Ah so a gradual decline into unmanageable debt is the more preferred option.Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:32 pmI don’t understand your argument, any fan would prefer a billionaire owner rather than owners that start there tenure-ship plunging the club into debt.
While there are indeed relegation clauses in all the players contracts (football standard is 30% - 40%) I think that is in the accounts somewhere and Premier League bonuses (roughly 30%) of the player and coaching staff wage bill (1st team squad only I suspect) are not paid on relegation. The bigger concern is that the permanent contracted staff at the club has doubled in the last 3 years to around 300, more than 1 season in the Championship is likely to see a significant round of redundancies.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:30 pmI don't know what the relegation clauses are for our staff.
With all the money spent etc this last decade, we are a more attractive proposition for players and managers if we got relegated and Dyche left.
That's a bit of a weird argument. Chelsea are owned by a company that is owned by Abramovich. City are owned by a company that is owned by Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, etcGodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:29 pmHow successful have billionaire owners been?
Only 1 that I can think of, Chelsea.
City are owned by a company, as are Leicester I think.
The rest just prop up their clubs.
My point being Newcastle stated a preference for billionaire owners instead of a leveraged buyout but it's only been a success for a very small number of clubs, if we are measuring success by regular top half/6 finishes and trophies.
There's no evidence either way as to whether he received a salary as Executive Chairman. He hadn't received any remuneration up until 30 June 2019.jojomk1 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:00 pmI think you will find that MG, in the latter stages of his reign, had altered his title to that of "Executive Chairman" for which he received a remuneration
If Mr Pace is going to relocate to this area, in order to work closely on the financial stability of the club, where will his future earnings come from ?
Manchester City is owned by CFG a multi-club group which is controlled by a Billionaire, and has 2 other major investment groups each controlled by Billionaires, some of the other clubs in CFG have share holdings with other BillionairesGodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:29 pmHow successful have billionaire owners been?
Only 1 that I can think of, Chelsea.
City are owned by a company, as are Leicester I think.
The rest just prop up their clubs.
This right there is what I mean when I say every single Fan would prefer to be taken over by a billionaire rather than a leveraged takeover.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:02 pmManchester City is owned by CFG a multi-club group which is controlled by a Billionaire, and has 2 other major investment groups each controlled by Billionaires, some of the other clubs in CFG have share holdings with other Billionaires
Leicester is owned by King Power which is owned by a Billionaire family
Liverpool is owned by FSG which is a multi-franchise sports group owned by a group of around 20 families - which are for the most part Billionaires
Manchester United are owned by a Billionaire family who also have a multi-franchise sports group
Arsenal is owned by a Billionaire and are part of a multi-franchise sports group
Tottenham is owned by a Billionaire
These are the clubs which have won most of the domestic trophies in the last decade and/or have participated in the Champions League
-------------------------------
Wolves are owned by Fosun which is controlled by a Billionaire family and have football clubs in Switzerland and China
Aston Villa are owned by NSWE which is owned by two Billionaires
Leeds United are owned by a Billionaire and and Billionaire family that control the San Francisco 49ers
Brighton are owned by a Billionaire who also owns a club in Belgium
These clubs have appeared to be on the up
------------------------------------------
Crystal Palace are controlled by two Billionaires who have other sports franchises
Newcastle are owned by a Billionaire
Southampton are owned by two Billionaires
Fulham are owned by a Billionaire and part of a multi-franchise group
Everton are owned by a Billionaire
West Ham is owned by a Billionaire and someone else who is close to being a Billionaire
These clubs have peeks and troughs of form - Palace and West Ham are the 8th and 9th longest serving current members of the Premier League, Everton are ever presents
----------------------------------------------
West Brom is owned by Chinese group that want to sell
Sheffield United are part of a multi-club group
and Burnley's owners may be poorer than the last lot
I was happy with our previous owners and have never wanted a Billionaire, to stretch the club's sustainability or take us financially out of the reach of the community in which it was based. Yes they could have done more to grow the commercial income, though that was coming on stream and all the evidence I have seen was that they were on a planned growth across the whole club.Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 3:37 pmThis right there is what I mean when I say every single Fan would prefer to be taken over by a billionaire rather than a leveraged takeover.
