[acid911]

Things might have turned out differently if we had thought things through more carefully.

Best way to put all of it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleep.gif) Best honest way!

[Jack Sparrow]

I understand the regulations of the FFP, but that's not what I was asking. You post countless articles and comments to demonstrate the effectiveness of the FFP, as if trying to persuade us into thoroughly believing in it, all in all to come to the conclusion that Berlusconi is trying to run this club as efficiently as possible, in accord with the rules. Sorry, but that's total bullshit to me. We're all grown-ups here, we understand the situation we're in. We realize that we can't even come close to competing with the footballing giants of today in terms of revenue and liquidity, and that without Berlusconi's investment 26 years ago we might not exist as a club nowadays. There's no need for all the lecturing and @ss-kissing. If we criticize the guy, it's because we all care a whole lot about this club, and we simply don't agree with some or most of his decisions in recent times. If we have a mediocre team nowadays run by a mediocre coach, then who's to blame other than the management? Things might have turned out differently if we had thought things through more carefully.

Well you're absolutely right in a way that mistakes were made. But at least they're rectifying it sooner rather than later.

I would say FFP completely caught us off guard, but then we probably wasted another year and a half to begin with the re-organization. But now I do believe we are proceeding in the only way possible. We do not know much about the other teams struggles, because we did not follow them as seriously. R7 is completely right when he says Juve already did their reorganizing.


For me still missing is:

- The plans for a new stadium (Juve have one, Inter and Roma have both announced theirs...)
- New youth project (this will of course take us some more time to see the results)
- Financials after the reorganization (this will be coming up soon I expect)

[X-Offender]

If Inter are getting a new stadium, can't we just purchase San Siro from the municipality and renovate it?

[Jack Sparrow]

We've been over this with the municipality before. They flat out refuse to sell, coz it's such a cash cow for them with all the rent it brings in from both clubs. It just doesn't make any sense.

The work on it , whether it is the new pitch or the turnstiles is to be done by the two clubs.

The rent has to be paid by the two clubs.

The municipality makes money not just from the rent but also any other event that may be hosted there!!

[Rossoneri7]

I understand the regulations of the FFP, but that's not what I was asking. You post countless articles and comments to demonstrate the effectiveness of the FFP, as if trying to persuade us into thoroughly believing in it, all in all to come to the conclusion that Berlusconi is trying to run this club as efficiently as possible, in accord with the rules. Sorry, but that's total bullshit to me. We're all grown-ups here, we understand the situation we're in. We realize that we can't even come close to competing with the footballing giants of today in terms of revenue and liquidity, and that without Berlusconi's investment 26 years ago we might not exist as a club nowadays. There's no need for all the lecturing and @ss-kissing. If we criticize the guy, it's because we all care a whole lot about this club, and we simply don't agree with some or most of his decisions in recent times. If we have a mediocre team nowadays run by a mediocre coach, then who's to blame other than the management? Things might have turned out differently if we had thought things through more carefully.

In all fairness, you asked me and I answered.

And I don't mean to lecture, I mean to add value to the forum. However, if your flavor of the day is to criticize B&G, then by all means (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by Rossoneri7: Oct 11 2012, 05:43 PM

[kurtsimonw]

Actually the revenue alone does not dictate anything. The expenses do. Contrast the expenses of the clubs with the expenses of Milan and you will get a better picture.

I don't agree. Revenue dictates the majority of it. A club can always lower certain expenses, but you can't just increase revenue.

For example (and these figures are totally random so don't look into the numbers too much):

Milan revenue is £200m, expenses are £220m - That puts us at negative £20m

Everton revenue is £50m, expenses £50m - That puts them at breaking even.

Milan can (which is what you're saying they're doing now) cut down the wage bill, sell players and lets say their revenue sticks at £200m, but now expenses are at £180m. Milan now, despite spending £130m on the club more than Everton are actually in a better position.

This is why it's a load of balls to me. It's about meking the rich richer by making sure other teams can't break into the CL to improve their revenue. It's all geared towards keeping the status quo whilst hiding behind this Fair Play nonesense (which as showed above, is anything but 'fair'.)

This post has been edited by kurtsimonw: Oct 11 2012, 05:44 PM

[X-Offender]

We've been over this with the municipality before. They flat out refuse to sell, coz it's such a cash cow for them with all the rent it brings in from both clubs. It just doesn't make any sense.

The work on it , whether it is the new pitch or the turnstiles is to be done by the two clubs.

The rent has to be paid by the two clubs.

The municipality makes money not just from the rent but also any other event that may be hosted there!!

How do you know that? I don't remember anyone saying such a thing. And if they refuse to sell it, then Inter and us can get new stadiums and San Siro will become useless to them as a result.

[Rossoneri7]

I don't agree. Revenue dictates the majority of it. A club can always lower certain expenses, but you can't just increase revenue.

For example (and these figures are totally random so don't look into the numbers too much):

Milan revenue is £200m, expenses are £220m - That puts us at negative £20m

Everton revenue is £50m, expenses £50m - That puts them at breaking even.

Milan can (which is what you're saying they're doing now) cut down the wage bill, sell players and lets say their revenue sticks at £200m, but now expenses are at £180m. Milan now, despite spending £130m on the club more than Everton are actually in a better position.

This is why it's a load of balls to me. It's about meking the rich richer by making sure other teams can't break into the CL to improve their revenue. It's all geared towards keeping the status quo whilst hiding behind this Fair Play nonesense (which as showed above, is anything but 'fair'.)

