Leicester City £100m action plan revealed in worst-case scenario

[trooky]

8 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

I don't want anyone to take this personally but I feel that not enough people quite understand the ways in which we've been held back since we won the league. It's not just about Everton and Man City's antics - to add to the unlevel playing field analogy we've also quite literally had our arms tied behind our back by a system that treats the "big" with deference and everyone else with nothing but contempt, including us fans as consumers.

 

The TV deal for UK consumers is quite literally the worst in the world for non-"top 6" clubs and consumers. It's what sustains the "big" clubs and prevents smaller clubs from ever developing and breaking into the top 7 places on a long term basis.

 

If you are a British consumer and you want to access every single Premier League match, then you have absolutely no legal right or means to do so.

 

In most other countries you can.

 

In the UK you are expected to subscribe to Sky, BT and Amazon and yet you only get access to 52% of the matches. A rough estimate on my part is that this will cost you £775 per annum, although I can only find a minimum 18 month contract with Sky and 24 month contract with BT.

 

I've said this before, but for the last 6 months of our title winning season I was living in Cape Town then spent 2-3 months living in Botswana and travelling around the region. I could either pay for DSTV/Supersport at £360pa and get access to every single Premier League match, or walk in to any pub to get access to it.

 

My dad lives 8 miles away from the King Power and had absolutely absolutely no legal right or means to watch us play on tv.

 

A few weeks ago there was a gang of Brits jailed for decades for providing access to "illegal" streams for UK consumers.

 

Or to put it another way, the Premier League managed to prosecute people for making their product actually accessible to people who wanted to access it. 

 

-------

 

But here's why it's bad for clubs like us.

 

Football has had a Saturday 3pm broadcast blackout since the 60s, which is why UK based consumers can't watch the games. So matches are selected by broadcasters and moved away from the Saturday 3pm slot to get around that rule. Clubs are given "facility fees" - £1.2m per game as it stands - for every match selected for UK broadcast. They have viewers to attract, so the broadcasters pick the clubs they feel will bring in more viewers, which is what tips the eventual earnings in favour of the biggest clubs.

 

To give you an example, in 2014/15, we were selected for broadcast only 8 times.

 

In 2015/16, we were selected for broadcast 15 times (just 12 in 2016/17). Newcastle 16. Everton 18. Spurs 21. Chelsea 22. Liverpool 23. Man Utd 25. Man City 26. Arsenal 27.

 

In total prize money, we were the 5th highest earners with £93m. Spurs £95m, Man Utd £96.3m, Man City £96.8m and Arsenal £100.8m.

 

That right there is evidence of football not being a meritocracy.

 

And that's before you even get to the extra exposure for sponsors which sends their 'earnings' skyrocketing - Man City have certainly been using it as an excuse to inflate their deals, hence the constant investigations.

 

And that's just part of the issue. One of the FFP measures they brought in in 2013 was called Short Term Cost Control (STCC). It was basically, they said, designed to keep clubs spending within their means {directly controlled, see above} and not have wage bills spiralling out of control.

 

Clubs were restricted from increasing wage bills by more than 7% each season.

 

That in itself is designed to protect the bigger clubs IMO.

 

We won the league with a squad that had been promoted 2 seasons earlier and had finished 14th the previous season. So despite being the actual Champions, we were restricted from spending money {that had already been stifled} on players to compete at the top where we found ourselves.

 

We were the reigning Champions but effectively only had the spending power of 14th place club.

 

(Side note - STCC ended in 2019 which is why Newcastle were able to spend £300m in the last year despite circa £30m the previous)

 

-------

 

In summary, you've basically got a company (the Premier League) colluding with participants (the "big" clubs) and restricting access (via broadcasters) in order to restrain competition (the "other 14") and prices for consumers (us).

 

That, my friends, is the dictionary definition of a cartel:

 

cartel

noun

a group of similar independent companies who join together to control prices and limit competition

 

-------

 

Miguel Delaney did a fantastic article in The Independent in early 2020, about a month before lockdown. It begins:

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

These were the words spoken by a senior figure from the Premier League’s ‘big six’ clubs, in the kind of high-end London hotel you can easily imagine.

