Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Pompey become first top-flight club in administration
It does not matter where it is - it can be on the Moon: laws of economics work even there.
IMO Premiership League is a reflection of modern Britain ...
It matters that you know where it is, in so much that it gives an indication of your level of interest in football, and hence your knowledge on the subject. Whilst I probably wouldn't disagree with your sentiment regarding the Prem being a reflection of modern Britain on the face of it (assuming you mean badly managed and badly in debt).
However, unlike modern Britain, some of the highest profile cases in the Prem are actually massively in debt not due to long term mis-management, but rather, as a result of foreign "investment". Here's a summary of the top 4 clubs financial situation:
Man Yoo sold the most profitable football club on the planet to the American Glazers who effectively borrowed the money to buy the club by mortgaging not just existing assets but future ticket sales. The interest alone on the £750m debt is some £50m a year, which is paid not by the Glazers, but by the club. This means that had Ronaldo not been sold for £80m earlier in the (financial) year Man United would have actually posted a pre-tax loss.
Liverpool are in a similar crazy situation, again with American owners.
Arsenal borrowed heavily against future season ticket sales to finance the construction of a new stadium. Arguably they are better managed in so much that they have significantly reduced spending since the move from Highbury. Net result of reduction in spend? Fewer players purchased, smaller squad, not won anything since the move.
Chelsea were bought for £140m by Abramovich back in 2003, at the time they had £80m of debt (ken Bates having increased the debt from £1.5m to £80m during his tenure). Abramovich paid off that debt and subsequently ploughed over £1/2bn into player purchases, training facilities and staff (managers, coaches, scouting network etc.). To this day Chelsea are still trading at a loss (last year losses of £44m were posted). However, they are virtually debt free, since the 'loan' from Abramovich has been converted into equity.
For the record, Pompey are a complete shambles both on and off the pitch.
Whilst I probably wouldn't disagree with your sentiment regarding the Prem being a reflection of modern Britain on the face of it (assuming you mean badly managed and badly in debt).
Comment