So you haven't read a word I just said, then?
You said money was there, but Fergie did not spend it.
I said money was there, Fergie did not spend it, because his hands were tied.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
You said money was there, but Fergie did not spend it.
I said money was there, Fergie did not spend it, because his hands were tied.
Technically it's dropped, not just peaked.
£50m? Might be. I last summer we'd spend about £35m. Still substantially less in net terms than we spent as a PLC despite much smaller income.
Hmmmm.... well the income in the account has been increasing over the last 2 years. Very easy to argue that Fergie has a target in mind that he needs the money for and for that he has to wait (because most of the money in the account is destined to pay off the PIKs) - which, of course, was what the Bond issue was all about in the first place.
I don't know anyone who has lost faith in Fergie's judgement. I think he has pulled a masterstroke over the Rooney situation.
The bloke who told me is a friend, he works for BskyB. The basics are the top 5/6 clubs will take controll of their own TV rights in the next deal. Sky will still look to be the major broadcaster of PL in the UK and outside those clubs the broadcasting rights will be similar to now. Those top clubs matches will be available on Sky however those matches will be Pay to View only. Outside Uk each club will be able to do their own deals; TV, Internet, Mobile phone etc; this certainly fits in with Uniteds recent sponsorship deals and also other things i have heard.
The premier league have agreed to this?
They have given in by agreeing to let Fergie spend part of the money in reserve.
Everybody here knew we were weak in a few departments, after losing two of our best players. Fergie should have been the first to know. He knew. But, he did not spend. Why? No value for money? Bull shit.
It took a crisis to hammer it into their thick skulls that we had to buy; not just Bebes or Dioufs, but quality players who could fit in to our senior side.
According to the EPL constitution, it would take 14 clubs to agree to any change in how TV rights are sold, either home or abroad. So if 7 clubs think they will lose out due to any change, it won't happen.
Oh right, I hadn't seen anything where United have said that we can spend a part of the money in reserve. Do you have a link to it please?
The way it would work will be more likely to increase the income for the smaller clubs
In the end the power lies with those top clubs and the present format is unsustainable.
One of the conditions, as I understand, of Rooney signing, is that we would be signing new players. There are threads in this forum stating that. And new signings means money to be spent.
It won't be a condition. It will just be an assurance.
If there is a condition it will be an escape clause linked to United's success or lack thereof.
If there is a condition it will be an escape clause linked to United's success or lack thereof.
Yeah I know people are saying that but I haven't seen it as fact, more assumption on our and the media's part. In essence, I just haven't seen anything official that says that.
I'd be very surprised if that was the case.
I've not heard anything along those lines, but if it's going to increase income all round they I would have thought the clubs would go for it.
Nor had I until yesterday and of course it is completely unofficial, however he is not one to bullshit and how he outlined it made a lot of sense and would take PL income (especially for the big clubs) to a new level.
Could it explain why businessmen --- Arabs, Americans and Russians suddenly developed such a great interest in owning PL football clubs? Also in the case of first Chelsea and now Man City are so keen to take them into that group of elite by throwing money at them.
Thinking out loud here, would the FA premiership allow that to happen or would the clubs have to force the issue by say threatening to resign, I know this is what the Glazers have been waiting to happen, the other American owners will no doubt back them up
Uh? Tied by what?
At a guess perhaps they might but as I understand it the idea would be to keep the revenue the other clubs currently receive similar to what they would get under a new joint agreement to stop conflict happening.
As it was put to me how much could United earn world wide per match selling the rights to every game on an individual basis.
Say the rights to the Stoke game had been marketed world wide by United perhaps through MUTV the potential income is mind blowing and Stokes share, even a small percentage of the gross, would still be sizeable.
Thanks for that, interesting and all very feasible
From our point of view, I'd love to believe that there is some substance to this.
One of the main thrusts of the anti-Glazer argument has been that certain revenues have been maxed out and TV money was one of them. This would blow a lot of those out of the water if it's true.
Nothing to do with the discussion at hand but it would also mean an even greater divide between the haves and have nots in the PL though and a far more static league than we are even likely to have when the FFP Regs come in.
It would be silly for the smaller Premier League clubs to agree to a new deal which accentuated the gap between the rich and poor clubs. Bigger TV deals bring increased costs in terms of further wage inflation across the board. What matters to the small clubs should not merely be the raw amount they receive from the TV deal, but keeping some sense of equality in it.
The owners of clubs like our own are only interested in lining their own pockets and the smaller clubs will likely be bullied into accepting their will, good for the greedy Glazers not so good for the game and the English premier league
I don't think the divide can get much bigger than it is now its still 11 v 11 on the pitch. As now they would have enough good players to cause a few shocks and plenty of hard games but not enough to break the monopoly of the big clubs so for them you could say a win win situation.
Like you say, a different question, but an important one. Is it in United's interest to become so much bigger than most of our rivals, it becomes like shooting fish in a barrel? Would that risk killing interest.