“Football history suggests fans like big teams winning,” the official continued, to the group of business people and media figures present. “A certain amount of unpredictability is good, but a more democratic league would be bad for business.”

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/champions-league-superclubs-liverpool-man-utd-barcelona-real-madrid-a9330431.html

 

That was about 9 months before Man United and Liverpool tried to bring in Project Big Picture, which involved reducing the teams to 18, giving the 9 clubs with the longest time in the league (but in reality allowing 'any six clubs' and we all know who they are) more voting power on competition issues, and especially distribution of broadcast revenues. citation

 

That was 14 months before they announced the European Super League which as we all know would have bankrupted everyone but themselves.

 

-------

 

We absolutely should not have been allowed to win the Premier League. It shouldn't have happened. They let their guard down expecting that one of the six (well, four; Liverpool hadn't won a title in 25 years and Tottenham are, well, Tottenham). They had controlled the finances and fortunes (in every sense of the word) of the competition for so long that a club ACTUALLY WINNING IT ON MERIT was utterly unthinkable.

 

As far as I'm concerned, with our relegation, they got exactly what they wanted. This is our punishment for humiliating them without buying in.

 

Clubs like Manchester City and Newcastle are so wealthy that they are unaccountable. Man City's CEO is literally on record saying he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine. They refused to cooperate with UEFA for years, were allowed to appoint 2 of the 3 CAS judges who - lo and behold - declared that their rule breaks were "time barred". The Premier League spent 2 years investigating Man City before they were even allowed to report on it. Just look at the trophies they've won in just the 4 years they were being investigated.

 

Football is broken to such a level that only government action will fix it. The problem we have with that is that we don't have a functioning government, and the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is a vocal Man City fan who expressed disappointment after the UEFA ban.

 

Football in this country is beyond broken.

 

And it won't get 'fixed'. Because it already is.

 

-------

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

Great post, the article by Delaney is an interesting read, It reported that FFP should have been implemented 20years earlier and it would have discouraged this financial disparity and levelled the playing field.

 

The cynic in means wonders if FFP was leveraged by the 11 Global super clubs to prevent more clubs like Man City, PSG and Chelsea emerging.

 

All FFP does now, is make it virtually impossible for anyone new join the financial elite.

 

The irony is, the financial disparity of the elite is getting wider each season, yet relegation threatened Everton are being investigated under FFP rules!!!

Edited 24 June 2023 by trooky

[Finnegan]

24 minutes ago, trooky said:

cynic in means wonders if FFP was leveraged by the 11 Global super clubs to prevent more clubs like Man City, PSG and Chelsea emerging.

 

I think we all know that's the case. 

[Pliskin]

9 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

I don't want anyone to take this personally but I feel that not enough people quite understand the ways in which we've been held back since we won the league. It's not just about Everton and Man City's antics - to add to the unlevel playing field analogy we've also quite literally had our arms tied behind our back by a system that treats the "big" with deference and everyone else with nothing but contempt, including us fans as consumers.

 

The TV deal for UK consumers is quite literally the worst in the world for non-"top 6" clubs and consumers. It's what sustains the "big" clubs and prevents smaller clubs from ever developing and breaking into the top 7 places on a long term basis.

 

If you are a British consumer and you want to access every single Premier League match, then you have absolutely no legal right or means to do so.

 

In most other countries you can.

 

In the UK you are expected to subscribe to Sky, BT and Amazon and yet you only get access to 52% of the matches. A rough estimate on my part is that this will cost you £775 per annum, although I can only find a minimum 18 month contract with Sky and 24 month contract with BT.

 

I've said this before, but for the last 6 months of our title winning season I was living in Cape Town then spent 2-3 months living in Botswana and travelling around the region. I could either pay for DSTV/Supersport at £360pa and get access to every single Premier League match, or walk in to any pub to get access to it.

