Are 12 American owners a serious threat to our game ?

[VOOMER]

I wouldn't say they are racist, it's just that they want to have success without investing to maximise the money they strip from our game.

Because the Middle Eastern owners tend to be willing to invest, this is pushing them down the league and making it harder for them to profit as much as they'd like. It forces them to put their hands in their pockets and spend, which is the last thing they want to do

They are shithouses. The rest of it I 100% agree with.

Bigoted

 

[HumbledGooner]

? Are you suggesting they are good ? Load clubs with debt, want a ESL with no relegation or promotion

City were also part of the ESL dont forget. As for generalizing American owners, ive said it before the Kroenke's have turned into fine owners since the took ownership. Not every American owner are like Man United's.

Look what happened to Chelsea with Roman having to force the sale. Politically exposed and politically sensitive persons carry a big risk. Middle East is a very volatile region, you just dont know whose going to get the Gaddaffi treatment next

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

City were also part of the ESL dont forget. As for generalizing American owners, ive said it before the Kroenke's have turned into fine owners since the took ownership. Not every American owner are like Man United's.

Look what happened to Chelsea with Roman having to force the sale. Politically exposed and politically sensitive persons carry a big risk. Middle East is a very volatile region, you just dont know whose going to get the Gaddaffi treatment next

Kronkes were nearly hounded out of Ars. Last seasons success has really tainted your pov. They were toast a few years ago.
Utd owners - Protests
LFC owners - protests against owners missed opportunities and lack of funding.
Leeds - protests

You/they might say well theyre up against state funded clubs and cant compete, but tbh the clubs taking football to the next level are City and will be Newcastle in future, those clubs are showing how to run a business from bottom to top. Yanks just want return, fuck the stadium,. the fans, the trophies... ROI.

If the PL have any brains they will invite clubs to follow the models of City and NUFC because they give long term stability to the league, the yankl clubs take the money back to the USA.

 

[Gazza]

Well they certainly picked the right club, I'll give them that.

They picked 'nited because Malcolm Glazer used to stand on the Gallowgate end of Old Trafford watching Bobby Law, Denis Best and Georgie Charlton when he was a nipper.

 

[HumbledGooner]

Kronkes were nearly hounded out of Ars. Last seasons success has really tainted your pov. They were toast a few years ago.
Utd owners - Protests
LFC owners - protests against owners missed opportunities and lack of funding.
Leeds - protests

You/they might say well theyre up against state funded clubs and cant compete, but tbh the clubs taking football to the next level are City and will be Newcastle in future, those clubs are showing how to run a business from bottom to top. Yanks just want return, fuck the stadium,. the fans, the trophies... ROI.

If the PL have any brains they will invite clubs to follow the models of City and NUFC because they give long term stability to the league, the yankl clubs take the money back to the USA.

A massive fallacy that is rooted in the belief that Arabs are better owners than Americans. Its just not true and the belief Newcastle will automatically be successful because they are owned by Arabs is incorrect.

Most of your success has to do with Pep, who like he did at Barcelona with really good players, raised standards very high.

Do you honestly think The American owned clubs think they couldn't beat you if Kompany is manager?

 

[mattcity5]

A massive fallacy that is rooted in the belief that Arabs are better owners than Americans. Its just not true and the belief Newcastle will automatically be successful because they are owned by Arabs is incorrect.

Most of your success has to do with Pep, who like he did at Barcelona with really good players, raised standards very high.

Do you honestly think The American owned clubs think they couldn't beat you if Kompany is manager?

Do you honestly believe that owners who take money out of the game are better for the club, the league and the sport, than owners who invest?

 

[1Basti]

For them football clubs are businesses who are interchangeable, should run profitable & have no/slightly
socio-economic purpose/responsibility for their local community. All their actions can be viewed/judged around these points (ESL, salary/cost caps, low investments in infrastructure etc).

Their end goal could be a franchise system similar to the NFL/NBA . The organisation will be PL/ESL.

 

[HumbledGooner]

Do you honestly believe that owners who take money out of the game are better for the club, the league and the sport, than owners who invest?

No I dont think Saudi owners who pay inflated wages to already obscenely paid footballers is good for the sport. Explain to me the benefits to society of Mbappe getting paid 1 billion annually.

Before all this talk of Arabian teams in the CL, or playing PL games outside England, was football shit? Did we really need a foreign prince to pump money into the game to make it good?

Because you do realise the 'investment' you speak of is basically player wages and agent fees. Thats were the 'investment goes'.

 

[mattcity5]

No I dont think Saudi owners who pay inflated wages to already obscenely paid footballers is good for the sport. Explain to me the benefits to society of Mbappe getting paid 1 billion annually.

Before all this talk of Arabian teams in the CL, or playing PL games outside England, was football shit? Did we really need a foreign prince to pump money into the game to make it good?

Because you do realise the 'investment' you speak of is basically player wages and agent fees. Thats were the 'investment goes'.

You've not actually answered what I asked though have you?

 

[HumbledGooner]

For them football clubs are businesses who are interchangeable, should run profitable & have no/slightly
socio-economic purpose/responsibility for their local community. All their actions can be viewed/judged around these points (ESL, salary/cost caps, low investments in infrastructure etc).

Their end goal could be a franchise system similar to the NFL/NBA . The organisation will be PL/ESL.

Its actually the Spanish teams pushing the ESL.

 

[HumbledGooner]

You've not actually answered what I asked though have you?

Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.

