Time running out for debt-laden clubs

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
With credit to Devonian (a fellow COYSer) for bringing this to my attention:

Platini, asked if the word could be used in the context of today's English dominance (not wholly unprecedented, for less than a decade ago Real Madrid were scaling Europe's heights on borrowed money) puffed his cheeks and replied that it might be a little strong. "There have always been some clubs, and some countries, with more money at their disposal than others," he said, "and I have no problem with that. The problem occurs when the clubs who run up huge debts always win - and that we must stop. Some clubs, and some leagues, have asked us to. We are preparing a plan that will encourage clubs to reduce their debts and give us clear, clean competition."

The initiative to which he referred can be assumed to have come from countries such as France, which Platini most gloriously represented in the European Championship of 1984, and Germany, which also has strict rules against debt; it is understood that Bayern Munich's Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, against whom Platini played at the game's highest levels, has complained that his club, four times European champions, now feel they are fighting rivals from England, and to an extent Spain and Italy, with one hand tied behind their back. The issue was aired in Manchester at a meeting of Uefa's Professional Football Strategy Council, a body bringing together clubs, leagues, federations and players which was Platini's brainchild when he took over from Lennart Johansson last year.

If the strategy council resolves to eradicate debt, Uefa's executive committee will endorse it and only clubs with balanced books will be licensed to play in the European competitions. It is difficult to imagine any sensible criteria which - if we hypothetically apply them to the here and now - would not oblige Abramovich to write off at least £500 million of his fortune and the Glazers to repay the American banks.

So there are going to be some interesting discussions with the Premier League. Each of the top four has a debt that would have been inconceivable even in 1992, when it began. If you add them together, you have a figure well over £1 billion - equivalent to at least two years' television revenue for all 20 clubs. Ar5ena1, to their credit, are the odd man out in that Arsene Wenger balances the footballing books and their debt is entirely related to the new stadium; Liverpool, like United once-exemplary, are also now owned by Americans and heavily in debt to banks. Yet the strength of their squads obliges others to spend in an effort to keep up. Even Newcastle, owned by the extremely rich Mike Ashley, struggle to compete, as Kevin Keegan's anguished cries the other day emphasised. It is no way to run a league and Platini said: "My concern is for football's image. I have to defend the values of the game against a relatively small number of people whose philosophy I do not share.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/05/18/sfnpb1118.xml

The above is real, not some fantasy scheme. UEFA are aiming to bring the legislation in for the 2009/10 season. It will be legal and won't fall foul of EU law – UEFA can licence European competitions as it sees fit.

Nor will Chelsea escape just because their huge debts are in the form of interest free loans from Roman - since they they make operational losses of over £75 million per annum then they would fall foul of the UEFA ruling.

United and Liverpool will be in big trouble (and soon), but Arsenal are well placed as their debt is for the stadium and their wage ratio is good.
 
The above is real, not some fantasy scheme. UEFA are aiming to bring the legislation in for the 2009/10 season. It will be legal and won't fall foul of EU law – UEFA can licence European competitions as it sees fit.

The above paragraph is speculation and represents nothing more than your own opinion.

As if UEFA would seriously implement some ludicrous new legislation, which would prevent two of the best-supported clubs in the world from competing in their blue riband competition :rolleyes:

This thread is a WUM. And a poor one at that.
 
You are a right gimp GlastonSpur

You use the debt as a way of winding us lot up

We use the fact that your poxy team is shite
 
The above paragraph is speculation and represents nothing more than your own opinion.

As if UEFA would seriously implement some ludicrous new legislation, which would prevent two of the best-supported clubs in the world from competing in their blue riband competition :rolleyes:

This thread is a WUM. And a poor one at that.

Or that he is so deluded and paranoid that he thinks the top 4 teams will go down and Spurs will win the league! :lol:
 
The above paragraph is speculation and represents nothing more than your own opinion.
This is true, but the Telegraph article is real and so is the UEFA the plan it discusses.

As if UEFA would seriously implement some ludicrous new legislation, which would prevent two of the best-supported clubs in the world from competing in their blue riband competition :rolleyes:

It would only prevent them from competing if they don't sort out their debt. MUFC and Chelsea are not the only clubs that count in Europe.

There is a huge amount of pressure from other clubs and other leagues for something to be done to stop Russian billionaires and their like from totally distorting the economics of football and dominating the game. And IMO something will be done - and sooner than you think.

This thread is a WUM. And a poor one at that.
It isn't a WUM. You're burying your head in the sand if you think it's all just fantasy.
 
You are a right gimp GlastonSpur

You use the debt as a way of winding us lot up
Did I invent the Telegraph article? Have I invented the UEFA plan it discusses?

You might try responding to what the article says rather than wasting your time hurling around childish insults.
 
