• 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

Antonio Conte - officially NOT the coach of THFC

How come west ham seem to regularly invest a lot (for a pea sized club) when presumably they make next to nothing from their stadium and have poultry european income if they are lucky.
 
Finney Is Back said:
What are clubs expected to do with the remaining 30% of their income? If we take a theoretical view that THFC, with a stadium sponsor in place and a number of other events at the stadium finish in the top 4 and get into the quarter finals of the CL then we could see £500m of revenue. If we spent 50% on wages and our remaining max of £100m on net transfer instalments then we'd have a surplus of £150m. Of course a bunch of that would be needed to service the debt and pay stadium operating costs etc... But what are UEFA proposing is done with the potential large portions of revenue that will still remain? It will be great for some clubs, who could do with putting that money towards improving their infrastructure, but for a club like THFC with brand new, state of the art training grounds and stadiums what is to be done with the rest of the money? Generate massive reserves of cash?!?
Click to expand...

Brown envelopes, hookers and drugs for eufa executives.
 
AjaxDeSuperYids said:
How come west ham seem to regularly invest a lot (for a pea sized club) when presumably they make next to nothing from their stadium and have poultry european income if they are lucky.
Click to expand...
West Ham have a far lower wage bill than us and have upped their turnover a decent amount these past few years by playing European football. It is only really in the last year or two that they have started to invest. I suspect they also feel that they will cash in on Rice at some point in the next 18 months or so and bring in £100m+ doing so.
 
Finney Is Back said:
West Ham have a far lower wage bill than us and have upped their turnover a decent amount these past few years by playing European football. It is only really in the last year or two that they have started to invest. I suspect they also feel that they will cash in on Rice at some point in the next 18 months or so and bring in £100m+ doing so.
Click to expand...

They also had a new investor that bought part of the club. Kretinsky.
 
Finney Is Back said:
What are clubs expected to do with the remaining 30% of their income? If we take a theoretical view that THFC, with a stadium sponsor in place and a number of other events at the stadium finish in the top 4 and get into the quarter finals of the CL then we could see £500m of revenue. If we spent 50% on wages and our remaining max of £100m on net transfer instalments then we'd have a surplus of £150m. Of course a bunch of that would be needed to service the debt and pay stadium operating costs etc... But what are UEFA proposing is done with the potential large portions of revenue that will still remain? It will be great for some clubs, who could do with putting that money towards improving their infrastructure, but for a club like THFC with brand new, state of the art training grounds and stadiums what is to be done with the rest of the money? Generate massive reserves of cash?!?
Click to expand...

Tax. Academy. Matchday costs. Debt. Profit. Training ground. Womens teams. Sustaining the pyramid...

Whatever they want to basically. The idea is to make clubs sustainable and stop some of their owners gambling with the clubs future. Might be ok for countries but for most investors, they can lose interest. If there isn't another investor with dreams of pl or cl then the club gets fudged.
 
Thought his substitutions were strange again tonight. I find really hard to understand what he sees in games.
Moura was awful tonight and Doherty was playing well, so he goes and takes off Doherty and puts Moura RWB.
How does that make sense???
 
DubSpur said:
Thought his substitutions were strange again tonight. I find really hard to understand what he sees in games.
Moura was awful tonight and Doherty was playing well, so he goes and takes off Doherty and puts Moura RWB.
How does that make sense???
Click to expand...

we were getting corners, and more crosses in, Moura is really good in the air, allowed Gil to play further forward
 
Baleforce said:
we were getting corners, and more crosses in, Moura is really good in the air, allowed Gil to play further forward
Click to expand...
I don't remember Moura getting near one ball in the box, Doherty got on the end of a couple plus he was much better in every aspect outside the box.
 
DubSpur said:
I don't remember Moura getting near one ball in the box, Doherty got on the end of a couple plus he was much better in every aspect outside the box.
Click to expand...

that is true, but that decision was probably made on career statistics rather than what happened in just the game tonight
 
Lilbaz said:
89 percentile for aerials won.
Click to expand...

Ok that shuts me up somewhat - still though id be interested to see that broken down further, as I'd be inclined to think that in corner type situations he's not as effective as in areas where he can get a running start.
 
billyiddo said:
Ok that shuts me somewhat - still though id be interested to see that broken down further, as I'd be inclined to think that in corner type situations he's not as effective as in areas where he can get a running start.
Click to expand...

I’m sure this is a slight exaggeration, but I feel like he’s scored about 600 goals from front post flick headers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back