by Forza It Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:54 pm
toon h wrote:It is very easy to indicate that this goes against Chelsea, but it seems also to benefit some clubs that are genuinely working on a balanced budget. My home club, De Graafschap was relegated two years ago for the simple reason that the board did not think it wise to spend money that they didn't have, whereas other clubs in the same league situation were piling up the debt. The debts mount up until some (usually local) government institution needs to bail the club out (in the general public interest) with some property deal or other and they can start all over again overspending. The board of football clubs are just not responsable in that respect and only spend money so they can be elected (the same way some politicians like Reagan and Major in the 80's could push through some popular tax and spending reforms while piling up the external debt, leaving the problems for the future political leaders of different parties usually).
In Spain this situation is also quite clear, where clubs that are trying to curb spending in order to survive find it increasingly difficult to compete (Espanyol for example) whereas big clubs with big local political backing like Real Madrid and even Barcelona can afford to run up hundreds of millions of debt and expect the public to bail them out at one point or another.
Quite right.
It is a problem everywhere…in Serie A it is a big problem and it is finding its way into the Prem.
Fiscal responsibility is at a premium. How can a club like Chelsea sustain itself in a few years – as the Kenyon rhetoric has us believe – when they are operating at a loss that would liquidate some medium-sized clubs??
That goes for many…look at Arsenal or Man U…look at the massive debt they have…Roma went through a similar process that Arsenal is going through now. Their debts have been “spread out.”
Milan have not been the best at budget-watching but they are starting to take small steps. This season the squad was trimmed down to just 24 players. That is the first team squad. That is why everyone was shocked that Milan did not buy blithely. There is a reason for that. Berlusconi steps in every two summers and helps out with a purchase. Patronage should have limits too.
Contrast that with Inter (Moratti and a huge squad) or Udinese (a few years back they started with a 51-member(!!) first team squad).
Why not keep the wage bill at 65% of the revenue? Surely smart businesses operate under sensible parameters.
Home
) is quite tempting.
why mention real madrid when the earlier bit would have been so much funnier without a mention of that name
Millwall's players would be on about £2 a year.