It isn't a WUM. You're burying your head in the sand if you think it's all just fantasy.

Of course it's a fecking WUM. It became a WUM the moment you added your own bullshit spin on it, by providing exact timelines on how and when this alleged plan will be implemented and your expert insight on the outcome of whatever legal minefield that UEFA would face if/when they ever attempt to move this forward.

UEFA are aiming to bring the legislation in for the 2009/10 season. It will be legal and won't fall foul of EU law

:rolleyes:

If/when enything of this nature is ever considered it will only be after extensive consultation with all the major powers in European football.

(meaning there's absolutely feck all chance of Spurs being in the loop)
 
"We are preparing a plan that will encourage clubs to reduce their debts and give us clear, clean competition."

"Encourage clubs to reduce their debts" obviously does not mean "throw clubs out of the CL." It will probably be some small penalty on transfers or a slap-on-the-wrist penalty. No big deal.
 
Spurs fan dreaming of scenarios where clubs like United are taken out of the equation :lol:

Jesus, that's desperation! Can't you just be patient and let Ramos develop a decent team to compete?
 
Unfortunately if this was to happen we would see a breakaway European league between the top clubs rather than them just suffering. UEFA would never implement it in fear of the main competition going down the shithole.
 
Did I invent the Telegraph article? Have I invented the UEFA plan it discusses?

You might try responding to what the article says rather than wasting your time hurling around childish insults.

Last Updated: 12:55am BST 18/05/2008

:rolleyes:

Love the way you've managed to dig this up
 
"We are preparing a plan that will encourage clubs to reduce their debts and give us clear, clean competition."

"Encourage clubs to reduce their debts" obviously does not mean "throw clubs out of the CL." It will probably be some small penalty on transfers or a slap-on-the-wrist penalty. No big deal.
Try reading the article properly:

"If the strategy council resolves to eradicate debt, Uefa's executive committee will endorse it and only clubs with balanced books will be licensed to play in the European competitions"
 
what's considered debt in their eyes though?

for example, we don't borrow cash to buy players and gain an advantage. Whereas Real just threw money at anybody that walked a few years ago.

the glazers financed an investment in a club. Similar to many different stock exchange deals. They are looking to make their investment more valuable by growing the brand name and sell for a profit in future

we fund our purchases through our revenue channels and so sustain our team that way, unlike Chelsea. Clubs need the right to borrow for investment opportunities like stadiums, takeovers etc. Unfortunately, clubs are now big corporate businesses
 
It would never happen. Most of the clubs who were part of G14 have some kind of debt including Real, Barca, AC Milan. They would simply pull out of UEFA and start their own league if UEFA was to disqualify them over debt concerns.
 
Try reading the article properly:

"If the strategy council resolves to eradicate debt, Uefa's executive committee will endorse it and only clubs with balanced books will be licensed to play in the European competitions"

I trust quotes from Platini. I don't trust the bullshit that the newspapers try to attach to the quotes. You'd be wise to do the same.
 
And without the big clubs UEFA' CL revenue would plummet. No way they would take financial loss.
 
Spurs fan dreaming of scenarios where clubs like United are taken out of the equation :lol:

Jesus, that's desperation! Can't you just be patient and let Ramos develop a decent team to compete?
I don't believe I've even mentioned Spurs in this thread.

I've drawn your attention to what is a very real intention by Platini and many others in UEFA to make some big changes. You might think they won't go through with it, or you might think they'll be somehow stopped - that's up to you - but either way it's got nothing to do with Spurs.
 
I trust quotes from Platini. I don't trust the bullshit that the newspapers try to attach to the quotes.
Fine, that's up to you. But remember that that Telegraph reporter concerned will have spoken to many UEFA officials about this story and has thus included his understanding of what is intended. And nor is the Telegraph some sensationalist rag likely to wildly invent things.

Just because no official has been so far been willing to spell things out in detail in public quotes doesn't make it bullshit.
 
Won't happen and if it does it would be structured so that all the big teams (the ones actually bringing in the money) would be able to play in all the major tournaments.
 
It would never happen. Most of the clubs who were part of G14 have some kind of debt including Real, Barca, AC Milan. They would simply pull out of UEFA and start their own league if UEFA was to disqualify them over debt concerns.

Wasn't there talk of a split a few years ago? UEFA would have the likes of Everton and Spur fighting out for the CL.
 
Fine, that's up to you. But remember that that Telegraph reporter concerned will have spoken to many UEFA officials about this story and has thus included his understanding of what is intended. And nor is the Telegraph some sensationalist rag likely to wildly invent things.

Just because no official has been so far been willing to spell things out in detail in public quotes doesn't make it bullshit.

