Author Topic: FFP rules  (Read 33715 times)

Offline TSC

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 25,340
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #120 on: May 18, 2015, 10:08:47 pm »


Tell you what, I'm glad we missed the boat with getting a billionaire owner in Abromovich in that case, as he's given Chelsea fuck all. Loaned them £1bn though.

Obviously Roman will never call that in.  He's not in it to make money.  FSG are, even if it's indirectly.  Otherwise they could have also 'loaned' us £1b.

Online Eeyore

  • "I have no problem whatsoever stating that FSG have done a good job.".Mo Money, Mo Problems to invent. Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,557
  • JFT 97
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #121 on: May 18, 2015, 10:09:28 pm »
I guess so.

I imagine yours doesn't include the reason for the money coming in as a loan being mostly for tax reasons (and various other group finance reasons). Kinda like why Abromovich has 'loaned' Chelsea £1bn.

It's incurred no interest, and has no repayment terms from what I can remember (don't have the documents in front of me).

Chelsea are debt free Craig. Abramovich converted his 726m loan into shares in 2009. There is debt placed on the holding company Fordstam Ltd.
"Ohhh-kayyy"

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #122 on: May 18, 2015, 10:17:47 pm »
I used the word given.

You've used the words charitable donation and loan.  I think you are the one confused with what giving means, making me pity your wife and kids. 

Once again Craig, I've said fsg have not GIVEN Liverpool fc a single cent and you want to dispute that then show me the money.  Show me something, anything, that says John Henry, or any other sod  connectedhas given a dollar, pound, to lfc just cos.




Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #123 on: May 18, 2015, 10:18:21 pm »
Chelsea are debt free Craig. Abramovich converted his 726m loan into shares in 2009. There is debt placed on the holding company Fordstam Ltd.

Whose only asset is Chelsea FC, so it's the same thing. If he calls it in from Fordstam then it's only asset is Chelsea FC so where do you think the loan repayment comes from?

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #124 on: May 18, 2015, 10:20:19 pm »
I used the word given.

You've used the words charitable donation and loan.  I think you are the one confused with what giving means, making me pity your wife and kids. 

Once again Craig, I've said fsg have not GIVEN Liverpool fc a single cent and you want to dispute that then show me the money.  Show me something, anything, that says John Henry, or any other sod  connectedhas given a dollar, pound, to lfc just cos.

Alright KiNki, let's just play it your way because honestly I can't be arsed with going round in this pointless circle.

FSG has given us fuck all. Not a cent. Not a fucking penny.

Offline decky

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,821
  • DOYA
    • I play in a band you know
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #125 on: May 18, 2015, 10:52:19 pm »
I used the word given.

You've used the words charitable donation and loan.  I think you are the one confused with what giving means, making me pity your wife and kids. 

Once again Craig, I've said fsg have not GIVEN Liverpool fc a single cent and you want to dispute that then show me the money.  Show me something, anything, that says John Henry, or any other sod  connectedhas given a dollar, pound, to lfc just cos.





How much money have Arsenal and United's owners GIVEN them? The Glazers certainly aren't the giving type and that money Arsenal used to build the Emirates has only just been paid back to their owners. GIVE is completely the wrong word to use when talking about finances in football.

Why would you want owners to just throw money at (sorry, give money to) our club?

Wouldn't you rather they gave their expertise in running profitable businesses and sports teams to help the club generate its own money? It's exactly what is happening at Arsenal and ok, they haven't had the best decade in their history, but now are finally in a position to compete without anyone GIVING them anything

They've had 10 years of balancing their books to get to this point, we were on the brink of administration 5 years ago. Our owners may have made mistakes but they are actually the best ones we've had in decades. They certainly know how to market the club and generate revenue. If we'd had an owner like this in the 90's we wouldn't even be arguing now as we'd have gone toe to toe with United.

I don't want this club to be GIVEN the capacity to compete, I'd rather they earned it by growing and trying to be smarter than the clubs above us.

A title funded by a sugar daddy would feel hollow to me, would rather do it like we almost did last year.


Offline rafathegaffa83

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 41,943
  • Dutch Class
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #126 on: May 18, 2015, 10:54:23 pm »
How much money have Arsenal and United's owners GIVEN them? The Glazers certainly aren't the giving type and that money Arsenal used to build the Emirates has only just been paid back to their owners. GIVE is completely the wrong word to use when talking about finances in football.

