Thermopylae 15,286 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 Given the poor results by all SPL clubs is the real agenda who can be the first to get a genuine oligarch on board? Can you imagine the impact that having real money to spend in the goldfish bowl of Scottish football would have ... I just hope it's us and not them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUE CYCLOPS 26 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 The SPL is not an attractive investment opportunity for anyone. If I had to put my head on a block though, I,d say that we are a better bet to attract some international buyer. Celtic suffer from the same problem that we had for many years when we weren,t signing Catholics. We were eliminating a large constituency of potential players from our pool. In an investment situation, Celtic cannot ,and will not, risk selling to anyone outside the "Sellik minded" in case it dilutes the "historical associations" of the club. What businessman will want to be associated with a club which has a "speshul relationship" with Irish republicanism? Celtic are a closed shop as far as the open market is concerned. Their only hope is an Irish American who has already bought in to the whole Irish myth. We are not a good bet either, but at least our options are wider than theirs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommy2212 151 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 the thing is who is daft enough to spend the money in scotland say £25million a season - you would never get it back in that one season and in turn is how debt arises - even if we won the champions league + tv rights , treble , tv from setanta , merchadise , ticket sales and a few other bits and bobs - i think you may just break even. but liverpool spend "£25 million on one player - why because of the sky deal and not because of their owners - we are a plc club - that means it's strictly business in my eyes. the only way we can raise extra cash to invest in the team is to -- 1. somehow get into england. 2. the intial investment a new owner would have but would be a one time thing. 3. expand our brand in the far east and the states similar to what celtic have been trying - but this would put a burden on our first team. 4.go for a barcalona type ownership for rangers - where its the fans that come up with the goods. IMO which is :cobblers: by the way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearsrus 12 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 The SPL is not an attractive investment opportunity for anyone. If I had to put my head on a block though, I,d say that we are a better bet to attract some international buyer. Celtic suffer from the same problem that we had for many years when we weren,t signing Catholics. We were eliminating a large constituency of potential players from our pool. In an investment situation, Celtic cannot ,and will not, risk selling to anyone outside the "Sellik minded" in case it dilutes the "historical associations" of the club. What businessman will want to be associated with a club which has a "speshul relationship" with Irish republicanism? Celtic are a closed shop as far as the open market is concerned. Their only hope is an Irish American who has already bought in to the whole Irish myth. We are not a good bet either, but at least our options are wider than theirs. are you for real? celtic have wiped the floor with us regarding marketing and branding on a global scale, they have got their feet in the door of important global markets such as East Asia and North America whereas we have been left standing because SDM could'nt market a fucking fruit stall in a fruit market, and unfortunately for us, those mhanky bastards are far more of an attractive investment than we are at this point in time, also they are not running debts anywhere near the value of ours, no one with a modicome of knowledge about finance would touch us with a barge pole which is why our situation is not going to change anytime soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? No, i mean take stock brokers and that, they could earn a company £100 million.. doesn't mean they are worth it.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? No, i mean take stock brokers and that, they could earn a company £100 million.. doesn't mean they are worth it.. How though? Imagine you worked your titties clean off to consolidate a deal that earned your company £100m, I wonder if you'd still be saying that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfish51 0 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? Exactly, people complain about the crzy money footballers earn but at the end of the day they make the clubs a lot of money so why should they not get a large chunk of it. A good example is David Beckham LA Galaxy pay him a fortune but he makes them more than he gets. We should of tried to get him to Rangers, think of the shirt sales Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearsrus 12 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? No, i mean take stock brokers and that, they could earn a company £100 million.. doesn't mean they are worth it.. stockbrokers earning excessive profits for their company's get massive bonuses, and if you earned your boss 100mill in the city, you would be looking at around 500k-1mill for doing so. you are worth what your company sees fit in this world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I hate the fact that football has turned into some mass money making market just like everything else in the world. PLAYERS are not worth £100k a week or £50 million, no matter who they are. NO ONE is worth that