Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Go fuck yourselves FSG


Neil G
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Doctor Troy said:

 

Where's the Sonos money John????

I've got quite a bit of Sonos gear in our living room. Any blues come to visit I'm going to tell them I bought it solely due to the Liverpool connection and apparently sales are through the roof.

 

I'll also hint that Everton are pairing up with Amstrad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Jimmy Hills Chin said:

I've got quite a bit of Sonos gear in our living room. Any blues come to visit I'm going to tell them I bought it solely due to the Liverpool connection and apparently sales are through the roof.

 

I'll also hint that Everton are pairing up with Amstrad. 

Amstrad beat off stiff competition from Hinari and Grundig. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jimmy Hills Chin said:

I've got quite a bit of Sonos gear in our living room. Any blues come to visit I'm going to tell them I bought it solely due to the Liverpool connection and apparently sales are through the roof.

 

I'll also hint that Everton are pairing up with Amstrad. 

 

Don't also forget to mention that Hitachi would no doubt have offered them the first-ever billion dollar sponsorship deal were they able to take their place in the 1986 European Cup.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lessons.

 

All the action on the pitch during Euro 2021 (sorry, Euro 2020) earlier this summer somewhat eclipsed the drama off it in the weeks leading up to the competition. But news that a private equity firm is banging hard at the gates to Spain’s La Liga and Barcelona has been forced to sell Lionel Messi because of financial difficulties serves as a reminder that English football still needs to take a long, hard look at itself.

The aftermath of the failed European Super League bid gave added piquance to the Government’s pre-planned “fan-led review” of football chaired by Tracey Crouch. This will, among other things, assess the need for an independent football regulator. But even the most ferocious regulator won’t help address the issues with football unless there is an honest assessment of what it’s presiding over. 

The review will look at the flow of money through the game and assess the need for “cost controls [and] real time financial monitoring”. It will also consider the possibility of a levy on transfer or agent fees to support the development of the grassroots, amateur and women's games. 

All this is to be welcomed - as far as it goes. But there’s a real possibility it will not address the main financial forces that led to the Super League, the malignant threat of which is not dead, merely sleeping.

Placeholder image for youtube video: fHT9ZSMSpoQ
 

There’s a popular myth that football clubs are rich. This is understandable. The owners are gazillionaires, the players drive from their mansions to training in supercars. The fans pay through the nose for season tickets, replica shirts and even to watch their teams play on TV. What’s more, the Premier League has never been more popular. Surely these guys must be coining it?

And the pretence is perpetuated by those who really should know better. In that sense, Barcelona’s recent woes should serve as a salutary lesson to all in the sport. This is a football club that was crowned the world’s richest in Deloitte’s Football Money League as recently as January this year.

The illusion of wealth comes from a cycloptic-focus on just one side of the ledger. Too few in the world of football, it would seem, are familiar with the principle espoused by the Charles Dickens character Wilkins Micawber: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.”

Barcelona may have been the first club in any sport ever to surpass $1bn in annual revenues but this was slashed by the pandemic and, as Simon Kuper details in his book Barça: The Inside Story of the World’s Greatest Football Club, was easily surpassed by the club’s annual expenditure. “Adding together the salaries and write-offs [on transfer fees], Barça’s total outlay on players was about €700m a year,” writes Kuper. “Shockingly, that was more than the club’s entire revenue for the 2020-21 season.” 

Barcelona, like Mr Micawber, was living beyond its means. Result: misery. Or, more specifically: the tearful departure of perhaps the best player in the history of the sport, debts of €1.2bn, league-imposed spending limits, a desperate hunt for out-of-contract players so as to avoid transfer fees and evaporating hopes of winning La Liga or the Champions League for the foreseeable future. 

Barça’s problems are far from unique - they are just both more extreme and more obvious thanks to rules that govern member-owned clubs in Spain. The finances of English football clubs are somewhat obscured by their owners’ propensity to keep shelling out ever-more cash to prop them up. Normal accounting rules ascribed zero cost to this equity, allowing most clubs to post (fairly meagre) profits. 

But that money could have been invested in something else. Ascribe the correct opportunity cost to such owner-equity and you can calculate the economic profit (or loss), which gives a much clearer picture of what’s going on. 

The reality is pretty frightening. Premier League clubs suffered record economic losses totalling £1.4bn for the 2019-20 season, according to financial and strategy analysts Vysyble, well over double the £599.5m loss made in the 2018-19 season.

Lionel Messi
Lionel Messi finalised agreement on his contract with Paris Saint-Germain and arrived in the French capital on Tuesday to complete the move that confirms the end of a career-long association with Barcelona. Credit: AP Photo/Francois Mori

Such ugly numbers are, of course, partly the result of Covid. But they are also the continuation of a long-term trend. Since 2010, Premier League clubs have achieved combined revenues of £34.3bn but suffered collective economic losses of £3.5bn.

The Crouch-chaired review of English football will assess the flow of money through the sport. But the issue is less with flow and more with leakage in the form of player salaries and agents fees. Transfers are a zero-sum game: one club sells and another buys. A potential levy on transfer or agent fees might result in some money being redirected but would mostly add to the costs.