 

My dad lives 8 miles away from the King Power and had absolutely absolutely no legal right or means to watch us play on tv.

 

A few weeks ago there was a gang of Brits jailed for decades for providing access to "illegal" streams for UK consumers.

 

Or to put it another way, the Premier League managed to prosecute people for making their product actually accessible to people who wanted to access it. 

 

-------

 

But here's why it's bad for clubs like us.

 

Football has had a Saturday 3pm broadcast blackout since the 60s, which is why UK based consumers can't watch the games. So matches are selected by broadcasters and moved away from the Saturday 3pm slot to get around that rule. Clubs are given "facility fees" - £1.2m per game as it stands - for every match selected for UK broadcast. They have viewers to attract, so the broadcasters pick the clubs they feel will bring in more viewers, which is what tips the eventual earnings in favour of the biggest clubs.

 

To give you an example, in 2014/15, we were selected for broadcast only 8 times.

 

In 2015/16, we were selected for broadcast 15 times (just 12 in 2016/17). Newcastle 16. Everton 18. Spurs 21. Chelsea 22. Liverpool 23. Man Utd 25. Man City 26. Arsenal 27.

 

In total prize money, we were the 5th highest earners with £93m. Spurs £95m, Man Utd £96.3m, Man City £96.8m and Arsenal £100.8m.

 

That right there is evidence of football not being a meritocracy.

 

And that's before you even get to the extra exposure for sponsors which sends their 'earnings' skyrocketing - Man City have certainly been using it as an excuse to inflate their deals, hence the constant investigations.

 

And that's just part of the issue. One of the FFP measures they brought in in 2013 was called Short Term Cost Control (STCC). It was basically, they said, designed to keep clubs spending within their means {directly controlled, see above} and not have wage bills spiralling out of control.

 

Clubs were restricted from increasing wage bills by more than 7% each season.

 

That in itself is designed to protect the bigger clubs IMO.

 

We won the league with a squad that had been promoted 2 seasons earlier and had finished 14th the previous season. So despite being the actual Champions, we were restricted from spending money {that had already been stifled} on players to compete at the top where we found ourselves.

 

We were the reigning Champions but effectively only had the spending power of 14th place club.

 

(Side note - STCC ended in 2019 which is why Newcastle were able to spend £300m in the last year despite circa £30m the previous)

 

-------

 

In summary, you've basically got a company (the Premier League) colluding with participants (the "big" clubs) and restricting access (via broadcasters) in order to restrain competition (the "other 14") and prices for consumers (us).

 

That, my friends, is the dictionary definition of a cartel:

 

cartel

noun

a group of similar independent companies who join together to control prices and limit competition

 

-------

 

Miguel Delaney did a fantastic article in The Independent in early 2020, about a month before lockdown. It begins:

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

These were the words spoken by a senior figure from the Premier League’s ‘big six’ clubs, in the kind of high-end London hotel you can easily imagine.

“Football history suggests fans like big teams winning,” the official continued, to the group of business people and media figures present. “A certain amount of unpredictability is good, but a more democratic league would be bad for business.”

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/champions-league-superclubs-liverpool-man-utd-barcelona-real-madrid-a9330431.html

 

That was about 9 months before Man United and Liverpool tried to bring in Project Big Picture, which involved reducing the teams to 18, giving the 9 clubs with the longest time in the league (but in reality allowing 'any six clubs' and we all know who they are) more voting power on competition issues, and especially distribution of broadcast revenues. citation

 

That was 14 months before they announced the European Super League which as we all know would have bankrupted everyone but themselves.

 

-------

 

We absolutely should not have been allowed to win the Premier League. It shouldn't have happened. They let their guard down expecting that one of the six (well, four; Liverpool hadn't won a title in 25 years and Tottenham are, well, Tottenham). They had controlled the finances and fortunes (in every sense of the word) of the competition for so long that a club ACTUALLY WINNING IT ON MERIT was utterly unthinkable.

 

As far as I'm concerned, with our relegation, they got exactly what they wanted. This is our punishment for humiliating them without buying in.

