[Palace] Palace hypocrisy

[lawros left foot]

Surely having to re-pay 100% of the money owed to creditors, instead of the paltry amount you actually paid, would have had a serious effect on your future ambitions. The name of this thread isPalace hypocrisy, to gloat over your ongoing place in the premier league, whilst making unfounded accusations against our club , on our message board, and stating you are the guardians of old time football is, quite honestly, nauseating in the extreme

 

[andy1980]

Would they really, Andy? How about the clubs showing solidarity and saying, we don't think this is fair, and not is threatening to withdraw funding unless we vote it in?

Just a coincidence I presume, that altruistic Brighton had an eye on Cat 1 status themselves down the line.

They did show solidarity and say its not fair. but we all know saying and doing is two different things. Money talks pure and simple. The Premiership is too powerful, and we are beholdent to them.

 

[VHA on NSC]

Surely having to re-pay 100% of the money owed to creditors, instead of the paltry amount you actually paid, would have had a serious effect on your future ambitions. The name of this thread isPalace hypocrisy, to gloat over your ongoing place in the premier league, whilst making unfounded accusations against our club , on our message board, and stating you are the guardians of old time football is, quite honestly, nauseating in the extreme

A somewhat muddled post. Palace were in the PL before any administrations, therefore it is equally understandable that they could be a PL club had they not had any admins. The circumstances leading up to the admins were every bit as destabilising to the club's future as were the stabilising influence of the admins themselves. Yes, Palace have benefitted from the legally approved conditions of creditor settlement, but have lost much in terms of playing staff, supporters, and future investment.

Who exactly is purporting that Palace are the guardians of old time football?

And the main hypocrisy of this thread really is the domain of BHAFC's condescending, holier than thou sermonising.

 

[lawros left foot]

I don't think we are being sanctimonious at all , numerous Palace fans come o here crowing about your PRESENT league position, and the fact you haven't been in the two lowest leagues for God knows how long, all acheived of yhe back of two administrations. Read the start of the threadPLace agai st modern ffootball

 

[VHA on NSC]

I don't think we are being sanctimonious at all , numerous Palace fans come o here crowing about your PRESENT league position, and the fact you haven't been in the two lowest leagues for God knows how long, all acheived of yhe back of two administrations. Read the start of the threadPLace agai st modern ffootball

All achieved on the back of two administrations? Are you sure about that?

Please also point me in the direction of the thread you mention, and associate it with the contributors to this thread.

Thank you sir.

 

[lawros left foot]

The start of this thread. Can you honestly say that your club would be where you are now, without the benefits of writing off the vast majority of the debt, , not once but twice, would you have had the money to sign better players, and keep those young players for as long as you did, if you had to pay back 100% of the debt. I don't have time to point out all the Palace fans gloating on here, as I have a weekend away coming up and need to do other stuff before then

 

[Stato]

Now, before you guys get too carried away with your own academy, it's worth noting that you will be required to spend a minimum amount of funding per year (probably between £2.5-5m per year) on your academy to retain its status, which given the way things are going, might not be the best news for your shoe string budget.

As you have pointed out on other threads, Brighton are lucky enough to be bankrolled by Tony Bloom. You will see from this summary of FFP rules: http://chrisechris.hubpages.com/hub/UEFA-Financial_Fair_Play-Regulations that:

"Any money spent on infrastructure, training facilities or youth development will not be included."

Therefore investment in the academy is not limited by FFP rules, only investment in transfers and wages. It is the FFP rules which limit our budget and, if Mr Bloom thinks that investment in an academy is sustainable, he is free to do it.

 

[VHA on NSC]

As you have pointed out on other threads, Brighton are lucky enough to be bankrolled by Tony Bloom. You will see from this summary of FFP rules: http://chrisechris.hubpages.com/hub/UEFA-Financial_Fair_Play-Regulations that:

"Any money spent on infrastructure, training facilities or youth development will not be included."

Therefore investment in the academy is not limited by FFP rules, only investment in transfers and wages. It is the FFP rules which limit our budget and, if Mr Bloom thinks that investment in an academy is sustainable, he is free to do it.

