How Standard Chartered Can Rescue Its Disastrous Deal With Liverpool F.C.

[Fierce]

Anyone could suggest that - why drag Standard Chartered into it? Just because they sponsor the club? SBOBet were hardly going to advise West Ham when they were ****ed.

Have you actually read the article?

I think its less to do with the fact that they sponsor us, and more to do with the fact that they're well, y'know, an INVESTMENT BANK

That article is **** though. It doesn't actually say anything. All it does is suggest that SC must be absolutely gutted to be sponsoring such a **** and troubled team. It uses SC as a name drop to make the authors suggestions more credible, then pops a little caveat on the end about how SC 'could' handle a part of it.

[el matador]

Madrid and Barca are run via the fan ownership model, arent they?

The same Barca who have massive debts and the same Madrid who had to sell their training ground to the council due to impending financial meltdown.

so according to this logic then only clubs with sugar daddies can operate at the top levels of football.

we currently pay ridiculous amounts on interest payments and the club runs on about a £40m per season profitability all of which is swallowed up by interest loan repayments.

we buy out the americans and the club as no debt. then the £40m we make a season can be put towards transfers etc. we keep the current admin setup who have done a fab job

debt free we can ask the banks to lend us £300m foa a new stadium which will virtually double our matchday revenue and add another £25m or so the the profits.

the repayments will be £15m per season, we sell the naming rights and generate another £10m plus per season.

the key thingv is to be debt free before the stadium begins otherwise we will just end up strangling the club, but as long as you have clever people running the club unlike the self proclaimed messiahs of madrid and barcelona the fans ownership can work.

but how do you raise £280m in the first place ?

[destinydude]

Craig, why do you think the fan ownership wont work?

Yes Real and Barca are in debt but that's only because of their inane buying policy.

We generate around 175m pounds every year and the board who is elected by the fans will do their best to run the club from that 175m.

It'll work, esp in England where the finances are more transparent and the president isn't someone who is a nutter.

[CJ]

i dont know if it would work but can you point me to one club where it has worked?

[destinydude]

i dont know if it would work but can you point me to one club where it has worked?

Most of the German clubs are 51% fan owned. It works well for them. The only bad examples are Real and Barca and that's because they are the only ones that fight for the title there and it's more abt the prestige than football there in Spain.

For eg; Bayern Munich is a membership-based club with more than 152,000 members

[dww]

Most of the German clubs are 51% fan owned. It works well for them. The only bad examples are Real and Barca and that's because they are the only ones that fight for the title there and it's more abt the prestige than football there in Spain.

For eg; Bayern Munich is a membership-based club with more than 152,000 members

The thing is though that the existing model were put in place in a time/league where clubs were not the vast financial institutions they are now. The problems with implementing them now is the need for us to raise at least ~£150m and that wouldn't even get the fans a controlling stake. We know we need investment in the squad so in fact we would probably have to stump up another £50m.

If we want the whole club we need >£350m probably.

Even if we got the cash we would have to organise voting rights etc. Because clubs with this tradition have had them for many years people are used to them and have accepted them. Getting it to work from nothing would be very difficult.

I'm not against the idea in principle but a/ you need some very wealthy fans of which we have seen no sign in two takeover processes and b/ a very well coordinated plan.

I also don't think it is the panacea that some make out. Obviously the financial problems (which seem to largely have been escaped by a combination of corruption and local banks good will) which even the massive clubs like Barca and Real have had show this. The German league whilst held up as great for fans has suffered for many years comparative to the other big leagues as they have struggled to invest in players partly due to their ownership structures.

Obviously anything is better than what we have now but I'd bet against fan ownership and I'm not sure it's absence is entirely a bad thing.

[Will]

Madrid and Barca are run via the fan ownership model, arent they?

The same Barca who have massive debts and the same Madrid who had to sell their training ground to the council due to impending financial meltdown.

I see your point. However, this is the same Barca that spend £70 and £80million a season on transfers. The same Real who spend £200mill here and £300mill there. I think Real sold off their training ground just after the "galactico" era, Zidane, Ronaldo etc. Both of them clubs spend stupid ammounts of money on transfers. I wouldn't see us spending anywhere near those sort of figures, tho we would be spending more than the current bunch do! Real got a £300million loan and pissed it up the wall and won ****all. I have a feeling we would be far more sensable than that.

[Craig_H]

so according to this logic then only clubs with sugar daddies can operate at the top levels of football.

we currently pay ridiculous amounts on interest payments and the club runs on about a £40m per season profitability all of which is swallowed up by interest loan repayments.

we buy out the americans and the club as no debt. then the £40m we make a season can be put towards transfers etc. we keep the current admin setup who have done a fab job

debt free we can ask the banks to lend us £300m foa a new stadium which will virtually double our matchday revenue and add another £25m or so the the profits.

the repayments will be £15m per season, we sell the naming rights and generate another £10m plus per season.

the key thingv is to be debt free before the stadium begins otherwise we will just end up strangling the club, but as long as you have clever people running the club unlike the self proclaimed messiahs of madrid and barcelona the fans ownership can work.

but how do you raise £280m in the first place ?