much. Transfer fee's should be held down by a new rule, max you can pay for players is £500k and max wage should be like £5k a week.. Why should footballers get so much more than people who do much better jobs? Because people are willing to pay. People say that players aren't worth £10m etc, but I always remember one really good example. Barcelona v Valencia about 7 years ago. The winner went into the Champions League, and what a game that was. Rivaldo scored a hat-trick including an overhead kick from outside the box in the last minute to win it 4-3 for Barca, getting them into the CL. Does that make him worth the £10m+ he single handedly earned the club in that game? No, i mean take stock brokers and that, they could earn a company £100 million.. doesn't mean they are worth it.. stockbrokers earning excessive profits for their company's get massive bonuses, and if you earned your boss 100mill in the city, you would be looking at around 500k-1mill for doing so. you are worth what your company sees fit in this world. Sure.. I just hate the way the world is run on money. Big shame, especially when some people out there will do ANYTHING for money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 How though? Imagine you worked your titties clean off to consolidate a deal that earned your company £100m, I wonder if you'd still be saying that. I'd never consider myself worht £100m Human lives are priceless in all technicality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 How though? Imagine you worked your titties clean off to consolidate a deal that earned your company £100m, I wonder if you'd still be saying that. I'd never consider myself worht £100m Human lives are priceless in all technicality. £100m seems like a bargain then. I'd take it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 How though? Imagine you worked your titties clean off to consolidate a deal that earned your company £100m, I wonder if you'd still be saying that. I'd never consider myself worht £100m Human lives are priceless in all technicality. £100m seems like a bargain then. I'd take it you'll pay £100m for me.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 How though? Imagine you worked your titties clean off to consolidate a deal that earned your company £100m, I wonder if you'd still be saying that. I'd never consider myself worht £100m Human lives are priceless in all technicality. £100m seems like a bargain then. I'd take it you'll pay £100m for me.. Since it's you McBoyd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUE CYCLOPS 26 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 are you for real? celtic have wiped the floor with us regarding marketing and branding on a global scale, they have got their feet in the door of important global markets such as East Asia and North America whereas we have been left standing because SDM could'nt market a fucking fruit stall in a fruit market, and unfortunately for us, those mhanky bastards are far more of an attractive investment than we are at this point in time, also they are not running debts anywhere near the value of ours, no one with a modicome of knowledge about finance would touch us with a barge pole which is why our situation is not going to change anytime soon. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you read the first post properly, you will see that the point was ----how it would change the SPL if one of the OF were bought out by a millionaire sugar-daddy ala,Abromovich. If you had read my answer properly, you would have seen that I admitted that no-one would invest in the SPL but, IF ANY ONE DID, we would be more likely to attract a buyer than Celtic. Celtic are a one issue,one policy, one history club and will never alllow control of the club to go outside the Sellk/Irish Mafia. That in itself, reduces their pool of potential buyers. The present financial performance of the clubs doesn,t enter into the discussion, although I doubt if Celtic are as far ahead of us as they would have you believe. Celtic are the biggest arse-lickers in the game, continually hyping themselves up and forming "speshul relationships" with other big clubs to try and get into the gang by the back door. The gang aren,t fooled. Just ask yourself, who was elected onto UEFA,s controlling body? The self styled 5th. biggest club in the world with a new advertising system. or the poverty stricken Rangers? NUF said? Your problem is , you have been sucked into Liewells zero sum game. (Celtic keep telling everyone how good they are, so we must be bad) Celtic are ahead of us in marketing true but in world terms, they are still 2nd rate,just like us. Lasr season Liwell told us that Celtic are now one of the 5 biggest clubs in the world. Last week he told us that their new advertising board system positioned them with the major clubs in Europe. I wonder why Strachan was complaining yesterday about Spurs (a mid table club) pricing Celtic out of the market and Celtic can,t compete at that level. I agree with your point about SDM. He has lost the heart for the battle, and that is not going to change anytime soon but don,t extrapolate that to mean that Celtic are a better buy than us. Truth is, we,re both sh*t! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighlandBear 1 Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 celtic have wiped the floor with us regarding marketing and branding on a global scale, they have got their feet in the door of important global markets such as East Asia and North America whereas we have been left standing because SDM could'nt market a fucking fruit stall in a fruit market, Sad, but true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts