While I still feel like it ...
in [Chelsea]
|
Prev: 2014 World Cup in Brazil
Next: Parking the bus
From: JAB on 23 Apr 2010 04:29 On 23/04/2010 9:19 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: > "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message > news:AAcAn.35629$xE4.32757(a)newsfe29.ams2... >> On 23/04/2010 9:03 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>>> It's a shame the Liverpool model wasn't followed where the club did have >>>> the debt put on to it! >>>> >>> >>> You've confused me there, was that sarcasm? >>> >> >> It may have been ... I just remember all the gloating about how the >> Liverpool take over was going to be different from the Man U one and they >> weren't going to be saddled with debt etc. not quite how it turned out if >> I remember! On a more serious note the situation at Liverpool does >> indicate why the PL needs to think hard about who can buy clubs and how >> they are run. It could still go horrible wrong for Liverpool ... >> > > What a shame that would be. > > Well the current owners have put the club up for sale... I'm thinking the > �800 million asking price is a bit o the steep side though. > > .... and that's the point I was making about some of the evaluations we see of clubs. �800 million for a club that needs a new ground and some serious investment in the team to enable it to compete for the title. Not exactly the sort of price I would of had in mind ...
From: Diablos Rojos on 23 Apr 2010 04:33 "JAB" <nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message news:HTcAn.35630$xE4.26611(a)newsfe29.ams2... > On 23/04/2010 9:19 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >> "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message >> news:AAcAn.35629$xE4.32757(a)newsfe29.ams2... >>> On 23/04/2010 9:03 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>>>> It's a shame the Liverpool model wasn't followed where the club did >>>>> have >>>>> the debt put on to it! >>>>> >>>> >>>> You've confused me there, was that sarcasm? >>>> >>> >>> It may have been ... I just remember all the gloating about how the >>> Liverpool take over was going to be different from the Man U one and >>> they >>> weren't going to be saddled with debt etc. not quite how it turned out >>> if >>> I remember! On a more serious note the situation at Liverpool does >>> indicate why the PL needs to think hard about who can buy clubs and how >>> they are run. It could still go horrible wrong for Liverpool ... >>> >> >> What a shame that would be. >> >> Well the current owners have put the club up for sale... I'm thinking the >> �800 million asking price is a bit o the steep side though. >> >> > > ... and that's the point I was making about some of the evaluations we see > of clubs. �800 million for a club that needs a new ground and some serious > investment in the team to enable it to compete for the title. Not exactly > the sort of price I would of had in mind ... You're forgetting something else very important too.... �800million for a club that is not even in the money spinning Champions League next year and not even guaranteed entry into the other cup whatever they call it now.
From: JAB on 23 Apr 2010 04:40 On 23/04/2010 9:33 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: > "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message > news:HTcAn.35630$xE4.26611(a)newsfe29.ams2... >> On 23/04/2010 9:19 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>> "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message >>> news:AAcAn.35629$xE4.32757(a)newsfe29.ams2... >>>> On 23/04/2010 9:03 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>>>>> It's a shame the Liverpool model wasn't followed where the club did >>>>>> have >>>>>> the debt put on to it! >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You've confused me there, was that sarcasm? >>>>> >>>> >>>> It may have been ... I just remember all the gloating about how the >>>> Liverpool take over was going to be different from the Man U one and >>>> they >>>> weren't going to be saddled with debt etc. not quite how it turned out >>>> if >>>> I remember! On a more serious note the situation at Liverpool does >>>> indicate why the PL needs to think hard about who can buy clubs and how >>>> they are run. It could still go horrible wrong for Liverpool ... >>>> >>> >>> What a shame that would be. >>> >>> Well the current owners have put the club up for sale... I'm thinking the >>> �800 million asking price is a bit o the steep side though. >>> >>> >> >> ... and that's the point I was making about some of the evaluations we see >> of clubs. �800 million for a club that needs a new ground and some serious >> investment in the team to enable it to compete for the title. Not exactly >> the sort of price I would of had in mind ... > > You're forgetting something else very important too.... �800million for a > club that is not even in the money spinning Champions League next year and > not even guaranteed entry into the other cup whatever they call it now. > > Does that really make that much difference to the asking price if you assume that you need to invest to challenge for the title. What's the CL worth, �20-�30mil?
