When the bubble bursts...

If your prediction comes true ( which I believe it will) then surely the smaller feeder clubs like ourselves will also be affected. Players like Lallana would fetch a much smaller fee, than the £5m quoted figure that is floating around at the moment. Without the profits from player sales, then surely we are doomed also ?

I do believe that Platini, the EU, FA/FL and our own weak Sports Minister do need to look favourably at clubs that raise their own more talented young players through their expensive Academies, only to see them leached for peanuts by richer clubs. It will always happen to some extent, but it goes on far too easily now. Some world-wide legislation is needed.

We always say that it isn't going to change, but the looming crisis is an opportunity to redress some of the major fault-lines throughout football. Leadership is needed. Is Platini tough enough to initiate change for the better? I hope so, because no-one else seems to want to.

If we get a statue of ML our saviour, can we employ the guy that did the first TB statue...

In all seriousness we're not the first and certainly not the last club to suffer through finances.

I don't want us to splurge to achieve success, steady growth is safer.

Without relegation, american sports will always be candy-floss entertainment, feckless bliss for an infantilised population.

Strange that you're patting yourself on the back for lauding a "strategy" that went catastrophically t*ts-up! The only reason we're out the other end is because ML came in and saved us after L*** experimental disaster hit ground, as we all anticipated.

 

You are right though that other clubs might have to go through what we have been through, possibly in the Prem, possibly not too far from us...

yes, far from being immune to the problems, we were so very close to being the first victim. Of course the strategy may now work now we have no debt......

Without relegation, american sports will always be candy-floss entertainment, feckless bliss for an infantilised population.

Relegation almost destroyed Saints. Would you still think relegation were a great thing, if ML hadn't bought SFC and our club had gone out of existence?

Come on, be honest. :cool:

Having relegation 30 years ago was a healthy thing: it hurt, but wasn't a disaster. Nowadays, it could be the kiss of death to a club.

I do Steve. I advocated then to cut them adrift, if it had happened they would have come back cap in hand as they needed both competitions but the chairman of the other clubs caved in.

That included our own Rupert.

Without relegation, american sports will always be candy-floss entertainment, feckless bliss for an infantilised population.

LOL ...You call pitching teams with multi million $$$ wage bills like Man City, Utd, Chelsea against the likes of Hull, Burnly, Fulham, Stoke etc SPORT???? LMAO

Heh that would be ilegal here...We give wild game a better chance than that

Here's a home truth for ya.......Fraid to say in the main, Southampton fans can't hold a candle to the passion generarated by The "feckless infantilised" Saints supporting population" around here......Not even close.......Quite remarkable considering its only "candy floss entertainment"

Without relegation, american sports will always be candy-floss entertainment, feckless bliss for an infantilised population.

Exactly the audiences that the whole Sky/Premier League axis is aimed at, not just in the UK but increasingly overseas.

The Premier League self-styles itself as the "world's greatest football league" for the main purposes of being able to sell itself in China, the Far East, and elsewhere.

Richard Scudamore, as the PL's chief executive, is mainly charged with marketing 'the product' and bringing in as much money as he can. Nothing wrong with that, but the rabid pursuit of money streams has been at the price of any football moral soul that clubs had.

Clubs moan like hell that players play too much, but they are on the first plane to Kuala Lumpur or Hong Kong to take part in Premier League pre-season tournaments abroad (Asia Cup, anyone?)

The PL has been led by the nose by Sky (and to a lesser extent other broadcasters) since the day in 1992 when clubs left the Football League to form it.

Sky have been good for the PL, but if it suits Sky, it won't hesitate to knife its old football chum in the back.

Look back in this thread and I waffled on about a Sky-backed world league.

As money gets tighter all over the world, the battle for the shrinking pot will heat up.

Setanta's collapse has shown Sky there is effectively nobody else out there who can compete with them (not even Disney-owned ESPN). Thre've now got the PL where they want them, and don't be surprised if their next contract bid is worth a lot, lot less.

That could lead to an end of the collective agreement and the break up of the PL as the Big Four realise they could do better by negotiating their own deals - just like Real Madrid and Barca do in Spain where there is no collective agreement.

Sky will go with those who they think will provide the biggest audiences and that might be all those Man Utd/Liverpool/Chelsea wearing hordes in the Far East.

How many Hull City/Bolton/Blackburn shirts do you see in KL? The overseas market for the 'world's greatest football league' is not interested in seeing the vast majority of its games which feature the likes of Fulham v Sunderland or Aston Villa v Wigan.

And Sky are increasingly wondering if those games are an incumberence they don't really be want to saddled with.

The first cracks are starting to appear, and it will be the players who drive wedges into those cracks and widen them out.

The top earners are already moaning about the tax levels in the UK and it's interesting to see that all the big transfer business this summer has been done by clubs outside the UK.

