singe Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 57 minutes ago, kowenicki said: Spot on. All very free market Utopia, but two facts: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/reader-comments/p/comment/link/457038831 and the fact the League is a club that is supposed to benefit all it's members. The Prem are proposing to reduce the payments to lower league clubs and they have fed the wage inflation, and will potentially directly benefit from some clubs demise in the future by bribing for B Teams to be allowed in . Clearly they will not be so obvious to do it now. It is clear the FL are majorly at fault yet that is downplayed in the article to champion the Prem-how self serving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 5 minutes ago, singe said: All very free market Utopia, but two facts: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/reader-comments/p/comment/link/457038831 and the fact the League is a club that is supposed to benefit all it's members. The Prem are proposing to reduce the payments to lower league clubs and they have fed the wage inflation, and will potentially directly benefit from some clubs demise in the future by bribing for B Teams to be allowed in . Clearly they will not be so obvious to do it now. It is clear the FL are majorly at fault yet that is downplayed in the article to champion the Prem-how self serving. The PL and the EFL are two different clubs though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythemostimportantkick Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 27 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: Keep these kind of posts coming lads. Very enjoyable.... Anyone else got any driving in or near Bury anecdotes? I know some lovely little cut throughs around the wash lane area. DM me if your intrigued Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythemostimportantkick Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 18 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: On my only trip to Bury I missed the turning for the business park and had to go round the motorway roundabout again. I've been living off that story on the after dinner circuit for years now. If it’s the business park I’m thinking of you could have easily gone to the next lights and thrown a left. Amateur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, simplythemostimportantkick said: If it’s the business park I’m thinking of you could have easily gone to the next lights and thrown a left. Amateur If you are ever in the audience when I'm doing a turn please don't mention that, it would ruin the denouement of the tale completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 8 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: The PL and the EFL are two different clubs though... Absolutely, and I disagree with Martin Samuel that all has been glorious since the split. Scudamore negotiated well to get the revenue, and that is fair enough, but the EFL has been woefully conversely as weak since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweeperKeeper Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 38 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: Keep these kind of posts coming lads. Very enjoyable.... Anyone else got any driving in or near Bury anecdotes? Either the mourning period is over, or Oldham fans express their grief in a very weird way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 28 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: The PL and the EFL are two different clubs though... Exactly - the top 20 clubs are opted out so they can retain the bulk of monies earned. For the sake of argument, in 1991 let’s say income generated from TV rights, sponsorship et al was shared amongst the 92 thus; Div 1. £1m to each club Div 2. £500k Div 3. £250k Div 4. £125k Today, those numbers are something like; Prem £90m Champ £20m L1 £1.5m L2 £500k. So, while the journo - who could have been reading the oafc hashtag prior to writing that article - clearly influenced by the political ideology of the newspaper he writes for, argues soundly that it is Bury’s owners who must carry the can..... I’m still saying it’s utterly immoral for a footballer to be earning £500k a week.... and that is only afforded by the capitalist greed of the opted out top tier. The numbers he quotes - that the Premier League share in solidarity payments - sound impressive in isolation, but are minuscule in reality. It needs heavier regulation. Also, using the Tesco analogy, while some corner shops still co-exist, Tesco have seen many of their smaller competitors out of business often through acquisitions - One Stop, Premier, Budgens & Londis are now all owned by Tesco & contributed to the decimation of local amenities and often treat their suppliers & shareholders with utter contempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfatjoe1 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 A form of nationalisation/municipalisation is the answer. Nationalise the lot. Football shouldn't be reduced to balance sheets. The endless bollocks on sites like this about business processes ('i know more about spreadsheets than you,' 'Companies House,' blaha blah blah) is totally pointless as well as tedious. Football, for most fans, can not be reduced to business. If you've got a football soul then you need to think outside your tiny little world that pre-supposes all things related to the world of business are somehow sacrosanct. They aren't. What these last few years show is how utterly corrupt it can be. It also shows that it's a model that doesn't work for most clubs. So stop reducing it to the immoral world of grubby capitalism. Of course, Sky and the PL have made it worse. They're obsessed with money. They changed the language of football in the 1990s from 'community' to 'business,' and everyone went along like a bunch of sheep. That language reflected the values that shaped the game. That's