Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
DoctorJ

Moneyweek - The Next Victim Of The Credit Crunch

Recommended Posts

Moneyweek

I have been wondering for a while now about how people are going to be able to afford to pay silly prices to watch premiership matches in order to pay the astronomical footballer wages.

Expect the transfer market and footballer wages to crash. Along with lots of empty seats. Hey, maybe I'll be able to go watch a few matches without my wallet jumping out my pocket and running for the hills! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this.

I have gone so far as to call the "top" in the premiership "bull" market this summer.

SKY are struggling. Not financially so much, but they're topping out on new subscribers so can only grow through price hikes and/or new "services". I can't see how this is compatible with the economic fundamentals so I think it's over.

The other contra-indicator for me was the huge leveraged take-over of United by Glazer and the debacle that is the Hicks/Gillett take-over down the road in Liverpool. They've leveraged up and bought right at the top imho. As with everything else, they will likely have to offload to cash rich Arabs, Chinese or maybe Indians.

'Tis over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the fact that you have "die-hard" nutcase football fans who one minute love there top player and the next hate and want him dead when he misses a penalty or transfers somewhere else.

Yet these mindless fools still shovel money into there pockets by paying top whack for tickets, The ultimate irony is that many of these top players I imagine would not give a flying sh!t about these so called "die-hard" fans

The rich get richer and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/ma...rleague.chelsea

Chelsea and Manchester United, the Premier League's two representatives in tomorrow's Champions League final, owe creditors £1.5bn between them. According to the latest accounts of Chelsea Limited, the company which owns the football club, Chelsea owed £736m to all its creditors. United's accounts, also recently filed at Companies House, showed total creditors at £764m. Those unprecedented figures will fuel concern that at this time of English football's greatest club triumph its clubs are carrying too much debt.

Covering the year to June 30 2007, Chelsea's accounts show that the club's largest creditor was the owner himself, Roman Abramovich, who had poured £578m into the club, not as a donation but as an interest-free loan. As stated by the chief executive, Peter Kenyon, in February, Chelsea did not owe "external debt" to any bank.

However, with Abramovich's £578m loan, introduced to sign players and pay wages since he bought the club in 2003, plus general amounts owed, taxes and some categories listed among creditors for formal accounting purposes, Chelsea's creditors stood at £736m in total.

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=61472

Club financing

* Capital employed by Premier League clubs – being the aggregate of debt financing and shareholders funds – continued the rise of recent years to reach over £2.2 billion at the end of the 2006/07 season.

* The Premier League clubs' net debt figure at summer 2007 increased by 19% to £2,469m. It is sometimes commented that "football is not like a normal business"; the net debt figure includes around £900m which is of a non-interest bearing 'soft loan' nature from club owners.

* The net debt figure includes £605m in relation to Red Football Shareholder Limited (the UK parent company of Manchester United) and £620m in respect of Chelsea Limited (the parent company of Chelsea).

* By the end of the 2006/07 season, Roman Abramovich had injected around £575m of new money into Chelsea, through a combination of debt and equity. This represents by far the largest contribution to a football club from any single funder.

* Around £1.4 billion has changed hands in respect of almost 20 changes of ownership of English clubs in the top two divisions since the start of 2005. For the majority of these transactions it is too early to assess the overall financial impact on the clubs themselves.

* Premier League clubs incurred aggregate net interest charges from finance providers of £144m in 2006/07. The non-interest bearing nature of other loans at a number of clubs help to keep the Premier League clubs' aggregate net debt service charge at under 6% of the overall debt balance.

* Based on the available information, the Championship clubs had aggregate net debt at the end of the 2006/07 season of £289m. Ten Championship clubs had filed accounts showing net debt at the end of the 2006/07 season in excess of £10m. In general, a Championship club can only hope to significantly reduce its net debt in the short/medium term via either promotion to the Premier League or an injection of equity funding from its owner.

* Below the top two divisions, managing the club's financial position remains a challenge from one season to the next. Legacy debt issues and the risks taken by some boards of directors will, without correction, inevitably lead to a continuing flow of insolvency cases in the seasons to come.

Football it's as safe as houses.

As for Sky if there is a severe downturn I think they will struggle although Setanta may go first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky were one of the few companies that did fairly well during the last down turn, however this time there financial commitments to the Premier League are a lot higher so they could struggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sky are toast from hereonin.they've lumbered themselves with a three or is ti five year deal with the premiership and punters who can unsubscribe with a months notice.