 

Clubs like Manchester City and Newcastle are so wealthy that they are unaccountable. Man City's CEO is literally on record saying he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine. They refused to cooperate with UEFA for years, were allowed to appoint 2 of the 3 CAS judges who - lo and behold - declared that their rule breaks were "time barred". The Premier League spent 2 years investigating Man City before they were even allowed to report on it. Just look at the trophies they've won in just the 4 years they were being investigated.

 

Football is broken to such a level that only government action will fix it. The problem we have with that is that we don't have a functioning government, and the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is a vocal Man City fan who expressed disappointment after the UEFA ban.

 

Football in this country is beyond broken.

 

And it won't get 'fixed'. Because it already is.

 

-------

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

Couple of great posts from you! 
 

Absolutely hit the nail on he head… football is a complete shambles in this country…… your average fan with no subscriptions is limited to highlights on a Saturday evening. 
 

It’s becoming more like American sports, and with these world superpowers now starting to invest, it’s going to get even worse. 
 

I really struggle to get my head round how Everton have escaped punishment? The only way to set a precedent is Man City get severely punished, I.E. relegated and stripped of all of their titles…. What is the point in financial regulations if they’re not applied properly. The whole industry is an absolute farce.

[trugerkem]

Which makes our title win all the more remarkable 

[Phil Bowman]

1 hour ago, trooky said:

The cynic in means wonders if FFP was leveraged by the 11 Global super clubs to prevent more clubs like Man City, PSG and Chelsea emerging.

No cynicism needed. That's exactly what FFP is for.

 

1 hour ago, trooky said:

All FFP does now, is make it virtually impossible for anyone new join the financial elite.

Yep. Unless they're Qatar or Saudi Arabia.

[Phil Bowman]

22 minutes ago, trugerkem said:

Which makes our title win all the more remarkable 

Exactly.

We won a league which was invented precisely so we* wouldn't be able to win it.
 

 

 

* okay, not just us - all clubs like us, which is to say all clubs that weren't already members of the rich and greedy club.

[OnlyOneCity]

When City were on the way to winning the league, a Chelsea fan at work was excited because Conte was joining them the next season. He said, we’re going to have 169m to spend next season, (it was a lot of money back then). I said well John, that’s why WE need to win the league to show that it can be done without spending millions. We of course, have since seen quoted from some high-up, that “we don’t want another Leicester “ . I think they’re making sure there isn’t!

[Finnegan]

10 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

I don't want anyone to take this personally but I feel that not enough people quite understand the ways in which we've been held back since we won the league. It's not just about Everton and Man City's antics - to add to the unlevel playing field analogy we've also quite literally had our arms tied behind our back by a system that treats the "big" with deference and everyone else with nothing but contempt, including us fans as consumers.

 

The TV deal for UK consumers is quite literally the worst in the world for non-"top 6" clubs and consumers. It's what sustains the "big" clubs and prevents smaller clubs from ever developing and breaking into the top 7 places on a long term basis.

 

If you are a British consumer and you want to access every single Premier League match, then you have absolutely no legal right or means to do so.

 

In most other countries you can.

 

In the UK you are expected to subscribe to Sky, BT and Amazon and yet you only get access to 52% of the matches. A rough estimate on my part is that this will cost you £775 per annum, although I can only find a minimum 18 month contract with Sky and 24 month contract with BT.

 

I've said this before, but for the last 6 months of our title winning season I was living in Cape Town then spent 2-3 months living in Botswana and travelling around the region. I could either pay for DSTV/Supersport at £360pa and get access to every single Premier League match, or walk in to any pub to get access to it.

 

My dad lives 8 miles away from the King Power and had absolutely absolutely no legal right or means to watch us play on tv.

 

A few weeks ago there was a gang of Brits jailed for decades for providing access to "illegal" streams for UK consumers.

 

Or to put it another way, the Premier League managed to prosecute people for making their product actually accessible to people who wanted to access it. 

 

-------

 

But here's why it's bad for clubs like us.