Barcelona had an annual wage bill of €500m. About a quarter of this went to Messi. El Mundo newspaper calculated that the Argentinian earned a total of €555m between 2017 and 2021. His salary tripled between 2014 and 2020. Each time he got a raise, his team mates asked for one too. Messi brought footballing glory and trophies to Barcelona and untold joy to the fans. But he also brought ruin to the club’s finances. 

It’s not as if Premier League clubs reined in spending to help counter their diminished revenues through the pandemic. Collectively, they spent £874.1m on transfers in 2020-21, the second most profligate year after 2018-19 when they shelled out £918.8m. It is now clear that the era of parabolic TV rights deals, which saved the sport in the past, is over. 

Jack Grealish’s recent £100m transfer from Aston Villa to Manchester City does not augur well for more spending restraint in English football. According to Vysyble’s calculations, Man City suffered an economic loss of £189m during the 2019-20 season, the biggest in the Premier League. 

Football can’t go on like this and it won’t. “It was clear looking at the underlying economics of the game in England over several years that the owners of Premier League football clubs would not want to continue shouldering large economic losses. That is why we thought something like the European Super League was inevitable,” says John Purcell of Vysyble. 

“Yes, it was stopped in its tracks … this time. But the underlying economics remain the same. It is therefore safe to assume that English football will be confronted with something very similar to the Super League before long.”

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/08/11/another-fine-messi-football-must-heed-lessons-barcas-woes/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dockers_strike said:

Lessons.

 

All the action on the pitch during Euro 2021 (sorry, Euro 2020) earlier this summer somewhat eclipsed the drama off it in the weeks leading up to the competition. But news that a private equity firm is banging hard at the gates to Spain’s La Liga and Barcelona has been forced to sell Lionel Messi because of financial difficulties serves as a reminder that English football still needs to take a long, hard look at itself.

The aftermath of the failed European Super League bid gave added piquance to the Government’s pre-planned “fan-led review” of football chaired by Tracey Crouch. This will, among other things, assess the need for an independent football regulator. But even the most ferocious regulator won’t help address the issues with football unless there is an honest assessment of what it’s presiding over. 

The review will look at the flow of money through the game and assess the need for “cost controls [and] real time financial monitoring”. It will also consider the possibility of a levy on transfer or agent fees to support the development of the grassroots, amateur and women's games. 

All this is to be welcomed - as far as it goes. But there’s a real possibility it will not address the main financial forces that led to the Super League, the malignant threat of which is not dead, merely sleeping.

Placeholder image for youtube video: fHT9ZSMSpoQ
 

There’s a popular myth that football clubs are rich. This is understandable. The owners are gazillionaires, the players drive from their mansions to training in supercars. The fans pay through the nose for season tickets, replica shirts and even to watch their teams play on TV. What’s more, the Premier League has never been more popular. Surely these guys must be coining it?

And the pretence is perpetuated by those who really should know better. In that sense, Barcelona’s recent woes should serve as a salutary lesson to all in the sport. This is a football club that was crowned the world’s richest in Deloitte’s Football Money League as recently as January this year.

The illusion of wealth comes from a cycloptic-focus on just one side of the ledger. Too few in the world of football, it would seem, are familiar with the principle espoused by the Charles Dickens character Wilkins Micawber: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery.”

Barcelona may have been the first club in any sport ever to surpass $1bn in annual revenues but this was slashed by the pandemic and, as Simon Kuper details in his book Barça: The Inside Story of the World’s Greatest Football Club, was easily surpassed by the club’s annual expenditure. “Adding together the salaries and write-offs [on transfer fees], Barça’s total outlay on players was about €700m a year,” writes Kuper. “Shockingly, that was more than the club’s entire revenue for the 2020-21 season.” 

Barcelona, like Mr Micawber, was living beyond its means. Result: misery. Or, more specifically: the tearful departure of perhaps the best player in the history of the sport, debts of €1.2bn, league-imposed spending limits, a desperate hunt for out-of-contract players so as to avoid transfer fees and evaporating hopes of winning La Liga or the Champions League for the foreseeable future. 

Barça’s problems are far from unique - they are just both more extreme and more obvious thanks to rules that govern member-owned clubs in Spain. The finances of English football clubs are somewhat obscured by their owners’ propensity to keep shelling out ever-more cash to prop them up. Normal accounting rules ascribed zero cost to this equity, allowing most clubs to post (fairly meagre) profits. 

But that money could have been invested in something else. Ascribe the correct opportunity cost to such owner-equity and you can calculate the economic profit (or loss), which gives a much clearer picture of what’s going on. 

The reality is pretty frightening. Premier League clubs suffered record economic losses totalling £1.4bn for the 2019-20 season, according to financial and strategy analysts Vysyble, well over double the £599.5m loss made in the 2018-19 season.

