Jump to content

duke63

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,152

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by duke63

  3. Posted

    13 hours ago, chicken said:

    There is a reason France is more like that, their unions are pretty strong. It's also why they took to the streets to aggressively protest against raising the retirement age up from 60.

    Here we are in the UK and we just roll over and let them push it up to 68. I would not be surprised if it moves north of that. Their argument? We are living longer... unfortunately that isn't true anymore. Life expectancy in the UK is on the decrease.

    Totally agree. Much of it is to do with Britain's old class system amd inherited wealth and power. Too many people seem to cowtoe to thsoe idiotas in power. Its time they were removed from office and Britain as governed by people with the best interests of the majority actually living here and not just a few inbred idiots. You can see with Labour likely to gain power that the Labour party has suddenly changed way beyond what it is a few years ago and now is just a Tory-lite option.

    Recently Schapps mentioned pushing the retirement age past 70. That is just not a viable option. What jobs are there that 70 year old can do? I have just turned 60 and it relatively good health and fitness but there are many things i could with ease 10 years ago but are now not so easy. Add another ten years on and the same will be true again.

     

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    7 hours ago, TheDarkKnight said:

    And yet the Prime Minister and his wife have a personal fortune of £1bn+

    Britain isn't broke. When there's a war there's a bottomless put of cash.

    When the people of the UK require help, the coffers are empty.

    When there is a war or whatever other crisis they just borrow more and make us plebs pay it back over the next 10, 20 or 50 years, depending on the size of the crisis. 
    Meanwhile they just stash more of their cash and assets offshore out of reach of and hidden from the tax man. 
    Eventually it will all come crashing down. 
     

     

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    Britain is broke.

    There are only two ways of changing that, bring more money in or spend less.

    There is no where left to make spending cuts - the NHS is no longer functioning properly and slowly being privatised, the police are non existent to the ordinary citizen, our roads are falling apart due tto lack of maintenance, our schools are falling down as they were built on the cheap and some kids are not even getting a proper education.

    Remind me who has been in power over the last 13 years and in that time has taken UK national debt from £1 trillion to over £2.5 trillion and the interest on that debt has risen from approx £30 billion per year to well over £100 billion per year. And still rising!

    That's the record of idiots!

     

     

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    6 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

    France is highly protectionist of its agricultural economy and way of life. France was the main architect of what is now the European Union and people have said that one of the main drivers of this was to protect French farmers even to the detriment of other parts of the European economy. Not that the French will admit it of course.

    So why couldn’t the UK do the same? It’s always excuses and moaning but very little action when it comes to the UK. 
    Seems as long as it’s cheap it doesn’t matter if it’s imported. No wonder we make and grow so very little. 

    • Like 1

  7. Posted · Edited by duke63

    26 minutes ago, chicken said:

    This sounds good until you say the same thing happened in the states. The states doesn't have the same union strength as the UK does and that is typically what drives "workers rights".

    More accurately. it is to do with lower wages in countries, some of which are considered as "developing". China, is a great example. It's not that rights cost money, their workers are on pennies in comparison. Equally, materials can be produced in some of those countries and again, for cheaper.

    Steel is a good example.

    Once upon a time the West wouldn't do business with China. What changed that? Money. Simple. 

    France makes a lot of what it consumes. Be that food or manufactured goods. 
    Go into their supermarkets and you can see which part of France the food comes from and local farmers are encouraged to see direct to their LOCAL supermarket.
    Not only that but french people will often buy something marked ‘Fabrique en France’ before something that isn’t even if it costs more.
    Britain lost that decades ago. 

  9. Posted

    This James Dyson? Leading Brexiteer Dyson who chooses to set up much of his wealth in offshore tax havens?

    https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/brexiteer-james-dyson-among-those-140530089.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJmJxidMroAEqdftxdGOYeJEF7Y4He3VjA1NIVbC3PwQyqdB2C_VT8jZfjSq5-aGCZDfy5LY7n-xrHHHmn1deUWRiudE6O1Vanme-W0q7l95m5Tb-CBg4rq20z5aBCJpfALsb4sa3i7g68MsgPORFJi32Vgad8gKy0deJ3hBaVTC

     

    • Like 13

  10. Posted

    18 hours ago, Badger said:

    As suggested above it's due to amortisation and players developed through the academies.

    An academy player is more or less pure profit.  Amortisation involves writing down the value of a player's registration over time.

    e.g. If you buy a player for £10 million on a five year deal, his registration is written down over 5 years, - @ 2 million p.a. Therefore, after 4 years, he will only be valued at £2 million - if a club then sells him for say, £4 million, it has made a profit of £2 million, even though it paid £10 million originally.

     

    I just don't see every club making a profit on transfers when we see the ridiculous and ever increasing transfer fees plus wages that go with them.