I am not so sure, I think rightly or wrongly many now think of Sky as a necessity rather than a luxury - similar to mobile phone contracts.

The people I know with Sky all claim they could not live without it. Personally I have got to the point where I watch so little TV that if I were to get a place of my own even a TV licence could well be quite a long way down the list of priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/may/0...ws.broadcasting

Setanta and BSkyB have paid £1.706bn between them for live Premier League matches over three years from 2007 - £700m more than Sky paid for the same TV rights in 2003.

The Irish broadcaster picked up two packages of 23 games per season after today's second round bids were submitted, breaking BSkyB's 14-year stranglehold on live Premier League rights.

Sky secured the other package on offer today, to add to the three it won in the first round of bidding a week ago.

Setanta has paid £392m for 46 live matches per season over three years from August 2007; while BSkyB has spent £1.314bn for 92 games a year over the same period.

In total, the live TV rights auction has netted the Premier League £1.706bn - up from the £1.02bn Sky paid in July 2003.

Sky will now be paying £4.76m per game over the three years, nearly double the £2.5m it paid under the 2003 agreement, while Setanta will be paying £2.82m for each of its games.

So it will need renewing in 2010 if we are in a major recession I doubt they'll get this money again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sooner this over hyped circus comes crashing down the better!

I haven't paid for a live game in ten years, and refuse to subscribe to Sky in principle. Apparently some fans are so fed up with out of touch and over expensive premier league sides, that they go abroad to their adopted teams to watch live football instead.

I reckon FreeSat could be the final nail in the coffin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did a poll of subscribers earlier this year it turned out that folk having full package we're likely to live on benefits.

Two of the towns polled we're in south wales & we're in the top five for folk living on bens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They did a poll of subscribers earlier this year it turned out that folk having full package we're likely to live on benefits.

Two of the towns polled we're in south wales & we're in the top five for folk living on bens

I really annoyed a collegue recently (a keeping up with the Beckhams type) by describing Sky TV as 'Council TV' suggesting that the only people who feel the need to get it are the unemployed. She didn't like me comparing her to someone on benefits :)

I seriously wonder how anyone in full time work can justify the expense of the whole thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The majority of bankrupts have Sky and list it as an essential item

To be fair, although not essential, I always found TV programs on the 5 main channels rubbish in general, especially around bank holiday periods nd unless you get these documentary, sport or music channels from SKY, it can get really boring really quickly.

just my 0.02p worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not so sure, I think rightly or wrongly many now think of Sky as a necessity rather than a luxury - similar to mobile phone contracts.

The people I know with Sky all claim they could not live without it. Personally I have got to the point where I watch so little TV that if I were to get a place of my own even a TV licence could well be quite a long way down the list of priorities.

Well, I'm not sure SKY have faced a real downturn yet. So it will depend on how bad the economy gets I suppose. But with nearly 10 million subscribers, many of whom will have it to watch the sport (I don't know how many) then they could get hit hard. Anecdotally, I know people who are ringing them up to cancel and being offered £15 or more off their monthly bill to stay. This is before the economy turns south. They turnover something like £4.5 billion I think and make about £500million on that so it will take some downturn. Still, I also read about more technically minded people linking up their TV's to internet feeds with free software and people using free foreign feeds over non-sky satellite decoders. I either watch the footie in a pub, or on an internet feed or listen on the radio mostly. Mind you I am an exceptional cheapskate and if Rupert was the only show in town he wouldn't get my money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They did a poll of subscribers earlier this year it turned out that folk having full package we're likely to live on benefits.

Two of the towns polled we're in south wales & we're in the top five for folk living on bens

How else do you think these fans have the time to go round the world following their teams??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I really annoyed a collegue recently (a keeping up with the Beckhams type) by describing Sky TV as 'Council TV' suggesting that the only people who feel the need to get it are the unemployed. She didn't like me comparing her to someone on benefits"

Totally off-topic, but this made me think of the hazy summer days of when I was a kid, coming in from a hot day playing out & asking my mom if we had any coke or lemonade to drink, and she'd reply more often than not that we'd have to make do with a glass of 'council pop' (i.e. water). Bless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 399 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.