Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:19 amby Tokyo Blue
Mase wrote:As I mentioned above, these turds voted for FFP. So they can get fucked now if they think we won't try and screw them like they tried to do us.
Because they voted for FFP, they have screwed themselves. We don't need to do anything.
Look at Everton. They finally get a rich owner and they can't spend any money due to the rules they themselves voted in specifically to stop us spending. Now they want to do it and they can't. It is very amusing.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 6:17 amby Abu Dhabi
Only 50% of the bigger domestic deal is distributed equally and people are putting their hands up because there is a suggestion to "only" distribute 65% of the foreign deal equally.
Am I the only want thinking that equal distribution just means keeping current order as it is? Wigan can over achieve in one year, and is not rewarded financially for it, finds it harder to repeat the run next year. United under achieves, doesnt get affected, give it another run next year. To be honest, I find it hurting competitiveness, not aiding it as being discussed.
I would structure the domestic and foreign deals similarly. 50% equal and 50% on merit. Nothing based on games broadcasting. That one is a farce.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:42 amby CrownPointBlue
Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:In life,in business,in almost anything, the most successful usually get the biggest rewards. Meritocracy !!
City ( HHSM ) have invested hugely to break the Sky 4 cartel,to improve the competitiveness of the PL,& to bring elite players & coaches to its benefit & to improve East Manchester.
No other club on the planet has the vision of ours.
If Burnley are more successful than Everton they deserve higher rewards. If we are more successful than Burnley & win the league we should get more than them & those who finished second. Meritocracy !!
Sunderland getting £100m for relegation & failure is what's wrong !!
City should protect their own interests cos we know from recent experience that most others will try to fuck us over.
Manchester - The City of CITY.
wasn't that long ago we were in sunderland's shoes
Beg pardon.
We never enjoyed the money Sunderland have had & WASTED,or been rewarded for failure,mismanagement & incompetence at the same financial level.
Fact.
The reason foreign owners have come in is not to win anything or contribute beneficially,it's to scrape 17th and collect £140 MILLION !!
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:31 amby Socrates
Abu Dhabi wrote:Only 50% of the bigger domestic deal is distributed equally and people are putting their hands up because there is a suggestion to "only" distribute 65% of the foreign deal equally.
Am I the only want thinking that equal distribution just means keeping current order as it is? Wigan can over achieve in one year, and is not rewarded financially for it, finds it harder to repeat the run next year. United under achieves, doesnt get affected, give it another run next year. To be honest, I find it hurting competitiveness, not aiding it as being discussed.
I would structure the domestic and foreign deals similarly. 50% equal and 50% on merit. Nothing based on games broadcasting. That one is a farce.
That's a really powerful case you've made there and I have to agree if every place in the table was worth a significant amount's difference (a simple formula based on 50% of everything would be 14 million per place) it would certainly motivate every club to play hard every game right to the end of the season and could actually increase competitiveness.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:06 amby Foreverinbluedreams
Abu Dhabi wrote:Only 50% of the bigger domestic deal is distributed equally and people are putting their hands up because there is a suggestion to "only" distribute 65% of the foreign deal equally.
.
I thought it was only 33% of the domestic deal that is currently divided equally.
Essentially the proposal is looking for the same to apply to the foreign deal.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:07 amby Nigels Tackle
CrownPointBlue wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:In life,in business,in almost anything, the most successful usually get the biggest rewards. Meritocracy !!
City ( HHSM ) have invested hugely to break the Sky 4 cartel,to improve the competitiveness of the PL,& to bring elite players & coaches to its benefit & to improve East Manchester.
No other club on the planet has the vision of ours.
If Burnley are more successful than Everton they deserve higher rewards. If we are more successful than Burnley & win the league we should get more than them & those who finished second. Meritocracy !!
Sunderland getting £100m for relegation & failure is what's wrong !!
City should protect their own interests cos we know from recent experience that most others will try to fuck us over.
Manchester - The City of CITY.
wasn't that long ago we were in sunderland's shoes
Beg pardon.
We never enjoyed the money Sunderland have had & WASTED,or been rewarded for failure,mismanagement & incompetence at the same financial level.
Fact.
