Investment Rumours Thread

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby EastBrisHammer on Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:33 am

Ultimately, I think a Super League would be good. The big clubs will have to get used to losing as there will be very few easy games. Our domestic league will become competitive again and you will probably find that a substantial number of fans of big teams will pick a second team from the domestic league meaning there will still be heavy interest. My only worry will be these people might start turning up at Stratford.

The teams in the Super League can still play in their domestic cup competitions so we can still get our 5-0 drubbing from Man City when we get bored of winning. :wink:

It might mean heavy investment is not so vital to compete.
User avatar
EastBrisHammer
 
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:24 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby YorksHammer on Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:36 am

Ding wrote:2. At the same time, Amanda Staveley, up to her eyeballs with Middle Eastern money, is on the hunt for a football club. Is this a co-incidence? Was she in Newcastle not to watch Newcastle but West Ham? Is Smith and whoever Staveley is fronting acting in concert?


Wan't Staveley behind the Man City buy out?
YorksHammer
 
Posts: 2875
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby szola on Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:37 am

We already have a European league. Everyone who loves football should stay away, unless their own team plays. Don't feed the troll.

The rich teams in the league will always try to use their leverage to gain an advantage over the rest. Everyone who loves football should do their utmost to stop them in their tracks. No good will come of a performance based distribution of income.

What the FA should work towards is a funding of the lower leagues through the revenue of the top league.
Ex. 5% redistribution to the top four leagues. They should also implement stricter rules of who is homegrown, and who is club grown. No players leaving the club, either on foreign or other type of loan, should count as homegrown.
User avatar
szola
 
Posts: 12440
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:33 am
Location: Bumblebee is back

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Wembley1966 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:38 am

Mega Ron wrote:The Premier League is the league that is most popular, and richest, for a reason. It's the most exciting league to watch.

The 'big 6' would be crazy to leave what has made their brands.


http://www.reuters.com/article/soccer-england-finance/soccer-smaller-premier-league-clubs-to-argue-for-balance-in-tv-cash-split-idUSL8N1ME1DR

Football finance expert Rob Wilson of Sheffield Hallam University believes the relatively equal distribution of revenue helps make the Premier League the most competitive in Europe.

“All the data we have on European leagues has the Premier League coming out top in terms of competitive balance. It is not an equal distribution system but it is a relatively equal one,” he told Reuters.

“It means the smaller clubs can invest in the transfer market and then can compete against the top six and put a good game on, there is a spectacle there and that is what the broadcasting companies pay for. If I am brutal the top clubs have forgotten about that,” he said.
User avatar
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 5510
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby the pink palermo on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:23 pm

European super league ?

I'd call the bluff of any British club that tried it .

Go, and you can't come back , well , other than at the very bottom of the UK football pyramid .

I'm also disappointed to see the greedy 6 trying to extort a bigger slice of the pie from overseas TV revenues to the detriment of the other sides in the top flight .


All of these things though are symptoms of club ownership issues - once the yanks start moving in to sports the concept of relegation becomes an issue and this is just a different kind of relegation they wish to avoid - a reduction in income .They want an advantage which secures their status and protects revenues .

It's the death of competition .

In the last 20 years the German league has been won by Bayern 13 times , the Spanish league by either RM or Barcelona, 16 times, the Dutch league by either PSV or Ajax 16 times , the Italian league Inter or Juventus 15 times .

At least the PL has been won by 5 different clubs in that time .

It's worth noting however that in the last 20 years of the old first division the league was won by 7 different clubs .

Sticking more and more money into fewer and fewer clubs will see competition reduce and the league becoming more predictable .I'd hope our club would vote against such a move .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 38572
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Malcontented

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Ozza on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:27 pm

The question to ask is if the big 6 left would the money leave as well? You've got to think it would certainly the foreign money from the game, which in turn would damage the prem and then the championship.

Anyway for now a mute point as I can't see the other 14 clubs in the league going for it, or giving the big all the foreign TV money
User avatar
Ozza
 
Posts: 13946
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Karens Tash

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby sanchoz on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:28 pm

the pink palermo wrote:.I'd hope our club would vote against such a move .


Apparently they are in favour of it

Any change to the status quo needs a two-thirds majority, or 14 of the 20 clubs, and it is understood a middle-class trio of Everton, Leicester and West Ham have indicated they will vote with the big six.

The other 11, however, appear to be deeply opposed.


http://www.football365.com/news/eleven- ... e-overhaul
User avatar
sanchoz
 
Posts: 10709
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby bondsbootlaces on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:28 pm

the pink palermo wrote:Sticking more and more money into fewer and fewer clubs will see competition reduce and the league becoming more predictable .I'd hope our club would vote against such a move .


The board would definitely vote against it because overall it would hit them in there pockets. The £30 away tickets had them spitting feathers about lost revenue, no way they'd vote for it.
User avatar
bondsbootlaces
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:30 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Ozza on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:34 pm

sanchoz wrote:Any change to the status quo needs a two-thirds majority, or 14 of the 20 clubs, and it is understood a middle-class trio of Everton, Leicester and West Ham have indicated they will vote with the big six.

The other 11, however, appear to be deeply opposed.




That's ridiculous, why the hell would we support the bigger 6 getting even more money and leaving us short?
User avatar
Ozza
 
Posts: 13946
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Karens Tash

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Mega Ron on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:43 pm

Our trio have probably been lobbied for support and have given it.