I'd have expected anyone in the van supply business to have done very well during a period when shops aren't open and the roads full of vans delivering parcels from on-line purchases.ŽižkovClaret wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:15 amI wonder who the local businessman mentioned in the BBC article is? Fishwick maybe? guess we'll be playing spot the missing advert tonight
Great listing of all the Premier League clubs, CP.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:02 pmManchester City is owned by CFG a multi-club group which is controlled by a Billionaire, and has 2 other major investment groups each controlled by Billionaires, some of the other clubs in CFG have share holdings with other Billionaires
Leicester is owned by King Power which is owned by a Billionaire family
Liverpool is owned by FSG which is a multi-franchise sports group owned by a group of around 20 families - which are for the most part Billionaires
Manchester United are owned by a Billionaire family who also have a multi-franchise sports group
Arsenal is owned by a Billionaire and are part of a multi-franchise sports group
Tottenham is owned by a Billionaire
These are the clubs which have won most of the domestic trophies in the last decade and/or have participated in the Champions League
-------------------------------
Wolves are owned by Fosun which is controlled by a Billionaire family and have football clubs in Switzerland and China
Aston Villa are owned by NSWE which is owned by two Billionaires
Leeds United are owned by a Billionaire and and Billionaire family that control the San Francisco 49ers
Brighton are owned by a Billionaire who also owns a club in Belgium
These clubs have appeared to be on the up
------------------------------------------
Crystal Palace are controlled by two Billionaires who have other sports franchises
Newcastle are owned by a Billionaire
Southampton are owned by two Billionaires
Fulham are owned by a Billionaire and part of a multi-franchise group
Everton are owned by a Billionaire
West Ham is owned by a Billionaire and someone else who is close to being a Billionaire
These clubs have peeks and troughs of form - Palace and West Ham are the 8th and 9th longest serving current members of the Premier League, Everton are ever presents
----------------------------------------------
West Brom is owned by Chinese group that want to sell
Sheffield United are part of a multi-club group
and Burnley's owners may be poorer than the last lot
How does the ownership work of those clubs work in terms of financing the clubs? Are they just pumping their own money in or are they putting the club into debt (like Davies did at Bolton) by lending rather than "giving"?Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:02 pmManchester City is owned by CFG a multi-club group which is controlled by a Billionaire, and has 2 other major investment groups each controlled by Billionaires, some of the other clubs in CFG have share holdings with other Billionaires
Leicester is owned by King Power which is owned by a Billionaire family
Liverpool is owned by FSG which is a multi-franchise sports group owned by a group of around 20 families - which are for the most part Billionaires
Manchester United are owned by a Billionaire family who also have a multi-franchise sports group
Arsenal is owned by a Billionaire and are part of a multi-franchise sports group
Tottenham is owned by a Billionaire
These are the clubs which have won most of the domestic trophies in the last decade and/or have participated in the Champions League
-------------------------------
Wolves are owned by Fosun which is controlled by a Billionaire family and have football clubs in Switzerland and China
Aston Villa are owned by NSWE which is owned by two Billionaires
Leeds United are owned by a Billionaire and and Billionaire family that control the San Francisco 49ers
Brighton are owned by a Billionaire who also owns a club in Belgium
These clubs have appeared to be on the up
------------------------------------------
Crystal Palace are controlled by two Billionaires who have other sports franchises
Newcastle are owned by a Billionaire
Southampton are owned by two Billionaires
Fulham are owned by a Billionaire and part of a multi-franchise group
Everton are owned by a Billionaire
West Ham is owned by a Billionaire and someone else who is close to being a Billionaire
These clubs have peeks and troughs of form - Palace and West Ham are the 8th and 9th longest serving current members of the Premier League, Everton are ever presents
----------------------------------------------
West Brom is owned by Chinese group that want to sell
Sheffield United are part of a multi-club group
and Burnley's owners may be poorer than the last lot
I doubt that would stop him asking for a discount. I suspect Fishwick would be quite happy to be named in the article, he's not shy when it comes to publicity.Paul Waine wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:35 pmI'd have expected anyone in the van supply business to have done very well during a period when shops aren't open and the roads full of vans delivering parcels from on-line purchases.
Exciting times.
UTC
Hmmm, every game on tv. Sponsors names seen every time. I hope BFC aren't shy in their response to any of the sponsors who think they've lost out by no fans being at the games.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:51 pmI doubt that would stop him asking for a discount. I suspect Fishwick would be quite happy to be named in the article, he's not shy when it comes to publicity.