According to a contact who works there, the PL are messing themselves at Pompey's predicament.

How can you style yourself as the 'world's greatest football league' when one of your members has debts the size of a small third-world country and could go bust?

It doesn't look good for your status does it?

The PL 'fast-tracked' (ie, just conducted the most basic and cursory of tests) Dr Al Fathead's Fit and Proper Person's eligibility in the hope his appointment as chairman would speed up his takeover of the club and avert any embarrassing situation of a member club going boobies-up.

But it looks as though he doesn't have the money which has put the PL on the very sharp horns of a dliemma.

Their FaPP test has sent his hooky backers heading for the hills, and the PL has said it will monitor closely any sudden influx of money into the club, which has effectively put the kibosh on him raising the scratch needed.

The PL are now desperately seeking a way they can remove obstacles to Pompey raising money, without losing face by backtracking on their rulings.

As a responsible sports ruling body the PL should stand firm on its morals and rules and let the devil take the hindmost on clubs who fail to run a tight financial ship.

As a platform to market the 'world's greatest football league' the PL cannot sit on its hands and do nothing.

I'll bet a cooling Coors with anyone that Pompey will not go into administration and that some strangely cooked-up deal will somehow save them.

It would be a good thing for football players wages to get a reality check, what a crazy world we live in when players earn 100k a week and a nurse saving peoples lives earns absolute FA for a year... I suppose football is like any other market, if the market collapses everything is affected, not just the big players, the small ones too, so Southampton are susceptible to a football recession just like Manchester united. Do I think the bubble will burst? - yes, will pompey be one of the middle not rich not poor clubs that get hit the worst? - its happening before our eyes, will we weather the storm because we have some of the coolest, calmest, most business aware owners in the world - abso bludey lutely! the universe is levelling itself! and thank god. football really has been rediculous

....we are in a better position than many think, to survive.

 

The pain we have gone through will be ten times worse for the "bigger" clubs over the coming months. It will happen soon and the pigs who have been at the Sky Sports trough will find that it will soon be empty. The balance sheets of these mercenary armies(or their banks) will soon be found to be nothing more than a mirage of creative accounting, that the Premier League have ignored for too long. Ashley has lost over £300M on HBOS shares, allegedly. A firesale of Newcastle is on the cards and relegation is not out of the question. If we found it hard, how will they cope? Even Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal are not immune to the firestorm engulfing the world's economy. Massive debts built on the assumption that there is an inifinite apetite for overpaid foreigners kicking a ball around at a strange time on the weekend (ie not 3:00pm on a Saturday) are going to be unsustainable and with many of the property assets (£10M for Fratton Park, anyone???) underpinning the balance sheets, a slight nudge that propelled some of the biggest financial institutions into oblivion, will be all it takes.

Live with the pain at Southampton Football Club, turn up to as many of the games as possible, because soon, our model of sustainable football covered by income from the pockets of the real fans will be the daily diet of many of the clubs in the Premiership.

As they sink, we will rise again, on the back of a vision of the economic reality that so many people are having to face in the financial community, but few inside football can see. Just be glad we are facing up to it now. Those in denial, not a few miles down the M27 will soon be jolted into a world of pain, along with a few others and their journey will go downhill far more rapidly than ours.....

Straight lift from Henry V's St Crispan's Day speach GM?

According to a contact who works there, the PL are messing themselves at Pompey's predicament.

 

How can you style yourself as the 'world's greatest football league' when one of your members has debts the size of a small third-world country and could go bust?

 

It doesn't look good for your status does it?

 

The PL 'fast-tracked' (ie, just conducted the most basic and cursory of tests) Dr Al Fathead's Fit and Proper Person's eligibility in the hope his appointment as chairman would speed up his takeover of the club and avert any embarrassing situation of a member club going boobies-up.

 

But it looks as though he doesn't have the money which has put the PL on the very sharp horns of a dliemma.

 

Their FaPP test has sent his hooky backers heading for the hills, and the PL has said it will monitor closely any sudden influx of money into the club, which has effectively put the kibosh on him raising the scratch needed.

 

The PL are now desperately seeking a way they can remove obstacles to Pompey raising money, without losing face by backtracking on their rulings.

 

As a responsible sports ruling body the PL should stand firm on its morals and rules and let the devil take the hindmost on clubs who fail to run a tight financial ship.

 

As a platform to market the 'world's greatest football league' the PL cannot sit on its hands and do nothing.

 

I'll bet a cooling Coors with anyone that Pompey will not go into administration and that some strangely cooked-up deal will somehow save them.

It's amazing how panic can shape decision making.

Fahim never had enough money, There is a story waiting to come out another day, but the reak issue is that FAPPT the PL and FL want to run.

I keep harping on about how easy it would have been for me to have bought Saints before admin through a leveraged buy-out.