Why would you want owners to just throw money at (sorry, give money to) our club?

Wouldn't you rather they gave their expertise in running profitable businesses and sports teams to help the club generate its own money? It's exactly what is happening at Arsenal and ok, they haven't had the best decade in their history, but now are finally in a position to compete without anyone GIVING them anything

They've had 10 years of balancing their books to get to this point, we were on the brink of administration 5 years ago. Our owners may have made mistakes but they are actually the best ones we've had in decades. They certainly know how to market the club and generate revenue. If we'd had an owner like this in the 90's we wouldn't even be arguing now as we'd have gone toe to toe with United.

I don't want this club to be GIVEN the capacity to compete, I'd rather they earned it by growing and trying to be smarter than the clubs above us.

A title funded by a sugar daddy would feel hollow to me, would rather do it like we almost did last year.

Great post.

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #127 on: May 18, 2015, 10:59:13 pm »
One that misses the point when we are repeatedly told how much fsg have given to this club.  They have given this club not a single cent.  Capiche

Offline stockdam

  • The sheer loftus-cheek of the man.....
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,362
  • Walk on through the wind, Walk on through the rain
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #128 on: May 18, 2015, 11:36:17 pm »
What effect would a relaxation if FFP have on us? Would us help us to buy ourselves out of a hole (if we have the money) or would we fall further behind?
#JFT97

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #129 on: May 18, 2015, 11:43:53 pm »
What effect would a relaxation if FFP have on us? Would us help us to buy ourselves out of a hole (if we have the money) or would we fall further behind?

Well United and Arsenal would spend no more than they do now, as they aren't FFP limited as it is and don't have owners who will fund them any more. Chelsea have been a massive backer of FFP so remains to be seen if Abromovich would be willing to continually dip into his own pocket to fund transfers again. City, well, they haven't really stopped spending what they want as it is.

We aren't competing with them for transfers anyway in to honesty, plus we don't really need to to compete with them on the pitch. We do need to become much much better than we currently are with scouting, selecting and securing our targets though.

It could cause an issue if a team below us gets bought, but then that's a fairly big if currently.

Online west_london_red

  • Knows his stuff - pull the udder one! RAWK's Dairy Queen.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,750
  • watching me? but whose watching you watching me?
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #130 on: May 18, 2015, 11:46:05 pm »
One that misses the point when we are repeatedly told how much fsg have given to this club.  They have given this club not a single cent.  Capiche

Who has said that they have given the club money out of curiosity?
Thinking is overrated.
The mind is a tool, it's not meant to be used that much.
Rest, love, observe. Laugh.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #131 on: May 18, 2015, 11:48:44 pm »
Who has said that they have given the club money out of curiosity?

The answer you'll be given is me, although I actually said they'd put money in not given.

Offline decky

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,821
  • DOYA
    • I play in a band you know
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #132 on: May 18, 2015, 11:53:15 pm »
One that misses the point when we are repeatedly told how much fsg have given to this club.  They have given this club not a single cent.  Capiche

I think you're missing the point of why people want to own a football club in the premier league. All the owners are getting something out of it, otherwise they wouldn't do it. FSG don't need to make money, they've already done that in their previous careers. They want to win believe it or not, that's what they get out of it. Maybe if you did a little more research into their backgrounds you would see that.

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #133 on: May 18, 2015, 11:55:49 pm »
Maybe if you did a little more research into their backgrounds you would see that.

Jesus wept.

Offline decky

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,821
  • DOYA
    • I play in a band you know
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #134 on: May 18, 2015, 11:56:22 pm »
Jesus wept.

and that shows me you haven't

Offline stockdam

  • The sheer loftus-cheek of the man.....
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,362
  • Walk on through the wind, Walk on through the rain
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #135 on: May 18, 2015, 11:57:37 pm »
It could cause an issue if a team below us gets bought, but then that's a fairly big if currently.

Although it's remote, if a couple of teams are bought over then they may push us further back. We could be a mid table team if we don't get our act together.
#JFT97

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #136 on: May 19, 2015, 12:00:09 am »
Although it's remote, if a couple of teams are bought over then they may push us further back. We could be a mid table team if we don't get our act together.

