only1salty wrote: ↑Mon Oct 12, 2020 1:26 pm
Just to add - giving the Big 6 the ability to have special status includes the ability for them to veto the sale of any other member club. Just think about that for a second. It would have meant that the top 6 teams at the time could have banned Abramovic from taking over at Chelsea
Of course. It is protectionism of the most blatant kind. As are the various FFP rules and regulations.
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
The top 6 trying to get themselves more power by using Covid and the story about funding the EFL as a cover. Who knew they would stoop so low....wait a minute.
The only people I have little sympathy for is the PL. They created this monster and now they are moaning the big 6 want more.
The top 6 trying to get themselves more power by using Covid and the story about funding the EFL as a cover. Who knew they would stoop so low....wait a minute.
The only people I have little sympathy for is the PL. They created this monster and now they are moaning the big 6 want more.
Bloody ridiculous that anyone is talking about funding anybody imo. Of course many clubs in the Championship are struggling financially, but have any of them approached their playing staffs to suggest salary reductions ? Apparently Stoke City, to name one, have 9 players on the books who earn salaries in excess of £2.5 million p.a. Why should they be "funded" by the Premier League, the government or anyone else. ?
A football club relies on income, of course it does. But there is absolutely no rule, written or unwritten, that demands there have to be 92 full time professional clubs in England and a good many more outside the league structure. In my experience in any business propping up the weak and inefficient is a surefire route to ruin. Apparently the owners of Barnsley, to name one club, have wealth measured in billions. Why should they expect to be bailed out or financially supported by others ? I have much more sympathy with the volunteers who run clubs lower down the pyramid who in many cases make football accessible to kids in whatever town they are operating in up and down the country.
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
9898 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 12, 2020 4:12 pm
Football fans are so gullible.
Notice talk of PPV matches gone away with this announcement.
There was never any new talk of PPV matches. We have had PPV on football for years and this week the govt forced the broadcasters to cover all matches but other than that business as usual so not sure why that makes football fans gullible.
The top 6 trying to get themselves more power by using Covid and the story about funding the EFL as a cover. Who knew they would stoop so low....wait a minute.
The only people I have little sympathy for is the PL. They created this monster and now they are moaning the big 6 want more.
Bloody ridiculous that anyone is talking about funding anybody imo. Of course many clubs in the Championship are struggling financially, but have any of them approached their playing staffs to suggest salary reductions ? Apparently Stoke City, to name one, have 9 players on the books who earn salaries in excess of £2.5 million p.a. Why should they be "funded" by the Premier League, the government or anyone else. ?
A football club relies on income, of course it does. But there is absolutely no rule, written or unwritten, that demands there have to be 92 full time professional clubs in England and a good many more outside the league structure. In my experience in any business propping up the weak and inefficient is a surefire route to ruin. Apparently the owners of Barnsley, to name one club, have wealth measured in billions. Why should they expect to be bailed out or financially supported by others ? I have much more sympathy with the volunteers who run clubs lower down the pyramid who in many cases make football accessible to kids in whatever town they are operating in up and down the country.
Bloody ridiculous that anyone is talking about funding anybody imo. Of course many clubs in the Championship are struggling financially, but have any of them approached their playing staffs to suggest salary reductions ? Apparently Stoke City, to name one, have 9 players on the books who earn salaries in excess of £2.5 million p.a. Why should they be "funded" by the Premier League, the government or anyone else. ?
A football club relies on income, of course it does. But there is absolutely no rule, written or unwritten, that demands there have to be 92 full time professional clubs in England and a good many more outside the league structure. In my experience in any business propping up the weak and inefficient is a surefire route to ruin. Apparently the owners of Barnsley, to name one club, have wealth measured in billions. Why should they expect to be bailed out or financially supported by others ? I have much more sympathy with the volunteers who run clubs lower down the pyramid who in many cases make football accessible to kids in whatever town they are operating in up and down the country.
As I've already said this idea is dead already. With 14 votes from the 20 members required for any changes to the structure of the PL it's a complete non starter.
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
Do some research..It`s all about the big 6 taking control and making even more money.They want to turn it into a cartel.
PL at 18 is great. Get rid of the Norwich, Fulham types who come up with no real intention of moving on, just a quick money snatch.
Get rid of the ridiculous League Cup and Charity Shield.
Taking power away from the PL.
That's just for starters.
What utter crap!
Do your research numbers ffs.REALLY..This is your reason?