IF I had not been a fan, I could have borrowed the money and done a Man Ure/Liverpool loading the club with debts that would only ever be able to have the interest repaid.

Liverpool pay 30mil a YEAR in Interest on the loans used to buy the club. They generate 30mil in profit.....

Hello - HOW THE FOOK does anyone expect them to PAY BACK that capital when they ONLY just make enough to pay THE INTEREST. The ever expanding market just shrank, IF the Skates go then someone like them COULD be next

(But don't worry RBS lent them the money so you'll all just pay an extra 1p tax to clear it off...............)

According to a contact who works there, the PL are messing themselves at Pompey's predicament.

 

How can you style yourself as the 'world's greatest football league' when one of your members has debts the size of a small third-world country and could go bust?

 

It doesn't look good for your status does it?

 

The PL 'fast-tracked' (ie, just conducted the most basic and cursory of tests) Dr Al Fathead's Fit and Proper Person's eligibility in the hope his appointment as chairman would speed up his takeover of the club and avert any embarrassing situation of a member club going boobies-up.

 

But it looks as though he doesn't have the money which has put the PL on the very sharp horns of a dliemma.

 

Their FaPP test has sent his hooky backers heading for the hills, and the PL has said it will monitor closely any sudden influx of money into the club, which has effectively put the kibosh on him raising the scratch needed.

 

The PL are now desperately seeking a way they can remove obstacles to Pompey raising money, without losing face by backtracking on their rulings.

 

As a responsible sports ruling body the PL should stand firm on its morals and rules and let the devil take the hindmost on clubs who fail to run a tight financial ship.

 

As a platform to market the 'world's greatest football league' the PL cannot sit on its hands and do nothing.

 

I'll bet a cooling Coors with anyone that Pompey will not go into administration and that some strangely cooked-up deal will somehow save them.

Pompey are perilously close to doing a 'Leeds', the first club that could not sustain the players' costs they accrued in gambling on achieving big-time success. And Leeds's financial black hole was small compared to what Portsmouth's is now. It would be very odd if the PL came to their rescue to save face. Because there will be a very long queue of clubs following in their wake.

Pompey are perilously close to doing a 'Leeds', the first club that could not sustain the players' costs they accrued in gambling on achieving big-time success. And Leeds's financial black hole was small compared to what Portsmouth's is now. It would be very odd if the PL came to their rescue to save face. Because there will be a very long queue of clubs following in their wake.

I dont think the PL would come to their rescue.

Not a London club or a big club

Crap ground

plus the PL would use it as message to other clubs to sort out their finances.

Meanwhile, News Corp lose £2 Billion. Plunging advertising revenue is blamed. But how are Sky doing?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/05/news-corp-losses

Meanwhile, News Corp lose £2 Billion. Plunging advertising revenue is blamed. But how are Sky doing?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/05/news-corp-losses

Hee! Hee! Nice little spat developing here. The Times has been gleefully reporting that The Observer (owned by Guardian Media Group) is about to fold.

So the Guardian are equally gleeful in their reporting of News Corp's losses.

Murdoch organisation organs never fail to take any opportunity to boot the boot in on one of its rivals. Time was when media groups drew together in times of common adversity.

How are Sky doing? Not bad. But if you ever read a definitive history of News Corp it will tell you that during Sky's early days, when it was struggling to get enough subscribers, it was effectively underwritten by Murdoch's British newspaper organisation.

News Corp is now a global media player, but its British newspapers are still a significant part of its business and a barometer of how the company is doing.

It's amazing how panic can shape decision making.

 

Fahim never had enough money, There is a story waiting to come out another day, but the reak issue is that FAPPT the PL and FL want to run.

 

I keep harping on about how easy it would have been for me to have bought Saints before admin through a leveraged buy-out.

 

IF I had not been a fan, I could have borrowed the money and done a Man Ure/Liverpool loading the club with debts that would only ever be able to have the interest repaid.

 

Liverpool pay 30mil a YEAR in Interest on the loans used to buy the club. They generate 30mil in profit.....

 

Hello - HOW THE FOOK does anyone expect them to PAY BACK that capital when they ONLY just make enough to pay THE INTEREST. The ever expanding market just shrank, IF the Skates go then someone like them COULD be next

 

(But don't worry RBS lent them the money so you'll all just pay an extra 1p tax to clear it off...............)

If we believe the stories being generated by the press at the moment then the money being charged by Gaydamak for a loan to his own business is about £3 million a year!

I just don't get it. How can he own Pompey and then loan it money at 15% pa?

How can the FA jump down on us from a great height and then allow this sort of crap to go on??

....we are in a better position than many think, to survive.