We could be even if we do get it together. So could Arsenal. You can't really do much to stop a billionaire if he wants to come in and spend £1bn+ on transfers.

Offline rafathegaffa83

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 41,943
  • Dutch Class
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #137 on: May 19, 2015, 12:01:12 am »
Although it's remote, if a couple of teams are bought over then they may push us further back. We could be a mid table team if we don't get our act together.

But then again, it's a pretty remote possibility. Villa, Newcastle and to an informal extent Everton, have been for sale for years with no takers.

Offline The Playmaker

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,149
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #138 on: May 19, 2015, 12:11:44 am »
How much money have Arsenal and United's owners GIVEN them? The Glazers certainly aren't the giving type and that money Arsenal used to build the Emirates has only just been paid back to their owners. GIVE is completely the wrong word to use when talking about finances in football.

Why would you want owners to just throw money at (sorry, give money to) our club?

Wouldn't you rather they gave their expertise in running profitable businesses and sports teams to help the club generate its own money? It's exactly what is happening at Arsenal and ok, they haven't had the best decade in their history, but now are finally in a position to compete without anyone GIVING them anything

They've had 10 years of balancing their books to get to this point, we were on the brink of administration 5 years ago. Our owners may have made mistakes but they are actually the best ones we've had in decades. They certainly know how to market the club and generate revenue. If we'd had an owner like this in the 90's we wouldn't even be arguing now as we'd have gone toe to toe with United.

I don't want this club to be GIVEN the capacity to compete, I'd rather they earned it by growing and trying to be smarter than the clubs above us.

A title funded by a sugar daddy would feel hollow to me, would rather do it like we almost did last year.
Fantastic post.

Offline Redman0151

  • Stills and Nash Warloch
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,967
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #139 on: May 19, 2015, 12:31:48 am »
I think you're missing the point of why people want to own a football club in the premier league. All the owners are getting something out of it, otherwise they wouldn't do it. FSG don't need to make money, they've already done that in their previous careers. They want to win believe it or not, that's what they get out of it. Maybe if you did a little more research into their backgrounds you would see that.


:lmao :lmao

They're here to make money, don't fool yourself
"I would say we certainly have the resources to compete with anybody in football." Tom Werner 12/04/2012

Offline decky

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,821
  • DOYA
    • I play in a band you know
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #140 on: May 19, 2015, 01:03:55 am »

:lmao :lmao

They're here to make money, don't fool yourself

but they want to do it by winning, that's their buzz and my point

Offline Kopenhagen

  • Ban hammer of Damocles poised to drop if Everton finish fourth.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,165
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #141 on: May 19, 2015, 01:08:00 am »
but they want to do it by winning, that's their buzz and my point

Winning the Wenger Cup, maybe.
"There is no final victory, just as there is no final defeat. There is just the same battle to be fought over and over again."

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #142 on: May 19, 2015, 01:09:37 am »
Who has said that they have given the club money out of curiosity?

The forum is a awash with fsg have given the manager x amount, fsg have invested x amount. Fsg saved us from administration and other such spin.   

Simple truths. We were in debt. Fsg and Peter Kim were suitors. Fsg bought us. Fsg have loaned us money.  Fsg haven't given us a cent.

Sorry decky you've lept to the conclusion me stating they haven't given us a penny is akin to me asking for them to suddly bestow millions on us.   

I just want honest discussion, free from spin, for I think it's the only way the club can progress.  I'll call out the bullshit as and when I see it.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #143 on: May 19, 2015, 01:12:19 am »
Course you will.

With that great understanding of accounting strategies as well as charitable donations and owners funds investment I'm sure you'll be pointing out the bull shit left, right and centre.

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #144 on: May 19, 2015, 01:18:39 am »
Craig  I work for a firm of accountants.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #145 on: May 19, 2015, 01:20:33 am »
Craig  I work for a firm of accountants.

Then it makes your arguing over the accounting practices employed even more bizarre, as you'll surely know full well why money from the owners has been put in the way it has been. Also makes it bizarre that you tried to class my charitable donation the same as money in from owners.