In exchange for what I couldn't imagine.
User avatar
Mega Ron
 
Posts: 8963
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Warp's mum

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby yonni on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:47 pm

the pink palermo wrote:European super league ?

In the last 20 years the German league has been won by Bayern 13 times , the Spanish league by either RM or Barcelona, 16 times, the Dutch league by either PSV or Ajax 16 times , the Italian league Inter or Juventus 15 times .

At least the PL has been won by 5 different clubs in that time .



Selective stats there though - you could include the English league with ManU & Chelsea winning 14 times or ManU, Chelsea and Arsenal 17 times over the same period. We're better, but only by a very slim margin. Could even argue that if it hadn't been for 1 manager retiring we would be worse than some of the above.
User avatar
yonni
 
Posts: 2461
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 11:11 am
Location: In Cockney Hammer's Claret & Blue Army

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby ludo22 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:55 pm

Mega Ron wrote:Our trio have probably been lobbied for support and have given it.

In exchange for what I couldn't imagine.


Dildos,mainly.
User avatar
ludo22
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: on a dark desert highway,cool wind in my hair

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Corney Beal on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:07 pm

YorksHammer wrote:
Wan't Staveley behind the Man City buy out?



Apparently so. She also was working with the chap named Bick, part of the Whistle group of WHU fans that attempted to takeover the club when Terry Brown in charge..
(See kumb homepage Whistle story)
User avatar
Corney Beal
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:36 pm
Location: Way over yonder in the minor key

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Jedi Al Khalaas on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:26 pm

ludo22 wrote:
Dildos,mainly.


They already have thousands of those , they dont need more !
User avatar
Jedi Al Khalaas
Shut that door ...
 
Posts: 10148
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:45 pm
Location: http://blackadam-comics.ebid.net

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Hammer.CA on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:31 pm

the pink palermo wrote:European super league ?

I'd call the bluff of any British club that tried it .

Go, and you can't come back , well , other than at the very bottom of the UK football pyramid .

I'm also disappointed to see the greedy 6 trying to extort a bigger slice of the pie from overseas TV revenues to the detriment of the other sides in the top flight .


All of these things though are symptoms of club ownership issues - once the yanks start moving in to sports the concept of relegation becomes an issue and this is just a different kind of relegation they wish to avoid - a reduction in income .They want an advantage which secures their status and protects revenues .

It's the death of competition .

In the last 20 years the German league has been won by Bayern 13 times , the Spanish league by either RM or Barcelona, 16 times, the Dutch league by either PSV or Ajax 16 times , the Italian league Inter or Juventus 15 times .

At least the PL has been won by 5 different clubs in that time .

It's worth noting however that in the last 20 years of the old first division the league was won by 7 different clubs .

Sticking more and more money into fewer and fewer clubs will see competition reduce and the league becoming more predictable .I'd hope our club would vote against such a move .


I agree with that 100%, the more anybody gives in then they will always want more. Not only would I ban the clubs I'd also say no players at any of these super clubs can play for their national team.
The gap between clubs started with the abolition of the 50-50 split of gate money. The one thing more than anything else that someone with lots of money has is more money. Once you accede to 1 request then something else will come along later. I've said this for years, at some point the clubs not in the 6 will have to say, no more.
Hammer.CA
 
Posts: 1376
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:37 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Wembley1966 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:39 pm

Ozza wrote:That's ridiculous, why the hell would we support the bigger 6 getting even more money and leaving us short?

The proposal is that the top 10 would get more money and the bottom 10 less.

Image
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/915478356694650880

Edit: This is based upon existing international TV rights. It is assumed that these are about to increase significantly compared to any potential increase (or decrease) in the domestic rights, 25% of which are already based upon league position.
Last edited by Wembley1966 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 5510
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby mushy on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:40 pm

bondsbootlaces wrote:
The board would definitely vote against it because overall it would hit them in there pockets. The £30 away tickets had them spitting feathers about lost revenue, no way they'd vote for it.

The board voted in favour of it.
mushy
 
Posts: 12520
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby Ozza on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:42 pm

cheers Wembley that now makes sense.

Well the Dildo twins better get their arses in gear and invest in the squad properly to ensure they finish in the top 10
User avatar
Ozza
 
Posts: 13946
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Karens Tash

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby ludo22 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:44 pm

Jedi Al Khalaas wrote:
They already have thousands of those , they dont need more !


I think Sullivan is very much in the "you can't have too many dildos" camp.
User avatar
ludo22
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: on a dark desert highway,cool wind in my hair

Re: Investment Rumours Thread

Postby sanchoz on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:47 pm

Ozza wrote:cheers Wembley that now makes sense.

Well the Dildo twins better get their arses in gear and invest in the squad properly to ensure they finish in the top 10



West Ham’s co-chairman, David Sullivan, left no doubt about the importance of that extra money to his side. “It’s vitally important,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “We budget to finish 10th. If we finish lower than 10th, we have a hole in our finances which impacts on our ability to buy players and pay players’ wages next season.”


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... orth-100m/
User avatar
sanchoz
 
Posts: 10709
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BarkingHammer75, Brendan, continental skills, Denali, gosling67, hammer348, HornchurchHammerDM, IronworksDave, Max Fischer, mumbles87, olliestyle, randerskent, Wembley1966, woodford and 67 guests