 

The pain we have gone through will be ten times worse for the "bigger" clubs over the coming months. It will happen soon and the pigs who have been at the Sky Sports trough will find that it will soon be empty. The balance sheets of these mercenary armies(or their banks) will soon be found to be nothing more than a mirage of creative accounting, that the Premier League have ignored for too long. Ashley has lost over £300M on HBOS shares, allegedly. A firesale of Newcastle is on the cards and relegation is not out of the question. If we found it hard, how will they cope? Even Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal are not immune to the firestorm engulfing the world's economy. Massive debts built on the assumption that there is an inifinite apetite for overpaid foreigners kicking a ball around at a strange time on the weekend (ie not 3:00pm on a Saturday) are going to be unsustainable and with many of the property assets (£10M for Fratton Park, anyone???) underpinning the balance sheets, a slight nudge that propelled some of the biggest financial institutions into oblivion, will be all it takes.

Live with the pain at Southampton Football Club, turn up to as many of the games as possible, because soon, our model of sustainable football covered by income from the pockets of the real fans will be the daily diet of many of the clubs in the Premiership.

As they sink, we will rise again, on the back of a vision of the economic reality that so many people are having to face in the financial community, but few inside football can see. Just be glad we are facing up to it now. Those in denial, not a few miles down the M27 will soon be jolted into a world of pain, along with a few others and their journey will go downhill far more rapidly than ours.....

All very encouraging for Saints fans but it's a bit early to start raising the drawbridge. How many times have we seen new owners lose interest after 2/3 years when results are not quite working out and clubs are bleeding money through inadequate gate receipts and crippling wage bills. I am not suggesting our new owner is of this mold but we are living through precarious financial times indeed and if balance sheets start going south... just a thought to head of your sense of complacency.

Just look up the road to see how the world of football club ownership really works.

According to a contact who works there, the PL are messing themselves at Pompey's predicament.

 

How can you style yourself as the 'world's greatest football league' when one of your members has debts the size of a small third-world country and could go bust?

 

It doesn't look good for your status does it?

 

The PL 'fast-tracked' (ie, just conducted the most basic and cursory of tests) Dr Al Fathead's Fit and Proper Person's eligibility in the hope his appointment as chairman would speed up his takeover of the club and avert any embarrassing situation of a member club going boobies-up.

 

But it looks as though he doesn't have the money which has put the PL on the very sharp horns of a dliemma.

 

Their FaPP test has sent his hooky backers heading for the hills, and the PL has said it will monitor closely any sudden influx of money into the club, which has effectively put the kibosh on him raising the scratch needed.

 

The PL are now desperately seeking a way they can remove obstacles to Pompey raising money, without losing face by backtracking on their rulings.

 

As a responsible sports ruling body the PL should stand firm on its morals and rules and let the devil take the hindmost on clubs who fail to run a tight financial ship.

 

As a platform to market the 'world's greatest football league' the PL cannot sit on its hands and do nothing.

 

I'll bet a cooling Coors with anyone that Pompey will not go into administration and that some strangely cooked-up deal will somehow save them.

What can the FA do about the Skates situation to prevent them going into administration? They've already cooked their own goose with their open declaration that the owners of football clubs in the top flight should not be used to launder money through football. And they do not have the power to pursuade a bank not to call in a large debt which the club might not be able to pay. Even if they back-tracked on who they let buy the Skates, there would be a swarm of journalists digging into the background of any major investor hoping for an exclusive scoop.

As to comments in another post you made about the audience out in the Far East only being interested in the big four clubs, I beg to disagree. Granted that as over here, people like to watch them play on TV and buy the merchandise of those clubs because there are plastics the World over, but those other lesser clubs get their exposure when they play the big four clubs and even the plastics would be bored out of their skulls if the big four only played themselves every week. The entertainment value grows when a minnow beats the big four club, that is the excitement.

Some interesting points of discussion being raised here.

The Premier League - Its hard to know what the future will be although as the original poster stated, the bubble will either burst or reduce in size. People are switching off to the Premier League in the UK because it is becoming boring. The big 4, Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool tend to dominate and although it will turn into the big 5 this year with Man City spending a large fortune on players. So that leaves the less glamorous clubs to scrap it out for the hope of mid-table safety. Yawn! That is why The Championship is the fifth most watched league in the world. Why? Because no team dominates that league, it is much more competitive where any team can beat any other team on their day and is much more entertaining and that is the key. People like to be entertained and I know the quality of football isn't quite as good but at least it is much more interesting.

Players Wages - The PL is becoming unsustainable and there is going to come a time where clubs will simply say 'no' to players wages demands. After all, there are only a few clubs that can afford paying a player £150K a week and it can't continue otherwise more clubs will start to go into administration. The gravy train that the current players and their agents are on needs to stop somehow.

Platini - I applaude his motion to limit the number of foreigners allowed in a team, to encourage clubs to produce home-grown talent. Not only will this level the playing field but will improve the national teams. One tiny but significant flaw in this plan is that it would contravene European Employment Law and therefore unless this could be exempted (which I doubt), FIFA/UEFA will be unable to force this through, even if the clubs agree to it.