As well as counting all the betting ads. 
There are new ones too - the surprising one is the number of housing/property companies - I think I saw 3 on the Bob Lord for the Bournemouth gamesPaul Waine wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:59 pmHmmm, every game on tv. Sponsors names seen every time. I hope BFC aren't shy in their response to any of the sponsors who think they've lost out by no fans being at the games.
Of course, we'll all be playing "spot the missing sponsor" tonight.
Exciting times.
UTC
Venky's are covering the losses and writing off chunks here and there.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:50 pmHow does the ownership work of those clubs work in terms of financing the clubs? Are they just pumping their own money in or are they putting the club into debt (like Davies did at Bolton) by lending rather than "giving"?
What I am trying to get at is that it's all very well having a millionaire owner but what happens if/when they decide enough is enough? Is the club saddled with debt or just a huge hole in their income?
I’m pretty sure we had relegation clauses in last time we were relegated and we ended up losing around 8 million.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:30 pmI don't know what the relegation clauses are for our staff.
With all the money spent etc this last decade, we are a more attractive proposition for players and managers if we got relegated and Dyche left.
Modern training facilities.Winstonswhite wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 5:47 pmI’m pretty sure we had relegation clauses in last time we were relegated and we ended up losing around 8 million.
We’ve now got a much larger wage bill and if we did go down we’ve got an additional 10 million in Interest payments now.
Not sure how all that adds up to us being a more attractive proposition for players if Dyche left on relegation.
I will do the big six for nowTheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:50 pmHow does the ownership work of those clubs work in terms of financing the clubs? Are they just pumping their own money in or are they putting the club into debt (like Davies did at Bolton) by lending rather than "giving"?
What I am trying to get at is that it's all very well having a millionaire owner but what happens if/when they decide enough is enough? Is the club saddled with debt or just a huge hole in their income?
countedChester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 5:03 pmThere are new ones too - the surprising one is the number of housing/property companies - I think I saw 3 on the Bob Lord for the Bournemouth games
I will say that new line-up does look far smarter and more Premier League than the double up stack quilt mish/mash that was a throwback to the 80's - though it has lost some of the nostalgic charm the club has been appreciated for
Chester Perry, I have a question. Did you just type all that out off the top of your head? I’m impressed, you are a mine of information with an encyclopaedic knowledge.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:02 pmI will do the big six for now
Chelsea - have around £1,5 billion of debt to the owner, and want a new stadium that is likely to cost similar...
He has it all written on his arms, like old skool exam cheating, so it's ready to use when needed
This has now been posted at Companies House - As I previously suggested done to keep in line with changes at the Holding company to allow the loaning of money to a related company to buy shares in the business - Article 4 has changed to allow it still working though the rest of itChester Perry wrote: ↑Tue Feb 16, 2021 1:09 pmlooks like more changes to the articles of association at the club are coming through - I suspect in line with those at the holding company, just housekeeping in reality though interesting that the signatory was Mile Garlick on these changes, on the day of takeover.
https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history
Brighton are an interesting one - yes there are debts of circa £300m to the owner, and they are still growing as a result of Covid (Eddie's debt build up was about £185m in an era of substantially less tv money, so proportionately greater), you can see Brighton growing revenues and being very smart in acquisition and development of young talent going forward, plus their catchment is both large and relatively prosperous in comparison to Bolton. The Amex has the capability of expanding to around 32,000 seats, but anything beyond the current outer shell is unlikely to get pass the local council, who are already seething about the volume of match-goers not using public transport and especially cycles. You could reasonably expect a latent demand for a 40,000 capacity ground with around 8000 hospitality seats for them in the Premier League over the next couple of seasons and I am sure it would be an attractive location for the Football tourist market given the proximity to London and the amenities on offer in the areaGodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 5:34 pmVenky's are covering the losses and writing off chunks here and there.
Davies covered them and wrote them off, but had a clause in the sale that if Bolton got promoted he got a percentage of the TV money.
In Boltons case, writing off the debt achieved nothing because the cause of the losses, the wage bill, was still there and a massive problem.
Brighton have the same issue, as do most PL clubs.
For years Bolton fans said it was fine cos Eddie was there..
Brighton are the same about it.
Many fans from varying clubs, inc this one, can't see the issue of running a club at a massive loss and relying on an owner to cover those losses.
