• 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

ENIC

DubSpur said:
You'd still need to invest billions in a SW or Bristol to get them to the stage we're at. They don't have the income to be able to buy players that would get them into the premier league for starters. Even the likes of Leeds with bigger revenue struggle to get the players to stop them being a yo-yo club. New owners can't just come in and splash their own cash on the players and do a City. They don't have the fan base to fill out a big stadium and they can't charge the higher prices we do for tickets.
Click to expand...
Plus the fans can easily get replaced by tourists without even worrying about ticket prices
 
Lilbaz said:
Psg maybe. No italian, spanish or even byern (now) can really sacrifice games. They are either fighting for the title or a cl place.
Click to expand...
But the big teams in Italy, Spain, France and Germany can rest players against all but the top 5 or 6 clubs and still know that they are very likely to win. The strength in depth in the Premier League doesn't afford that luxury to the top 4 clubs here.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Not convinced by that. Saudi Sportswashing Machine are running very close to the limit of FFP and that already involves the owners putting money in, it is that they can only put in a limited amount due to FFP.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard it from several people
They thought they could come in and take control like they have in other sports
They can’t so they have backed off
It’s not how they work
Im working right now with two experts on Saudi and the UAE and it’s something they have said form day 1
 
Bullet said:
Back to the subject of Spurs.
We lost £26m last year and the year before we lost £87m so that is £113m lost in 2 years.


We're allowed to lose £150m every 3 years.
So surely even if Daniel had huge backers, we can't invest (i.e. lose) much more than we are already.


What we need to do is buy well-priced players and sell players when ripe.



PPS - yes, sponsorships can go up, particularly the stadium
PPPS - Chelsea failed to organise a shirt sponsor for the last 2 seasons
Click to expand...
Not true. Losses allowed under FFP only relate to specific things (mens first team squad and coaching staffs transfer cost (amortised over length of contract) + wages + agents fees - player sales.

We get nowhere near the allowed losses for FFP limits. Our losses are mainly due to depreciation on the stadium. Huge backers coming in could immediately up our transfer and wage budget quite considerably (and that is before considering things like stadium, kit and training ground sponorship at Emirates Marketing Project type levels)
 
Finney Is Back said:
Not true. Losses allowed under FFP only relate to specific things (mens first team squad and coaching staffs transfer cost (amortised over length of contract) + wages + agents fees - player sales.

We get nowhere near the allowed losses for FFP limits. Our losses are mainly due to depreciation on the stadium. Huge backers coming in could immediately up our transfer and wage budget quite considerably (and that is before considering things like stadium, kit and training ground sponorship at Emirates Marketing Project type levels)
Click to expand...
The loss worries get brought up every year post accounts....and every year it has to be pointed out it's the depreciation cost on the stadium.

What I would say is the 'profit' gained on player trading, due to HK being sold, is a massive help BUT only a massive help in the 3 year cycle before it drops out of calculations.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Their actions do not reflect that. They are running up to their FFP limit.
Click to expand...
What actions ?
They haven’t done anything if you look at it
They haven’t injected cash other than via sponsorship
They are barely visible now unless it’s a cup final when they can sponsor the fans to sell “Saudi”
They could easily fudge e sponsorship like city or sell some assets to themselves
They haven’t done that because they know that unlike other sports there are equally rich people involved who will object
So instead they are focusing their money on sports they can dictate
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
The loss worries get brought up every year post accounts....and every year it has to be pointed out it's the depreciation cost on the stadium.

What I would say is the 'profit' gained on player trading, due to HK being sold, is a massive help BUT only a massive help in the 3 year cycle before it drops out of calculations.
Click to expand...

Forget the loss. Our debt went up £100m and our cash balance went down £100m.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back