Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Newcastle on furlough.



Rogero

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2010
5,834
Shoreham
I am not sure if this subject has been covered on here but surely Newcastle should not have been allowed to sign new players whilst the club is on furlough. Has anyone worked out what sort of money this has cost Tony Bloom for example ?
 




OSRGull

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2011
5,298
N1A
I am not sure if this subject has been covered on here but surely Newcastle should not have been allowed to sign new players whilst the club is on furlough. Has anyone worked out what sort of money this has cost Tony Bloom for example ?

Different budgets that cover different areas of the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,319
It’s morally disgraceful, but nothing anyone can do. Thank God we have a classy football club and hierarchy - I’d be embarrassed if we did that.
 








Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,888
West west west Sussex
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
May 25, 2014
2,114
Haywards Heath
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.
 




Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,888
West west west Sussex






Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,888
West west west Sussex


drew

Drew
NSC Patron
Oct 3, 2006
23,608
Burgess Hill
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
May 25, 2007
1,084
Horsham
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.
 


Pondicherry

Well-known member
May 25, 2007
1,084
Horsham
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?
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,097
Faversham
I am not sure if this subject has been covered on here but surely Newcastle should not have been allowed to sign new players whilst the club is on furlough. Has anyone worked out what sort of money this has cost Tony Bloom for example ?

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:






Eeyore

Colonel Hee-Haw of Queen's Park
NSC Patron
Apr 5, 2014
25,901


Weststander

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
69,256
Withdean area
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.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here