We pay stupid interest and are ****ed, because we were bought entirely via borrowings and debt. Not because we dont have fan ownership.

And yes, as is proving to be the case, the clubs most likely to compete at the top, are those with billionaire benefactors. Correct.

as long as you have clever people running the club unlike the self proclaimed messiahs of madrid and barcelona the fans ownership can work.

Clever enough to have Barca in unprecedented levels of debt, and clever enough to see Madrid forced into selling off the training ground. If Madrid werent the King's club, they'd be out of business now.

[Craig_H]

I see your point. However, this is the same Barca that spend £70 and £80million a season on transfers. The same Real who spend £200mill here and £300mill there. I think Real sold off their training ground just after the "galactico" era, Zidane, Ronaldo etc. Both of them clubs spend stupid ammounts of money on transfers. I wouldn't see us spending anywhere near those sort of figures, tho we would be spending more than the current bunch do! Real got a £300million loan and pissed it up the wall and won ****all. I have a feeling we would be far more sensable than that.

Have Madrid spent £200m-£300m on transfers every year since they were under fan ownership? Have Barca spent £70m and £80m each year since they've been under fan ownership?

And are they net figures? I suspect the answer to every question there, would be no.

You also neglect to mention the fact that Madrid and Barcelona both have independent TV deals and make far more rights revenues than we could ever hope to generate, with the collective nature of the PL deal. Not to mention having far bigger stadia, more matchday income and more ST holders.

[destinydude]

Have Madrid spent £200m-£300m on transfers every year since they were under fan ownership? Have Barca spent £70m and £80m each year since they've been under fan ownership?

And are they net figures? I suspect the answer to every question there, would be no.

You also neglect to mention the fact that Madrid and Barcelona both have independent TV deals and make far more rights revenues than we could ever hope to generate, with the collective nature of the PL deal. Not to mention having far bigger stadia, more matchday income and more ST holders.

Come on Craig. We get ~170m and we spend about ~110m on wages now. Where's the rest of the money going? It can definitely be used for player transfers, new training grounds, reserves etc.

[Craig_H]

When you use vague expressions like 'we get' and what not, it clouds the issue somewhat. If you have valid figures for our turnover and expenditure, i'd certainly be keen to read them and see the details.

[destinydude]

Also, I think we can get around 100,000 members at least given our global appeal. Heck Bayern have 150k+ so, add our global support to that and we can get around that number too.

And while I agree that not everyone is rich, we could rate a share at 5,000 and let the fans buy it in 3-5yrs in paid investments and that would amount to around 750m. That let us buy the club+ build a stadium in those 3-5 yrs.

And once you've build that new stadium, Our match day revenue which is around ~42m a yr will get to ~85m a year taking into account that we aren't based in cities like London or Manchester.[Arsenal get~94m and Utd ~100m]. So, effectively our yearly revenues can touch ~220m. That's a heck lot of a money to run a football club. Bayern generate around ~280m euros and aren't they properly run? They are partly fan owned. In fact their majority is fan owned.

[CJ]

Come on Craig. We get ~170m and we spend about ~110m on wages now. Where's the rest of the money going? It can definitely be used for player transfers, new training grounds, reserves etc.

so we have no expenditure other than wages?

whatabout other staffs wages ie non footballers

the utilitiy bills

the bills it bills

the tax

and that is nowhere near all the costs we will have, lawyers accountants benifits etc etc etc

[Craig_H]

Also, I think we can get around 100,000 members at least given our global appeal. Heck Bayern have 150k+ so, add our global support to that and we can get around that number too.

And while I agree that not everyone is rich, we could rate a share at 5,000 and let the fans buy it in 3-5yrs in paid investments and that would amount to around 750m. That let us buy the club+ build a stadium in those 3-5 yrs.

And once you've build that new stadium, Our match day revenue which is around ~42m a yr will get to ~85m a year taking into account that we aren't based in cities like London or Manchester.[Arsenal get~94m and Utd ~100m]. So, effectively our yearly revenues can touch ~220m. That's a heck lot of a money to run a football club. Bayern generate around ~280m euros and aren't they properly run? They are partly fan owned. In fact their majority is fan owned.

So you're asking the fans to pay £5k each - the vast majority wont be able to afford this. And if you allow them to pay it over 3-5 years, what does the club do in the meantime, while it's waiting for this money to come in and has expenses to pay now?

I'm also interested in how you substatiate those figures you've quoted. If this was Dragon's Den, Bannatyne would've destroyed you

[destinydude]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8541445.stm

1) Real Madrid: 401.4m euros
2) Barcelona: 365.9m euros
3) Man Utd: 327m euros
4) Bayern Munich: 289.5m euros
5) Arsenal: 263m euros
6) Chelsea: 242.3m
7) Liverpool: 217m euros
8) Juventus: 202.3m euros
9) Inter Milan 196.5m euros
10) AC Milan: 196.5.m euros
Source: Deloitte: 2008/09