Your the one who confused 'investment' in football with what is just player wages and agent fees. Your the one who thinks Saudi Arabia is 'investing in football'.

 

[mattcity5]

Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.

Your the one who confused 'investment' in football with what is just player wages and agent fees. Your the one who thinks Saudi Arabia is 'investing in football'.

I didn't mention countries at all.

I asked if money being taken out of the game is good, or if investment into the game is good.

You seem to think that just means agent fees and wages. It really doesn't, but if the money is coming in via commercial routes and prize money, then I would prefer the players be rewarded than the owners, yes.

This is investment.



This is what happens when owners are in it for themselves.

 

[Gazza]

Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.

Your the one who confused 'investment' in football with what is just player wages and agent fees. Your the one who thinks Saudi Arabia is 'investing in football'.

*you're.

 

[HumbledGooner]

I didn't mention countries at all.

I asked if money being taken out of the game is good, or if investment into the game is good.

You seem to think that just means agent fees and wages. It really doesn't, but if the money is coming in via commercial routes and prize money, then I would prefer the players be rewarded than the owners, yes.

This is investment.



This is what happens when owners are in it for themselves.

Its a training ground. Have you seen Liverpools AXA centre - its fantastic. As is Arsenals trianing ground.

As for Old Trafford, its an Old Ground, the San Siro is also old too. Some people prefer the old art deco house rather than the modern mcmansion.

Lets hope the Saudi's dont invest cricket. They will knock down Lords to build a bigger ground. SOmeone like you would be like 'ooohhhh investment'.

 

[mexico1970]

I didn't mention countries at all.

I asked if money being taken out of the game is good, or if investment into the game is good.

You seem to think that just means agent fees and wages. It really doesn't, but if the money is coming in via commercial routes and prize money, then I would prefer the players be rewarded than the owners, yes.

This is investment.



This is what happens when owners are in it for themselves.

You could have put a trigger warning on the post mate ;)

 

[mattcity5]

Its a training ground. Have you seen Liverpools AXA centre - its fantastic. As is Arsenals trianing ground.

As for Old Trafford, its an Old Ground, the San Siro is also old too. Some people prefer the old art deco house rather than the modern mcmansion.

Lets hope the Saudi's dont invest cricket. They will knock down Lords to build a bigger ground. SOmeone like you would be like 'ooohhhh investment'.

Wow. Some levels of delusion.

And it isn't just 'a training ground'. It's the whole area. Though the training ground is certainly better than Liverpool's, though I don't know Arsenal's, I admit. Wait until the current redevelopments are done too.
This is investment. Constant improvement and not resting on laurels.

And as for your silly cricket comparison. If anyone thought Lords needed to be bigger, someone would make it bigger. That would make sense, no? Your point really is irrelevant and seems odd from an Arsenal fan - are you still pining for the Highbury days?

 

[give it to gordon]

City were also part of the ESL dont forget. As for generalizing American owners, ive said it before the Kroenke's have turned into fine owners since the took ownership. Not every American owner are like Man United's.

Look what happened to Chelsea with Roman having to force the sale. Politically exposed and politically sensitive persons carry a big risk. Middle East is a very volatile region, you just dont know whose going to get the Gaddaffi treatment next

Your club likes writing letters

 

[HumbledGooner]

Wow. Some levels of delusion.

And it isn't just 'a training ground'. It's the whole area. Though the training ground is certainly better than Liverpool's, though I don't know Arsenal's, I admit. Wait until the current redevelopments are done too.
This is investment. Constant improvement and not resting on laurels.

And as for your silly cricket comparison. If anyone thought Lords needed to be bigger, someone would make it bigger. That would make sense, no? Your point really is irrelevant and seems odd from an Arsenal fan - are you still pining for the Highbury days?

Its a training ground. All modern clubs have top training grounds. Its a one off contract to a construction firm, and thats its only benefit to society.

Its not like its open the the public, nor is it a public service like a hospital or library.

Your interpretation of investment is bizarre.

 

[M18CTID]

Its a training ground. Have you seen Liverpools AXA centre - its fantastic. As is Arsenals trianing ground.

As for Old Trafford, its an Old Ground, the San Siro is also old too. Some people prefer the old art deco house rather than the modern mcmansion.

Lets hope the Saudi's dont invest cricket. They will knock down Lords to build a bigger ground. SOmeone like you would be like 'ooohhhh investment'.

I think there's a lot of generalising going on here - on both sides of the argument. For me, some American owners of English clubs - often high profile clubs - are bad for the game and for those respective clubs and fans. United are the most prominent example and it's difficult to argue against that. Liverpool I'm not sure about because whatever we think of FSG, they have been an improvement on their previous owners who were also American but the underlying suspicion is that even though they've overseen some major successes on the pitch, they're in it to line their own pockets first and foremost. They were also one of the main drivers behind the ESL. Up until a few years ago, I'd have definitely included your owners too (as I'm sure 99% of Arsenal fans would) but there's been a huge shift in policy of late at Arsenal and you're actually going for it on the spending front which flies in the face of what many of us expected from Kroenke and makes the Liverpool owners look like proper dicks as you're spending far more than them on players despite posting lower revenues. Then you have the Wrexham owners who are as far removed from the Glazers as you can get. Even if it goes tits up from here, they've put the club on a much more sustainable footing by purchasing the freehold of the Racecourse Ground.

 

[Phil1]

Rule of thumb says whatever humbled gooner is wittering on about the truth is likely the complete opposite.
Him rushing to defend the American owners tells you they are terrible for the game.