Top 6 clubs close to claiming majority of tv rights

GX Blue said:
Nope. Not for me. Equal money to keep the league competitive.
Click to expand...
It's not equal though. Some clubs get champions league money. The higher up get more prize money.

This just widens the gap even bigger.
 
Equal money so they can park the bus, and be scared of dropping out of the prem? Fuck that.
 
I'd normally be the first to criticise something that could be seen as a money-grabbing attitude from the club. But this doesn't seem unfair. They're asking that all the money goes into a single pot and gets distributed in the same way.

The other side of it though is that the first major shifting of the financial playing field was in 1981 when clubs abandoned the gate money sharing agreement whereby the visiting club got 25% of the gate. So a pot of money that had previously been distributed more equitably was skewed sharply towards the bigger clubs. That wasn't good for football in hindsight so I'd be a little wary about the impact of this, albeit it's seemingly not as bad as the 1981 change.

I reckon it'd make about £15m difference to the top clubs, on the basis we'd get around £54m compared to the £39m we currently get on the equal share.
 
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue said:
I'd normally be the first to criticise something that could be seen as a money-grabbing attitude from the club. But this doesn't seem unfair. They're asking that all the money goes into a single pot and gets distributed in the same way.

The other side of it though is that the first major shifting of the financial playing field was in 1981 when clubs abandoned the gate money sharing agreement whereby the visiting club got 25% of the gate. So a pot of money that had previously been distributed more equitably was skewed sharply towards the bigger clubs. That wasn't good for football in hindsight so I'd be a little wary about the impact of this, albeit it's seemingly not as bad as the 1981 change.

I reckon it'd make about £15m difference to the top clubs, on the basis we'd get around £54m compared to the £39m we currently get on the equal share.
Click to expand...

About a 37% cut on overseas costs then for Sunderland (15/39M last year)?
1/6th of all their TV income is a very big chunk to lose.
 
I see they are using our name as the main driver behind it, regardless it is the top six calling for it.

Funny that?

That Charlie Sale in the Mail is a shit-stirring prick. Also got his mileage out of our Amazon deal, amount of times he has twisted the tale to include Sky and other clubs were unhappy with us doing the deal.

Suppose that's standard for a man who has to justify his existence each day in a column which is nothing more than a platform to peddle his own bias and PR plugs for his mates.
 
This year's split (stolen from Martin Samuel's article)

4C5AC36800000578-5740325-image-a-22_1526557831009.jpg
 
I’m not a fan of any rule change that increases disparity, I never have been and never will, so this doesn’t sit comfortably with me either. I get it and from our boards perspective, it’s absolutely their prerogative. As a football fan first and foremost though, it’s not something I like.

The damage has absolutely already been done though, I’d personally want to revert a lot of rule changes over the last thirty years.
 
nom rather cut more Money from top Clubs. Or else we will become Bundesliga or ffrench league
 
RACHACE said:
It was always going to happen sooner or later. Are we happy to have crossed the bridge before it’s raised or do we see this as potentially another nail in the coffin for traditional support and competition?

Surely a European league is on its way anyway which will only make the rich clubs richer and leave the rest behind. The rich/popular clubs globally are bound to want the lions share of the tv money.

Personally I don’t like it and I’d love a competition that’s not affected hugely by how much money you’ve got. I would have said that 20 years ago too but the rich clubs have always been greedy which has stifled a lot of the competition in the leagues.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with your point. A competition should be about having the right to play in it - The Champions League as it is advertised is not that, because it allows teams to enter who are so far away from winning a domestic title to go on and become the so called winners - when in fact they wont be considered the best team in europe if they did. Madrid apart this season as they are the current holders.

I was sort of happy to hear about the muted Club World Cup that FIFA are organising to try and rival the CL, but when you look into their motives (which are just basically money driven) and the fact that clubs will be invited into the competition then that just says it all.

personally i wouldnt care if someone like everton or burnley got bought out by a rich owner and there owners implemented what we have done - I would be all for the competition. However it is the likes of your uniteds/liverpool who dont want this happening so they can stay relevant in global terms
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.