All Activity

Think we could spend big, if it’s on a player or two we accept could be off the following summer or one after if they do well, and we’d be happy to sell for a profit. We now reaching the stage because of the limited youth players/kids, the signings we make have to be with a view that they could be off in 12/24 months.

It was an xG massacre bobby.

I look great in it.

Who won the xG though eh ?

Wilson stays, we must be signing a young(ish) 2nd choice striker so they have some experience to work with on training ground.

We've already battered Glimt to be fair. One of the worst teams we've played this season. Hojlund got a brace.

I hope Spurs smash them just for those quotes.

Don’t think anyone knows what the future financial landscape can end up as trends change. But say Man Utd don’t challenge Premier League in next 10 years, their finances may stay high, but everyone else will close in and overtake and theirs could be like 6th highest in Prem. Only way they mess up financially and do harm long term, is they have more seasons of wrong investment than have to take on a sizeable chunk of stadium debt. Ratcliffe won’t be there long term, and football clubs to be bought for say £3bn are not logical investments because of how much they cost to run to be competitive. So it’s then all the debt repayments needed to various people which if there’s an average billionaire in charge, would find very challenging.

Spurs will win 2-1 at home and then lose 3-0 away. Spurs are absolute trash, as are you guys. Bilbao would wreck Glimt beyond recognition, though.

Consistently stays like that for a bit, every chance the 18 Prem league may get voted through (with two down), because more sides will fancy their chances of never going down due to gulf in finances, and 18 sides means more wealth for them as there’s 2 less sides to give money too.

The dude who was main footy kit designer for Nike 5-10 years ago is a Geordie and loves the toon. We’ve been pals since school When he was there he always said he would love to design our kit, but alas, twas not to be

Vardy and Jota were good finishers, but it doesn't look like it anymore. DCL is way below the line, which raises all kinds of alarms. Its easier to forgive Nico Jackson, because his pace/power will be creating some of the many opportunities he's had. Above the line, Wood and Welbeck are having great seasons in spite of their historic finishing abilities. Is the circle size minutes played?

Spurs will batter them though.

No malo.

He’s actually good too.

Can't go into a season in Europe with Isak, Wilson, and Osula. Isak goes down and the club are done in Europe, the cups, and the league. Just foolish. Don't think Howe is a fool.

Watch Adam Pearson be the "influencer".

The question would be 'where are the buyers?'. We're already at the point of nation states buying clubs. Who is going to pay 4bn for Chelsea? The club that Abramovich sold was English football's most successful club of the century to date, but they aren't Man Utd. 4bn is the purchase cost + what Boehly and co. has poured in to date. I'm just not seeing that happen - football clubs have tiny revenue streams (and profit potential) against their 'value'. Football clubs are not good investments at all.

In a daft way I think a new Wilson deal must mean Howe has huge faith in Osula, no new striker to bring in and more cash to spend on RW CD and GK

Spurs' income was over 200m more than ours when we had CL football and they didn't. The gulf is absolutely massive - and yes, they're losing money, in Spurs' case in part due to stadium costs. Man Utd are going absolutely nowhere when it comes to income - I think some are genuinely deluded if they think that Man Utd are going to suffer significant financial harm in the long run. They're a monster of a club, they have huge global reach - they'll be England's biggest club in 50 years time, never mind right now. Man Utd and Spurs are absolutely not dependent on European football - they aren't Leeds c.2002

They're billionaires, so obviously they've got better vision than me. I'm sure they know what they're doing. Will it help Chelsea? Maybe not. But I bet they'll make a ton of money off it.

Yeah I get all of that, the issue is the amount they've spent already and the amount they will spend in the future. I don't see how they make money in the long run especially considering the opportunity cost.

So being a fund and all, the plan's to boost the team's worth, simples. New stadium, better facilities etc, a young hotshot team to rake in cash for years through player trading and sponsorship etc, then sell the club for a profit. Classic American investor model. The Glazers' primary motivation for acquiring Manchester United was likely financial gain. Their subsequent success in this endeavor is evident. copy and paste that to Clearlake