PIF, PCP, and RB Sports & Media

[r0cafella]

53 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

At present, I’d say we’re running out of headroom.  There’s some low-hanging fruit still available, but after that we look knackered at the moment.  I can’t foresee circumstances where our revenues go past £350m without something really significant happening - which would leave us at about 60% of Spurs’ income.

And this is the key point I’ve been driving at, we are about way off budget wise and in the league money wins every time, it’s why I’ve been wondering how they will square that circle  

[TheBrownBottle]

49 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

We will have the new fan-zone (open all week), training kit sponsorship, training ground sponsorship, stadium stands/stadium sponsorship and I'm sure quite a few other sponsorship/commercial deals which will happen. I honestly think it's a load of shit that some are thinking revenue steams will slow down. They won't. The owners are playing a very clever game of drip feeding things yearly to avoid any major scrutiny from the clubs desperate to try and stop our advancement and of course the southern media.

 

 

 

The adidas deal is a five-year one.  Fan zones and training ground sponsorships won’t put a dent in the quarter of a billion difference between us and Spurs.  I can guarantee that next season’s accounts, like this season’s when they’re produced, will not show anything close to the growth in 22/23. 
 

I’m not convinced that this is a clever game - the club needs a big state-of-the-art new stadium or I’d say we’re close to our ceiling at the moment, without something extraordinary being achieved on the pitch.  

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The adidas deal is a five-year one.  Fan zones and training ground sponsorships won’t put a dent in the quarter of a billion difference between us and Spurs.  I can guarantee that next season’s accounts, like this season’s when they’re produced, will not show anything close to the growth in 22/23. 
 

I’m not convinced that this is a clever game - the club needs a big state-of-the-art new stadium or I’d say we’re close to our ceiling at the moment, without something extraordinary being achieved on the pitch.  

This is pretty much where I am. Ultimately the other clubs are also pushing to increase revenue which is why during the Ashley years the a chasm opened between us and the big 6. So in order to progress we have to close the gap which is difficult because we are limited by FFP. We are not allowed to invest into the business because of the rules    I know it’s repeated a lot but I truly can’t get over this. 
 

So basically we are left hoping for miracles, or we have to become the best traders in football to open up headroom, so when we sell a Bruno we need to find two more. 

[SAK]

3 hours ago, Nobody said:

I can't think of a single metric that made us a big club under Ashley. 

Would argue the support made us a big club as well as reputation (yes, not measurable) but even when we were shit we were one of the most televised teams.

[timeEd32]

I think it’s likely true that we can’t assume these revenue increases continue at pace. Not to diminish what’s been done so far, but it’s mostly a case of doing things a football club with any ambition in the 21st century should be doing. Easy wins so to speak.

 

I agree that revenue in the neighborhood of £350m not counting player sales or Europe may be a bit of a near term ceiling. With consistent European participation and a better sales pipeline we could be in the £400m range.

 

Beyond that is going to take some path to dramatically increase matchday revenue, consistent knockout CL football (which would be punching above our revenue), an insane transfer record both buying and selling, or some real commercial ingenuity. Or likely some combination of those things.

 

We are also trying to chase down a moving target as the pie keeps growing for the others. One of them (Chelsea) falling away would be tremendously helpful for a number of reasons. Not impossible and also not something we can count on yet.

 

As we’ve seen this season this isn’t going to be a straight line up. Patience will be required at various points assuming there aren’t any massive rule changes. But I also think much of the pessimism is still looking in too short of a time period. There’s a long game we’re playing and I think our owners mostly knew that’s what they were signing up for. 

[TheBrownBottle]

23 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

I think it’s likely true that we can’t assume these revenue increases continue at pace. Not to diminish what’s been done so far, but it’s mostly a case of doing things a football club with any ambition in the 21st century should be doing. Easy wins so to speak.

 

I agree that revenue in the neighborhood of £350m not counting player sales or Europe may be a bit of a near term ceiling. With consistent European participation and a better sales pipeline we could be in the £400m range.

 

Beyond that is going to take some path to dramatically increase matchday revenue, consistent knockout CL football (which would be punching above our revenue), an insane transfer record both buying and selling, or some real commercial ingenuity. Or likely some combination of those things.