I never said it was limited by FFP allowances. Of course, unless by then BHAFC is actually self sufficient financially, I assume you are implicitly saying that Tony can stump up the costs out of his pocket?

 

[VHA on NSC]

The start of this thread. Can you honestly say that your club would be where you are now, without the benefits of writing off the vast majority of the debt, , not once but twice, would you have had the money to sign better players, and keep those young players for as long as you did, if you had to pay back 100% of the debt. I don't have time to point out all the Palace fans gloating on here, as I have a weekend away coming up and need to do other stuff before then

Yes, without the 'benefit' of these administrations, Palace were often promoted to the top flight. Why would it not have continued?

 

[andy1980]

I never said it was limited by FFP allowances. Of course, unless by then BHAFC is actually self sufficient financially, I assume you are implicitly saying that Tony can stump up the costs out of his pocket?

I think he plans to build a hotel, lease it to a hotellier and that will cover its cost. The income from the hotel won't have anything to do with FFP either.

 

[VHA on NSC]

I think he plans to build a hotel, lease it to a hotellier and that will cover its cost. The income from the hotel won't have anything to do with FFP either.

Don't forget about expenditure as well as income, Andy. It seems Tony did when he built the Amex.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

As you have pointed out on other threads, Brighton are lucky enough to be bankrolled by Tony Bloom. You will see from this summary of FFP rules: http://chrisechris.hubpages.com/hub/UEFA-Financial_Fair_Play-Regulations that:

"Any money spent on infrastructure, training facilities or youth development will not be included."

Therefore investment in the academy is not limited by FFP rules, only investment in transfers and wages. It is the FFP rules which limit our budget and, if Mr Bloom thinks that investment in an academy is sustainable, he is free to do it.

Ignore his snidey insinuations , all he does is denigrate TB at every opportunity with constant sniping about his fortune drying up and walking away from the club.

 

[andy1980]

Don't forget about expenditure as well as income, Andy. It seems Tony did when he built the Amex.

Are you saying once the hotel is built we won't get more than 2-3 million a year? Our catering contract stands at £5 million.

 

[CPFC G]

I don't think we are being sanctimonious at all , numerous Palace fans come o here crowing about your PRESENT league position, and the fact you haven't been in the two lowest leagues for God knows how long, all acheived of yhe back of two administrations. Read the start of the threadPLace agai st modern ffootball

37 Years in the top two divisions. First admin was in 2000, So we must be doing something right at Palace to sustain our status even before the first admin came along.

 

[lawros left foot]

Because you would have a lot less money to spend on wages, transfer fees, signing on fees etc, therefore employing players of lesser ability, and as a result, your performances, and results would nosedive, closely followed by your attendances, resulting in less money to spend on players, and on and on in a viscous circle, until relegation becomes an inevitability. Thishas been proven in numerous clubs over te years. But, as you didn't pay the debt back, you keep your good young players, and you sign a better standard of player than you would otherwise be able to attract, therefore keeping your falsely elevated league position.





I hope this explains it to you, so you understand it now.

 

[upthealbion1970]

37 Years in the top two divisions. First admin was in 2000, So we must be doing something right at Palace to sustain our status even before the first admin came along.

Then number 2 in 2010

Promoted 2013

Funny that

 

[CPFC G]

Then number 2 in 2010

Promoted 2013

Funny that

Yes the 0-2 was f'ing hilarious.

 

[Sweeney Todd]

Yes the 0-2 was f'ing hilarious.

We will more than get our revenge. Be sure about that.

 

[VHA on NSC]

Ignore his snidey insinuations , all he does is denigrate TB at every opportunity with constant sniping about his fortune drying up and walking away from the club.

Not at all, I have a lot of time for TB, just not the hypocritical and holier than thou approach of many who live off his coat tails.

And in the absence of any tangible proof of the the root of his money other than the spending of it, questioning the viability of indefinite handouts from a single benefactor is something that every prudent Brighton fan should care about.

 

[VHA on NSC]

Are you saying once the hotel is built we won't get more than 2-3 million a year? Our catering contract stands at £5 million.

I'm saying that once the Amex was built it was supposed to be the club's cash cow, not something that cost more to staff than revenue it brought in. Does every hotel built successfully make a profit, Andy?