4 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

No, it's about the club being valued higher than when they bought us. They are betting that PL football will grow.

Despite the debts, the huge loans etc roman still made a profit on Chelsea because our value went up significantly. 

I agree mate, it's almost a property investment for Clearlake, 10 years after buying it , they sell at a profit.. And all the safeguards that Roman put in the original contract ( the anti Glazer type investment for one ) will be gone..

Thanks for your reply 

31 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

I actually think my interest as a fan is completely separate and in no way overlaps the interests of our investors at all.

Come on you BLUES!

So you don't want us to succeed on the pitch and year by year get closer to the top of the football pile? Financially that would be great. 

22 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

I agree mate, it's almost a property investment for Clearlake, 10 years after buying it , they sell at a profit.. And all the safeguards that Roman put in the original contract ( the anti Glazer type investment for one ) will be gone..

Thanks for your reply 

Honestly if we sell for a profit I'll take that as a win. I'm more worried they run out of the funds to grow the club and they make a pretty big loss. Then who knows what happens next.

If we don't sort out a new stadium we will be left behind by the north London clubs, and maybe even west ham. 

5 minutes ago, evissy said:

So you don't want us to succeed on the pitch and year by year get closer to the top of the football pile? Financially that would be great

We didn't benefit financially during our 20 years of fantastic success under Roman.

But I know what you mean, cheers.

1 minute ago, bisright1 said:

Honestly if we sell for a profit I'll take that as a win. I'm more worried they run out of the funds to grow the club and they make a pretty big loss. Then who knows what happens next.

If we don't sort out a new stadium we will be left behind by the north London clubs, and maybe even west ham. 

We've been spending money like we've got an 80,000 stadium anyway outspending clubs with bigger stadiums. 

 

 

 

It hasn't done us much good . Arsenal are better than us not because of their stadium, but because of football related things.

I honestly see a narrative now that it's because of our 42,000 stadium that we aren't very good.  Yeah it gives us more income but at an unbelievable cost . .

But it looks inevitable for sure , knowing our luck,  we'll build it and then FFP will be abandoned and club owners will be allowed spend what they like regardless of income !

 

 

 

 

12 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

We didn't benefit financially during our 20 years of fantastic success under Roman.

But I know what you mean, cheers.

And that is very unsustainable. The club as any other business needs to be a success on the pitch and financially as well. That is if you want to be up there with the best. 

We all know how dirty financies can be. Probably half of top football's money is dirty in some way. That is how it is unfortunately.

I also think FFP or some type of tight regulation will stay and probably be developed further. American money is coming in and we know how they operate in their big leagues. They have salary ceilings and floors in place. 

I personally think their system is pretty great. It keeps the sport interesting and levels the playing field. Money is then not the factor that dictates success but ability, work and great decision making. 

If football as a sport can't handle these systems coming in place it tells about the sport more than about the system imho.

1 hour ago, evissy said:

And that is very unsustainable. The club as any other business needs to be a success on the pitch and financially as well. That is if you want to be up there with the best. 

We all know how dirty financies can be. Probably half of top football's money is dirty in some way. That is how it is unfortunately.

I also think FFP or some type of tight regulation will stay and probably be developed further. American money is coming in and we know how they operate in their big leagues. They have salary ceilings and floors in place. 

I personally think their system is pretty great. It keeps the sport interesting and levels the playing field. Money is then not the factor that dictates success but ability, work and great decision making. 

If football as a sport can't handle these systems coming in place it tells about the sport more than about the system imho.

The problem with all that is that we are in Europe and, even though the UK is closer to the US than other European countries, the way that football works is very different than the way US sports work, if only because culturally we are a completely different beast (and I hope that we stay like that). I haven't been on the back of the owners and quite accept that they've got good intentions. I agree with some of the decisions to get young players although would have kept some experience in the team. However, time is showing that they came in with their American mentality, did not adapt to our ways, and now we could be in trouble and have to sell some of our best prospects to balance the account, which will debilitate the team. They should have come in and learned the ropes of how European football works and then make decisions, but they thought that they could change the mentality and the way our sport works, and it is not the case. They are not at the Glazer's level in my eyes, I believe they have good intentions because a successful Chelsea will make them more profit, but they thought the old ways were bad and that they could do it their way much better, and it has not been the case.

Good post, well appreciated! 

Football has moved towards American models every year. I don't think it will stop any time soon. In general everyone wants to step away from the financial jungle and everyone basically wants a more level playing field so to say. 

I think we will come up with an European solution for this but it will probably be something very similar to what they do in America. Boehly has said this many times when the takeover started. 

Cultural things change over time as they have done in England. I bet when they introduced Premier League people were on the barricades. Nowadays it is the norm. 

Meanwhile Todd is working his "magic" 🤣🤣

https://www.instagram.com/p/C5tJWlgN6y8/?igsh=MWpjYzVqM3g3dTNjeg==

10 hours ago, evissy said:

And that is very unsustainable. The club as any other business needs to be a success on the pitch and financially as well. That is if you want to be up there with the best. 

We all know how dirty financies can be. Probably half of top football's money is dirty in some way. That is how it is unfortunately.

I also think FFP or some type of tight regulation will stay and probably be developed further. American money is coming in and we know how they operate in their big leagues. They have salary ceilings and floors in place. 

I personally think their system is pretty great. It keeps the sport interesting and levels the playing field. Money is then not the factor that dictates success but ability, work and great decision making. 

If football as a sport can't handle these systems coming in place it tells about the sport more than about the system imho.

Thanks for our reply mate. The thing is our FFP etc ensures that the clubs with the biggest income will always dominate our league.  We wouldn't have had the success we had  under Roman had those rules been in place back then . It prevents anyone else from living the dream,.it's put the brakes on Newcastle now. 

What I don't understand is why spending on a bigger stadium doesn't count under FFP even though it benefits a club financially once it's built.  Why don't repayments and interest on loans count under the rules ?

I assume that if a billionaire funds the new stadium himself , that's ok under the rules?

I believe most EPL clubs run at a loss or break even , the rules actually seem to encourage it by allowing a loss as long as it is under the imposed limit?

Anyway, thanks for the info on how Americans run the financial side of things. 

👍

 

On 17/04/2024 at 02:13, evissy said:

And that is very unsustainable. The club as any other business needs to be a success on the pitch and financially as well. That is if you want to be up there with the best. 

We all know how dirty financies can be. Probably half of top football's money is dirty in some way. That is how it is unfortunately.

I also think FFP or some type of tight regulation will stay and probably be developed further. American money is coming in and we know how they operate in their big leagues. They have salary ceilings and floors in place. 

I personally think their system is pretty great. It keeps the sport interesting and levels the playing field. Money is then not the factor that dictates success but ability, work and great decision making. 

If football as a sport can't handle these systems coming in place it tells about the sport more than about the system imho.

American sports in most cases adopt a salary cap which also levels things somewhat. Of course they have the draft systems too, which allow the worst teams to pick the best new players from the college systems. But that system doesn't apply in football with academies etc. being the preferred way to develop players.

Most importantly American sports also don't have the concept of relegation. I feel that eventually the big clubs will get their way and have a super league of some sort as it protects the assets of the rich owners.

1 hour ago, forbzy said:

American sports in most cases adopt a salary cap which also levels things somewhat. Of course they have the draft systems too, which allow the worst teams to pick the best new players from the college systems. But that system doesn't apply in football with academies etc. being the preferred way to develop players.

Most importantly American sports also don't have the concept of relegation. I feel that eventually the big clubs will get their way and have a super league of some sort as it protects the assets of the rich owners.

It's the very reason I can't get into my local team that was created back in 2019. It's in the 4th tier of American "Soccer". The only game I saw them play was when they had a pretty big preseason friendly against Hertha Berlin and I got to see the great Solomon Kalou at the time. But other than that I haven't been arsed. They get quite big turnouts too which I always find weird. It's like, what's the point? What is there to actually aspire or look forward to? If we win the league, cool? We stay put. 

Even if we made it into Europe, we can’t meet FFP so we would have to forfeit it. How crazy is that. Basically because the sale Of the hotel won’t count in Europe so we would be over and then get a 2 year ban. 
 

Must say, I don’t understand the clubs thinking here hamstringing yourself. Be interesting to hear if this was an actual strategy of the club - somehow. 

2025 we are in World Cup.... anyone else knew about this? 

17 minutes ago, evissy said:

2025 we are in World Cup.... anyone else knew about this? 

Yes, it was announced a couple of years ago I think? You must have missed it.

We qualified by winning the CL in 2021 so our place has been secured for years.

54 minutes ago, evissy said:

2025 we are in World Cup.... anyone else knew about this? 

There is already a thread on here about it ... bottom of page 3 ... I'll bump it for you so you can get up to speed LOL

Thanks 👌

The EPL took advertising space on the " Politico" site to put the case against the Government's regulatory proposals.

They obviously don't want government interference.

The same government that sanctioned our club and imposed a quick forced sale which was apparently ok and perfectly fine  .😜

Edited April 19, 20242 yr by The Rising Sun
Info

On 17/04/2024 at 18:51, The Rising Sun said:

Thanks for our reply mate. The thing is our FFP etc ensures that the clubs with the biggest income will always dominate our league.  We wouldn't have had the success we had  under Roman had those rules been in place back then . It prevents anyone else from living the dream,.it's put the brakes on Newcastle now. 

What I don't understand is why spending on a bigger stadium doesn't count under FFP even though it benefits a club financially once it's built.  Why don't repayments and interest on loans count under the rules ?

I assume that if a billionaire funds the new stadium himself , that's ok under the rules?

I believe most EPL clubs run at a loss or break even , the rules actually seem to encourage it by allowing a loss as long as it is under the imposed limit?

Anyway, thanks for the info on how Americans run the financial side of things. 

👍

 

Football finances baffle me. As you said, most clubs loose money or struggle to break even, and yet their book prices continue to rise based on future earnings. Jam tomorrow. 

When it was Romans hobby horse he put his hand in his pocket to the tune of hundreds of millions. The yanks came in and made him look like Scrooge- Drunken Sailors on Shore Leave.

If we spend a Billion on a new stadium, how long would that take to pay for itself- 30 years? Since the formation of the Premiership 30 years ago it’s been the same story. Jam tomorrow 

I reckon there was more to the hotel selling than simply a FFP loophole.

On 18/04/2024 at 14:19, JM7 said:

Even if we made it into Europe, we can’t meet FFP so we would have to forfeit it. How crazy is that. Basically because the sale Of the hotel won’t count in Europe so we would be over and then get a 2 year ban. 
 

Must say, I don’t understand the clubs thinking here hamstringing yourself. Be interesting to hear if this was an actual strategy of the club - somehow. 

If this is correct, is this only likely to be a big problem for the 2023-24 season given our outgoings? Or an ongoing issue with all of our amortized payments? As you point out that is a strange strategy as it basically means they hamstrung themselves with the excessive outgoings. Not to mention the Premier League voted to start using UEFA FFP rules for 24/25 reporting period in place of the existing PSR rules. 

2 hours ago, axman2526 said:

I reckon there was more to the hotel selling than simply a FFP loophole.

Didn't they effectively move an asset of the club to another sub-division of the Clearlake business group? The hotel is prime real estate and could generate a fair amount of income for them in time. All effectively to balance the books because of their excessive spending on unproven players.

10 hours ago, forbzy said:

Didn't they effectively move an asset of the club to another sub-division of the Clearlake business group? The hotel is prime real estate and could generate a fair amount of income for them in time. All effectively to balance the books because of their excessive spending on unproven players.

Aye they did. What was club property is now blueco property, like the Stoll mansions.

Without Palmer in the team, you see just how bad these players are. 

I've never seen a bigger waste of money in this sport in my life.