As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Old Rosie wrote:Can anyone explain to me how the TV revenue will go up when you have an inferior product to sell?
It's a done deal for the next few years. Money is in place. It remains to be seen if the product deteriorates. I very much doubt it.
That's the next few years though. Football clubs, like all major businesses, have financial plans that are far more forward thinking than next years money.
This is talking about the whole structure of football and placing English clubs at a disadvantage to the rest of Europe. Spain has recently become the 'league to be in' and it is no coincidence that they recently started to deal in wages net-tax to try and keep or obtain the best players.
If we have a set of rules that restricts the trade of the best talent to the Premier League it is churlish to argue that the quality will remain unaffected.
If Lionel Messi was being paid half the money he is being paid right now, would it make him a lesser footballer? I don't think so.
If top players were offered roughly the same money to play for Arsenal or Manchester City...who do you think they would prefer to play for? And who would be the most successful team between the two?
Your comment about the Spanish league...I'm not sure if you are correct. That league has always been weighted in favour of Barcelona and Real Madrid. One is subsidised by local government. The other is subsidised by the royal family. Two teams in it. Same as Scotland. Boring.
SteveO 35 wrote:A shareholder of a club can pump whatever money he likes into his team. There are hundreds of companies out there funded by wealthy owners who haven't posted a profit in years - its not like they get shut down by some sort of governing body like the London Stock Exchange is it?
If some lunatic wants to write off £1 billion having a bit of fun then who are the FA to judge?
It's not the FA involved here. It's the Premier League. I'm assuming they have separate powers.
Old Rosie wrote:Can anyone explain to me how the TV revenue will go up when you have an inferior product to sell?
It's a done deal for the next few years. Money is in place. It remains to be seen if the product deteriorates. I very much doubt it.
That's the next few years though. Football clubs, like all major businesses, have financial plans that are far more forward thinking than next years money.
This is talking about the whole structure of football and placing English clubs at a disadvantage to the rest of Europe. Spain has recently become the 'league to be in' and it is no coincidence that they recently started to deal in wages net-tax to try and keep or obtain the best players.
If we have a set of rules that restricts the trade of the best talent to the Premier League it is churlish to argue that the quality will remain unaffected.
If Lionel Messi was being paid half the money he is being paid right now, would it make him a lesser footballer? I don't think so.
If top players were offered roughly the same money to play for Arsenal or Manchester City...who do you think they would prefer to play for? And who would be the most successful team between the two?
Your comment about the Spanish league...I'm not sure if you are correct. That league has always been weighted in favour of Barcelona and Real Madrid. One is subsidised by local government. The other is subsidised by the royal family. Two teams in it. Same as Scotland. Boring.
Are you serious?
Nobody was saying what the player gets paid dictates how good they are rather that the best players are unlikely to play for an English side when they can earn double elsewhere.
Spin it round regarding Messi then. Do you seem him ripping up his 250k+net a week contract with Barcelona to join Man City who by law can pay him 75k tops of which he has to pay 50% to HRMC?
WIth regards to Spain the point is valid. Yes, Real Madrid and Barcelona do live by their own rules but the tide is shifting more and more towrads Spain having the most exciting teams as a whole and the TV revenues demanded by all clubs has gone through the roof. Five years ago England was the place to come however that is no longer the case and as all things the cycle has moved on and Spanish football is now en vogue.
Football is this country has peaked in terms of its status in the world game and to bring in a rule that prevents teams competing on a level playing field is so smallminded.
I am not sure we will be so impressed with this law if it was enforced when Jack Wilshere moves abroard to fulfill his earning potential thjat was so heavily restricted in England.
Old Rosie wrote:Can anyone explain to me how the TV revenue will go up when you have an inferior product to sell?
It's a done deal for the next few years. Money is in place. It remains to be seen if the product deteriorates. I very much doubt it.
That's the next few years though. Football clubs, like all major businesses, have financial plans that are far more forward thinking than next years money.
This is talking about the whole structure of football and placing English clubs at a disadvantage to the rest of Europe. Spain has recently become the 'league to be in' and it is no coincidence that they recently started to deal in wages net-tax to try and keep or obtain the best players.
If we have a set of rules that restricts the trade of the best talent to the Premier League it is churlish to argue that the quality will remain unaffected.
If Lionel Messi was being paid half the money he is being paid right now, would it make him a lesser footballer? I don't think so.
If top players were offered roughly the same money to play for Arsenal or Manchester City...who do you think they would prefer to play for? And who would be the most successful team between the two?
Your comment about the Spanish league...I'm not sure if you are correct. That league has always been weighted in favour of Barcelona and Real Madrid. One is subsidised by local government. The other is subsidised by the royal family. Two teams in it. Same as Scotland. Boring.
Are you serious?
Nobody was saying what the player gets paid dictates how good they are rather that the best players are unlikely to play for an English side when they can earn double elsewhere.
Spin it round regarding Messi then. Do you seem him ripping up his 250k+net a week contract with Barcelona to join Man City who by law can pay him 75k tops of which he has to pay 50% to HRMC?
WIth regards to Spain the point is valid. Yes, Real Madrid and Barcelona do live by their own rules but the tide is shifting more and more towrads Spain having the most exciting teams as a whole and the TV revenues demanded by all clubs has gone through the roof. Five years ago England was the place to come however that is no longer the case and as all things the cycle has moved on and Spanish football is now en vogue.