 

We are also trying to chase down a moving target as the pie keeps growing for the others. One of them (Chelsea) falling away would be tremendously helpful for a number of reasons. Not impossible and also not something we can count on yet.

 

As we’ve seen this season this isn’t going to be a straight line up. Patience will be required at various points assuming there aren’t any massive rule changes. But I also think much of the pessimism is still looking in too short of a time period. There’s a long game we’re playing and I think our owners mostly knew that’s what they were signing up for. 

Yeah, agreed.

 

I think the short-to-medium term has to be to follow Spurs’ model - buy young, quality players with an eye to moving them on for megabucks.  The club already has an age policy in place for most transfers apparently, which suggests that we may well be going down that route.

 

There’ll be a few upset punters when they realise that this means the likelihood is that the likes of Bruno, Isak etc are as likely to be sold as not.  But it’s the only way to bridge the huge income gap in the immediate term.  

[Infatuation Junkie]

Everyone seems to have the right idea on what we need to do to at least start scraping by and getting closer to the big six with revenue,

 

What 99% don’t realise though is that it won’t happen.

 

Masters probably already has 20-30 brand spanking new rules up his sleeve that are ready to be implemented if we manage to slightly start competing.

 

PIF could quite possibly decide to pack up and fuck right off because no one in their right mind is going to sit for ten years with a new club then just as things start improving to become competitive. The line gets erased and the line gets drawn higher.

 

Masters will not stop. He won’t be beaten. He’s pissed we were taken over by them as he done everything to stop it. This is a personal vendetta. It won’t end well. He is pulling strings and is playing god within a very lucrative market. 

[Nucasol]

6 minutes ago, Infatuation Junkie said:

Everyone seems to have the right idea on what we need to do to at least start scraping by and getting closer to the big six with revenue,

 

What 99% don’t realise though is that it won’t happen.

 

Masters probably already has 20-30 brand spanking new rules up his sleeve that are ready to be implemented if we manage to slightly start competing.

 

PIF could quite possibly decide to pack up and fuck right off because no one in their right mind is going to sit for ten years with a new club then just as things start improving to become competitive. The line gets erased and the line gets drawn higher.

 

Masters will not stop. He won’t be beaten. He’s pissed we were taken over by them as he done everything to stop it. This is a personal vendetta. It won’t end well. He is pulling strings and is playing god within a very lucrative market. 

At which point legal action might have to be used. I think the house of cards for the PL will come crashing down before that with Everton, Forest, Chelsea and potentially Leicester.

[macphisto]

1 hour ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Yeah, agreed.

 

I think the short-to-medium term has to be to follow Spurs’ model - buy young, quality players with an eye to moving them on for megabucks.  The club already has an age policy in place for most transfers apparently, which suggests that we may well be going down that route.

 

There’ll be a few upset punters when they realise that this means the likelihood is that the likes of Bruno, Isak etc are as likely to be sold as not.  But it’s the only way to bridge the huge income gap in the immediate term.  

Is that model not broken now since Real and Barcelona don't splash the cash like they used to? I can think of Berbatov, Modric, Bale, Suarez and Coutinho for Spurs and Liverpool but no one in recent times. 

 

I'd say the model is now to buy young to mid-career players, get 5-6 years at their peak and then sell to Saudi when they're 31-34. Obliviously the Saudi's have enough money to start buying younger players if they wanted to. 

[TheBrownBottle]

16 minutes ago, Infatuation Junkie said:

Everyone seems to have the right idea on what we need to do to at least start scraping by and getting closer to the big six with revenue,

 

What 99% don’t realise though is that it won’t happen.

 

Masters probably already has 20-30 brand spanking new rules up his sleeve that are ready to be implemented if we manage to slightly start competing.

 

PIF could quite possibly decide to pack up and fuck right off because no one in their right mind is going to sit for ten years with a new club then just as things start improving to become competitive. The line gets erased and the line gets drawn higher.

 

Masters will not stop. He won’t be beaten. He’s pissed we were taken over by them as he done everything to stop it. This is a personal vendetta. It won’t end well. He is pulling strings and is playing god within a very lucrative market. 

I think you’re right, and I have genuinely thought about just sacking all of this off.  I don’t like state ownership of clubs, but I also don’t like the closed shop PL.  It always felt possible to break into the top clubs, until the last decade or so.  It’s a complete stitch-up

[Stifler]

30 minutes ago, Infatuation Junkie said:

Everyone seems to have the right idea on what we need to do to at least start scraping by and getting closer to the big six with revenue,

 

What 99% don’t realise though is that it won’t happen.

