Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Newcastle on furlough.
- Thread starter Rogero
- Start date
Different budgets that cover different areas of the club.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #3
I am sure that would not worry Mike Ashley.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Newcastle have refunded fans season ticket money.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
I thought this was a new seaside town opening up.
Needs hyphens.
Needs hyphens.
No different to Spurs getting a £175m government bail out then spending £80m in the transfer window, while being owned by a multi billionaire.
Mayonaise
Well-known member
Arsenal did he same - laid off a load of staff to save money (even the mascot) and then spent millions on new players... seems so out of touch when many people can no longer afford even the basics.
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,440
Missed this when did this happen?
The first hit when I copy and pasted 'Spurs getting a £175m government bail out' into my internet search engine.
https://www.espn.co.uk/football/tot...tottenham-borrow-175m-from-british-government
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,440
The first hit when I copy and pasted 'Spurs getting a £175m government bail out' into my internet search engine.
https://www.espn.co.uk/football/tot...tottenham-borrow-175m-from-british-government
thanks this is an absolute disgrace. I don't understand how this does not break some form of fair play and yes it will given them a big financial advantage.
You'd think $4.8bn would be a big enough advantage...
https://www.forbes.com/profile/joe-... Tavistock,pub operator, Mitchell's & Butlers.
...but this is Spurs.
drew
Drew
Think it's a bit over the top re Spurs. They've got a loan which they are going to have to repay including some interest. Does seem though that their owners aren't quite as benevolent as TB.
Pondicherry
Well-known member
Spurs stated the money "will not be used for player acquisitions" and instead to ensure the club has "financial flexibility and additional working capital," while also helping repay the debt on their new £1 billion stadium.
Surely they wouldn't have any money available for player acquisitions (Bale) if they had to fund their "financial flexibility and additional working capital," themselves.
Surely they wouldn't have any money available for player acquisitions (Bale) if they had to fund their "financial flexibility and additional working capital," themselves.
Pondicherry
Well-known member
Also given that the Bank of England is a public body that must answer to the people of the UK through Parliament, I don't remember this getting much publicity at the time.
Whilst football clubs are businesses, they are not normal businesses and it is not appropriate in my view to use a public governmental body to prop up a Premier League football club. Why couldn't they fund the loans privately or use some Joe Lewis' billions?
Whilst football clubs are businesses, they are not normal businesses and it is not appropriate in my view to use a public governmental body to prop up a Premier League football club. Why couldn't they fund the loans privately or use some Joe Lewis' billions?
This is the key bit for me. Who makes the rules and who enforces them? All the while all the 'sheep' carry on paying to watch games (on TV and/or in the ground) those who run the game will take that cash flow and 'maximise their position'.
That said I thought the clubs who used the furlough initially backed off after a few days when they realised that taking the massive piss was not a good look?
Edit: internet search has nothing on this since the end of April. The link below is comprehensive. I am not sure the government policed the furlough payments so if football clubs (OK, Newcastle, er, that's it, with the caveat noted above about season ticket payments) took the piss they were not alone. I may be a sheep but I see clubs as businesses operating in a capitalist society so I don't expect them to disadvantage themselves to the benefit of competitors. The buck stops with FIFA, the EPL and the government. Incompetent, self-interested and incompetent, respectively.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...mier-league-clubs-furlough-pay-cuts-deferrals
Last edited:
Russconha
Well-known member
Newcastle-on-furlough is near Stoke.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 23,570
I still think Furlough is a village in Cambridgeshire.
This is the key bit for me. Who makes the rules and who enforces them? All the while all the 'sheep' carry on paying to watch games (on TV and/or in the ground) those who run the game will take that cash flow and 'maximise their position'.
That said I thought the clubs who used the furlough initially backed off after a few days when they realised that taking the massive piss was not a good look?
Edit: internet search has nothing on this since the end of April. The link below is comprehensive. I am not sure the government policed the furlough payments so if football clubs (OK, Newcastle, er, that's it, with the caveat noted above about season ticket payments) took the piss they were not alone. I may be a sheep but I see clubs as businesses operating in a capitalist society so I don't expect them to disadvantage themselves to the benefit of competitors. The buck stops with FIFA, the EPL and the government. Incompetent, self-interested and incompetent, respectively.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...mier-league-clubs-furlough-pay-cuts-deferrals
Bmuff, Newcastle, Norwich and Sheffield Utd used the scheme in the end.
Whilst Spuds imposed 20% pay cut on 550 staff.