• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Financial Fair Play

Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Bullet said:
Chelsea were on the curve towards bankruptcy that very year.

City were screamingly average, Georghe Kinkladze and Uwe Rosler were their stars back in the day.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Take away the billionaires that have transformed them and we'd be above both Chelsea and City most seasons.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Bullet said:
Chelsea were on the curve towards bankruptcy that very year.

City were screamingly average, Georghe Kinkladze and Uwe Rosler were their stars back in the day.
Click to expand...

Not talking financially, or comparing year for year. Chelsea were a top 4 team when Roman took over. City were midtable but on the up when Sheikh Mansour took over.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Danners9 said:
Not talking financially, or comparing year for year. Chelsea were a top 4 team when Roman took over. City were midtable but on the up when Sheikh Mansour took over.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Bullet is making the point that they got to that point by over-extending themselves. There were rumours they were only days/weeks from their debts being called in.

City were on the up on the field when Mansoor took over because of big spending by Thaksin Shinawatra. However, they were also in financial trouble because the latter had become an international fugitive and had his assets frozen.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

jts1882 said:
Yes, but Bullet is making the point that they got to that point by over-extending themselves. There were rumours they were only days/weeks from their debts being called in.

City were on the up on the field when Mansoor took over because of big spending by Thaksin Shinawatra. However, they were also in financial trouble because the latter had become an international fugitive and had his assets frozen.
Click to expand...

Indeed - I could get a mortgage on a mansion, go and put a deposit down for a Ferrari and buy a wardrobe of sharp suits and be on top of the world... but... then I'd have to pay for it.

Chelsea even had to change their name from Chelsea Football Club to Chelsea Football and Athletics Club or somesuch to dodge creditors, IIRC
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Both City and Chelsea had been spending beyond their natural means at the time of their latest takeovers, Mansour and Abramovich just took it further.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

the second part of that analogy is that you then sell weekend breaks at the mansion and rent out the ferrari to cover the payments on all of it, long term your up

its all capex
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

Mumorn said:
you would all still celebrate like nobody if we won the Premier League thanks to a 90th minute Aaron Lennon winner.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself, for me the whole point of a competition is to compete.

If Team GB started the 100m race from the 50m mark and won, I wouldn't celebrate the gold medal.

In fact I'd be rather embarrassed.
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

Bullet said:
Speak for yourself, for me the whole point of a competition is to compete.

If Team GB started the 100m race from the 50m mark and won, I wouldn't celebrate the gold medal.

In fact I'd be rather embarrassed.
Click to expand...

thats not whats happening though, that would be cheating, no rules are being broken
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

Some fans wouldn't stay if we got a Sugar Daddy fair enough. But plenty more would get on the bandwagon if we started winning things.

There would be net growth in our fanbase, I have no doubt whatsoever.
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

JPG_357 said:
Some fans wouldn't stay if we got a Sugar Daddy fair enough. But plenty more would get on the bandwagon if we started winning things.

There would be net growth in our fanbase, I have no doubt whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah proper fans they'd be wouldn't they? You can stick your oil money don't want it near THFC.
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

Roy1983 said:
Oh yeah proper fans they'd be wouldn't they? You can stick your oil money don't want it near THFC.
Click to expand...

Proper fans? You mean like those who would abandon the club just because it was bought by a rich benefactor?
 
Re: Let's NOT Laugh At Arsenal

I suppose the difference between joe Lewis the sugar daddy top of Forbes rich list and another sugar daddy is, Joe Lewis likes marmite
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Chelesea were in big trouble before RA saved them. Effectively he wiped out their debts, so they are in a far stronger position now financially.

Chelsea were on the edge of fire sale before they got lucky, very, very lucky.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

I can see why people are saying Emirates Marketing Project and Chelsea are lucky, However I don't think for a second that RA etc just draw out of a hat which club they are going to buy.

They look for specific clubs. I.e Chelsea were on the brink or bankruptcy hence buyer steps in, he might have been waiting for a London club to be on the brInk like that for years. Emirates Marketing Project is obvious, Look how big manure are, they believe they can replicate that.
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

Well Chelsea and City, the football clubs, got lucky. Their buyers obviously picked well.

So effectively a well run club like Spurs becomes expensive to buy unless its leveraged buyout. So that limits the prospective owners. If the club was run irresponsibly and on the edge the pool of prospective buyers would increase. So strangely, if a sugar daddy is the only way of winning the league, then Levy is harming our prospects by being financially responsible. Levy Out!
 
Re: O/T Financial Fair Play

jts1882 said:
Well Chelsea and City, the football clubs, got lucky. Their buyers obviously picked well.

So effectively a well run club like Spurs becomes expensive to buy unless its leveraged buyout. So that limits the prospective owners. If the club was run irresponsibly and on the edge the pool of prospective buyers would increase. So strangely, if a sugar daddy is the only way of winning the league, then Levy is harming our prospects by being financially responsible. Levy Out!
Click to expand...


One of our big problems indeed is that ENIC would want a lot of money for us, and that could keep out potential benefactors.

Of course RA paid a hell of a lot for Chelsea because he took on their debts as well as paying out the former owners.

I doubt very much Chelsea got into trouble as part of a cunning plan. They went for champagne players on a lemonade budget, but got lucky when someone else picked up the tab. No-one did that for Leeds, who were arguably a bigger club than them before RA moved in. Though you could argue the power of London meant that Chelsea in effect were more attractive then Leeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back