- This topic has 6 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Despite increased turnover…..
When are these clubs going to realise that wages being 100% of income is not viable?
FA Cup Winners 2013, sounds good that
Despite increased turnover…..When are these clubs going to realise that wages being 100% of income is not viable?
Have you missed a link Jayt ?
The funny thing about it was when it was announced last night they they seemed quite proud of the fact that they had decreased their losses from £70.9 million last year and their turnover had increased.
How are all these teams going to fall within this so called financial fair play guideline, and that includes the big teams in france, spain and italy as well as here, or will it just be another fudge and not worth the paper its written on.
Sorry, see what you mean….
This is Chelsea’s account situation. I don’t see what all these billionaires get out squandering this sort of money, it disgusts me that it is even available to squander in a time when some families can’t even put food on the table.
FA Cup Winners 2013, sounds good that
The whole question of what constitutes “debt” is a really weird one.
As a non-football related analogy – a few years ago Sarah Ferguson was reported to be bankrupt owing millions. Therefore on paper I was far far richer than her.
But she was driving round in big cars, jetting off around the World, staying in top hotels, and returning to her luxury home. I wasn’t. How does that work then?
Top clubs can be millions in debt and no-one blinks; smaller clubs are threatened with going out of existence.
The whole question of what constitutes “debt” is a really weird one.As a non-football related analogy – a few years ago Sarah Ferguson was reported to be bankrupt owing millions. Therefore on paper I was far far richer than her.
But she was driving round in big cars, jetting off around the World, staying in top hotels, and returning to her luxury home. I wasn’t. How does that work then?
She’s got to be spreading em for some rich sugar daddy .Saying that, i wouldnt even pay her for an “hamburg flip” ( a german prostitute who belts you one off while her back’s turned on you ) i’ve been told ;)
Sorry, see what you mean….This is Chelsea’s account situation. I don’t see what all these billionaires get out squandering this sort of money, it disgusts me that it is even available to squander in a time when some families can’t even put food on the table.
I remember listening to some bloke on talksport the day after the Sheikh had bought City
He was based over in Abu Dabi (or however you spell) it & knew the bloke who fronts the organisation at City. He was asked at the time how much it had cost Chelsea/Abramovich to get where they were & was told £450mill. Their reply was “Is that all?”
As for what they get out of it – Lord knowsStatus is one thing they get out of it, a bit like paying a few hundred grand for a supercar, when a ford focus would get you there just the same.
Another thing is free international advertising for any businesses you have, I’d imagine tv ads in Japan etc wouldn’t be cheap.
Depending on how they run the ‘business’, certain money making streams, like shirt sales, image rights etc, could be run through seperate companies, which would obviously be quite profitable, but keeps the club in debt. But as the club itself is a saleable asset, with these revenue streams available, then the owner always has some ‘collateral’ to service the debt.
They probably do it just to get shut of money that they’d otherwise just be paying to a taxman, there’s got to be a financial benefit somewhere, these guys live and breathe money. And politically, they must get top brownie points, because the revenue to the government through players taxes, the economy in general (transport/ hospitality etc) has to be absolutely colossal.
And that my friends is why it will never stop, and no financial fair play b*llocks will change anything.
Money talks, fairness walks.
‘
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