The reason foreign owners have come in is not to win anything or contribute beneficially,it's to scrape 17th and collect £140 MILLION !!
sorry, you're 100% correct.
I must have imagined the early / mid 2000s when john wardle was lending his own money to the club to keep us afloat.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:37 amby Abu Dhabi
Socrates wrote:
That's a really powerful case you've made there and I have to agree if every place in the table was worth a significant amount's difference (a simple formula based on 50% of everything would be 14 million per place) it would certainly motivate every club to play hard every game right to the end of the season and could actually increase competitiveness.
I am a board member in a UAE league club, and believe me league position is something important, specially with those bonus based contracts for players.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:40 amby Abu Dhabi
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
I thought it was only 33% of the domestic deal that is currently divided equally.
Essentially the proposal is looking for the same to apply to the foreign deal.
As far as I can authenticate online, it is 50% equally, 25% on merit, and 25% facilty fee.
The proposal is nothing similar. It proposes 65% equally and 35% on merit.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:55 amby Foreverinbluedreams
Abu Dhabi wrote:Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
I thought it was only 33% of the domestic deal that is currently divided equally.
Essentially the proposal is looking for the same to apply to the foreign deal.
As far as I can authenticate online, it is 50% equally, 25% on merit, and 25% facilty fee.
The proposal is nothing similar. It proposes 65% equally and 35% on merit.
Yep, sorry, you're spot on. Don't know where I got the idea that just 33% was divided equally.
For me, the two deals should be treated equally in terms of how the money is divided up.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:41 amby littlebig
Don't know the intricacies of current structure and proposed one but my main concern would be the erosion of the competitiveness of the league. There is no league like it in the world (that I know of) where any team can beat any other, long may that continue.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:37 pmby Nickyboy
Abu Dhabi wrote:Only 50% of the bigger domestic deal is distributed equally and people are putting their hands up because there is a suggestion to "only" distribute 65% of the foreign deal equally.
Am I the only want thinking that equal distribution just means keeping current order as it is? Wigan can over achieve in one year, and is not rewarded financially for it, finds it harder to repeat the run next year. United under achieves, doesnt get affected, give it another run next year. To be honest, I find it hurting competitiveness, not aiding it as being discussed.
I would structure the domestic and foreign deals similarly. 50% equal and 50% on merit. Nothing based on games broadcasting. That one is a farce.
That is my thinking. Have a % of the total pot of revenue (domestic and foreign) that is split equally and the rest split depending on position finished. It rewards teams for finishing higher in the league and if one place in the league is worth millions then it keeps teams playing right up until week 38
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:34 pmby Tokyo Blue
Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:In life,in business,in almost anything, the most successful usually get the biggest rewards. Meritocracy !!
City ( HHSM ) have invested hugely to break the Sky 4 cartel,to improve the competitiveness of the PL,& to bring elite players & coaches to its benefit & to improve East Manchester.
No other club on the planet has the vision of ours.
If Burnley are more successful than Everton they deserve higher rewards. If we are more successful than Burnley & win the league we should get more than them & those who finished second. Meritocracy !!
Sunderland getting £100m for relegation & failure is what's wrong !!
City should protect their own interests cos we know from recent experience that most others will try to fuck us over.
Manchester - The City of CITY.
wasn't that long ago we were in sunderland's shoes
Beg pardon.
We never enjoyed the money Sunderland have had & WASTED,or been rewarded for failure,mismanagement & incompetence at the same financial level.
Fact.
The reason foreign owners have come in is not to win anything or contribute beneficially,it's to scrape 17th and collect £140 MILLION !!
sorry, you're 100% correct.
I must have imagined the early / mid 2000s when john wardle was lending his own money to the club to keep us afloat.
You must have also slept through the bit where we outspent virtually everyone in the late 70s and early 80s. I wish I had.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:53 pmby Peter Doherty (AGAIG)
Mase wrote:Everyone hates us so fuck it!! West Brom fans and the like booing Sterling last season for no reason? Sound, we'll take all your money then. Wankers.