Football is this country has peaked in terms of its status in the world game and to bring in a rule that prevents teams competing on a level playing field is so smallminded.
I am not sure we will be so impressed with this law if it was enforced when Jack Wilshere moves abroard to fulfill his earning potential thjat was so heavily restricted in England.
If Spain takes the best footballers in the world by paying stupid money and giving them dodgy tax breaks....so be it.
They can't possibly get ALL the best players. With just two teams.
Call me small minded if you like. And churlish. But football, worldwide, is a business. And should be properly regulated. Like the banks should have been.
Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Not being funny here but it is smallminded again to bring the banking industry into the same equation as football. Both are very different beasts.
Both warped and fucked, but very different!
Banks have one thing and one thing only to please........shareholders. I speak as someone who works for what used to be known as 'the world's local bank' (although I will say I am not involved in finance in any way).
If football clubs were only there to appease shareholders then you may as well close this forum down as the vast majority of shareholders at Arsenal would be more than happy watching their investment grow as the club continues to grow ever increasingly cash rich.
With regards to Spain, can you not see that the lesser teams in the league there will suddenly become a very attractive proposition to many players. Ok, they may not win much but they will earn over double what they can in England. The one thing you have got right is that most footballers, like bankers, have no morals and will follow the gravy train.
You moan about certain leagues being a two horse race but I would prefer that than a league where half the teams are skint because Sky no longer has an interest in them and the quality of football diminishes.
Also, how would you feel when it comes to European nights? Do you want to see Arsenal take on the continents elite with one arm tied behind their back?
Fuck me it is a struggle as it is!
Oh, and thanks for showing me how to Google a word.
Last edited by Old Rosie on Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
northbank123 wrote:Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Well said sir!
Does anyone remember when Chelsea were truly a shit club but could suddenly afford Gullit, Vialli and Zola?
They managed to afford that because the Prewmier League was paying the best wages due to massive TV investment namely from Sky!
northbank123 wrote:Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Well said sir!
Does anyone remember when Chelsea were truly a shit club but could suddenly afford Gullit, Vialli and Zola?
They managed to afford that because the Prewmier League was paying the best wages due to massive TV investment namely from Sky!
Actually Chelsea were on the verge of bankruptcy when they were rescued by the Russian.
They had invested stupid money. Which they had borrowed. Against the promise of Sky money. In order to chase success. Lucky club. No history.
Someone made a very good point regarding the clubs that have become financially a mess. There is one common denominator...............a greedy bastard owner.
All of them have been raped by a single person or a group of persons using the club as colateral to fund their lifestyle.
Now look at the guy who controlled Nortern Rock bank. The FSA won't give him a current account now. Compared to the FA who let the likes of Risdale fleece club after club and permit forigen owners to buy what are in effect institutions without any traceable history only to rob then blind the banking world is a very controlled one.
northbank123 wrote:Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Well said sir!
Does anyone remember when Chelsea were truly a shit club but could suddenly afford Gullit, Vialli and Zola?
They managed to afford that because the Prewmier League was paying the best wages due to massive TV investment namely from Sky!
Actually Chelsea were on the verge of bankruptcy when they were rescued by the Russian.
They had invested stupid money. Which they had borrowed. Against the promise of Sky money. In order to chase success. Lucky club. No history.
Yes they borrowed against a guaranteed contractual income.
In the same way as how you and I get a mortgage.
They maximised their potential at the right time. Lucky or smart business?
northbank123 wrote:Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Well said sir!
Does anyone remember when Chelsea were truly a shit club but could suddenly afford Gullit, Vialli and Zola?
They managed to afford that because the Prewmier League was paying the best wages due to massive TV investment namely from Sky!
Actually Chelsea were on the verge of bankruptcy when they were rescued by the Russian.
They had invested stupid money. Which they had borrowed. Against the promise of Sky money. In order to chase success. Lucky club. No history.
Yes they borrowed against a guaranteed contractual income.
In the same way as how you and I get a mortgage.
They maximised their potential at the right time. Lucky or smart business?
Shame Arsenal did not get so lucky when they decided to play property developer!
northbank123 wrote:Football is a business, that doesn't mean it requires the same regulation as banking which, despite what people would have you believe in the wake of the financial crisis, is generally strictly regulated. That's a pretty bold statement to make.
And it wouldn't just be two teams in Spain attracting players. Teams outside the top two would be able to attract better players that would start going there instead of English clubs for the money. As time went on these sides would perform better, increase revenue via TV deals and European performance and therefore be able to attract even better players with even higher wages whilst the Premier League stood still. The fact that the Premier League is the top league and has been for years is testament to the fact that money will see clubs grow exponentially.
Well said sir!
Does anyone remember when Chelsea were truly a shit club but could suddenly afford Gullit, Vialli and Zola?
They managed to afford that because the Prewmier League was paying the best wages due to massive TV investment namely from Sky!
Actually Chelsea were on the verge of bankruptcy when they were rescued by the Russian.
They had invested stupid money. Which they had borrowed. Against the promise of Sky money. In order to chase success. Lucky club. No history.
Yes they borrowed against a guaranteed contractual income.
In the same way as how you and I get a mortgage.
They maximised their potential at the right time. Lucky or smart business?
Shame Arsenal did not get so lucky when they decided to play property developer!
Bollocks. They were just a few weeks away from being bankrupt! How can you possibly say that was SMART BUSINESS???