Fair enough. Do forgive me if I remain highly skeptical, however.
 
Won't happen and if it does it would be structured so that all the big teams (the ones actually bringing in the money) would be able to play in all the major tournaments.
The attraction of the CL and the money it generates won't just disappear if MUFC and Chelsea aren't in it.

The CL is bigger than any one or two clubs and would survive quite nicely without them for a few seasons if it came to that.
 
The attraction of the CL and the money it generates won't just disappear if MUFC and Chelsea aren't in it.

The CL is bigger than any one or two clubs and would survive quite nicely without them for a few seasons if it came to that.

and Milan, Real, Barca and Liverpool. So, yes, it would.
 
The attraction of the CL and the money it generates won't just disappear if MUFC and Chelsea aren't in it.

The CL is bigger than any one or two clubs and would survive quite nicely without them for a few seasons if it came to that.

It's the top 10 clubs except bayern not 1-2 (only reason they're not on that list is the government funded there stadium). And probably 15 of the top 20.

Debt is and always has been part of the game.
 
Add arsenal to that list as well and juve has a small debt but i'd expect to increase quite a bit this summer if they're looknig for champs league glory. schalke has a big debt as well.

So how can you have a champions league without all the champions lol. Where is the revenue coming from? Surely not spurs lol :p
 
Unfortunately if this was to happen we would see a breakaway European league between the top clubs rather than them just suffering. UEFA would never implement it in fear of the main competition going down the shithole.
You're missing the point: most of the 'top clubs' across Europe - bar MUFC, Chelsea and possibly Liverpool - will likely support and endorse the UEFA plan.

I don't see the three Prem clubs wanting to try and play with themselves in their own little private competition.
 
As GeeAngel said, it was funded by the city for the world cup. They didn't own the old Olympic stadium and all.
 
Fine, that's up to you. But remember that that Telegraph reporter concerned will have spoken to many UEFA officials about this story and has thus included his understanding of what is intended. And nor is the Telegraph some sensationalist rag likely to wildly invent things.

Maybe not.

But you've managed to "wildly invent things" all by yourself, haven't you?

The above is real, not some fantasy scheme. UEFA are aiming to bring the legislation in for the 2009/10 season. It will be legal and won't fall foul of EU law – UEFA can licence European competitions as it sees fit.
 
You're missing the point: most of the 'top clubs' across Europe - bar MUFC, Chelsea and possibly Liverpool - will likely support and endorse the UEFA plan.

I don't see the three Prem clubs wanting to try and play with themselves in their own little private competition.

Maybe you don't get it most of the top clubs are in debt. The second tier teams would be the only ones left. Sponsors would be puling out left right and centre. At the end of the day it's always going to come down to revenue and the biggest clubs generate the biggest revenue. Bayern beating spurs 8-1 in the finals doesn't interest me or anyone else :D.
 
No the government built a ton of stadiums for the world cup + there football is subsidized.

So Rummenigge is complaining about Bayern having an unfair disadvantage yet they get a huge stadium built for them by the Government? Talk about irony.
 
So Rummenigge is complaining about Bayern having an unfair disadvantage yet they get a huge stadium built for them by the Government? Talk about irony.

In April 2006, FC Bayern München bought out TSV 1860 München's 50% share in the arena for a reported 11 million Euros.

The cost of the construction itself ran to €286 million but financing costs raised that figure to a total of €340 million. In addition, the city and State incurred approximately €210 million for area development and infrastructure improvements.
 
and Milan, Real, Barca and Liverpool. So, yes, it would.
It depends on the details of what ends up being pushed through by UEFA - e.g - what kind of debt is included in the plan (stadium-related debt would probably be excluded).

I'd bet that more clubs than you imagine would endorse the plan, which is aimed at stemming the extreme foreign ownership situations we are now seeing with the debt of MUFC - which dwarfs the debt of all other clubs - and Chelsea's 'debt-free' Russian money.
 
It depends on the details of what ends up being pushed through by UEFA - e.g - what kind of debt is included in the plan (stadium-related debt would probably be excluded).

I'd bet that more clubs than you imagine would endorse the plan, which is aimed at stemming the extreme foreign ownership situations we are now seeing with the debt of MUFC - which dwarfs the debt of all other clubs - and Chelsea's 'debt-free' Russian money.

You know utd could easily take all the debts off red football and move it back to a U.S. holding company and still pay a dividend?

Platini can't do shit about it just talking out of his ass as usual. I understand your excitement being this may be the only way you'd ever get into the competition but you'd just bottle it anyways.

And once again it's not just utd and chelsea it's all the large revenue clubs.
 
What I don't understand is how the fans of clubs like United can be punished because American businessmen have come in and created hundreds of millions of pounds of debt. Seems unfair to me.