Don't forger when we pull up the draw-bridge we'll be stuck inside the castle with the scum, the dippers, the tarquins and spuds. Now, that is one fucking stench you wouldn't want in your nostrils.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 4:43 pmby Dameerto
Abu Dhabi wrote:Socrates wrote:
That's a really powerful case you've made there and I have to agree if every place in the table was worth a significant amount's difference (a simple formula based on 50% of everything would be 14 million per place) it would certainly motivate every club to play hard every game right to the end of the season and could actually increase competitiveness.
I am a board member in a UAE league club, and believe me league position is something important, specially with those bonus based contracts for players.
That's what prize money is for - rewarding league finishing position. TV money should be for recognition of league appeal - which once again, isn't down to any one team but all of them. The domestic TV money should also be split 20 ways if we're going to make any changes to anything.
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:20 pmby Nickyboy
Dameerto wrote:Abu Dhabi wrote:Socrates wrote:
That's a really powerful case you've made there and I have to agree if every place in the table was worth a significant amount's difference (a simple formula based on 50% of everything would be 14 million per place) it would certainly motivate every club to play hard every game right to the end of the season and could actually increase competitiveness.
I am a board member in a UAE league club, and believe me league position is something important, specially with those bonus based contracts for players.
That's what prize money is for - rewarding league finishing position. TV money should be for recognition of league appeal - which once again, isn't down to any one team but all of them. The domestic TV money should also be split 20 ways if we're going to make any changes to anything.
Isn't the prize money funded by the UK TV revenue?
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:52 pmby Dameerto
Nickyboy wrote:Dameerto wrote:Abu Dhabi wrote:Socrates wrote:
That's a really powerful case you've made there and I have to agree if every place in the table was worth a significant amount's difference (a simple formula based on 50% of everything would be 14 million per place) it would certainly motivate every club to play hard every game right to the end of the season and could actually increase competitiveness.
I am a board member in a UAE league club, and believe me league position is something important, specially with those bonus based contracts for players.
That's what prize money is for - rewarding league finishing position. TV money should be for recognition of league appeal - which once again, isn't down to any one team but all of them. The domestic TV money should also be split 20 ways if we're going to make any changes to anything.
Isn't the prize money funded by the UK TV revenue?
Not that I know of. Why would it be? It often gets talked about in the same sentence by the media, maybe that's why you're thinking it?
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:28 pmby CrownPointBlue
Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:CrownPointBlue wrote:In life,in business,in almost anything, the most successful usually get the biggest rewards. Meritocracy !!
City ( HHSM ) have invested hugely to break the Sky 4 cartel,to improve the competitiveness of the PL,& to bring elite players & coaches to its benefit & to improve East Manchester.
No other club on the planet has the vision of ours.
If Burnley are more successful than Everton they deserve higher rewards. If we are more successful than Burnley & win the league we should get more than them & those who finished second. Meritocracy !!
Sunderland getting £100m for relegation & failure is what's wrong !!
City should protect their own interests cos we know from recent experience that most others will try to fuck us over.
Manchester - The City of CITY.
wasn't that long ago we were in sunderland's shoes
Beg pardon.
We never enjoyed the money Sunderland have had & WASTED,or been rewarded for failure,mismanagement & incompetence at the same financial level.
Fact.
The reason foreign owners have come in is not to win anything or contribute beneficially,it's to scrape 17th and collect £140 MILLION !!
sorry, you're 100% correct.
I must have imagined the early / mid 2000s when john wardle was lending his own money to the club to keep us afloat.
Cheers....John not only lent the club money interest free,he sold his shares to Shaskin for less than cost.
John & David Makin should have statues in gold on the forecourt They really saved the club !!
Re: TV money
Posted:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:36 pmby Abu Dhabi
Dameerto wrote:Nickyboy wrote:Isn't the prize money funded by the UK TV revenue?
Not that I know of. Why would it be? It often gets talked about in the same sentence by the media, maybe that's why you're thinking it?
It actually is. What else would it be?
Re: TV money
Posted:
Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:22 amby Dameerto
Abu Dhabi wrote:Dameerto wrote:Nickyboy wrote:Isn't the prize money funded by the UK TV revenue?
Not that I know of. Why would it be? It often gets talked about in the same sentence by the media, maybe that's why you're thinking it?
It actually is. What else would it be?
Premier League revenue in all it's forms - so sponsorship amongst other things.