From: Diablos Rojos on 23 Apr 2010 04:47 "JAB" <nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message news:L1dAn.35631$xE4.14939(a)newsfe29.ams2... > On 23/04/2010 9:33 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >> "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message >> news:HTcAn.35630$xE4.26611(a)newsfe29.ams2... >>> On 23/04/2010 9:19 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>>> "JAB"<nochance(a)nohope.com> wrote in message >>>> news:AAcAn.35629$xE4.32757(a)newsfe29.ams2... >>>>> On 23/04/2010 9:03 AM, Diablos Rojos wrote: >>>>>>> It's a shame the Liverpool model wasn't followed where the club did >>>>>>> have >>>>>>> the debt put on to it! >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You've confused me there, was that sarcasm? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It may have been ... I just remember all the gloating about how the >>>>> Liverpool take over was going to be different from the Man U one and >>>>> they >>>>> weren't going to be saddled with debt etc. not quite how it turned out >>>>> if >>>>> I remember! On a more serious note the situation at Liverpool does >>>>> indicate why the PL needs to think hard about who can buy clubs and >>>>> how >>>>> they are run. It could still go horrible wrong for Liverpool ... >>>>> >>>> >>>> What a shame that would be. >>>> >>>> Well the current owners have put the club up for sale... I'm thinking >>>> the >>>> �800 million asking price is a bit o the steep side though. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ... and that's the point I was making about some of the evaluations we >>> see >>> of clubs. �800 million for a club that needs a new ground and some >>> serious >>> investment in the team to enable it to compete for the title. Not >>> exactly >>> the sort of price I would of had in mind ... >> >> You're forgetting something else very important too.... �800million for a >> club that is not even in the money spinning Champions League next year >> and >> not even guaranteed entry into the other cup whatever they call it now. >> >> > > Does that really make that much difference to the asking price if you > assume that you need to invest to challenge for the title. What's the CL > worth, �20-�30mil? It's not to be sniffed at. The price they're asking is fantasy, half that would be a truer value.
From: JAB on 21 Apr 2010 01:46
On 20/04/2010 10:20 PM, Legend-11 wrote: > On 18/04/2010 12:41, Red Rackham wrote: >> "Graf Finklestein"<udo_binsack(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:8f5d3e66-2d3c-41ad-8c6e-2de848a7b988(a)j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >> On 18 Apr, 12:12, "Red Rackham"<ONei...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> "Udo Binsack"<udo_bins...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:86d79498-5ae0-497b-bf29-e0156b9f4f8c(a)u31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... >>> >>> On 18 Apr, 11:18, "Steev"<st...(a)shirleyroad.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> "Google Beta User"<wanyik...(a)gmail.com> wrote >>> >>>>> I have a hunch since about 2007, coinciding with your current run of >>>>> three straight titles, you've been bigger spenders than them. I >>>>> haven't run the figures, but you've had some pretty big purchases. >>> >>>> Your hunch would be wrong. >>>> Since 2007 Chelsea have spent 94.2m and Man U 49.75m..(figures courtesy >>>> of >>>> soccerbase.com) >>> >>>> Steve >>> >>> Soccerbase is notoriously inaccurate. >>> >>> Yeah naff, you're far more reliable. >> >> More so than you, it seems. Notice you've chosen not to back up your >> "Chelsea have spent �2bn" lie. Any reason? >> >>> GBU's hunch is absolutely spot >>> on - Utd have spent far more than Chelsea. >>> >>> Source for United and Chelsea's spending since 2007? >> >> Just look it up. >> >> >> I'm asking for 'your' source. >> >> >>> Since 2007, Chelsea have spent �94m, Utd have spent over �105m just on >>> the likes of Berbatov, Nani, Hargreaves, Anderson, the Silva brothers, >>> Valencia and Obertan. That isn't taking into account how much they >>> spent on Manucho, Kuszczak (sp?), Samlling, Diouf, Tosic, Ljajic, etc. >>> >>> So far I've only found figures for the entire premiership era: >>> >>> http://transferleague.co.uk/ >> >> Feel free to post anything you feel disproves the above. >> >> >> Right. So you just want to take a period where Chelsea have already spent >> well over half a billion quid and pat yourself on the back because they >> haven't spent any more. >> >> Well done. >> >> PMSL > > > LOL, I noticed that too...he should get a job in politics....he'd go a > long way. :) > A job in politics ... Le Dieu claimed they had spent less money in the period that was clearly specified in a post and it was shown that this was yet another on of his "facts" i.e. flat out wrong and you think graf should be the politician? What a strange little world you inhabit if you think that pointing out someone is wrong makes you LOL. |