I was reading an interesting book a while back that touched on this. It was interesting because it argued a view that was the opposite of what I believed to be true. It said in sport generally, not just football, statistics imply "consumers" are more interested in sport when there is one team or a small group of teams with an almost unassailable dominance. Whereas sport where measures are taken to maintain some kind of equilibrium, which you would think would maintain interest - i.e. kepeing the hope alive for all teams that they could win it - actually end up seeing declining interest.
United were used as the case study in this. To simplify, it is good to have teams like United because everyone loves to hate us. Except for the glory hunters who love to support us. And the smaller teams, who love the opportunity to beat us.
So the argument goes there is no reason to worry about the league becoming increasingly uncompetitive. If England gets even more like Scotland and the gap between the top teams and the rest grows and grows and grows, apparently, there is no evidence this will kill interest in football. Even though this is something I have always worried about, and why I have argued in the long run this kind of TV arrangement would end up hurting us.
(The book was Why England Lose, by Simon Kuper.)
I always assumed the Glazers intended on trying to break away from the collective TV deal back in 2007.
I have to say though, I'm struggling to see how our 7 smallest clubs would get more money selling their overseas rights individually rather than as part of the current collective deals.
Not sure this is the right place to post but alluding to the Rooney contract issue if the stipulation of success or get out clause is in fact in place.
What would happen if Rooney need to help win the last game of the season to gain 'success' according to the clause or if not be able to get out of his contract on the cheap and therefore make himself a boat load more money?
Would Mr ambtion want the trophy or the money? Interesting scenario and one reason why I hope the contract is not stipulated like that.
EDIT: I will repost in the Rooney contract thread.
What would happen if Rooney need to help win the last game of the season to gain 'success' according to the clause or if not be able to get out of his contract on the cheap and therefore make himself a boat load more money?
Would Mr ambtion want the trophy or the money? Interesting scenario and one reason why I hope the contract is not stipulated like that.
EDIT: I will repost in the Rooney contract thread.
I think that argument does stand up - no one can argue with the passion of the Stoke fans yesterday yet I am sure not one of them thinks their team will challenge even for the top 6 ----------so for them their joy would have come from beating one of the big boys.
Only the top 5-6 clubs will have individual rights the rest will continue with a collective agreements the obvious reduction in the collective will be made up by the proportion they would receive from the big clubs.
In other words Phil they are going to have alot less money to work with?
I think he's saying that they would be on about the same as they are now.
Is it just me or does anyone else find all this talk another depressing example of footballs gradual slide into soulless commercialism? Going to Old Trafford feels like I'm being subjected to a marketing exercise sometimes.
Personally, I had never given a minute's thought to the financial working of Manchester United or any other football club prior to January of this year - it held absolutely no interest to me whatsoever. It was only when I started to hear the horror stories about how shit our financial situation was that I became interested - I just didn't want to believe that Manchester United were going to go down the plughole after such a glorious 20 years of success.
I think I have some perspective on the issue now and I just enjoy the football again.
When Hernandez scored that winner yesterday, that relief was just palpable and the guy who ran out onto this pitch was an expression of this - he just couldn't help himself.
The bean counters behind the scenes might not see football like we do but pity them for that. The soul is still very much there.
It's a pity it was embodied by a fat bloke falling on his arse but it's still there!
Football has become a fat bloke falling on his arse.
Fat, bloated, rudderless, greedy ............ and drunk.
Ah ok. Although they'd presumably need to make it up to the small clubs with more money than they would get from the equivalent collective deal - can't imagine they'd be too happy getting the same while the top clubs get more as this inevitably makes it harder to compete and drives up wage costs.
To be honest, it could pan out in all kinds of ways if this turns out to be true.
The one rule that has come to smaller clubs' rescue this season is the squad limit rule.
It doesn't matter how much the "big clubs" are willing to pay their players, they can still only have 25 players each (plus the kids, obviously).
Once these clubs have their full quotas (and the big clubs will obviously be able to cherry-pick - what's new there though?), the rest will have to go somewhere and if the difference in revenues between the big clubs and the rest is such that we effectively have a "two-tier" Premier League then everyone will have to accept that if you're not wanted by the top tier then you have to go into the second tier and accept what they are able to afford.
So you'll be watching Eastenders instead tomorrow night? Thought not!
Why the hell would I? Watching a fat drunk bloke is hilarious, especially when there are loads of other blokes watching who don't even know that he's fat and drunk!!
Glad you made yourself laugh though.
Dunno. You sounded a bit disillusioned with football for a minute.
I suppose I could have guessed that he'd had a pint or two at that point but I can't see why anyone wouldn't have known he was fat. Somewhere in the world, there were guys who measure seismic activity getting all excited at the moment he hit the deck.
I think you are right and they won't be happy but in the end it might be their only viable option. The owners of these clubs will all see large bucks at the end of the day.
- Status