 

Football has had a Saturday 3pm broadcast blackout since the 60s, which is why UK based consumers can't watch the games. So matches are selected by broadcasters and moved away from the Saturday 3pm slot to get around that rule. Clubs are given "facility fees" - £1.2m per game as it stands - for every match selected for UK broadcast. They have viewers to attract, so the broadcasters pick the clubs they feel will bring in more viewers, which is what tips the eventual earnings in favour of the biggest clubs.

 

To give you an example, in 2014/15, we were selected for broadcast only 8 times.

 

In 2015/16, we were selected for broadcast 15 times (just 12 in 2016/17). Newcastle 16. Everton 18. Spurs 21. Chelsea 22. Liverpool 23. Man Utd 25. Man City 26. Arsenal 27.

 

In total prize money, we were the 5th highest earners with £93m. Spurs £95m, Man Utd £96.3m, Man City £96.8m and Arsenal £100.8m.

 

That right there is evidence of football not being a meritocracy.

 

And that's before you even get to the extra exposure for sponsors which sends their 'earnings' skyrocketing - Man City have certainly been using it as an excuse to inflate their deals, hence the constant investigations.

 

And that's just part of the issue. One of the FFP measures they brought in in 2013 was called Short Term Cost Control (STCC). It was basically, they said, designed to keep clubs spending within their means {directly controlled, see above} and not have wage bills spiralling out of control.

 

Clubs were restricted from increasing wage bills by more than 7% each season.

 

That in itself is designed to protect the bigger clubs IMO.

 

We won the league with a squad that had been promoted 2 seasons earlier and had finished 14th the previous season. So despite being the actual Champions, we were restricted from spending money {that had already been stifled} on players to compete at the top where we found ourselves.

 

We were the reigning Champions but effectively only had the spending power of 14th place club.

 

(Side note - STCC ended in 2019 which is why Newcastle were able to spend £300m in the last year despite circa £30m the previous)

 

-------

 

In summary, you've basically got a company (the Premier League) colluding with participants (the "big" clubs) and restricting access (via broadcasters) in order to restrain competition (the "other 14") and prices for consumers (us).

 

That, my friends, is the dictionary definition of a cartel:

 

cartel

noun

a group of similar independent companies who join together to control prices and limit competition

 

-------

 

Miguel Delaney did a fantastic article in The Independent in early 2020, about a month before lockdown. It begins:

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

These were the words spoken by a senior figure from the Premier League’s ‘big six’ clubs, in the kind of high-end London hotel you can easily imagine.

“Football history suggests fans like big teams winning,” the official continued, to the group of business people and media figures present. “A certain amount of unpredictability is good, but a more democratic league would be bad for business.”

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/champions-league-superclubs-liverpool-man-utd-barcelona-real-madrid-a9330431.html

 

That was about 9 months before Man United and Liverpool tried to bring in Project Big Picture, which involved reducing the teams to 18, giving the 9 clubs with the longest time in the league (but in reality allowing 'any six clubs' and we all know who they are) more voting power on competition issues, and especially distribution of broadcast revenues. citation

 

That was 14 months before they announced the European Super League which as we all know would have bankrupted everyone but themselves.

 

-------

 

We absolutely should not have been allowed to win the Premier League. It shouldn't have happened. They let their guard down expecting that one of the six (well, four; Liverpool hadn't won a title in 25 years and Tottenham are, well, Tottenham). They had controlled the finances and fortunes (in every sense of the word) of the competition for so long that a club ACTUALLY WINNING IT ON MERIT was utterly unthinkable.

 

As far as I'm concerned, with our relegation, they got exactly what they wanted. This is our punishment for humiliating them without buying in.

 

Clubs like Manchester City and Newcastle are so wealthy that they are unaccountable. Man City's CEO is literally on record saying he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine. They refused to cooperate with UEFA for years, were allowed to appoint 2 of the 3 CAS judges who - lo and behold - declared that their rule breaks were "time barred". The Premier League spent 2 years investigating Man City before they were even allowed to report on it. Just look at the trophies they've won in just the 4 years they were being investigated.