What can the FA do about the Skates situation to prevent them going into administration? They've already cooked their own goose with their open declaration that the owners of football clubs in the top flight should not be used to launder money through football. And they do not have the power to pursuade a bank not to call in a large debt which the club might not be able to pay. Even if they back-tracked on who they let buy the Skates, there would be a swarm of journalists digging into the background of any major investor hoping for an exclusive scoop.

 

As to comments in another post you made about the audience out in the Far East only being interested in the big four clubs, I beg to disagree. Granted that as over here, people like to watch them play on TV and buy the merchandise of those clubs because there are plastics the World over, but those other lesser clubs get their exposure when they play the big four clubs and even the plastics would be bored out of their skulls if the big four only played themselves every week. The entertainment value grows when a minnow beats the big four club, that is the excitement.

All very encouraging for Saints fans but it's a bit early to start raising the drawbridge. How many times have we seen new owners lose interest after 2/3 years when results are not quite working out and clubs are bleeding money through inadequate gate receipts and crippling wage bills. I am not suggesting our new owner is of this mold but we are living through precarious financial times indeed and if balance sheets start going south... just a thought to head of your sense of complacency.

 

Just look up the road to see how the world of football club ownership really works.

This is the crux of what I think will be an interesting couple of months.

Lowe tried (and failed) to build a club that was self financing and stable. In reality that was a sensible plan, however as we all know, football post CL has lost all sense of reality. So when YOU try to be sensible and everyone plays by different rules milking rich people, you come off worst.

Today, football really is at a crossroads, despite the Sky money, Liverpool & Man U are up to their necks in leveraged debt, secure but in the current climate with little short term chance of repaying the debt. Chelsea are under orders from Abramovich to become self sustaining and Arsenal (like us) mortgaged much of their medium term future to build their stadium.

Outside of those you have Man City, they are not a football club anymore, they are simply a marketing budget, the longer the ridicule continues the more concerned their backers will become that their global branding idea is met with distaste and derision rather than praise.

Villa have a wealthy owner but they aren't going mad, and "Arry is doing his thing at Spuds....

I've said that the Swiss business model is for careful planned growth. In many ways that is no different from the core concept that Lowe had. Fortunately, the new regime have brought wisdom with them rather than Dictatorships.

I really don't see our guys spending millions, and I don't understand our fans expecting them to either. Football is a "business" that is at extreme risk at the moment, the loss of Setanta and you lot all cutting back on unwanted expenses in the recession means that Sky won't have competition OR the cash when the NEXT round of auctions comes along.

It's pretty clear that much of football believes that they got a good wad this time around and that by the time the next auction comes around the gravy train will have eased through the recession and they can carry on living in cloud cuckoo land. That MAY well happen.

I'm really HAPPY that we have people who are SENSIBLE at this time of major risks.

The risk that the money bubble may burst

The risk that the 10 point deduction won't be overhauled in time to get promotion this season

The risk that the delays in the admin process do not give the new players time to gel into a team

The risk that our over-exposed left over youngsters will be able to compete in L1

They have clearly stated what they will do, IF we are in with a shout in 3-4 months then they CAN use the January window to strengthen the team, but why oh why would they risk everything on ANOTHER insane gamble..

You know - 900k a year in wages and bonuses and fees for another Jason Euell......

When by the end of the season, one or more PL clubs COULD have gone to the wall and the whole game could change dramatically.

IMHO football will just carry on living in cloud cuckoo land and probably, unlike Iceland and "many" of you lot with credit cards and negative equity, they'll probably come out of it as snug, smug and profligate as when they went into it.

I do HOPE not though, while it is great to have the ability to sit at a Bar-Beer in Bangkok watching Hull play Stoke, in reality it just washes past as eye candy in the way much of the interminable Basketball, Bass Fishing, MTV hourly repeats and Cooking progammes do

That included our own Rupert.

No it was in the 80's well before RL. They may have voted again and Im sure RL would have voted for it, but he is history and he was using self interest.

We will get to a stage when the big 4 will try and use their muscle. It is time for the smaller clubs to stand up and cut them adrift otherwise in 20years football will be a vastly different animal than it is now, not for the better.

IMO the English football league is part of my heritage. I like many others supported it through its darkest hours and if it wasnt for people like us, when the crowds were dropping and football was seen as a leper many clubs would have folded.

The modern game will eat itself, already the big clubs have got their way by being parchuted into the more lucrative stage of the league cup, if they get knocked out early in the CL they get into the Uefa and of course they get the best of the tv revenue.

It is all lopsided and surely cant be sustained

Nostradamus lives.....

