business deal? Maybe get a business associate who owes Roman money to pay that money to the club by hiring them to come play an exhibition game in his backyard? Surely there are ways for Roman (or the group that owns City now) to turn their billions into 'revenue' for their clubs to facilitate transfers/wages?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 22:17
|
|
|
Noxville posted:A certain degree of creative accounting is probably expected, totally gaming the system is going to be easily spotted and punished for clear breaching of the rules. You're being silly if you think anything like these scenarios would possibly happen. I was coming up with some silly/obvious examples (birthday party, come on) but my point was that there must be dozens of ways for a rich owner to sneak 200k here, 100k there into his clubs revenue stream throughout the year for a man with Roman's connections. It would be obvious if Chelsea's revenue was suddenly 50m higher, but it would be tough to pin a lot of things as obvious and clear cut examples of rules violations.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 22:26
|
|
|
Money is money and I will take it. Between 50m for a broken Torres and this, NESV have already proven themselves better at finances than H&G ever were.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2011 01:11
|
|
|
euroboy posted:The first new sponsor is in, and it's this obscure company called Carlsberg... Not surprising given how utterly poo poo Arsenals sponsorship deals are. Will feel wrong seeing Carlsberg on anything but a Liverpool top though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2011 06:47
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:I wonder if UEFA will step in to decide whether or not it's market value. Just like they stepped in on that City deal?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2011 22:25
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Also, everyone in the financial markets is really wary of big IPOs right now because Facebook fell so flat and its share price has declined so much since IPO Day (~25% so far iirc), so any other big IPO right now is likely to fall flat as well. Facebook IPO only hurt uninformed small investors. I doubt any big fund managers lost a lot on it because they all avoided it (there was a long string of reports in the weeks prior to it about facebook failing to monetize mobile and not being as profitable in the future as predicted).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
el gaviero posted:This isn't true. The IPO wouldn't have priced otherwise. Facebook gave around 25% of the IPO to retail investors, but the other 75% went to large, experienced funds. What makes you think otherwise? That may be true, but how does that compare to other IPO's? My understanding, which may be wrong, of the facebook IPO is that a significantly larger % of the stocks ended up in the hands of small investors by the end of day 1 than is typical for less 'exciting' IPOs.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 03:32 |
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It's always struck me how socialist American sports seem in general tbh. Even down to that draft system with the worst teams getting first dibs on new players, when compared to the free market survival of the fittest you see in world football.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2013 03:19
|
|