what matters. It's clearly killing football. It doesn't work for most. Transformative for a few at the top end, but even clubs like Chelsea and City have need massive subsidies from egotistical billionaires in order to compete. It's utterly obscene. Football clubs are central to communities of like-minded people. They serve a much greater purpose than merely entertaining people. This is based on heritage, culture and social interaction. For all you Tory knobs, if you like, they help heal Broken Britain (itself a product of a system that works for a few people but convinces sad little cretins sitting on the sidelines that they actually have a stake in world that actually gives them crumbs). If successive governments can pump endless millions into high culture, watched and enjoyed by countless hundreds, then the culture that came through working communities needs to be recognised and appreciated. It should be protected. Nationalise the lot, in whatever form that might take. That's the only long-term solution to making them safe and preventing unscrupulous bastards from the world of business from destroying them. Belated Happy Joe Royle Day (yesterday, of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 9 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: Exactly - the top 20 clubs are opted out so they can retain the bulk of monies earned they earn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 12 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: Exactly - the top 20 clubs are opted out so they can retain the bulk of monies earned. For the sake of argument, in 1991 let’s say income generated from TV rights, sponsorship et al was shared amongst the 92 thus; Div 1. £1m to each club Div 2. £500k Div 3. £250k Div 4. £125k Today, those numbers are something like; Prem £90m Champ £20m L1 £1.5m L2 £500k. So, while the journo - who could have been reading the oafc hashtag prior to writing that article - clearly influenced by the political ideology of the newspaper he writes for, argues soundly that it is Bury’s owners who must carry the can..... I’m still saying it’s utterly immoral for a footballer to be earning £500k a week.... and that is only afforded by the capitalist greed of the opted out top tier. The numbers he quotes - that the Premier League share in solidarity payments - sound impressive in isolation, but are minuscule in reality. Also, using the Tesco analogy, while some corner shops still co-exist, Tesco have seen many of their smaller competitors out of business, contributed to the decimation of local amenities and often treat their suppliers & shareholders with utter contempt. But just throwing more money at lower league clubs will solve nothing, it'll just be consumed like it is now. How do you not get this? It seems like you just want the Premier League clubs to have a bit less rather than sort out what you're adamant is a situation that's going to see other clubs follow Bury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: Division 1 ‘earned it’ in 1991, then they opted out to keep more of it. It shouldn’t have been allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Just now, HarryBosch said: But just throwing more money at lower league clubs will solve nothing, it'll just be consumed like it is now. How do you not get this? ....it comes hand in hand with heavier regulation. Lower league clubs have to be run as community assets. With more money comes rules that you cannot do what Mr. Day and Mr. Dale have done.... to prevent Bury from happening again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: ....it comes hand in hand with heavier regulation. Lower league clubs have to be run as community assets. With more money comes rules that you cannot do what Mr. Day and Mr. Dale have done.... to prevent Bury from happening again. Do you not think something like that might prevent the next clubs to get into a mess from being saved when they would have been otherwise? This has probably happened many times - perfectly honest, competent owners have probably bought clubs who wouldn't have done so under more stringent regulation. I dare say numerous dodgy bastards have also bought clubs and it's somehow turned out alright aswell. I can also see the argument that the type of person who decides he/she wants to own a football club might be more willing to meet more draconian rules than they would when buying another type of business but I see my scenario being much more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: ....it comes hand in hand with heavier regulation. Lower league clubs have to be run as community assets. With more money comes rules that you cannot do what Mr. Day and Mr. Dale have done.... to prevent Bury from happening again. What about clubs where the owners have spent/risked a lot of their's and their families own money and ran their clubs competently and honestly - implemented the kind of plan you'd like us to have - who would then be held back and prevented from seeing that plan through by such regulation? Why should people like that and that clubs fans suffer because one club has been expelled from the league since 1992? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: What about clubs where the owners have spent/risked a lot of their's and their families own money and ran their clubs competently and honestly - implemented the kind of plan you'd like us to have - who would then be held back and prevented from seeing that plan through by such regulation? Why should people like that and that clubs fans suffer because one club has been expelled from the league since 1992? I don't see how the two things conflict. If an wealthy individual wishes to lavish/gift his/her earned wealth on a football club they love, that's up to them / they should be free to do so..... albeit there should be rules that mean they cannot just pull the plug, leaving said football club with liabilities it cannot afford without the sugar daddy income. What shouldn't be allowed is what Day did to Bury... which is burden them with so much debt from mortgages/loans, that they patently couldn't afford to pay back from their income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 16 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: Do you not think something like that might prevent the next clubs to get into a mess from being saved when they would have been otherwise? This has probably happened many times - perfectly honest, competent owners have probably bought clubs who wouldn't have done so under more stringent regulation. I dare say numerous dodgy bastards have also bought clubs and it's somehow turned out alright aswell. I can also see the argument that the type of person who decides he/she wants to own a football club might be more willing to meet more draconian rules than they would when buying another type of business but I see my scenario being much more likely. ....one might hope that it would leave only those who's motives towards the club they wanted to own, were genuine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, lookersstandandy said: I don't see how the two things conflict. If an wealthy individual wishes to lavish/gift his/her earned wealth on a football club they love, that's up to them / they should be free to do so..... albeit there should be rules that mean they cannot just pull the plug, leaving said football club with liabilities it cannot afford without the sugar daddy income. What shouldn't be allowed is what Day did to Bury... which is burden them with so much debt from mortgages/loans, that they patently couldn't afford to pay back from their income. But you're adamant loads of clubs, us included, are on the brink - what happens to them if they suddenly can't operate in a manner that, while far from healthy, is allowing them to keep their heads above water until the next big player sale or cup tie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, lookersstandandy said: ....one might hope that it would leave only those who's motives towards the club they wanted to own, were genuine. I've not seen you say it (that I can recall) but a lot of people who, like you, think loads of clubs are going to go to the wall also seem to share a consensus of opinion that there's nobody out there to buy us or clubs like us. "What if Abdallah does go? Then what? Who'll buy us? Nobody " Doing what you want would mean there'd be even fewer potential buyers. Or less than none if these people are right (thankfully they're not) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 59 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: But you're adamant loads of clubs, us included, are on the brink - what happens to them if they suddenly can't operate in a manner that, while far from healthy, is allowing them to keep their heads above water until the next big player sale or cup tie? This tells us many are on the brink..... unsustainable amounts of debt will cause a crash..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, lookersstandandy said: This tells us many are on the brink..... unsustainable amounts of debt will cause a crash..... Wolves and Blackburn's figures look worrying on the face of it but does he go on to add any context? If those losses have resulted in debt (does he go on to demonstrate that they have?) Wolves don't strike me as being in a position where they'd be unable to service it. Does he say they are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 hour ago, HarryBosch said: I've not seen you say it (that I can recall) but a lot of people who, like you, think loads of clubs are going to go to the wall also seem to share a consensus of opinion that there's nobody out there to buy us or clubs like us. "What if Abdallah does go? Then what? Who'll buy us? Nobody " Doing what you want would mean there'd be even fewer potential buyers. Or less than none if these people are right (thankfully they're not) I haven't said it.... and if it - heavier regulation - means the likes of Day, Dale, Chris Moore.... and those with dubious backgrounds / opaque motives are removed from the queue.... I'm perfectly fine with that. With sensible levels of - for want of a better phrase - 'football taxation' - and tighter rules on how a club can spend it's income..... maybe competent local businessmen/women would come forward...... I make an assumption many are put off because of the reckless behaviour of the many..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 27 minutes ago, HarryBosch said: Wolves and Blackburn's figures look worrying on the face of it but does he go on to add any context? If those losses have resulted in debt (does he go on to demonstrate that they have?) Wolves don't strike me as being in a position where they'd be unable to service it. Does he say they are? Both clubs' owners have underwitten their losses.... alebit sometimes in the form of 'loans', which presumably require paying back(!)..... neither are in imminent danger of going out of business..... but in the case of b@stard rovers, has that been a success for Venky's and their supporters? How long are they prepared to continue? Will they end up like Bolton? Meanwhile, Alexis Sanchez buys his 5th rolex in the last hour..... but it's ok, cos Yoonited can afford it. What about the other 51 posting a loss in the FY? We posted a profit, so we must be ok right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 It's currently within the power of the clubs to tighten things up. It isn't in the power of the EFL because the EFL is the clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 41 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: ....one might hope that it would leave only those who's motives towards the club they wanted to own, were genuine. It won't matter if Oldham Council are given powers to meet sure they're doing everything right, surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.