  11. Posted

    1 hour ago, Badger said:

    No - he just highlighted Brighton in green because it is the club he is discussing. He always does this. It is a bit confusing because Brighton at the bottom so the change in colour might appear to be significant

    I struggle to understand how nearly every club is making a profit in player trading. That cannot be true. 

  13. Posted · Edited by duke63

    The three promoted sides to date this season:

    P 36   W 3   D 6   L 27   F 29   A 83   Pts 15

    The bottom six now comprises all the promoted teams over the last two years.

     

    Doesn't sound much like entertainment to me. Winning one game in every twelve and losing 3 in every 4.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

  15. Posted

    On 10/11/2023 at 15:59, TheDarkKnight said:

    It's really not about money. It's about getting value. Andy Robertson cost Hull £2.9m and now he's holds the record for most assists as a full back in EPL history.

    The gulf only exists when unprepared clubs get promoted to the EPL.

    look at Brighton. They had a plan. They gutted the club of the old guard. They then employed people who had the exact same vision as the owner.

    They hired coaches, director of football, football analysts, scouts, etc, who all share the same ideals and for whom are all on the same page.

    Their scouting network is incredibly detailed. Their analytics are off the charts.

    This is why Brighton are now an established EPL club who have just beaten Ajax 0-2.

    "Fail to prepare, prepare to fail.

    The following is a comparison between Brighton and Manchester United's transfer spending since Brighton have been an EPL club:

    Brighton EPL net spending: 

    17/18: +£77.2m

    18/19: -£63.7m

    19/20: -£46.1m

    20/21: -£25.6m

    21/22: +£3.3m

    22/23: +£71.3m

    23/24: +£77.2m 

    So, they've actually made a profit of £93.6m. Pool that with their TV money, etc, it's safe to say that they are loaded.  Compare this with Manchester United's spending over the same period: 

    Manchester United: 

    17/18: -£132.9

    18/19: -£45.3

    19/20: -£134.9

    20/21: -£55.7

    21/22:  -£96.1

    22/23: -£190.4

    23/24:  -£131.4 

    A loss of £786.7m 

    Not really.

    Brighton are £211 million insolvent.

    they owe their owners £335 million.

     

     

     

  18. Posted

    Its fairly obvious the club is going through transition.

    Uncertainty on all levels ( owenrship, boardroom, Sporting director, manager) will ultimatley feed its way down thru the whole club.

    It needs Attanasio to take full control and start a new direction, sooner rather than later. I'm guessing he may well have had some input into Knapper's appointment, so let the changes start now.

  19. Posted

    13 hours ago, Commonsense said:

    Alternatively, wouldn’t it be refreshing if certain so called fans just fcuked off and jerked off on their keyboards to some other cause, so that the rest of us could get on with supporting our club.

    They would be better off pretending to be Man City fans, at least they win most weeks, after all surely that's what football is all about!!! 

  21. Posted

    53 minutes ago, FCC said:

    If previous promotion winning teams couldn’t compete in the Premier, the thought of this lot going up truly is a nightmare scenario.

    That's true of whoever wins this League.

    Look at Burnley - walked the league last year, can't buy a win in the EPL.

    The way to win the league and stay in the EPL isn't the one that Burnley, ourselves etc have chosen in recent seasons.

    It will be interesting to see if Leicester's chosen route has more success next year.

     

  24. Posted

    1 hour ago, Old Shuck said:

    The problem is, if the game does change, it will only be to the further detriment of all but the biggest clubs.

    Note how Rugby League is handing out 'Grade A' status to its leading clubs-a points system based on their respective merits in 'Fandom' (?), Performance, Finances, Stadium and Community. It effectively removes any threat of relegation from the top clubs whilst ends the prospects of promotion for many-so, for example, London Broncos won promotion  on merit to Super League last season but, when the 'Grade A' ruling sets in, they'll be, under this new criteria, be dropped back out of Super League, even if they finished in the top 3!

    You don't think the Premier League isn't keeping a very careful eye on this.

    What it would mean for football is that clubs such as ourselves, Bournemouth, Luton and Watford (amongst many) would be unable to take a place in the Prem by merit whilst clubs like Leeds, Sunderland and Sheffield Wednesday might end up back in it because they tick the five qualifying boxes better than we all do.

    Not sure I would have any interest in it at all if it went down that route. 
    I have said for sometime if I could subscribe to watching the Championship on Tv but not the EPL then I would. Many EPL games are drab boring matches with zero atmosphere. 
    The West Han v Everton game yesterday was a case in point. I turned over and watched an old black and white film instead. Much more entertaining. 

  25. Posted · Edited by duke63

    All last year's promoted sides in the bottom three. They have played 30 games between them, won 2, drawn 4 and lost 24. None of them have scored goals in double figures and all have conceded 2 or more per game on average. Sheffield still have not won a game with over a quarter of the season gone.

    All of the promoted sides of the last two years are in the bottom 7.

    Makes for very sorry reading and shows how the game has to change.

     

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...