The issue at Newcastle in regards to a leveraged buyout, is that the club carries debt of circa £110m to Ashley and has a relatively low cash position, though it does have a recent history of generating profit and paying down loans successfully. Ashley has a longstanding promise that he will only seek repayment of his loans upon the sale of the club, he also wants to recover all the money he has invested in the acquisition and development of the club hence the £300m + asking price that he won't budge on. He has softened a little on a staged payment deal, but is only interested in someone who can pay in cash.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:49 pmMy point being Newcastle stated a preference for billionaire owners instead of a leveraged buyout but it's only been a success for a very small number of clubs, if we are measuring success by regular top half/6 finishes and trophies.
The rest just bob along making up the numbers.
I will also add that for the most part I saw the same few companies on hoardings on The Jimmy Mac, Bob Lord and Cricket field stands, is this also part of the new policy, if so you would imagine that the price has rocketed and the club are only looking for another 3 advertisers/sponsors.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:08 pmcounted
3 spots advertising the club on the Bob Lord
3 spots advertising the club on the Cricket Field
4 spots advertising the club on the Jimmy Mac
also a huge Whitehough board (BFCitC)
so far - that is a lot of lost sponsors and not counting the double stack removal on the Bob Lord
People do not like to admit it but this is a town and region where memory and bitterness is held long (often for generations) and forgiveness is in very short supply. You can only see this biting back at some point in the future when the need is greater.joey13 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:05 amhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56089037
So much for the local community
One advert has been changed recently. It's on the Bob Lord wall just to the left of the home dug out. It's for a scaffolding comany and it always used to say NAME Scaffolding - for the perfect erection. The last part has now been removed.ŽižkovClaret wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:15 amI wonder who the local businessman mentioned in the BBC article is? Fishwick maybe? guess we'll be playing spot the missing advert tonight
When we first went to Brighton we parked at Lewes and got the train in. Last time it was train all the way via Brighton, but two seasons ago, when we won 3-1, we drove all the way to a housing estate some 15 mins walk away. It's permit holders only parking (residents) but the residents sell their parking spaces on match days. I don't know how all that will work in terms of the current free public transport situation.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Feb 17, 2021 10:22 pmBrighton are an interesting one - yes there are debts of circa £300m to the owner, and they are still growing as a result of Covid (Eddie's debt build up was about £185m in an era of substantially less tv money, so proportionately greater), you can see Brighton growing revenues and being very smart in acquisition and development of young talent going forward, plus their catchment is both large and relatively prosperous in comparison to Bolton. The Amex has the capability of expanding to around 32,000 seats, but anything beyond the current outer shell is unlikely to get pass the local council, who are already seething about the volume of match-goers not using public transport and especially cycles. You could reasonably expect a latent demand for a 40,000 capacity ground with around 8000 hospitality seats for them in the Premier League over the next couple of seasons and I am sure it would be an attractive location for the Football tourist market given the proximity to London and the amenities on offer in the area
Do we actually have any advertising on the Longside?
At the moment I don't know, but normally I think there are pitch side hoardings
I look over to it every game, and still not sureClaretTony wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:33 pmI sit in that stand so wouldn't ever see but the wall isn't high enough at one end to have anything I wouldn't have thought.
I've just had a look at a photo I took at an empty turf moor two years agoClaretTony wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:33 pmI sit in that stand so wouldn't ever see but the wall isn't high enough at one end to have anything I wouldn't have thought.
Think your missing the point. A lot of the sponsors have been there for a significant time, the club didn’t always have this reach and would rely on the income a lot more than they did now.Swizzlestick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:52 pmQuite right we are asking for proper fees now. Every match is televised and their branding will have significantly greater reach than in a normal season. Fair enough a few months grace when the pandemic hit but we are not a charity.
Have they?Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:55 pmConcerning that the new owners have just come in an effectively ripped up local community sponsorship.
What have they back tracked on?Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:23 pmWhat else do you call it when they back track on an arrangement?
), some of them, after all, do have a multinational/global presence. It's great if the town of Burnley, alongside the Premier League football club, can also "pitch" itself globally. That's how the town will grow and the citizens of Burnley will prosper. ) of the lower leagues? We all believe Burnley Football Club belongs in the Premier League. It's great that we have owners who are setting out their commercial model to shows that they also believe that Burnley Football Club belongs in the Premier League. 