Under FFP Milan wont be at EUR270MM in Revenue. You have to factor in the demand for tickets (fell to a new record low this season), take into account Merchandise, TV distribution, European prize money, if we get a chance to participate ...

[Jack Sparrow]

I don't agree. Revenue dictates the majority of it. A club can always lower certain expenses, but you can't just increase revenue.

For example (and these figures are totally random so don't look into the numbers too much):

Milan revenue is £200m, expenses are £220m - That puts us at negative £20m

Everton revenue is £50m, expenses £50m - That puts them at breaking even.

Milan can (which is what you're saying they're doing now) cut down the wage bill, sell players and lets say their revenue sticks at £200m, but now expenses are at £180m. Milan now, despite spending £130m on the club more than Everton are actually in a better position.

This is why it's a load of balls to me. It's about meking the rich richer by making sure other teams can't break into the CL to improve their revenue. It's all geared towards keeping the status quo whilst hiding behind this Fair Play nonesense (which as showed above, is anything but 'fair'.)

Let's say Everton finish in Europe this season. This means that they have the chance to get increased commercial revenue (more sponsors, sponsor bonuses), and of course the money from the Europa league (TV revenues plus stadium attendance for Europe games).

So I would imagine around another 12 million a year.

So now their revenue has increased by another 12million. While their expense remains at the 50 million. So that's 12 million a year extra they have got.

Now earlier, there was a chance that another 'big' club could just come in a raid one of their players for zilch, and they're back to square one.

Now it's not happening so much. Chelsea or Man U or Man C cannot come in and plonk down a crazy sum from 25 to 40 million for Fellaini as was their wont.

For starters if they're plopping down say 25 million (@ 8 million a year for 3 years), and let's be honest, Fellaini at any of the big clubs is still squad material, so the only way they can convince him is to pay huge wages.

So let's say Big Club's expenses are 8 million for the transfer plus wages for Fellaini at 4 million a year (he is on 3 at Everton right now), they have to be prepared to put out 12 million a year extra on their expense sheet.

Question is, can they do it and not wreck their books. We already know that they are not making a profit. So will an additional 12 million on the deficit column still keep them within Europe?

On the other hand for an extra 1 million on their 'expense' column Everton can keep Fellaini at matching wages, and promise him the starting role..so they're building on it.

Plus they could of course reinforce their strength which is a great scouting system wherein they pick up great players on the cheap.


As for the web's oft repeated cliche argument..the big clubs will just flip the bird and go play their own league...don't be silly.

Real, Barca, Bayern (in fact ALL german CL clubs), Juve, Milan, Inter (probably), Man Utd, Chelsea are all in tune with FFP.

So now, unless you're suggesting Man City, PSG, a few second tier Spanish clubs going off to play a league of their own will make the world stop...then nothin's gonna happen. These clubs will have to come around eventually.

[kurtsimonw]

Green added: "How can Manchester United's revenues be £320m and Aston Villa, who are completely useless, get £250m?

"What Manchester United put into world football is massive, but what they take out of it is a joke and they won't put up with that for much longer."

BBC

I don't know who the hell this Charles Green is. But what a randomly insulting comment to make. As for his final comment, what Man U have put into the World of football is massive? Sure. Though I'm not sure there's a more influential club in the history of the game than us, but if it makes him feel better, whatever.

[dst]

Though I'm not sure there's a more influential club in the history of the game than us

How so?

[kurtsimonw]

William McGregor (our chairman) created the first football league. At the time, with the FA Cup being the only competitive competition, teams were basically having to fold because they couldn't afford to keep running particularly if they went out quickly.

The league meant there were more meaningful games and it grew from there.

That clown's since apologised for his comments anyway.

[Rossoneri7]

Liverpool expected to affirm commitment to Anfield stay

Reds owners Fenway Sports Group will announce their desire to expand the historic ground, bringing an end to plans for a move to a new stadium on nearby Stanley Park

Liverpool owners Fenway Sports Group are expected to reaffirm their commitment to redeveloping the club's Anfield home on Monday.

The Reds' lengthy battle with Liverpool city council over the necessary demolition of nearby housing appears be nearing an amicable conclusion, though specific announcements regarding an increase in capacity are not expected to be confirmed until a later date.

The Anfield Road and Main Stand areas of the historic ground have been marked out for refurbishment, in order to bring the stadium’s capacity up to around 60,000 - in line with Liverpool's rivals at the top end of the Premier League.

As explained by fan site The Anfield Wrap on Saturday, the Merseyside outfit hope to begin the restoration work in 2014.

The news brings to an end links with a vacant plot of land on nearby Stanley Park, where the Reds club had previously planned to build a new stadium for which plans have been written off at the cost of £35 million.

Principal owner John W Henry has repeatedly spoken of his desire to refurbish Anfield following FSG’s takeover - two years ago to the day - citing concern over the escalating cost of a new build for the relatively small reward of just 15,000 extra seats.

Good for the heritage of the EPL.

[Fillipo Simone]

Btw. considering QPR are last, how well is Julio Cesar doing?

[kurtsimonw]

Good for the heritage of the EPL.

Agreed. As much as I hate Liverpool, it's one of the stadiums that needs to remain.

Btw. considering QPR are last, how well is Julio Cesar doing?

Clean sheet on his debut against Chelsea and played great in a loss against Spurs. Wasn't very good against West Brom or West Ham though - seems to play to the big occassion I suppose.