Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Do we think lots of clubs were crying wolf?
No bankruptcies (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sky Blue Pete
- Start date
derbyskyblue
Well-Known Member
Maybe, some way to go yet though. On another note i read that Burnley have been taken over by some American hedge fund financial business. what i dont understand is that they used (as far as i can see) Burnleys money to do it. So a club that had around 42 million in the bank has suddenly become 90 odd million in debt to its new owners.
Apparently a similar sort of deal as to Man utd and the glazers. I just cannot for the life of me work out how this works.
Apparently a similar sort of deal as to Man utd and the glazers. I just cannot for the life of me work out how this works.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Their fans seemed pleased that the investment had arrived and they were going to start spending and how much did they spend nothing (I haven’t checked all the transfers from yesterday yet). Even Dyche will get fed up and go and then they will be in trouble as it’s and ageing squad.
They were also a club pleading poverty but had 42 million lying about and has that done them any good having a pile of cash or just made them easier to take over and plunder?
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
The derby situation is baffling no money to pay wages but bringing players in.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Truly baffling
shepardo01
Well-Known Member
Haven't studied it carefully, but it can be possible through loans to bring in players with virtually no cost.
Eg if parent club do not want a loan fee and will contribute 100% to wages.
Rooney seems to obviously have good links to acquire these types of loan.
Also, did they not sell a young prospect to Liverpool(?) for a few million quid?
So quite conceivably they could have had zero outgoings and still acquired a few million from player sales....
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
It was stuff like this at uni that left me scratching my head in disbelief. Buying something using their money. In a way even things like limited liability encourages riskier behaviour because the risk of personal loss if much reduced. It's so obviously rules brought in by the rich to protect themselves. If they take a massive risk and it works they get massive rewards, for the many times it doesn't they're protected from losing too much. Ordinary people will lose their jobs, incomes etc from their reckless decision making but who gives a fuck - my stash is protected.
Like the current thing in the papers about short selling (or 'shorting'). You can sell something you don't currently own because you think the price will go down and then buy it at a later date? That's madness. We wonder why we get in the shit economically on a regular cycle yet the reason is quite obvious - you can make money from things losing their value. That should never be a thing. Why work hard trying to build value when you can just put yourself in a position where you can make it worse (which is much easier to do) and still profit? Like having a house and doing it up as best a possible but you can't really do much more, so instead why not sell it then trash the place and knock a wall down to reduce the value and then buy it back cheaper? Then just keep repeating.
In a way I've got a wry smile on my face about the shorting situation because those that have been fucking everyone else over with their inside knowledge/shenanigans are now crying about social media doing it to them. The irony of seeing a load of people up in arms about using regulation to stop it after years of clamouring for deregulation is beautiful. It's not all great though as most pensions are involved in this and I don't want 'normal' peoples retirement to be affected by it.
But it also shows just how stupid running an economy largely on financial services etc - there's little actual logic to the movements, just a bit of guesswork and 'feeling'. There's some very clever maths involved, but a lot of it is based on assumptions and 'best guesses'. Look at Tesla - best results ever yet lost value because it was lower than analysts expectations - half of the expected results are miles off. Most of the time the markets crash there's no sensible reason for it - it's just a load of people getting jumpy. That's why quite often they rally so quickly.
A stock exchange is basically just an upper class version of a bookies.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
We would have been promoted no doubt... But some clubs deffo pulled the wool
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Derby sign five including Gregory & Mengi
Derby County sign Teden Mengi, Lee Gregory, George Edmundson, Beni Baningime and Patrick Roberts on loan.
www.bbc.co.uk
No money for wages though they paying magic beans
shepardo01
Well-Known Member
Covered this earlier -Derby sign five including Gregory & Mengi
Derby County sign Teden Mengi, Lee Gregory, George Edmundson, Beni Baningime and Patrick Roberts on loan.
No money for wages though they paying magic beans
Haven't studied it carefully, but it can be possible through loans to bring in players with virtually no cost.
Eg if parent club do not want a loan fee and will contribute 100% to wages.
Rooney seems to obviously have good links to acquire these types of loan.
Also, did they not sell a young prospect to Liverpool(?) for a few million quid?
So quite conceivably they could have had zero outgoings and still acquired a few million from player sales....
