Why the aggressive tone? Obviously, I wasn't aware of that case, but does it not prove that I am right? Why not choose to focus on that aspect of my post rather than use it as yet another excuse to vent your spleen at me? Please, take a chill-pill, and keep it civil, eh?
He's not being aggressive, he's just saying you need to research your topics before making assumptions.
I'm afraid you can't call the shots here HIAG, you are never right and always proved wrong and then you cry, hide and then come out of your hole and pretend it was all just a big joke all along.
Is that what they call them these days ? Compared to HIAG I am an old geezer and compared to you, you are a Dinosaur
What is there to research? I said that FFP will never work because someone will challenge it, and someone comes on and says that its already being challenged, proving me right. Why do I need to research something that I knew would happen? Now, I'll go back to my original point, which was that all it would take is for a billionaire Arab or Russian to buy Spurs, and we could buy glory. It's not difficult, really. I know to many of you my comments will seem unpalatable, but that seems to be the way football has been progressing for the last 20 years, at least. I have little doubt that it will happen to Spurs in the not-to-distant future, and also to the likes of the Toon and Everton. Effectively, what will be created is a football super-league, consisting of up to a dozen clubs - the play-things of the super-rich - who will battle it out, year on year, in a "who has the fattest wad" contest. If nothing else, it will provide the game with an even playing-field at the highest level.
Football clubs always have been play-things for the super-rich, only before it was local multi-millionaires and now it's foreignmmulti-billionaires.
True, but I think it's different now. The money and media coverage in the modern game makes owning a top club very attractive to those rich enough to be able to indulge in real-world fantasy football. There are only so many clubs that fit the profile for these owners, and Spurs is definitely among those. As I said before, my heart would want us to develop our stadium and only increase player-wages, etc as our financial means grow naturally, but I fear that we'll end going the same way as CFC, PSG, and £ity.
What you're saying is that you wish your club would follow the model that Arsenal have set You know we're the benchmark for good practice, but for Spurs to raise the sort of revenue that we are now doing in our self financed stadium - you are looking at ten years of hard graft.
Oligopoly at the top. Sky and FA/UEFA want a consistent and more marketable product, it began with Man Utd, then Liverpool, then Arsenal and Chelsea soon followed. UEFA don't want fair competition, they never have done. "Champions League" is not a league of Champions, it's a league of the (commercially) biggest clubs from various leagues in order to maximise public interest. The PL are no different, they want their household names like West Ham, Newcastle, Villa in the division. You have to be deluded to think you can grow your financial means naturally. The only way you can grow is by having a more marketable product. Abramovich realised this straight away hence why he got Kenyon in - the man pretty much responsible United's "global brand" expansion in the 90s. Why do you think the Sheikh is arranging trips to the US? Spurs need a platform to grow and until they can get that I.e delivering CL football on a yearly basis they are pretty much stuck in the mud with the tyres burning. It's not fair but this is what UEFA have created, with the apathy of the FA and the Tory Government at the time and the Tory Tony did nothing to challenge it either.
please log in to view this image Unfortunately the twat spouts it on here as he's banned everywhere else.
It's a bit like the chicken and the egg argument. External cash investment like Abramovich at Chelsea has enabled us to grow as a brand and expand our product. In turn, that has massively increased revenue streams (although losses as well for a brief period). I still maintain that one way or the other it is impossible (under this current format) to grow without CL football - with or without external cash injection.
Shouldn't we change this threads name to the 'Nomad' Banter thread'? As those mongrels from norf London have had more home grounds than we have Premier titles.
CL football is the Golden Egg that all teams are chasing, not only because of the revenue it brings but because of the quality of players it attracts to the club. As for revenue generation, how much to Chelsea turnover as opposed to their outgoings ?
