Footballers have too much money

The problem with the Barca / Real situation is that both are bankrolled by the two major banks in spain, because of this they will never call the debts in, would you like to be the bank that destroyed Real Madrid or Barca, they would fall almost overnight in spain. Is better to have a massive account and not call it in just let them repay it, rather than call it in and have Millions of spaniards pull their accounts, and severly damage tha bank.

Also you can't stop the state getting involved, as they did with Real, they have had links to the Spanish government since Franco, as he was an avid Real fan, so he created links then, and how do you get rid of them ?

Also withdrawing state help would severly dmage Italian football, as the ony stadium that is not state owned is the san siro which was built and paid for by a private architecht and given as a gift to the city of Milan, the rest are all state owned, and state built.

Taking awya clubs that are in debt means you will be left with, Man U, Arse i think, Liverpool and Wallsall. What excitement you would have there :) They are the ONLY clubs that regularly make a profit, every single other club operates at a loss, do that and you destroy english football, meaning sky wouldn't pay the money, few would watch and the remaining sides would struggle, as they would get nothing like the money they do.
 
Originally posted by Spud21
The problem with the Barca / Real situation is that both are bankrolled by the two major banks in spain, because of this they will never call the debts in, would you like to be the bank that destroyed Real Madrid or Barca, they would fall almost overnight in spain. Is better to have a massive account and not call it in just let them repay it, rather than call it in and have Millions of spaniards pull their accounts, and severly damage tha bank.

Also you can't stop the state getting involved, as they did with Real, they have had links to the Spanish government since Franco, as he was an avid Real fan, so he created links then, and how do you get rid of them ?

Also withdrawing state help would severly dmage Italian football, as the ony stadium that is not state owned is the san siro which was built and paid for by a private architecht and given as a gift to the city of Milan, the rest are all state owned, and state built.

Taking awya clubs that are in debt means you will be left with, Man U, Arse i think, Liverpool and Wallsall. What excitement you would have there :) They are the ONLY clubs that regularly make a profit, every single other club operates at a loss, do that and you destroy english football, meaning sky wouldn't pay the money, few would watch and the remaining sides would struggle, as they would get nothing like the money they do.
Click to expand...

The longer they keep going, the further into debt they go. The more money has to come from somewhere, that will have an affect on the economy. Not jsut the footballing one, what they're doing actually violates some European laws on fair trade and industry and i doubt the EU monetary policy will be very happy. You've also got the banks shareholders to think of, this is costing them money, a lot more important than football fans. When you look into Spain's financial setup, they won't exactly be taking their business elsewhere as there isn't much else to go to. It makes world football a sham, it basically means a team has unlimited paper money and can just buy whoever they like and pay what they like in order to win.

How do you stop this? same way Britain did with Murdoch trying to get Man Utd, far trade and industry, vested interests. A government should not control private organisations out of the tax budget.

Italy has problems. Big clubs just falling into non existance because of their finances. If you can't afford the players or the wages, you can't have them. AC Milan are an odd club, on the one hand the PM controls them but he spends small amounts and apparently it's out of his own wealth (fair enough he is a rich enough bloke). He doesn't buy up their training ground through the government then sell it back to them for a fraction of the price a few weeks later. The stadiums being state owned was something I didn't know, i assumed they would be privately owned and shared. Which is a good enough idea, when a stadium costs hundreds of millions, it won't pay for itself for years, by which time you'd likely have needed a new one years before and had to buy it. The whole thing in London of about 5 different clubs and a national stadium being needed within a 10 mile radius is absurd. For the majority, that's a huge loss that will never be recouped.

I'm saying, operate at a loss unless you have a wealthy owner who can personally give you funds. The clubs who have debts going to banks and governments is going out, it leads down 2 roads; 1. they can't pay it back, the bank takes posession and sells assets and possibly closes club 2. Bank cannot do anything about it, has to keep the loss coming in forever and is stuck with these debts, very bad business.