Yeah, well done for repeating an argument that was old in 1998 and claiming it as your own. David Conn might have something to say about it.

Not to mention that apparently Saints' set-up in 08/09 would stand us in good stead as clubs with rich owners fell by the wayside... Erm, no, we're now One Of Them, and the one closest to disappearing altogether thanks to that approach.

The only difference is that we're not debt leveraged, and supposedly Pinnacle would have seen to that, too.

I might be better off assuming the Nostradamus comment was sarcasm, it works bette that way.

....we are in a better position than many think, to survive.

 

The pain we have gone through will be ten times worse for the "bigger" clubs over the coming months. It will happen soon and the pigs who have been at the Sky Sports trough will find that it will soon be empty. The balance sheets of these mercenary armies(or their banks) will soon be found to be nothing more than a mirage of creative accounting, that the Premier League have ignored for too long. Ashley has lost over £300M on HBOS shares, allegedly. A firesale of Newcastle is on the cards and relegation is not out of the question. If we found it hard, how will they cope? Even Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal are not immune to the firestorm engulfing the world's economy. Massive debts built on the assumption that there is an inifinite apetite for overpaid foreigners kicking a ball around at a strange time on the weekend (ie not 3:00pm on a Saturday) are going to be unsustainable and with many of the property assets (£10M for Fratton Park, anyone???) underpinning the balance sheets, a slight nudge that propelled some of the biggest financial institutions into oblivion, will be all it takes.

Live with the pain at Southampton Football Club, turn up to as many of the games as possible, because soon, our model of sustainable football covered by income from the pockets of the real fans will be the daily diet of many of the clubs in the Premiership.

As they sink, we will rise again, on the back of a vision of the economic reality that so many people are having to face in the financial community, but few inside football can see. Just be glad we are facing up to it now. Those in denial, not a few miles down the M27 will soon be jolted into a world of pain, along with a few others and their journey will go downhill far more rapidly than ours.....

Who agrees with that GM must have been visited by 3 ghosts at some stage?

He actually not only makes sense, but I find myself agreeing with him.

Bravo, sir Bravo.

Yeah, well done for repeating an argument that was old in 1998 and claiming it as your own. David Conn might have something to say about it.

David Conn's argument in 1998 was about football in the 90's and "how clubs such as Manchester United, Newcastle United, Tottenham Hotspur and others (were turned) into stockmarket money-making machines."

Feel free to look for different arguments than I was making and claim they are the same.

Read his book again, this time without dribbling on the pages...

Sky must be propping up a few clubs.

When they decide they don't want to pay as much, which they will, the pressure of big wages and borrowing will ride through the Prem like a demolition ball.

I wouldn't want to have a big wage bill and a shedload of borrowing in the next year or two, because trouble is a brewing...

I think we knew all along that we were punching about our weight but its come as a shock to people like Newcastle, they could yet go into freefall.

With a very feeble looking Prem this year it could be the time for a few to cut their cloth and try to get away with it, but they are all too busy panicking about it being the worst time to lose out on the money, thankfully we don't have those worries!

Personally I am pleased we have a sensible owner who has built businesses wisely, in fact I think we have found the perfect owner* for a club that wants to get back up there but doesn't want to gamble on its very existence.

I trust him and Pardew, we are in a realistic era and everyone wants the same thing, but achieved in a controlled low-risk manner.

If we have learned anything this summer it is bugger living the dream, just build sensibly.

*as long as he doesn't go bonkers at some point soon, takes training, picks teams, waves letters about etc

Sky must be propping up a few clubs.

When they decide they don't want to pay as much, which they will, the pressure of big wages and borrowing will ride through the Prem like a demolition ball.

They have had big losses recently as well. They reported a quarterly loss of $203 million compared to a net profit of $1.1 billion for the same period last year.

David Conn's argument in 1998 was about football in the 90's and "how clubs such as Manchester United, Newcastle United, Tottenham Hotspur and others (were turned) into stockmarket money-making machines."

 

Feel free to look for different arguments than I was making and claim they are the same.

 

Read his book again, this time without dribbling on the pages...

It's as different as those other little snippets of film of Hitler where you added subtitles to them, eh, Misguided? Your subtitles were different to the others, so it was nothing like the original idea, except that it was plagiarised.

David Conn's argument in 1998 was about football in the 90's and "how clubs such as Manchester United, Newcastle United, Tottenham Hotspur and others (were turned) into stockmarket money-making machines."

 

Feel free to look for different arguments than I was making and claim they are the same.

 

Read his book again, this time without dribbling on the pages...

Same basic argument, slightly different era. Football being used for financial leverage to the detriment of the game in general is a bad thing, m'kay.

Your point that we could be self-sufficient and everyone else would soon fall by the wayside due to their unserviceable debt was about as far wrong as you can get - at least for now.