Offline KiNki

  • Smicer devotee supreme, Sammy Lee impersonator extraordinaire.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,244
  • i am an_nik_ki.
    • http://hfdinfo.com/digital
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #146 on: May 19, 2015, 01:46:56 am »
I made one statement that they haven't put a single cent in. You contested that statement by raising the issue of loans, that isn't putting money in, that's la loan pure and simple. The point of a loan is it's gets paid back. We have to pay it back. You then tried to suggest that I'm  using semantics  and raised the issues of charitable donations.  Again a different kettle of fish. And finally in an attempt to close down discussion around the statement I keep making, that you cannot refute, is to question my credentials. Tsk tsk.

Wlr. When people say they've given us 35m for Carroll . It didn't come from their back pocket.  It came from selling Torres. For 50m.  Our money. Not theirs. We spent it.

When people say they gave the manager 100m in the summer. 70m Suarez money. TV money.  Our money. Not theirs.

When they say they've backed all our managers to the tune of 200m .... You know where I'm going with this...

They haven't put a penny in, what money we've earnt, we've spent, yet they dictate the strategy that never again will we overspend on over inflated transfer fees, their words, even though they know jack shit about the game, players, what an over inflated transfer fee is.  That's some bullshit.  Nor appoint someone with some pedigree in the game. More bullshit IMHO.

And while we go round and round talking  about players, agents, managers and fees the actual policy laid down goes under the radar.That's some clever bullshit indeed.  And the best yet is that it's probably charged to our accounts for such spin.

Offline Chakan

  • Chaka Chaka.....is in love with Aristotle but only for votes. The proud owner of some very private piles and an inflatable harem! Winner of RAWK's Carabao Cup captian contest.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 91,079
  • Internet Terrorist lvl VI
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #147 on: May 19, 2015, 01:59:47 am »
Our money, we spent it.

Who is we and our? Just curious.

Offline Trendisnotdestiny

  • Finally, the custom title that cannot be beat
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,630
  • Go for Goal Sunshine! - N Saunders
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #148 on: May 19, 2015, 03:07:48 am »
One that misses the point when we are repeatedly told how much fsg have given to this club.  They have given this club not a single cent.  Capiche

KiNki, forgive my ignorance, but I always thought (could be US propaganda after H&G debacle) that FSG and Henry saved the football club from going under (I forget the technical term) with a loan.  While this is clearly not the same thing as the Russian oligarch's money fueled love affair with plastic, it clearly has had tangible benefits for most involved. 

And if I am incorrect, hasn't Brendan always said if he needed an ace in the hole with just one more purchase that really mattered, that FSG would entertain it.

I do not want to be in the uncomfortable position of disagreeing with you, but clearly I do not have nearly as much information about our owners as yourself.  Can you provide a brief summary of FSG relationship with Liverpool.  Labor over management is my mantra, but in this case, we were pretty imperiled ---- beggars and choosers as it were.  I was not here following the day to day with the Purslow mess.
THIS IS ANFIELD SIGN:
It’s there to remind our lads who they’re playing for and to remind the opposition who they’re playing against! - Bill Shankly

We have everything we need - Jurgen Klopp

You need to get more wives mate, it fixes everything. Apart from then you have loads of wives, which is a nightmare.  -  Djozer

Offline bepoq

  • a-lu-la!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Anny Roader
  • ******
  • Posts: 496
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #149 on: May 19, 2015, 04:27:58 am »
They "saved" the club by buying it mate, and by buying it without leveraging it... at least in the same manner that Hicks and Gillette had.

And by buying it as a distressed asset—thus undervalued.

Offline LiverBirdKop

  • A moron. Twice. No flies on their nullshit
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,362
  • 51,077 Deleted
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #150 on: May 19, 2015, 07:04:39 am »
Great news! Now let's crack open the war chest for Reus/Pogba/Snoogy Doogy etc etc
Prefers London Amsterdam.

Offline TSC

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 25,340
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #151 on: May 19, 2015, 09:25:50 am »
I made one statement that they haven't put a single cent in. You contested that statement by raising the issue of loans, that isn't putting money in, that's la loan pure and simple. The point of a loan is it's gets paid back. We have to pay it back. You then tried to suggest that I'm  using semantics  and raised the issues of charitable donations.  Again a different kettle of fish. And finally in an attempt to close down discussion around the statement I keep making, that you cannot refute, is to question my credentials. Tsk tsk.