Clubs paying players wages they can't afford is where the line stops. Look at Arsenal, they need a new stadium and have to have the cash ready and a bank loan set (if they don't pay it back, the assets of the club risk being sold off). That is what i'm talking about by profit, either shareholders, private individuals or operate within your means, that is how football needs to be run. Not living in a fantasy financial world where they can spend as much as they like without having to pay it back.
 
I agree with the points you have made. Especially the one about london.

Madrid are not controlled by the state and there lies the problem, if they were then it would be easily stopped, but the government just help them out, just like governments do with other private entities, so it would be difficult to differentiate.

I still don't know how Barca survive, they have no links with the state, as i'd think theyd rather die than be associated with the spanish govt, but they still run up masses of debt, but they are all secured, think what the nou camp must be worth as real estate, it would most probably exceed their debt which is what 120 mill, plus they have the players as well.

The problem comes with panic selling, take Leeds they should have had the players to recoup most of their debts, ferdinand 30 mill, Kewell should have been a minimum of 10 mill if not 15,Dacourt should have recouped 5 mill at worst, Woodgate should have recouped 10 at a minimum etc etc. they should have been able to make at least 100 mil from the sale of their players to cover their debts and then some. But they lost them all for less than half that, so they are still screwed.
 
The reason they were going for little is because of the financial state football is in. Unless you've got a Russian owner or are bankrolled, you're having to survive within your means. Leeds are in debt, they need money, clubs know this, so they can bid what they can afford rather than too much and pray they win some competition or get some more tickets sold. Few clubs will be paying such huge fees for the minute, and I hope for good.

The bad side is if fees continued in thir current way, the only person screwed would be the fans, IE: Club wants player to come to them, another club who is bankrolled can pay more to get him, original club has to match/better that offer and pay more than they can realistically afford. Club has to get higher income now, TV deal is fixed rate and less than last year due to Sky, only thing is merchandise and ticket prices, leaving the fan having to foot the bill.

I'm not saying footballers deserve £40 a day, i'm saying in the current market, £100k a week for someone or £40k for a squad player is not going to be sustainable. Before anyone says movie stars get X million for a movie, films make money and are profitable, the current star will generate viewers and earn their pay. From the majority, footballers don't earn all their pay and make the club lose money, so they need to start being paid realistically.

Barca are in huge debt with banks (several and one major) but the banks are in a bind if they take the money back, IE they can't because the only asset they can do is take the stadium (effectively closing the club) or forcing them into administration. Either way, it's a problem as it's being controlled outside of them. It's cost the shareholders money, it needs to be fixed.

Real's operations are a joke, the government intervenes yearly somehow, be it buying the ground and selling it back, giving them tax breaks or any of their other recent stunts. Also I believe they are in debt to several banks aswell with the same situation.

It's not really difficult to differentiate, football is not an essential public service (awaits flames) it does not deserve millions of tax payers money especially for a club that only represents a small city. It'd be like Blair paying for Arsenal's new stadium and giving it to them as a gift, can you imagine the reaction from other fans?
 
I agree real madrid situation is a joke, the bank of madrid and the goverment pulling them out of the crap whenever needed. As for the premiership, there are some clubs who must be seriously in debt trying to keep up with the big teams in the league.

Ie middlesbrough, man city (keegan spending :rolleyes: ) Im just glad that liverpool are a well run club in a decent financial state
 
Originally posted by quackers
Im just glad that liverpool are a well run club in a decent financial state
Click to expand...

Aren't they backed by some rich guy as well? Houllier has spent loads of money for liverpool and they have never been in financial trouble, its not like they make LOADS of profit either hmmm
 
Originally posted by Goose
The top stars are probably over paid, yes. The guys who earn less (but still a lot for us guys) may have to live of what they earn for the rest of their lives.
Click to expand...

You are kidding??

What's wrong with them getting another job?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom