The Randy way or Citeh's Trillions ?

[Chris Smith]

I'm not so sure.  Our wagebill is high in relation to our turnover, but not unsustainable in so far as selling 1 top earner wouldn't have a significant impact towards bringing it back into line.  We've also just got a good sponsorship deal, so even if it stayed as it was it would fall in relation to turnover.  I also think that Randy's thinking in the whole 'buy to sell' philosophy is as much to do with long term stability as it is immediate freeing of wages for this summer's arrivals.

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

It isn't only about wage bills. You specifically mentioned if the owners walked away.

We're in debt to Randy by a large amount of money. He's pumped lots and lots of money into the club in the last four years, for which we're grateful, but that doesn't change the fact that he's put the money in, and it will need to be repaid at some point.

We're not as much at risk as Man City would be, not at all, but we'd still be in big, big trouble.

This talk of owners wlaking away confuses me. How can they from something they own? They'd have to find somebody to buy it off them, at which point what they've put in gets repaid. I reckon Randy will find it easier to find somebody richer than him to sell to than Man City's owners will.

[Concrete John]

I'm not so sure.  Our wagebill is high in relation to our turnover, but not unsustainable in so far as selling 1 top earner wouldn't have a significant impact towards bringing it back into line.  We've also just got a good sponsorship deal, so even if it stayed as it was it would fall in relation to turnover.  I also think that Randy's thinking in the whole 'buy to sell' philosophy is as much to do with long term stability as it is immediate freeing of wages for this summer's arrivals.

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

It isn't only about wage bills. You specifically mentioned if the owners walked away.

We're in debt to Randy by a large amount of money. He's pumped lots and lots of money into the club in the last four years, for which we're grateful, but that doesn't change the fact that he's put the money in, and it will need to be repaid at some point.

We're not as much at risk as Man City would be, not at all, but we'd still be in big, big trouble.

Very true, but the debt is interest free at the moment, isn't it?  And as I was arguing in the 'How much are we worth' thread, it would be taken into account by any new owners when valuing the club.  I suppose it would be a matter of how any deal was structured, but I don't think Randy would have sanctioned it were it not sustainable for the club.

[dave.woodhall]

Personally I hope pop gorges itself and the arse falls out of the Sky phenomenon. It will take something like subscriptions to be down for that to occur -not entirely unthinkable in the PC age where games can be watched for a fraction of the price online (and in most cases free).

The repercussions could be serious -for most clubs. But it might just take something drastic for the game to get it's house in order.

We thought that about ITV digital. What really happened was that the big clubs hardly blinked and it was the small ones which suffered. I have a horrible feeling that if Sky did similar the really big clubs would be fine and the Villa-sized ones would be in trouble.

[eastie]

Spend, spend spend!

[WA Villan]

Let the premiership go bankrupt, get rid of sky, introduce salary caps, and legal action against players who break contracts.
Invest in British players, academys, limit foreign players.

[Chris Harte]

Invest in British players, academys, limit foreign players.

I love it, but EU employment law would scupper the last bit.

[Concrete John]

Personally I hope pop gorges itself and the arse falls out of the Sky phenomenon. It will take something like subscriptions to be down for that to occur -not entirely unthinkable in the PC age where games can be watched for a fraction of the price online (and in most cases free).

The repercussions could be serious -for most clubs. But it might just take something drastic for the game to get it's house in order.

We thought that about ITV digital. What really happened was that the big clubs hardly blinked and it was the small ones which suffered. I have a horrible feeling that if Sky did similar the really big clubs would be fine and the Villa-sized ones would be in trouble.

I think all every club suffered, except for those in the PL and those recently out of it, who were still benefiting financially from being in it?  So if the scenario were to happen, what PL club could absorb such a big chunk of their income disappearing?  Even CL money is relatively small in comparison to the Sky TV deal, so only those with ridiculous rich owners, so Chelsea and Man City, would not feel the pinch.

[Risso]

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

Don't kid yourself John, we're a billionaire's plaything, he just doesn't have that much free cash to throw at us.

[Concrete John]

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

Don't kid yourself John, we're a billionaire's plaything, he just doesn't have that much free cash to throw at us.

I fundementally disagree with that.

[darren woolley]

I would rather do it the randy way man city are just buying success which is ok but they are walking over everybody in the process which is'nt.

[Risso]

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

Don't kid yourself John, we're a billionaire's plaything, he just doesn't have that much free cash to throw at us.

I fundementally disagree with that.

You'd be fundamentally wrong then.  The fact is that Randy has had to pump in over £200m to fund our spending, and we're making huge losses.

[Villan For Life]

Randy's way. We retain our heritage and our dignity without becoming a souless shell of a once proud club.

[Concrete John]

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

Don't kid yourself John, we're a billionaire's plaything, he just doesn't have that much free cash to throw at us.

I fundementally disagree with that.

You'd be fundamentally wrong then.  The fact is that Randy has had to pump in over £200m to fund our spending, and we're making huge losses.

Not arguing about the financials of what he's done, but I think it's completely wrong to say he treats us or views us a 'plaything'.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm not so sure.  Our wagebill is high in relation to our turnover, but not unsustainable in so far as selling 1 top earner wouldn't have a significant impact towards bringing it back into line.  We've also just got a good sponsorship deal, so even if it stayed as it was it would fall in relation to turnover.  I also think that Randy's thinking in the whole 'buy to sell' philosophy is as much to do with long term stability as it is immediate freeing of wages for this summer's arrivals.

We're being viewed as and run as a business, Man City simply aren't.

It isn't only about wage bills. You specifically mentioned if the owners walked away.

We're in debt to Randy by a large amount of money. He's pumped lots and lots of money into the club in the last four years, for which we're grateful, but that doesn't change the fact that he's put the money in, and it will need to be repaid at some point.

We're not as much at risk as Man City would be, not at all, but we'd still be in big, big trouble.

This talk of owners wlaking away confuses me. How can they from something they own? They'd have to find somebody to buy it off them, at which point what they've put in gets repaid. I reckon Randy will find it easier to find somebody richer than him to sell to than Man City's owners will.

What happened when Portsmouth's owner decided he'd had enough and couldn't / wouldn't fund it any more?

I also agree, it would be easier for Randy to find a buyer than the Man City arabs, but the fact still remains - they're a club funded by a billionaire, which is exactly what we are.

[WA Villan]

Invest in British players, academys, limit foreign players.

I love it, but EU employment law would scupper the last bit.

And last but not least come out the EU.