I think we should rig the 500 club and buy the club ourselves
I think we should rig the 500 club and buy the club ourselves
You make some good points Plague.Originally Posted by plague
The current costs of running a HAL club are such that it limits ownership to the top echelon of wealth in this country. Unfortunately most in this bracket have little interest in the game and are not passionate enough about it or you find one like Sage who is passionate but clueless.
Splitting the ownership up amongst a few parties may at least find us the people who have a passion for the game and can afford to piss 200k up against a wall a season having a 20% stake in the 1 million debt as opposed to not wanting 100% the 1 million debt.
End result is we are getting the better quality candidate in the picture ie people who care for the game
Foreign Clubs have had plenty of opportunity in the past to invest in foreign clubs. Reality with it is it ain't there interest. Even Wenger was blabbering some shit the other week about Arsenal being all about Arsenal and not interested in the club buying another club even if it could be used as a source to blood players.
Most of these arrangements are so heavily geared in favour of the big club anyway who just poach any notable talent that comes from the feeder club for less than market value anyway and they are prone to abandoning the feeder club without a care in the world when it serves them no purpose.
Forgot about the Gypo pair Arnie and Slater at Northern Spirit getting burnt
So... how is that different to any HAL club NOT owned by a foreign entity? They all get screwed over, the all lose best players for less than market value. The only example I can think of where that hasn't happened is Milligan at MV and his form was pretty shit after that fell through, so MV might be regretting not buckling under pressure back then.
We are a league made up entirely of feeder clubs. Anyone who thinks we aren't at present is deluded. And that really SHOULD be the financial sustainability model for clubs here until the sport starts dominating media market share or foreign investment takes over.
Salary cap needs to be locked in.
Clubs should be encouraged to invest in academies and start producing talent.
Then let the "home grown" players not count fully to the salary cap.
Clubs become financially stable by selling players they produce.
Isn't the salary cap locked in for the next 2-3 years post CBA? And doesn't the TV money cover the entire cap? Unless I've misunderstood all of the stuff about that in the past...?
agreed
Clubs shouldn't have to be encouraged to do that. It should be a given.
Problem is clubs can't do that at present without creating an additional expense on top of the existing 1-2 million a year they are blowing. Unfortunately the salary cap is far too high and out of whack with the income the clubs are making
Clubs getting ripped off is mainly down to their own inability to negotiate. Look at our CEO He gives Ryan Griff away and then sells a promising striker who has just been to the WC and bagged the golden boot award last season for 400k tops as that was the most HE agreed when signing this blokes contract. Middleby is not alone here as the rest of the clubs ain't much better
The issue with a foreign club owning the club is the complete lack of long term loyalty to the Aussie club. Very easy for them to **** the club up enough and send them extinct by walking out the door cause after all there number one priority is to their own interest.
Nothing wrong with foreign ownership ie some Foreign Rich Bloke as such.
Have big issues with clubs doing what Man City are doing with Heart.
Its all good in the honeymoon period with leads to problems eventually when the flow of money is reduced.
Good news is Heart were already a basket case. A couple of years of City running the show may be enough to kick start enough interest in the club to be able to survive with Man City walking out which is in this situation a better scenario than what would have occurred with the direction Heart were going on there own
Big rich Club walking away and leaving the club high and dry could be negated by FFA making big rich club have an insurance bucket that the FFA/club can use when the big guys leave town.
If get bought by Leicester, I only hope the FFA make Leicester sit 10million aside in a trust so that if they bail/go bankrupt, the club has operating monies. Leicester could keep the trust if they sell to another owner who then pays the same trust etc.
Is that what the Tinkler/knights/members group shirt fight was about?
Glad I still got my old away shirt from 2012/2013 then!
Newcastle United.... I could probably deal if we had to use that name
Away strip, whoo. Their third strip has green in it as well, methinks.
Nope, GK kit is green.
Surely Newcastle United's owner is a stable bloke and understands the importance of history to a club
The Championship Chronicles - The Jetstream's review of the 2007/08 season. www.newcastlefootball.net/chronicles
The knights had to have a bank guarantee, so not quite like a trust with cash sitting in it, but the purpose was the same as you're getting at.
I personally like the sound of a german club if it was one that was not wholly privately held, as they might be open to allowing the fans taking a share of the club Blackmac style.
You do realise that clause was included in the new 1 year extended contract the club got taggart to sign in November 2013, he originally signed a 2 year deal in march 2012, meaning if they had not signed the bloke to the extension he would have been out the door on a free transfer. Taggz was always going to be looking to move at the first chance he got, by getting an extension with that ceiling guaranteed that we'd make money and retain a good player, hardly the worst deal going around.
Surely Newcastle United's owner is a stable bloke and understands the importance of history to a club
You do realise that as Taggz was under the age of 23 the Jets are according to FIFA rules entitled to a training compensation fee anyway regardless of whether Taggz was under contract or not????? So it ain't like he would have walked out for nothing anyway
Bet you our club had NFI on that
Why exactly is everyone happy we sold the bloke and only got 400k or so for it?? The club negotiated this deal at a time he had just scored a few goals last season. No one at the time was predicting golden boot and World Cup for the kid. It was only the fact that these things happened the interest to leave would have been spiked.
To me it is a pretty poor decision to agree a stipulation in a deal like that at all particularly for a bloke who plays a position that goes for big $$ in transfer fees anyway and even more so when everyone could see the kid had talent and it would be a matter of time before it was fulfilled.
Hope there will be a spare sit for him in bay 60Surely Newcastle United's owner is a stable bloke and understands the importance of history to a club
It's absolute impossible to speculate on the negotiation of players contracts, what's to say Taggart would have accepted the contract if the $400k ceiling was not in the contract. You don't know what negotiated behind close doors so speculating about it is pointless.
Oh FYI Melbourne City are not own buy Manchester City. Both clubs are owned by Sheik Mansour.
I'd bet they had a better understanding and realised that $400k Australian is still better than at best $40,000 US per year of training as per FIFA's regulations, so basically what you would rather have had Middleby do was actually wait and let him leave on a free transfer missing out on a $400k transfer fee plus any additional training compensation so that the club could scoop up that awesome life changing $80k USD.
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...ionperiods.pdf
Which is precisely why they moved to extend his contract, it wasn't the worst deal going about but generally if as you say it was just a matter of time, why would it be smarter to refuse any transfer caps and have the bloke walk away in a couple of months time.
Last edited by Pico; 23-08-2014 at 07:02 PM.
Melbourne city is owned 80% by man City, 20% by consortium that owns Melbourne storm.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote