Atilla The Stockbroker

[DJ Leon]

Out of interest. How exactly has Falmer been financed? Sorry to be ignorant, but I know TB has saved the day, but how exactly? Has he loaned the money to the club?

 

[Tooting Gull]

While I agree with many of Attila's sentiments, he does come over a little bit 'Money men are all scum - except our one, who thankfully baled us out'.

Inconsistent logic, double standards, call it what you want but it doesn't fully stack up even though there is clearly a difference between a wealthy altruistic local businessman and some investor/speculator with no links to the club. It doesn't have to be foreign, either - look at Marcus Evans at Ipswich. That is purely a punt (and not much of one, he got them for a song and is charging them every year) on them one day getting in the Premier League.

Could an Albion supporters collective have underwritten the new stadium? I very much doubt it.

And I think we all know fans we wouldn't want running a whelk stall, let alone this football club.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I agree with with almost everything Attila said. Top man.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

If all the fans owned the club, who would they moan about when things went wrong?

There is a semi-serious point though. You need someone to make decisions and take responsobility, and in a "community" run club that is either going toi be bloody difficult or will end up with some fans being more equal than others!

 

[Trufflehound]

P.S Doesnt he look like Catweazle!!

I think this could be more than coincidence. Don't forget, Catweazle was also the creation of an ex-Albion stalwart in a former life (or possibly not):

 

[Brovion]

If all the fans owned the club, who would they moan about when things went wrong?

There is a semi-serious point though. You need someone to make decisions and take responsobility, and in a "community" run club that is either going toi be bloody difficult or will end up with some fans being more equal than others!

Indeed. And even at Barcelona the fans don't actually run the club in the same way that shareholders don't run a business.

Another point - one could argue that Brighton already match Attila's parameters for a community club as afaik 100% of the shares are owned by Albion fans!

 

[Fef]

Despise money men taking over football but happy to have one rich person financing our stadium.........

You've missed the point - to paraphrase: Despise money men (who are not fans of the club) taking over football but happy to have one rich person (who IS a fan of the club) financing our stadium.........

It's the motivation for owning a football club that is the important consideration here. Only a headcase or a fan would make an unsecured loan of £80m to a football club.

 

[Gwylan]

While I agree with many of Attila's sentiments, he does come over a little bit 'Money men are all scum - except our one, who thankfully baled us out'.

Inconsistent logic, double standards, call it what you want but it doesn't fully stack up even though there is clearly a difference between a wealthy altruistic local businessman and some investor/speculator with no links to the club. It doesn't have to be foreign, either - look at Marcus Evans at Ipswich. That is purely a punt (and not much of one, he got them for a song and is charging them every year) on them one day getting in the Premier League.

Could an Albion supporters collective have underwritten the new stadium? I very much doubt it.

And I think we all know fans we wouldn't want running a whelk stall, let alone this football club.

I don't think he's necessarily being inconsistent. His theme seems to be that clubs should be run by fans, ideally by a fans' trust - like Barcelona but if not, by a rich fan - like Tony Bloom.

His rant was about people with no links to the club ot the community using it either as a personal nest egg or as some sort of fashionable plaything, ready to be dropped when there's another toy available: this is a model that applies from Liverpool and Man U on one level or Mansfield and Ebbsfleet on another level.

If I were a multi-billionaire, I would be happy to finance a stadium and pump £10s of millions of running costs into the club every season with no return wanted - that's because I'm a fan and I want my club to do well. If I were to pump money into another club, say Crystal Palace, I'd want to make damn sure I had a top class return for my money. Same person, same money, two completely different scenarios.

 

[The Large One]

While I agree with many of Attila's sentiments, he does come over a little bit 'Money men are all scum - except our one, who thankfully baled us out'.

Pas du tout. He's implying there are money men who are scum (e.g. those using it for a plaything, or money-laundering, or for bleeding dry - yes, I know he doesn't use those phrases), but cited one example where it's not always the case.

 

[SI 4 BHA]

I think sadly you may be right. I too would LOVE to see all clubs run on the 'Barcelona' model (or the Green Bay Packers in the NFL) where the club is owned by the community, but I can't see it happening any time soon (I'd also like to see the railways re-nationalised and all essential goods and services in public ownership but I guess I'm going to have to wait for that too!).

But the "Barcelona" model really only works for them in modern football as they negotiate their on TV deal and they and Madrid get the vast majority of Spanish tv money. As far as those 2 clubs are concerned, everyone else can f**k off. There is no concept of a football family or community, they just hoover up all the money to the detriment of the rest of the league. As long as they are succesful they don't care about anyone else.

At least in England there is some kind of realisation that all clubs need some money so it is shared out so that even a bottom 3 club gets a decent piece of the action.

If you want some kind of football collective, it is more important that the money is shared out fairly, rather than who owns your club. I believe in Holland that although Ajax and PSV were offered their own tv deals that would be far better than everyone else, they agreed that for the good of Dutch football, all tv money would be shared equally between all the clubs in the top 2 divisions.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Entirely understand that the issue is here the resentment of the fact they are in a position to do this.

No, that's bollocks. Nobody is resentful because the Glazers can afford to 'own' the club.