 

Masters probably already has 20-30 brand spanking new rules up his sleeve that are ready to be implemented if we manage to slightly start competing.

 

PIF could quite possibly decide to pack up and fuck right off because no one in their right mind is going to sit for ten years with a new club then just as things start improving to become competitive. The line gets erased and the line gets drawn higher.

 

Masters will not stop. He won’t be beaten. He’s pissed we were taken over by them as he done everything to stop it. This is a personal vendetta. It won’t end well. He is pulling strings and is playing god within a very lucrative market. 

Masters will be gone soon. Clubs are already turning on him, even outside of FFP, his tenure has been a disaster. The other 14 will vote to have him gone, and that’s if he plays nice by letting both Chelsea, and Man City off.

[r0cafella]

Guys, please understand the PL shareholders are the club, masters is an employee of the PL, he does as he’s commanded by his masters. If he happens to leave nothing will change he has no real power. 

[BennyBlanco]

3 hours ago, r0cafella said:

This is pretty much where I am. Ultimately the other clubs are also pushing to increase revenue which is why during the Ashley years the a chasm opened between us and the big 6. So in order to progress we have to close the gap which is difficult because we are limited by FFP. We are not allowed to invest into the business because of the rules    I know it’s repeated a lot but I truly can’t get over this. 
 

So basically we are left hoping for miracles, or we have to become the best traders in football to open up headroom, so when we sell a Bruno we need to find two more. 

This is really bang on the money. Also don’t forget that when a club does start making headway in unearthing gems and getting a bit of a momentum going on a player production conveyer belt - the top 6 circle around like vultures and start picking up the back room staff responsible, plucking them root and stem from said club and transferring them over to their own. So then the process has to start all over again. It’s absolutely fucking minging.

[FloydianMag]

23 minutes ago, Nucasol said:

At which point legal action might have to be used. I think the house of cards for the PL will come crashing down before that with Everton, Forest, Chelsea and potentially Leicester.

If we, or others don’t resort to legal action then we’ll just have to be happy as an also ran, a mid to top 6-7 club that might fluke the odd cup, although lets face it we haven’t for the last 68 years. Everyone can see what’s going on now, even ordinary fans, that a cartel is well established. Smash it to fucking pieces and let the scouse and Manc twats really hate us.

[r0cafella]

Just now, BennyBlanco said:

This is really bang on the money. Also don’t forget that when a club does start making headway in unearthing gems and getting a bit of a momentum going on a player production conveyer belt - the top 6 circle around like vultures and start picking up the back room staff responsible, plucking them root and stem from said club and transferring them over to their own. So then the process has to start all over again. It’s absolutely fucking minging.

Yes sir, actually the entire thing is just one big funnel to the top and nobody else is allowed to join the table, Sheik Mansour was the last person allowed to board that train. 

[Stifler]

4 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Guys, please understand the PL shareholders are the club, masters is an employee of the PL, he does as he’s commanded by his masters. If he happens to leave nothing will change he has no real power. 

It all depends on the non-big 6 clubs though. If they start getting fucked about with FFP etc, I can’t see them wanting to keep people like Masters who they will view as in their pockets.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

It all depends on the non-big 6 clubs though. If they start getting fucked about with FFP etc, I can’t see them wanting to keep people like Masters who they will view as in their pockets.

Why would they be fucked on FFP? The big 6 are smart enough to know (FFP is the creation of the big clubs btw) that FFP is fantastic for them. 
 

Infact it’s fantastic anyone who isn’t ambitious and is happy to exist, it limits competition throughout the whole pyramid so if your backwards looking either by choice or circumstance FFP is great, your costs are limited and your competition can’t just outspend you so your market position is protected. 
 

when thinking about these financial rules throw away the “fan” hat and put on the business one. Everything then becomes crystal clear. 

[SAK]

14 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Guys, please understand the PL shareholders are the club, masters is an employee of the PL, he does as he’s commanded by his masters. If he happens to leave nothing will change he has no real power. 

Correct but he’s the established clubs man. Seem to recall certain clubs where given privileged access to interview him (or was it the other guy) before appointment. If he left the “other clubs” could make moves to get in a more supportive replacement.

