parklane1
Tony Galvin
You pays your money and takes your choice.
-
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 Results
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
You pays your money and takes your choice.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
WestBerkshire
Noé Pamarot
Record profits yet we'll still sell our best players as 'they left us no option'
I want to compete nothing more nothing less.
I want to compete nothing more nothing less.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
That's why we're building a £450m stadium. It's just a long game.
We're also much higher up the foodchain than we were.
Our top players only now leave to go to top European sides - like we happened in the late 80s/early 90s with Hoddle, Waddle and Gascoigne.
Between 1992-2008 we lost: Stewart, Ruddock, Campbell, Carr, Sheringham, Carrick, Berbatov, Keane to English rivals, which doesn't seem to happen any more.
Bedfordspurs
Chris Waddle
Liverpools owners aren't mega rich and have a history of buying for growth (as in player appreciation)
They will struggle to keep the fans happy without more investment and no champions league this year
jts1882
Dean Richards
I was surprised how many clubs have manageable player wages (under 60%) compared to a few years ago. Even Chelsea are at 60%.
I think the owners of West Ham and Saudi Sportswashing Machine have things under control now. West Ham get the OS and can sell Upton Park (although if that is debt after doing so, I might revise this comment). Ashley is paying under 50% on wages (only CP is less) and making profits so can slowly lower the debt (and pay himself back). The fans won't be happy as they will keep selling players, but they won't get relegated with sensible management.
I thought Abramovich had converted the debt to equity. Iirc, he converted half the £700 million some years back, then the other a year or so later. However, that is not the first accounts summary that has reinstated the debt.
P.S. You missed QPR who are in a category of their own.
Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
I disagree with you on West Ham. They were badly run but have been put back on much better footing by their current owners. Wages that only equate to 56% of their turnover and a £15 million profit are good numbers. It means that they have a chance of getting the debt down. It's also worth noting that most of their debt is to their current owners so they are reasonably secure (for now).
Similarly Chelsea's debt number (while being real and HUGE) is debt that is owed to Abramovich so not really a worry for them (unless Abramovich gets bored with football or somehow goes skint (let's all pray for that!)
I assume that's due to the increased TV revenue when salaries have (at least until the next contract review) stayed the same.
jts1882
Dean Richards
I'm sure the extra TV money and existing contacts was a big help in getting things under control, but I think there is more to it, a change of attitude. A few years ago we had clubs like West Ham, Portsmouth and Villa outspending us on wages despite much lower revenues. Ratios of 80-90% were common and very few clubs were below 70%. Now there are only a few exceptions, notably City and QPR, and only one is facing a crisis. I think owners have noted the dangers of overextending and getting relegated. We'll probably see a rise as contracts are replaced but I'd guess into the low-to-mid 60s rather than the 70-80% range.
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
How real are all those figures though? How much of it is just ingenious accounting to get round FFP?
Sky windfall or no, this wholesale transformation of the PL from gargantuan debt into healthy profit in such a short space of time seems suspiciously sudden.
Sky windfall or no, this wholesale transformation of the PL from gargantuan debt into healthy profit in such a short space of time seems suspiciously sudden.
Denmark Spur
Michael Carrick
The Swiss Ramble have made an article about Spurs following the announcement of the financial results
http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/
http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/
Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
Why is there no way?..... That was his buy out clause and from what I read at the time we eventually paid it.
Baleforce
Les Bennett
because football deals don't work like that, it's never hard cash for player, it's this and that now, if he does this then it's that as well, but not if its not by then
Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
Football deals are never (or at least very rarely) paid in full up front I agree. However in this case it wouldn't surprise me if we'd given Valencia half up front and then the rest in instalments over the next 2 or 3 years. I just don't think Valencia would've accepted the other £5 per goal and £1.65 per minute played nonsense that Levy likes to go with.
Baleforce
Les Bennett
at the time I think Valencia would have favoured the incentives approach, we'll never know, I just can't believe Levy would ever not have an angle
it obviously didn't work out but I can't rememeber a signing being considered such a sure thing since Klinsmann, no one expected this
it obviously didn't work out but I can't rememeber a signing being considered such a sure thing since Klinsmann, no one expected this
Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
Agreed, I even put a rather large each way bet on him being the top scorer in the league the season we bought him. I had no idea that his finishing was actually so bad!