You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Platini {merged}
- Thread starter HelloCity
- Start date
Clubber
Well-Known Member
Platini said:It's mainly the owners that asked us to do something - Roman Abramovich, (AC Milan's) Silvio Berlusconi, (Inter Milan's) Massimo Moratti. They do not want to fork out from their pockets any more
I think these last two words sum it up a treat. It was ok for them to spend massively when they had the cash, yet now they have made their names on a international scale, and can spend their revenue, which lesser clubs won't be able to make, due to less publicity, keeping the status quo. Chelsea have only recently become a global brand, due to Romans money, but it was fine for him a couple of years back to spend like a shaun ryder in boots.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
Re: Platini plans to make sure 'clubs like City' dont join elite
They already have
It is unworkable due to differences between countries and even regions. For example take Arsenal's gate receipts for a 48,000 crowd and compare it with City's, Arsenal's would be greater due to purely regional differences and thats within the same country Then take the receipts from SKY compared to those of Germany clubs and their TV revenue. What about exchange rate fluctuations between Euro and Pound etc? Like you said platini a pillock great player but should never be allowed anywhere near football administration
big blueballs said:what is to stop our generous owner donating £100mill a year to our club in the way of a gift?
nothing!
platinis plans could never be implemented platini talks gash and is a pillock
They already have
It is unworkable due to differences between countries and even regions. For example take Arsenal's gate receipts for a 48,000 crowd and compare it with City's, Arsenal's would be greater due to purely regional differences and thats within the same country Then take the receipts from SKY compared to those of Germany clubs and their TV revenue. What about exchange rate fluctuations between Euro and Pound etc? Like you said platini a pillock great player but should never be allowed anywhere near football administration
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
samharris said:revenue means gate recipts and sponsorship and if im right tv money....
Is there a cap on the amount a sponsor can pay ??
We could end up with ADUG on our shirts.
We already have, they have anticipated this situation and kept it in the family with an undisclosed deal If necessary other in the family deals could be set-up
mike channon´s windmill
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2008
- Messages
- 7,475
I think the Shiekh should have Rom kidnapped and offered up to the highest bidder;))
Shooter 83
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 4,234
Re: Platini plans to make sure 'clubs like City' dont join elite
Thats another thing. City are doing cheap tickets compared to the sky 4, this will only put the prices up more for everyone so clubs can get more money in, this is where the fans will lose out. What good is that? At the end of the day thats what it's all about is'nt it?
Horrible French C**t
kramer said:big blueballs said:what is to stop our generous owner donating £100mill a year to our club in the way of a gift?
nothing!
platinis plans could never be implemented platini talks gash and is a pillock
They already have
It is unworkable due to differences between countries and even regions. For example take Arsenal's gate receipts for a 48,000 crowd and compare it with City's, Arsenal's would be greater due to purely regional differences and thats within the same country Then take the receipts from SKY compared to those of Germany clubs and their TV revenue. What about exchange rate fluctuations between Euro and Pound etc? Like you said platini a pillock great player but should never be allowed anywhere near football administration
Thats another thing. City are doing cheap tickets compared to the sky 4, this will only put the prices up more for everyone so clubs can get more money in, this is where the fans will lose out. What good is that? At the end of the day thats what it's all about is'nt it?
Horrible French C**t
Wrighty Wrexham
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 5,239
Top four and Europes top teams cartel again!
Cheeky gits Chelsea and others dont want their "old boys club" admitting new members!
This pisses me off one rule for one another for City!
Cheeky gits Chelsea and others dont want their "old boys club" admitting new members!
This pisses me off one rule for one another for City!
not my fault!
Well-Known Member
TBF it wouldnt matter if this rule did come in to play for several reason...
1) You would have a date it would be implimented, say start of next season or the end of this one. Now all our owner would have to do is sign all those he wanted by this date! Clubs would sell as they know they will struggle in the future.
2) As someone else said ADUG would become our sponsor or Etihad (who our owner owns) would suddenly pay us a £200m sponsorship deal.
3) It would take a year at least to sort this out and get it drawn up and by then I would like to think our £200m spending days are behind us as we will have the team we need/want. Any additions would be the odd player every now and then.
4) We are currently buying all the best talent from around the world, thus producing our future Messi's, Kaka's and Trannies without paying stupid prices and buy out clauses. This in turn will set our future up without the huge spending.
5) This season in terms of spending is a one off (I'd imagine) maybe in Jan a few more mill will be spent but.... Overall thats about it we have a very scary team now.
6) The likes of the rags, bin dippers, chelski rent boys and that artilery team from darn sawf would be fucked as the debt is part of the issue and they are screwed big time with debt. All of them! He plans to stop teams with debt being able to play in Europe... Who the fuck is going to be in these competitions? Us, Notts county and Pompy, lol.
I hope it does happen as it wont effect us but will fuck over the competition down the line, like I say we will up the sponsorship deal amounts. Who else can do that?
1) You would have a date it would be implimented, say start of next season or the end of this one. Now all our owner would have to do is sign all those he wanted by this date! Clubs would sell as they know they will struggle in the future.
2) As someone else said ADUG would become our sponsor or Etihad (who our owner owns) would suddenly pay us a £200m sponsorship deal.
3) It would take a year at least to sort this out and get it drawn up and by then I would like to think our £200m spending days are behind us as we will have the team we need/want. Any additions would be the odd player every now and then.
4) We are currently buying all the best talent from around the world, thus producing our future Messi's, Kaka's and Trannies without paying stupid prices and buy out clauses. This in turn will set our future up without the huge spending.
5) This season in terms of spending is a one off (I'd imagine) maybe in Jan a few more mill will be spent but.... Overall thats about it we have a very scary team now.
6) The likes of the rags, bin dippers, chelski rent boys and that artilery team from darn sawf would be fucked as the debt is part of the issue and they are screwed big time with debt. All of them! He plans to stop teams with debt being able to play in Europe... Who the fuck is going to be in these competitions? Us, Notts county and Pompy, lol.
I hope it does happen as it wont effect us but will fuck over the competition down the line, like I say we will up the sponsorship deal amounts. Who else can do that?
To be fair, this idea, if passed, will not hurt us that much. We've got lots of gates, we've been a big club in the support side for a long time. In Manchester. Already now, are we creating a fuss elsewhere and creating foreign fanbases. More revenue to come.
2012 is 3 years away. We've spent £240m in 12 months on transfers. We will spend perhaps £60m in the next 12. Then £40m. Etc. By 2012 we will be on par with the revenue policy, if it comes in, no problem.
Not to mention, any outgoing transfers would be football revenue too. With the names we've got, we've got quite a bit of assets already.
Plus, we've got our beloved academy which Chelsea etc. can only compete with through the transfer window. So we might actually benefit from this.
However, I'm disappointed by the concept because this would not enable any future 'city' cases to rise. Notts County won't make it to the prem, Swindon won't get £100m to spend, etc. Shame. That just makes the game more exciting, creates more fuss and global attention, thus helping football in general.
2012 is 3 years away. We've spent £240m in 12 months on transfers. We will spend perhaps £60m in the next 12. Then £40m. Etc. By 2012 we will be on par with the revenue policy, if it comes in, no problem.
Not to mention, any outgoing transfers would be football revenue too. With the names we've got, we've got quite a bit of assets already.
Plus, we've got our beloved academy which Chelsea etc. can only compete with through the transfer window. So we might actually benefit from this.
However, I'm disappointed by the concept because this would not enable any future 'city' cases to rise. Notts County won't make it to the prem, Swindon won't get £100m to spend, etc. Shame. That just makes the game more exciting, creates more fuss and global attention, thus helping football in general.