We failed to be self-sufficient, got relegated, nearly disappearing altogether, whilst lots of clubs refinanced debts despite the credit crunch and three of those with the biggest debt are three of the most successful and showing no signs of failing.

As I mentioned on here a while back, it's great to be a self-funding and sustainable football club, but not so great when everyone else and their multi-millionaires goes racing past you.

Fortunately for Saints, if disappointingly for football, we couldn't beat them, so joined them.

There is a certain irony in the fact that the less glamourous premier league clubs (ourselves included at the time) were more than happy with the PL set up which at least doubled if not trebled their revenues, without really recognising the long term consequences.. Sky are only interested in subscribers and advertisers not football fans... I hate it when those dim wits presenters and ex players who buy into this crap on crap radio such as talk sport continue to peddle the popular myths that Sky has been good for the game.... it has been good business and turned simply wealthy by normal standard footballers into multi millionnaires.

The majority of clubs seem to have thick owners and boards who never realised that they may have trebled their revenue, but it only meant it ended up in the pockets of players and agents, mostly in disproportionate wages. Some clubs did invest some of these riches into infrastructure, academies and new facilities, but as we have seen, by doing this they diverted funds away from first team players and their deep pockets - how dare they? did the boards not know that all money in, must be spent on the players? ;-)

In addition, clubs should have been able to see that by handing the financial power to SKY they were in effect handing over the power to the 'brand' clubs (I wont say bigger, because how many fans you have on a global basis sat on their collective arses v actually turn up and to to games is irrelevent - thats just clever marketing). They hold the true power. Sky is only concerned with viewing figures... not football ..and these brand clubs now know that they have an even better negotiating position if they sell their own rights... this WILL happen, its why the Glaziers were prepared to borrow 700mil USD to buy Man U, and why they will make money long term...big money. When this does happen, I would like to think it will **** off Sky as viewing figures fall, because unless you are in that top 4 no one will watch your club. Those clubs will see further falls in rvenue and a further errosion of competition - thing is, considering that probaly 85% of those with sky subscriptions in the UP and those prepared to watch in China and the like are only interested in the top 4, Sky will be quids in by buying only the rights to the top 4, they will be saving money... the key then is for teh rest to simply refuse to play them... which leads nicely to the Euro super league...

Personnally i dont give a flying feck if it were to happen becasue I am sick of teh arrogance of these clubs dictating football finance... the problem is what it means for the clubs that remain, there wouldsimply not be enough cash left for teh domestic clubs to hold onto anyone who is of any quality as the media cash follows the top 4 whores into Europe like the pimp it is...

Sky, Greed, poncy players with diamond earings, agents - seriously all a bunch of tw***.

There is a certain irony in the fact that the less glamourous premier league clubs (ourselves included at the time) were more than happy with the PL set up which at least doubled if not trebled their revenues, without really recognising the long term consequences.. Sky are only interested in subscribers and advertisers not football fans... I hate it when those dim wits presenters and ex players who buy into this crap on crap radio such as talk sport continue to peddle the popular myths that Sky has been good for the game.... it has been good business and turned simply wealthy by normal standard footballers into multi millionnaires.

 

The majority of clubs seem to have thick owners and boards who never realised that they may have trebled their revenue, but it only meant it ended up in the pockets of players and agents, mostly in disproportionate wages. Some clubs did invest some of these riches into infrastructure, academies and new facilities, but as we have seen, by doing this they diverted funds away from first team players and their deep pockets - how dare they? did the boards not know that all money in, must be spent on the players? ;-)

 

In addition, clubs should have been able to see that by handing the financial power to SKY they were in effect handing over the power to the 'brand' clubs (I wont say bigger, because how many fans you have on a global basis sat on their collective arses v actually turn up and to to games is irrelevent - thats just clever marketing). They hold the true power. Sky is only concerned with viewing figures... not football ..and these brand clubs now know that they have an even better negotiating position if they sell their own rights... this WILL happen, its why the Glaziers were prepared to borrow 700mil USD to buy Man U, and why they will make money long term...big money. When this does happen, I would like to think it will **** off Sky as viewing figures fall, because unless you are in that top 4 no one will watch your club. Those clubs will see further falls in rvenue and a further errosion of competition - thing is, considering that probaly 85% of those with sky subscriptions in the UP and those prepared to watch in China and the like are only interested in the top 4, Sky will be quids in by buying only the rights to the top 4, they will be saving money... the key then is for teh rest to simply refuse to play them... which leads nicely to the Euro super league...

 

Personnally i dont give a flying feck if it were to happen becasue I am sick of teh arrogance of these clubs dictating football finance... the problem is what it means for the clubs that remain, there wouldsimply not be enough cash left for teh domestic clubs to hold onto anyone who is of any quality as the media cash follows the top 4 whores into Europe like the pimp it is...