 

Football is broken to such a level that only government action will fix it. The problem we have with that is that we don't have a functioning government, and the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is a vocal Man City fan who expressed disappointment after the UEFA ban.

 

Football in this country is beyond broken.

 

And it won't get 'fixed'. Because it already is.

 

-------

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

 

I don't normally quote huge long posts, especially to say "I agree" but I will in this instance just in case one or two people who might have missed it the first time read it.

 

Everybody should read this. 

[trugerkem]

I think the word we are all searching for is corrupt 

[urban.spaceman]

10 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I don't normally quote huge long posts, especially to say "I agree" but I will in this instance just in case one or two people who might have missed it the first time read it.

 

Everybody should read this. 

Genuinely relieved it's had this response and that the whole thing wasn't just in my head. I mean what I said in the first paragraph, it's important that people read it and understand it and not just Leicester fans.

 

The FFP and TV money distrubution issues have expicilty affected us the most because we're the club that went and won the league on pure merit.

 

Rival fans will just say it's sour grapes but it's not, it's demonstrable that we have been cheated by the league and authorities let alone the behaviour of Everton and Man City directly costing us hundreds of millions.

 

But equally important is the point about accessibility. I've spoken to fans who happily subscribe to Sky, BT and Amazon and they had no idea how badly they were getting screwed as consumers.

 

For me it is the crux of everything that is wrong and absolutely cannot be allowed to continue.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, Pliskin said:

Couple of great posts from you! 
 

Absolutely hit the nail on he head… football is a complete shambles in this country…… your average fan with no subscriptions is limited to highlights on a Saturday evening. 
 

It’s becoming more like American sports, and with these world superpowers now starting to invest, it’s going to get even worse. 
 

I really struggle to get my head round how Everton have escaped punishment? The only way to set a precedent is Man City get severely punished, I.E. relegated and stripped of all of their titles…. What is the point in financial regulations if they’re not applied properly. The whole industry is an absolute farce.

Apologies that this is The Sun and that it's 6 years old but the picture below speaks a thousand words:

 

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/4777809/manchester-united-arsenal-liverpool-owners-dinner-restaurant/

 

Boehly will now be in that club but the other issue you have are the owners of Man City and Newcastle.

 

**I want to make sure this isn't made about race or religion**

 

In Mansour and the PIF you've essentially got owners from a part of the world where they have always been in charge, they've always had wealth and power and control over the "little people", and crucially, have never been held accountable for anything in their entire life.

 

That quote from Man City's CEO:

 

"he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine"

 

Reveals everything. When they're richer than everyone else they are absolutely untouchable.

 

You see the exact same behaviour in Donald Trump - if he was a normal citizen he'd have been thrown in jail 50 ****ing years ago.

 

When you have endless money at your disposal you can just throw lawyers at issue and kick the can down the road until you bankrupt the people trying to hold you responsible.

 

This is what I meant by having a functioning government - the entire thing needs a reset and I mean from the bottom to the very top. 

[trooky]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

Apologies that this is The Sun and that it's 6 years old but the picture below speaks a thousand words:

 

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/4777809/manchester-united-arsenal-liverpool-owners-dinner-restaurant/

 

Boehly will now be in that club but the other issue you have are the owners of Man City and Newcastle.

 

**I want to make sure this isn't made about race or religion**

 

In Mansour and the PIF you've essentially got owners from a part of the world where they have always been in charge, they've always had wealth and power and control over the "little people", and crucially, have never been held accountable for anything in their entire life.

 

That quote from Man City's CEO:

 

"he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine"

 

Reveals everything. When they're richer than everyone else they are absolutely untouchable.

 

You see the exact same behaviour in Donald Trump - if he was a normal citizen he'd have been thrown in jail 50 ****ing years ago.

 

When you have endless money at your disposal you can just throw lawyers at issue and kick the can down the road until you bankrupt the people trying to hold you responsible.

 

This is what I meant by having a functioning government - the entire thing needs a reset and I mean from the bottom to the very top. 

