Leicester At It Yet Again! (5 Viewers)

Forums New posts
H

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
It's not about club v country, it's about not wanting clubs to whore themselves out to the highest bidder and blow wages and transfer fees up to insanity.
Click to expand...
But in some respects it is. If you keep it in check you tend to push to home grown thing, thus assisting the strength of the national team. Its not our money personally, all we want is our club to win at all costs. to hell with the consequences for anyone else.
 
Skyblueweeman

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
I’ve always said these rules shouldn’t be in place at all - it’s ridiculous and there is no actual fixed number a committee arrives at.
Click to expand...

What's the answer then?

There needs to be some sort of process/rules in place otherwise clubs will continue to outspend themselves and then go bust when owners with no affection to the community just bugger off.

I don't disagree that the current way of doing things isn't the best but something needs to be in place to keep cost controls under, erm, control.
 
H

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
Skyblueweeman said:
What's the answer then?

There needs to be some sort of process/rules in place otherwise clubs will continue to outspend themselves and then go bust when owners with no affection to the community just bugger off.

I don't disagree that the current way of doing things isn't the best but something needs to be in place to keep cost controls under, erm, control.
Click to expand...
As i've previously said - put a limit on clubs taking on loans from owners. Money must be gifted. Stops owners blackmailing clubs when they lose interest.

That way Owners are free to fund the club with their money, but they can't load debt against the club. That way it'll make Owners think about whether they want spend their own money, rather than asking for it back on a high interest loan down the line.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Skyblueweeman said:
What's the answer then?

There needs to be some sort of process/rules in place otherwise clubs will continue to outspend themselves and then go bust when owners with no affection to the community just bugger off.

I don't disagree that the current way of doing things isn't the best but something needs to be in place to keep cost controls under, erm, control.
Click to expand...

Pretty much every club is insolvent and relies on owner funding one way or another. We are insolvent
 
Senior Vick from Alicante

Senior Vick from Alicante

Well-Known Member
Leicester are an example of not a badly run club, but an example of what can go wrong in business if you make the wrong decisions. Brendan Rogers saw the lack of money available so engineered an exit and payoff. Director of football then makes purchases based on financial best scenario predictions in spite of company's balance sheet after covid nearly crippled them. The first gamble paid off and they got promoted, they then think they're onto something and the subsequent "it worked first time so we will do it again" fails. This has put them in a financial death spiral, with dwindling attendances and ticket sales mortgaged in advance and now an owner who will have to pump money in to cover losses despite parachute payments. Unless the owner can directly put in the cash to cover the running cost short fall, or have the will to do so, it will lead to a SWFC type scenario. Owners soon loose interest when you have to pump in 50 million a season. Foxes will end up being off loaded at a significant loss or go into administration if they get relegated. That is the modern day football reality, Doug if your reading this please carry on doing it sensibly!
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
It's not about club v country, it's about not wanting clubs to whore themselves out to the highest bidder and blow wages and transfer fees up to insanity.
Click to expand...

You keep bringing up Germany but the reality is their insolvency rate in football clubs is higher than in England - Uerdingdon were bankrupt last season - English clubs have a higher survival rate
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
As i've previously said - put a limit on clubs taking on loans from owners. Money must be gifted. Stops owners blackmailing clubs when they lose interest.

That way Owners are free to fund the club with their money, but they can't load debt against the club. That way it'll make Owners think about whether they want spend their own money, rather than asking for it back on a high interest loan down the line.
Click to expand...

Most loans though are just there to create a protected administration should it ever occur - we are a classic example really of manipulating rules, staging fake insolvency and carrying on

Wrexham are it seems more transparent in that they are gifting money through share issues but in the end its all the same. Owners doing big loans are aware that money is not coming back
 
H

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Most loans though are just there to create a protected administration should it ever occur - we are a classic example really of manipulating rules, staging fake insolvency and carrying on

Wrexham are it seems more transparent in that they are gifting money through share issues but in the end its all the same. Owners doing big loans are aware that money is not coming back
Click to expand...
Thats why i'm against loans such as that - Can be a form of blackmail. My idea is essentially that in the event that a club goes into administration its to external creditors meaning the owner can't just do what SISU did. i'm sure there will be ways around it but it'll make people think about their investment
 
S

SonofErnie

Well-Known Member
HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
As i've previously said - put a limit on clubs taking on loans from owners. Money must be gifted. Stops owners blackmailing clubs when they lose interest.

That way Owners are free to fund the club with their money, but they can't load debt against the club. That way it'll make Owners think about whether they want spend their own money, rather than asking for it back on a high interest loan down the line.
Click to expand...
That’s what they’re doing at Blues, with an 11% interest on borrowing. Ouch!
 
Ricketts

Ricketts

Well-Known Member
HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
I’d put good money on Birmingham City not “owning” that new ground either. That’s 100% a boom or bust situation. But it’s a situation Knighthead would control in an admin situation.
Click to expand...
Birmingham would be better off if they would just accept what they are, and then work at it and enjoy it. They should be a decent championship side, historically they are never as big as Villa, nor West Brom or Wolves
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
I’d put good money on Birmingham City not “owning” that new ground either. That’s 100% a boom or bust situation. But it’s a situation Knighthead would control in an admin situation.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's inevitable. The grounds not been built for blues, it's going to be built as part of a larger regeneration project with the goal of staging gigs and NFL in the stadium.
 
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top