 

 

Edited March 8 by SAK

[r0cafella]

Just now, SAK said:

Correct but he’s the established clubs man. Seem to recall certain clubs where given privileged access to interview him (or was it the other guy) before appointment. If he left the “other clubs could make moves to get in a more supportive replacement.

Of course he is, the big clubs are the ones pulling the strings? Why? Because that’s the deal with the devil and the cost of the more even distribution of funds. You can be absolutely certain the those cunts talk about how much money real and Barca make from tv and how they deserve more? They will also crow how much more engagement they get and how they know what’s best as they have the most revenue. It’s the nature of the beast. 

[FloydianMag]

10 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Of course he is, the big clubs are the ones pulling the strings? Why? Because that’s the deal with the devil and the cost of the more even distribution of funds. You can be absolutely certain the those cunts talk about how much money real and Barca make from tv and how they deserve more? They will also crow how much more engagement they get and how they know what’s best as they have the most revenue. It’s the nature of the beast. 

I’ve said it many times, all that exists in football is self interest, all the altruistic bollocks about protecting other clubs is a steaming pile of shite.

[r0cafella]

4 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

I’ve said it many times, all that exists in football is self interest, all the altruistic bollocks about protecting other clubs is a steaming pile of shite.

Of course it is, if you look at the owners of the clubs they are the most ardent capitalist in the world, but they adopt socialist structures such as parachute payments and solidarity payments it’s all rather bizarre but at its core as you mention is absolute self interest. 
 

Again, what FFP is when you strip it back is cost control and the more you control your cost the more profit you make, sadly for the owners they are also extremely egotistical so these rules create a brake and help them all control costs. 
 

Ultimately they all want to make money. 

[FloydianMag]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

Of course it is, if you look at the owners of the clubs they are the most ardent capitalist in the world, but they adopt socialist structures such as parachute payments and solidarity payments it’s all rather bizarre but at its core as you mention is absolute self interest. 
 

Again, what FFP is when you strip it back is cost control and the more you control your cost the more profit you make, sadly for the owners they are also extremely egotistical so these rules create a brake and help them all control costs. 
 

Ultimately they all want to make money. 

Therefore it’s no different to any other business sector which wouldn’t tolerate constructs like FFP and FMV. They would rapidly be challenged at a Competition Appeals Tribunal. 

[r0cafella]

Just now, FloydianMag said:

Therefore it’s no different to any other business sector which wouldn’t tolerate constructs like FFP and FMV. They would rapidly be challenged at a Competition Appeals Tribunal. 

Actually, that’s where it becomes interesting because we know the league is essentially a cartel, and usually cartels will behave in the manner the league is, ie lack of competition; price fixing etc. 

 

And nobody challenges it because they all benefits from it as do cartel members. Before we came along everyone was absolutely content with the status quo. If I’m palace I know I can never compete with City so I’m just happy to sit back and enjoy the massive revenue coming in for doing rather little. 
 

The bottom line is; nobody wants to watch palace vs Brighton and everyone wants to watch Liverpool vs City and it’s these factors which give the big clubs the leverage to tilt the rules in their favour. 

[FloydianMag]

8 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Actually, that’s where it becomes interesting because we know the league is essentially a cartel, and usually cartels will behave in the manner the league is, ie lack of competition; price fixing etc. 

 

And nobody challenges it because they all benefits from it as do cartel members. Before we came along everyone was absolutely content with the status quo. If I’m palace I know I can never compete with City so I’m just happy to sit back and enjoy the massive revenue coming in for doing rather little. 
 

The bottom line is; nobody wants to watch palace vs Brighton and everyone wants to watch Liverpool vs City and it’s these factors which give the big clubs the leverage to tilt the rules in their favour. 

Until City were taken over they were an average club as we are. We’re being denied the right to compete as are other ambitious clubs. It needs to change and if the cartel clubs don’t like it tough, even Palace’s co owner has spoken out against the current rules.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

Until City were taken over they were an average club as we are. We’re being denied the right to compete as are other ambitious clubs. It needs to change and if the cartel clubs don’t like it tough, even Palace’s co owner has spoken out against the current rules.

I don’t expect it to change sadly, I believe Palace are having internal issues so a lot of politicking going on where they are concerned.