They're just conspiring to keep out Man City because they consider their clubs to be historically superior to Man City and that they have a devine right to manipulate/ lobby the rules to prevent anyone else joining their elite cartel.

 

I'm personally glad that Man City have started to dominate these corrupt bastards.

 

The owners of Citeh have done far more good for their community and club compared to the others sat at that table, especially the absolute parasite Glazier family.

Edited 24 June 2023 by trooky

[Lambert09]

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Kante?

he left on a free at the end of hIs contract ????

 

has CHO gone anywhere ?  

 

and btw, remember summer 2016 when we saw seven’s Chinese club offer £35m for ngolo. This set a base for us to ensure Chelsea paid £30m+ for him. His release to a CL club was £20m. 

well fair enough on the kante point then. 

 

But it does look likely that by the close of the window they will have sold them all of these, for huge fees,  nobody else would value them at half of :

 

Mendy 

aubamayang

koloubailey 

cho

ziyech 

 

yet that doesn’t seem fishy to you? 

 

 

 

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

well fair enough on the kante point then. 

 

But it does look likely that by the close of the window they will have sold them all of these, for huge fees,  nobody else would value them at half of :

 

Mendy 

aubamayang

koloubailey 

cho

ziyech 

 

yet that doesn’t seem fishy to you? 

 

let’s see what the fees are when the moves are actually done 

certainly neves was 10/15m over the top 

there is likely to be a lot of back scratching going on and money to the Saudis seems not to be of any relevance.  

 

You will recall that chelsea made a fair amount of income from Oscar’s move to China. There weren’t any calls for investigations into that but it seems that this Saudi scenario is potentially a lot more murky 

[The Doctor]

42 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

let’s see what the fees are when the moves are actually done 

certainly neves was 10/15m over the top 

there is likely to be a lot of back scratching going on and money to the Saudis seems not to be of any relevance.  

 

You will recall that chelsea made a fair amount of income from Oscar’s move to China. There weren’t any calls for investigations into that but it seems that this Saudi scenario is potentially a lot more murky 

Did the owners of that Chinese team hold a lot of investment in Abromavichs business? Because if not the two aren't similar given Clearlake Capital (Boehlys private equity group) handles a lot of PIFs money for them. It is blatant corruption but the PL don't care so long as they get their pound of flesh kicked back to them 

 

 

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Did the owners of that Chinese team hold a lot of investment in Abromavichs business? Because if not the two aren't similar given Clearlake Capital (Boehlys private equity group) handles a lot of PIFs money for them. It is blatant corruption but the PL don't care so long as they get their pound of flesh kicked back to them 

Until we see ridiculous fees being paid by Saudi clubs for Chelsea players, I can’t see why there is a conflict. The fact that boehly is close to the PIF simply oils the wheels to get deals done. If these players weren’t going to Saudi then they’d be sold elsewhere. ziyech fee is reported to be £8m. Koulibaly £25m. 
 

 I’d be far more concerned with the neves deal and what may happen to the player over the next two seasons. (For now) 

 

I would have thought the PIF is invested in a lot of USA funds - that’s sort of what it’s for isn’t it ?  

[Lambert09]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Until we see ridiculous fees being paid by Saudi clubs for Chelsea players, I can’t see why there is a conflict. The fact that boehly is close to the PIF simply oils the wheels to get deals done. If these players weren’t going to Saudi then they’d be sold elsewhere. ziyech fee is reported to be £8m. Koulibaly £25m. 
 

 I’d be far more concerned with the neves deal and what may happen to the player over the next two seasons. (For now) 

 

I would have thought the PIF is invested in a lot of USA funds - that’s sort of what it’s for isn’t it ?  

I think it’s fair to be concerned watching it unfold though. 

 

They’ve found a loophole that will work well for them. Helps clear unwanted players out of chelsea rather than them being stuck with them and helps them with ffp whilst gaining names for their own league. 