Wlr. When people say they've given us 35m for Carroll . It didn't come from their back pocket.  It came from selling Torres. For 50m.  Our money. Not theirs. We spent it.

When people say they gave the manager 100m in the summer. 70m Suarez money. TV money.  Our money. Not theirs.

When they say they've backed all our managers to the tune of 200m .... You know where I'm going with this...

They haven't put a penny in, what money we've earnt, we've spent, yet they dictate the strategy that never again will we overspend on over inflated transfer fees, their words, even though they know jack shit about the game, players, what an over inflated transfer fee is.  That's some bullshit.  Nor appoint someone with some pedigree in the game. More bullshit IMHO.

And while we go round and round talking  about players, agents, managers and fees the actual policy laid down goes under the radar.That's some clever bullshit indeed.  And the best yet is that it's probably charged to our accounts for such spin.


Agree with much of this.   Although I still think we could compete and potentially be successful even under their model if only they'd make a few changes which wouldn't cost the earth.  Get someone/people with football experience at the top of the structure over here, call it whatever, DOF or some other title if Rodgers or whichever manager doesn't like the 'DOF' title.  Ayre's competent at his core job, commercial revenue generation.  Keep him there and don't let him anywhere near the football related decisions, including negotiating player contracts.  If he won't let go then bin him (this won't happen I fear, he's effectively FSG's eyes and ears over here).

And ffs change or bin this infamous transfer committee, and allow much more leeway over players wages to attract quality.  Incentivised contracts will only work if the basic is matching the basic offered by other top clubs.  Players generally won't sign for reduced wages (unless they're James Milner apparently) unless they've some sort of affinity with the club, and even that probably isn't enough to take pay cuts.

Offline ThePoolMan

  • Not quite the Pool Man, more like the ESL Man
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,730
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #152 on: May 19, 2015, 09:44:50 am »
How much money have Arsenal and United's owners GIVEN them? The Glazers certainly aren't the giving type and that money Arsenal used to build the Emirates has only just been paid back to their owners. GIVE is completely the wrong word to use when talking about finances in football.

Why would you want owners to just throw money at (sorry, give money to) our club?

Wouldn't you rather they gave their expertise in running profitable businesses and sports teams to help the club generate its own money? It's exactly what is happening at Arsenal and ok, they haven't had the best decade in their history, but now are finally in a position to compete without anyone GIVING them anything

They've had 10 years of balancing their books to get to this point, we were on the brink of administration 5 years ago. Our owners may have made mistakes but they are actually the best ones we've had in decades. They certainly know how to market the club and generate revenue. If we'd had an owner like this in the 90's we wouldn't even be arguing now as we'd have gone toe to toe with United.

I don't want this club to be GIVEN the capacity to compete, I'd rather they earned it by growing and trying to be smarter than the clubs above us.

A title funded by a sugar daddy would feel hollow to me, would rather do it like we almost did last year.



I don't care how the premiership win is funded as long as it was legal and as long as we win. The fact that FSG owns it is no better than a billionaire oligarch owning the club, because the fans aren't owning the club anyway. The only better arrangement is if the fans own the club directly - that is when the victory is truly the fans'.

Offline ThePoolMan

  • Not quite the Pool Man, more like the ESL Man
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,730
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #153 on: May 19, 2015, 09:48:15 am »
If there was any time when we have to spend big, it is now. we have to show intent to our own players or some will start to think like Sterling.

Offline walshys_mullet

  • Aka walshys_mullet. Thinks manager is a coward. Only posts in match threads every other week due to rotation. We suspect this is John Aldridge or Andy Gray posting under a pseudonym.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,615
  • We all live in a Red and White Kop
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #154 on: May 19, 2015, 10:27:28 am »
I made one statement that they haven't put a single cent in. You contested that statement by raising the issue of loans, that isn't putting money in, that's la loan pure and simple. The point of a loan is it's gets paid back. We have to pay it back. You then tried to suggest that I'm  using semantics  and raised the issues of charitable donations.  Again a different kettle of fish. And finally in an attempt to close down discussion around the statement I keep making, that you cannot refute, is to question my credentials. Tsk tsk.

Wlr. When people say they've given us 35m for Carroll . It didn't come from their back pocket.  It came from selling Torres. For 50m.  Our money. Not theirs. We spent it.