 

Sky, Greed, poncy players with diamond earings, agents - seriously all a bunch of tw***.

Ok globally they are not that strong but the PL did well before the Asian markets were looked at and so a good strong English league could do well.

It's as different as those other little snippets of film of Hitler where you added subtitles to them, eh, Misguided? Your subtitles were different to the others, so it was nothing like the original idea, except that it was plagiarised.

In the same way that you are replying to my post, using the same medium, but simply using different words?

Muppet...

Same basic argument, slightly different era.

Different era, different argument, but don't let that stop you spouting bo££ox. Reading you and Wes, is liking watching a re-run of a poor Laurel and Hardy film...

In the same way that you are replying to my post, using the same medium, but simply using different words?

 

Muppet...

Ah! I'm still off your ignore list. How can I ever thank you enough?

Which of the Laurel & Hardy films did you consider to be the poorest, Misguided? You know how much us acolytes hang on your every opinion as being gospel on all worldly matters.

Different era, different argument, but don't let that stop you spouting bo££ox. Reading you and Wes, is liking watching a re-run of a poor Laurel and Hardy film...

Feel free to address the points raised, rather than throw around snarky insults when someone posts something you can't actually put a coherent counterargument to.

I won't hold my breath.

Ah! I'm still off your ignore list. How can I ever thank you enough?

 

Which of the Laurel & Hardy films did you consider to be the poorest, Misguided? You know how much us acolytes hang on your every opinion as being gospel on all worldly matters.

Wes, I'll make this simple for you, so that you will understand why you are going back on ignore and everyone will see what a tool you are and that you only have yourself to blame.

You pi $$ me off because you're a pompous old windbag who is constantly looking for a bandwagon to jump on or an opinion to hang on to.

The evidence for this is that you accused me of plagiarising, yet out of over 3,000 posts, you have managed a sum total of 6 threads all of which have either been quotes of other publications as in the case of these:

1. Alan Pardew's birthday
   I don't know whether it has been mentioned on any of the many threads about our new manager, but according to the announcement on the OS, tomorrow is Alan Pardew's birthday.
   
2. McLeish after Bale
   McLeish is seeking to buy Gareth Bale from Spurs for Birmingham
   
3. Saints owe Bournemouth money
   This has just been published:-Championship side Southampton's parent company went into administration recently and that appears to have had a knock on affect, with Southampton FC owing AFC Bournemouth money.
   
4. Hatters consider legal action
   Just reported in thr last half hour:-Luton director Stephen Browne admits the club are prepared to take legal action against the Football League if they fail to dock points from Southampton.
   
5. Stern shocks States
   Really? Did he score a spectacular goal? What is the matter with the OS?
   

...or this shameless cr @p:

1. Would you BOYCOTT?
   Ways to get rid of Lowe and the board Well, I think that the time has come. We've had him forced back on us by the Quisling Wilde's alliance with Lowe and his cronies and there is nothing that can be done by way of an EGM to rid us of him through the shareholdings unless Wilde changes horses yet again.
   

In summary, Wes, despite claiming that my threads are unoriginal and copied from someone else, you have in fact, demonstrated just how large a w @ank stain you are on the fabric of this website.

Ok guys, that's probably enough, yeah?

Feel free to address the points raised, rather than throw around snarky insults when someone posts something you can't actually put a coherent counterargument to.

If you think that my original thread presents the same argument as the one made by David Conn over 10 years ago, then you obviously have a problem with the English language, which makes any attempt by me to debate, rather pointless. You appear to think that his statement in the book, that Newcastle, amongst a number of other Premiership clubs, such as Liverpool, are money making machines for the stock market, rather than clubs run for the fans, is still true today and that this, in some way is what I was arguing.

Hope that's not too "snarky" for you....

Ok guys, that's probably enough, yeah?

...probably...

Cheers.

If you think that my original thread presents the same argument as the one made by David Conn over 10 years ago, then you obviously have a problem with the English language, which makes any attempt by me to debate, rather pointless. You appear to think that his statement in the book, that Newcastle, amongst a number of other Premiership clubs, such as Liverpool, are money making machines for the stock market, rather than clubs run for the fans, is still true today and that this, in some way is what I was arguing.

 

Hope that's not too "snarky" for you....

The thread is a good 1 why ruin it?

Agreed, I WAS rather enjoying the read.

Ok guys, that's probably enough, yeah?

Going to be consistent and put this in the Lounge, Ponty?

Misguided cant tolerate anybody being critical of his threads and surely he ought not to be able to say that anybody who disagrees with him "dribbles on their keyboard"

Going to be consistent and put this in the Lounge, Ponty?

 

Misguided cant tolerate anybody being critical of his threads and surely he ought not to be able to say that anybody who disagrees with him "dribbles on their keyboard"

No, I'm going to lock it. It started out as relevant but has descended into childish barracking.