It’s your attitude that will let them get away with it as well because i can bet you an arm and a leg, the reported fees to the media will probably be a long way short of the real fee and what goes on the book.  

 

Hopefully you are right and it’s all a coincidence but people should absolutely be questioning what’s happening. 

 

No chance we get so lucky with crap like vestergarde, but a club like chelsea finding a way to get a young lad on 200k pw who’s done nothing off the wage bill and we shouldn’t blink at it ? 

 

I hope you’re right and it’s all just a coincidence and maybe down to players agents working for each other. But on paper it looks fishy 

[urban.spaceman]

On 24/06/2023 at 07:05, jmono84 said:

Bravo 👏 

 

I’m gonna cut and share this with my friends and family.

 

With all this info and Covid arguably affecting our owners more than any other it shouldn’t be no real surprise we’ve struggled financially.

 

 Is love to boycott football but being realistic I couldn’t stop going to Leicester games. I do boycott sky and especially SSN because all that does is brainwash fans into supporting the bigger clubs.

COVID was catastrophic for us, especially as it coincided with Man City's UEFA ban being overturned. 5th would have qualified us for the CL twice. The two issues are intertwined.

 

Here's the potential earnings comparison, visuals courtesy of Swiss Ramble:

 

 

That doesn't take into account gate receipts and merch which obviously during COVID was zero.

 

€15.64m just for participating in the Champions League vs €3.63m for being in the Europa League.

 

Add to that, as per my long post the other day, extra exposure for sponsors which would have brought in significantly more.

 

More detail:

https://editorial.uefa.com/resources/0277-158b0bea495a-ba6c18158cd3-1000/20220704_circular_2022_47_en.pdf

 

Without COVID our earnings had already dropped by 77% just by virtue of not being in the Champions League.

 

Then the global lockdowns walloping KP's finances really excasebated things. More than any other owners, as its income relies on the mass movement of people.

 

This really is the darkest possible timeline.

[urban.spaceman]

The very minute Man City are fined we should sue for £1bn.

[urban.spaceman]

Add this to the lawsuit for causing offence. 

 

 

[Lambert09]

9 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Add this to the lawsuit for causing offence. 

 

 

We really should have relegated these!!!!

 

I have often wondered if Vardy is the best penalty taker weve ever had... that doesnt like taking penalty's.  If theres ever an opportunity to avoid taking one he seems to take it. Feels like he just does it because hes asked to. 

 

Columbia for england, that carabao cup game against liverpool spring to mind. He should have been pushing hard to take that pen against everton...we all needed him to

[Finnegan]

18 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Add this to the lawsuit for causing offence. 

 

 

 

Any source trying to claim that Vardy got Leicester relegated and saved Everton so that he could go to them this season is so ****ing retarded that nobody should give them the oxygen of even engaging with their ragebait. 

[Finnegan]

8 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

We really should have relegated these!!!!

 

I have often wondered if Vardy is the best penalty taker weve ever had... that doesnt like taking penalty's.  If theres ever an opportunity to avoid taking one he seems to take it. Feels like he just does it because hes asked to. 

 

Columbia for england, that carabao cup game against liverpool spring to mind. He should have been pushing hard to take that pen against everton...we all needed him to

 

As much as I feel Vardy should have taken that penalty, it wasn't his decision. There will have been a designated penalty taker and that would have been Madders. 

[Foxmeister]

On 24/06/2023 at 09:55, Pliskin said:

Couple of great posts from you! 
 

Absolutely hit the nail on he head… football is a complete shambles in this country…… your average fan with no subscriptions is limited to highlights on a Saturday evening. 
 

It’s becoming more like American sports, and with these world superpowers now starting to invest, it’s going to get even worse. 
 

I really struggle to get my head round how Everton have escaped punishment? The only way to set a precedent is Man City get severely punished, I.E. relegated and stripped of all of their titles…. What is the point in financial regulations if they’re not applied properly. The whole industry is an absolute 

Only we can sue, Leeds and Southampton would have been relegated anyway. 

[Foxmeister]

Sorry, didn't intend to quote you @pliskin