Lionel Messi
Lionel Messi finalised agreement on his contract with Paris Saint-Germain and arrived in the French capital on Tuesday to complete the move that confirms the end of a career-long association with Barcelona. Credit: AP Photo/Francois Mori

Such ugly numbers are, of course, partly the result of Covid. But they are also the continuation of a long-term trend. Since 2010, Premier League clubs have achieved combined revenues of £34.3bn but suffered collective economic losses of £3.5bn.

The Crouch-chaired review of English football will assess the flow of money through the sport. But the issue is less with flow and more with leakage in the form of player salaries and agents fees. Transfers are a zero-sum game: one club sells and another buys. A potential levy on transfer or agent fees might result in some money being redirected but would mostly add to the costs.

Barcelona had an annual wage bill of €500m. About a quarter of this went to Messi. El Mundo newspaper calculated that the Argentinian earned a total of €555m between 2017 and 2021. His salary tripled between 2014 and 2020. Each time he got a raise, his team mates asked for one too. Messi brought footballing glory and trophies to Barcelona and untold joy to the fans. But he also brought ruin to the club’s finances. 

It’s not as if Premier League clubs reined in spending to help counter their diminished revenues through the pandemic. Collectively, they spent £874.1m on transfers in 2020-21, the second most profligate year after 2018-19 when they shelled out £918.8m. It is now clear that the era of parabolic TV rights deals, which saved the sport in the past, is over. 

Jack Grealish’s recent £100m transfer from Aston Villa to Manchester City does not augur well for more spending restraint in English football. According to Vysyble’s calculations, Man City suffered an economic loss of £189m during the 2019-20 season, the biggest in the Premier League. 

Football can’t go on like this and it won’t. “It was clear looking at the underlying economics of the game in England over several years that the owners of Premier League football clubs would not want to continue shouldering large economic losses. That is why we thought something like the European Super League was inevitable,” says John Purcell of Vysyble. 

“Yes, it was stopped in its tracks … this time. But the underlying economics remain the same. It is therefore safe to assume that English football will be confronted with something very similar to the Super League before long.”

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/08/11/another-fine-messi-football-must-heed-lessons-barcas-woes/

I don't think anyone sane is advocating spending like city and chelsea at all, its a total misconception. I fully expect a Club with the size and stature of Liverpool FC to be able to afford one or two players in the 25-40 million bracket without having to sell off all the dead wood first.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, BeefStroganoff said:

I don't think anyone sane is advocating spending like city and chelsea at all, its a total misconception. I fully expect a Club with the size and stature of Liverpool FC to be able to afford one or two players in the 25-40 million bracket without having to sell off all the dead wood first.

All of which sounds reasonable. Until you factor in having to pay the 'deadwood's wages if they arent sold, will be kicking their heels as unplayable squad members and the reality is selling to buy or buying then selling is no real difference in the scheme of things.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

All of which sounds reasonable. Until you factor in having to pay the 'deadwood's wages if they arent sold, will be kicking their heels as unplayable squad members and the reality is selling to buy or buying then selling is no real difference in the scheme of things.

 

 


We also did what he was asking for before a global pandemic which lost the club £120m but don’t ever let facts get in the way.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although not relevant to the clubs finances when you think they bought the red sox for about 300 million dollars and liverpool for supposedly a fair bit less, after selling an 11 percent cut of their business for 735 million dollars they dont need to take dividends out of their clubs (which they dont), they're up and still own 89 percent. They won't get anywhere near the value they want for LFC but they will be walking away with a big return. As long as they don't sell us to scum and the club is in good shape good luck to them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going to take the domestic leagues to continue to implement and refine there rules for this to work, at that point UEFA's FFP will work by proxy. On it's own though it's toothless as Man City have shown.

 

There seems to be an appetite for it domestically though with the Premier League pursuing City through the courts, despite UEFA's failure, and Barcelona's well publicised issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to set it at a level that makes consistently being in the luxury tax bracket prohibitively expensive and make the wages to turnover rate for the following year post the previous years penalty.

 

In baseball you pay 20% on the amount you go over in year 1, 30% in year two, 50% in year 3, between 2003 and 2019 the Yankees have paid out close to $350 million in penalties.

 

It's far from ideal and transfer embargoes/points deductions/bans is what most would like to see but maybe they think that will get them embroiled in endless law suits and challenges.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

They have to set it at a level that makes consistently being in the luxury tax bracket prohibitively expensive and make the wages to turnover rate for the following year post the previous years penalty.

 

In baseball you pay 20% on the amount you go over in year 1, 30% in year two, 50% in year 3, between 2003 and 2019 the Yankees have paid out close to $350 million in penalties.

 

It's far from ideal and transfer embargoes/points deductions/bans is what most would like to see but maybe they think that will get them embroiled in endless law suits and challenges.

 

 

 

PSG would just post 5 post dated blank cheques and have UEFA fill them in when the time comes. Easier and probably cheaper than arranging all these pretend contracts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Barry Wrong hasn’t posted in a while. Waiting for his next post come the 1st September to come when we haven’t signed anybody…

 

F6A3351D-2C21-4E4F-B917-A4F35DE9F094.gif
 

For avoidance of doubt, I’ll be pretty pissed off if we don’t sign anybody either.

No you wont

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...