Read this.

the andersred blog: Running on empty, how bad are things in the Glazer empire?

 

[attila]

Catweazle, NO! Crusty, No. I wash. The beard is 'cos my wife likes it and gets shaved off regularly!
But on to the important bit. For me, football is simply a microcosm of a society where the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and small global elites wield huge financial and political power while billions are powerless, many of them in abject poverty. I utterly reject that kind of society. I'm NOT going to get into general political arguments: this is an Albion forum.

As far as football is concerned the Ebbsfleet model is not the ideal 'community' model unless you view the internet as a 'community', which I certainly don't: for me the great thing about the internet is that it helps you get things together easier in the real world!
And in the real world it's the likes of AFC Wimbledon which is the real model, and it's going to be very interesting to see how far they can go. You're absolutely right that the likes of Brentford and Stockport messed up, but they didn't start with the principles of fan ownership as part of their consitution: fan ownership came as a last resort.

As for 'gushing' about the fact that Falmer is being built, too bloody right! I'm an Albion fan!!Being an Albion fan is about compromise: about spending time with and enjoying the company of people with vastly different lifestyles, political beliefs and tastes to yours (hi Paul!) and about doing what you can to help the club, whether you're you, me or Tony Bloom. In an ideal world we wouldn't need him, but this world isn't ideal. And after Archer TB makes it 1-1. We deserve it: all of us. That doesn't change the basic thrust of what I am saying. Football is going to crash. Things aren't going to stay the same. And we don't HAVE to have all-seater stadia with ridiculously high ticket prices for EVER! They don't in the rest of Europe!

 

[Simster]

But the "Barcelona" model really only works for them in modern football as they negotiate their on TV deal and they and Madrid get the vast majority of Spanish tv money. As far as those 2 clubs are concerned, everyone else can f**k off. There is no concept of a football family or community, they just hoover up all the money to the detriment of the rest of the league. As long as they are succesful they don't care about anyone else.

At least in England there is some kind of realisation that all clubs need some money so it is shared out so that even a bottom 3 club gets a decent piece of the action.

If you want some kind of football collective, it is more important that the money is shared out fairly, rather than who owns your club. I believe in Holland that although Ajax and PSV were offered their own tv deals that would be far better than everyone else, they agreed that for the good of Dutch football, all tv money would be shared equally between all the clubs in the top 2 divisions.

Agreed. I wouldn't touch the Spanish model with a barge pole. Madrid and Barca are the biggest bunch of twats going - both absolutely massive off the back of TV deals and enormous exposure.

No, that's bollocks. Nobody is resentful because the Glazers can afford to 'own' the club.

Entirely correct Max. The Glazers bought the club with the bank's money, because they have the capital to back it, if required. However, the borrowing they used to buy the club is now an enormous debt and costs about £70m a year to service. That's money that could have reduced ticket prices or been reinvested in their team. Instead, Glazer takes it out of the club to service a debt he created. It's all wrong.

 

[Jim D]

....The Glazers bought the club with the bank's money, because they have the capital to back it, if required. However, the borrowing they used to buy the club is now an enormous debt and costs about £70m a year to service. That's money that could have reduced ticket prices or been reinvested in their team. Instead, Glazer takes it out of the club to service a debt he created. It's all wrong.

It may be wrong but the outcome was clear as soon as ManU became a 'Plc'. Because of the amount of cash they generate it was always going to be a prime target. If it wasn't the Glazers it would have been another speculator.

 

[Pavilionaire]

But Man Utd is no longer a plc as the Glazers took it back into private ownership. That's precisely why they're in the shit.

Spurs are a plc and well-run, mainly because they've got Daniel Levy in charge. His man-management might not be perfect (see Jol, Ramos) but he has a nose for a good deal.

 

[Beach Hut]

No, that's bollocks. Nobody is resentful because the Glazers can afford to 'own' the club.

Read this.

the andersred blog: Running on empty, how bad are things in the Glazer empire?

You still miss the point the person who did the original rant resents those in any position to be able to do something it is nothing to do with how the deal is done whether by debt or cash.

The resentment is success there is more a political message in reality or perhaps how they would like to live and feel society should be

 

[attila]

You still miss the point the person who did the original rant resents those in any position to be able to do something it is nothing to do with how the deal is done whether by debt or cash.

The resentment is success there is more a political message in reality or perhaps how they would like to live and feel society should be

I don't 'resent success' - you should have seen me after our championship wins or, in a different way, at Hereford! Or when we finally got Falmer!

I just don't define 'success' as 'obtaining the maximum amount of money by any means necessary and sod who you destroy in the process'!

 

[Beach Hut]

We are miles apart on this

 

[ROSM]

You still miss the point the person who did the original rant resents those in any position to be able to do something it is nothing to do with how the deal is done whether by debt or cash.

The resentment is success there is more a political message in reality or perhaps how they would like to live and feel society should be

ooh spot the psycho babble - a thread about Mr Stockbroker and you pop up with your catty comments

 

[Everest]

And we don't HAVE to have all-seater stadia with ridiculously high ticket prices for EVER! They don't in the rest of Europe!

Couldn't this outdated ruling be taken to the ECHR?