Camuldonum 0 Posted September 5, 2008 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/simon_barnes/article4678248.ece All a matter of opinion, of course, but it''s a good read I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beauseant 0 Posted September 5, 2008 [quote user="Camuldonum"]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/simon_barnes/article4678248.ece All a matter of opinion, of course, but it''s a good read I think.[/quote]Excellent article.Football clubs are not like any other type of business,and are certainly not a place for those wishing to make a profit.Its also inevitably true that the bigger the financial stake of the principal investor,the less likely that he (or she ) will leave the manager alone to deal with the football side. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr_Chimp 0 Posted September 5, 2008 Interesting piece. There''s a big difference where Man City are concerned though - they have such obscene wealth that they need never see a return on it. They have said already they are willing to spend whatever it takes - just name the players and we''ll get them - to achieve the trophies they''re after. Should they up sticks and leave after this, the amount of money washing around the game would mean whoever did buy off of them would:a) have to have a significant personal fortune of their own to purchase the controlling interest - the club would be worth far more after a Prem and/or Champions League title or two.b) have a team in a far, far stronger position, both on and off the field.I think the only way Man City would go down the pan once the oil barons quit would be when the Premier League system itself collapses under it''s own excesses.Incidentally; the only thing that puts me off of us getting a big money takeover is the fear that the new man would interfere in Glenn''s plans - or shove him to install his own man. Look at QPR... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lucky green trainers 0 Posted September 5, 2008 well done cam for dragging this one up...imo- we''ve to thanks uncle rupert mudoch for turning football from semi realistic economics (although the most successful teams have always spent more) to pure fantasy land...and with it, the corinthian spirit went west...yep its all about money more than ever now - and we ain''t got none...and realistically, if we don''t join the rat race with a benefactor of our own - its clear we are destined to mend, make do, beg, steal and borrow - just to stave off a relegation fight><>yes captialism as its worst/best - depending upon your point of view,,,and where did everton get such huge sums to sign players on the last day??? did they follow the current fashion, and borrow against their future TV incomes??? like 15 other clubs do in the prem - as alledged by Man city spokesman, pre-takeover naturally!!! gosh, and what would the football bosses do if it all went pear shaped - stand by and hang the clubs out to dry - just like our own noble bank of england is doing to the victims of the house market crash (sorry - correction)??? imo, the gov of the b of e stood by while banks loaned u between 6-10 times applicants incomes...and in the same way, surely its folly for clubs to borrow against future incomes on such as scale???its just not good husbandry or stewardship in my book - call me ole fashioned... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shack Attack 0 Posted September 5, 2008 Good find Cam [Y]People always say that money won''t change them, sadly I''ve yet to have the chance to find out, but when you''re talking about the vast sums some of these guys are worth it must affect you. It seems to me that the aquisition of a football club is less about the chance to make money and more about power. Take the new Man City owners for instance, they''re never going to make any money from the club due to the vast transfer fees and wages they will end up paying but they will garner publicity for Abu Dhabi and increase their standing and influence in the wider business world.The problems seem to start when the owners start sticking their nose into playing matters and I wonder if it is encouragement from the fans which sometimes leads to this. Chelsea fans couldn''t wait to wear their Russian hats and chant Abramovichs name when he took over and you can bet that the stalls outside Eastlands will be doing a roaring trade in Sheik outfits before next weeks game. Once these men start hearing this hero worship and start to believe that it is they, rather than the manager and the players, who are the most important person at the club how big a jump is it to start picking the team themselves? Man City''s new owners have already started briefing the press about their transfer targets and that certainly doesn''t bode well for Mark Hughes.I guess we''ll never be able to truly compete unless we get our own billionaire but I do wonder how long this current trend is sustainable for. We''re already seeing a spot on belt tightening going on at West Ham and Newcastle and I hate to think what would happen to Liverpool if they got pipped to the last Champions League place by Man City*. What happens when The Premier League has twenty teams owned by either Arab billionaires or an American businessman who has saddled the club with huge debts? I suspect that the answer to that question is that the twenty chairmen will simply vote to end promotion and relegation and The FA will stand by and let them do it. * I don''t actually hate to think what would happen. Instead I love to dream of htem going into administration, $tevie Me demanding a move whilst still kissing his badge and subsequent relegations all the way down to League Two and beyond. However, they would probably get some special dispensation to avoid a points deduction due to theor ''history''. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