When people say they gave the manager 100m in the summer. 70m Suarez money. TV money.  Our money. Not theirs.

When they say they've backed all our managers to the tune of 200m .... You know where I'm going with this...

They haven't put a penny in, what money we've earnt, we've spent, yet they dictate the strategy that never again will we overspend on over inflated transfer fees, their words, even though they know jack shit about the game, players, what an over inflated transfer fee is.  That's some bullshit.  Nor appoint someone with some pedigree in the game. More bullshit IMHO.

And while we go round and round talking  about players, agents, managers and fees the actual policy laid down goes under the radar.That's some clever bullshit indeed.  And the best yet is that it's probably charged to our accounts for such spin.


KINKI FOR PRESIDENT!!!! :D
"If you're in the penalty area and don't know what to do with the ball, put it in the net and we'll discuss the options later."

The Great 'Should have been Sir' Bob Paisley

Offline Grobbelrevell

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,781
  • Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry & ignorance
    • The Grobbelramble
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #155 on: May 19, 2015, 11:00:07 am »
UEFA "relaxing" FFP comes with an assumption that they ever actively enforced it, or that they indeed harboured a genuine intention of doing so. It was empty rhetoric from the very beginning, which has been unconvincingly policed (for want of a better word) via token gestures with little or no bite and nothing more. It was and remains a joke that no-one finds remotely funny.

What may be interesting if we reach July and the Platini quotes are backed up, will be how FSG react. They were very public in declaring that the introduction of FFP had a major impact on their decision to purchase the club, and in allowing their model to potentially prove successful. Without it, what will their thinking become? I wouldn't be in any way surprised to see them look towards an exit in that scenario, if they weren't already.
Twitter | Blog

TRADE COUNT: +19  /  SoS Member 6854

Online jambutty

  • The Gok Wan of RAWK. Tripespotting Advocate. Oakley style guru. Hardman St. arl arse, "Ridiculously cool" -Atko- Impending U.S. Civil War Ostrich. Too old to suffer wankers and WUMs on here.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,836
  • June 20, 2009. Still no justice for Neda
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #156 on: May 19, 2015, 11:12:17 am »
I'd be shocked if an exit strategy isn't at least in the planning stages at this point.

We have to be one of the most contentious and high maintenance fan bases in the world.

For a capitalist entity (not an oligarch or a sheikh) to invest in a sports venture and keep plowing stupid money into it year after year just to try and stay abreast of rivals with larger, wealthier, less demanding fanbases, is normally inconceivable.

Had the price not been right and FFP not been in the mix, I doubt they'd do it again.

There was  only Shinawatra, the Chinese and the pizza guy interested, as I recall.
Kill the humourless

Offline Flaccido Dongingo

  • A Daily Mail plant. Don’t swing at the king!
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,362
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #157 on: May 19, 2015, 11:13:24 am »
So essentially Chelsea (that vanguard of transfer fair play and prudency), Man City and PSG can now spray money around like a Peter North money shot free from any sanctions?, great, so any player they want, they get through sheer weight of financial power?

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,461
  • YNWA
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #158 on: May 19, 2015, 11:15:42 am »
So essentially Chelsea (that vanguard of transfer fair play and prudency), Man City and PSG can now spray money around like a Peter North money shot free from any sanctions?, great, so any player they want, they get through sheer weight of financial power?

Well, not yet. Plus it remains to be seen just how much the rules will be 'eased'. I highly doubt they'll be removed entirely.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 75,608
Re: FFP rules
« Reply #159 on: May 19, 2015, 11:15:56 am »
I'd be shocked if an exit strategy isn't at least in the planning stages at this point.

We have to be one of the most contentious and high maintenance fan bases in the world.

For a capitalist entity (not an oligarch or a sheikh) to invest in a sports venture and keep plowing stupid money into it year after year just to try and stay abreast of rivals with larger, wealthier, less demanding fanbases, is normally inconceivable.

Had the price not been right and FFP not been in the mix, I doubt they'd do it again.

There was  only Shinawatra, the Chinese and the pizza guy interested, as I recall.

I cannot see us being an attractive prospect. If FSG did buy a club that was undervalued then now with a club where revenues have grown massively, a new stand is being built, a new TV deal in the offing and a younger playing squad means that it would be a very, very expensive investment.