No you just listen to a idiotic campaign that claims he's a bad defender and try to twist anything to make him look bad. I remember Hansen tried to twist the first 2 goals you scored against us as somehow Luiz's fault
No, I watch the games and think that. He's just too error prone for me and always out of position. If he can sort that out he may be a decent enough cb but for the moment hes not really that good.
You disagree, fair enough. Must be off anyway, have a good evening.
Luiz.. fecking laughing stock.. always when they lose
Daaammmmmn what an article I have created
Great debating and great reading with sensible arguments and the occasional re-tarded, yet humourous comments from wearethefamous.
If only was still in University, I would have aced my financial accounting exam. I now know about profit and loss, balance sheets, cumulative profits/losses, going concerns, liquidation and all that malarky
Weare made this article what it is
"I now know about profit and loss, balance sheets, cumulative profits/losses, going concerns, liquidation and all that malarky"
And can you make all that cursory info Companies House spewed out on Chelsky come out equal to no "debt" ??
I'll be effed if I can (I tried the same thing o my own company and the data matched the reality perfectly) .
I'm sure Chelsea's accountants and Roman has everything under control.
Chelsea are now a global brand, and have made their mark at just the right time with globalisation at its peak. I think it will be harder for City to break into that brand success as Chelsea have done. Same goes for Spurs who like it or not, live in Arsenals shadow. Thats the price you (Spurs and Man City) pay for being 2nd best in a local rivalry during the recent football era.
All Chelsea need to do is sort out their wage bill and at least ensure that a players wages matches his value to the team because at this moment Torres is a debt to the club every week.
Any business model that requires the owner putting his hand in his pocket on a regular basis isn't self-sufficient or 'under control'.
As for the global brand bit, you're way off the clubs with real pedigree and history such as Man Utd, Barca, Real and the Milan clubs in being a global brand leader. At the moment you're second tier at best with a whole stack of other clubs with a global following but not necessarily a high brand equity.
All Chelsea actually need to do is ensure they generate increased revenue both on and off the pitch, further improve their brand to increase merchandise revenues, and as you've already alluded ensure their outgoings do not exceed their revenue whilst still trying to compete with City and Man Utd.
If it was as easy as some of you think you'd have been in profit years ago
"I think it will be harder for City to break into that brand success as Chelsea have done."
Will be very easy for them.
Their business model seems to be on track. I would expect them to break even overall far quicker than Chelsky managed to even make just one annual profit.
"Same goes for Spurs who like it or not, live in Arsenals shadow. Thats the price you (Spurs and Man City) pay for being 2nd best in a local rivalry during the recent football era."
Local rivalry is irrelevant.
Usurping Sky 4 incumbents from the CL piggie trough is all that is necessary. One has been forced away. Another has had a summary warning.
Chelsea do not have the history and pedigree of the like of the clubs you've mentioned but in 20 years looking back what Chelsea have won, the new generation of fans will see Chelsea with alot of history and pedigree.
With regards to global brand strength, there are only 3 clubs Chelsea are way off from and that is Real, Barca and United.....and lets just say Bayern too for arguments sake.
Apart from Real Madrid, Chelsea sell more Adidas branded shirts than any other football team in the world and certainly above any Italian team. I would have to say given Chelsea's commercial success and well known global following, their brand equity is very strong. Wherever you go in the world, you will see a Chelsea shirt (well I have anyway).
The only issue now is getting the finances in check and making sure the players on field value match their wages. Chelsea are definetly moving in the right direction.
It won't be easy for Man City. They have spent more in wages and players than Chelsea over a shorter period with less success in that period. Added to that they have failed to even make the knockout stages of the Champions League since they were taken over.
If they somehow manage to make a profit, then they have pulled a trick, which I'm sure Chelsea can replicate (Gazprom deal?).
Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal? Why support La Clippers with their new superstars when the La Lakers are more fashionable? Why support the Mets when you can support the Yankees? Why support Brooklyn when you can support the Knicks?
There's a lot more to brand equity than seeing a football shirt in another country. Spurs have a great following in many countries but we're not a brand leader any more than yourselves. Selling more Adidas shirts than any other team would only be a good indicator if everyone wore Adidas!
Being £1.5 million in profit doesn't really show commercial success, especially given the losses you've posted since Roman took over. Who is to say whether the tiny profit posted isn't just a blip given your recent financial results?...fact is you need at least 3 good years of solid growth to know whether you're moving in the right direction
"It won't be easy for Man City. They have spent more in wages and players than Chelsea over a shorter period with less success in that period."
They have gone from 0 to PL champions in 4 yrs.
And are in the fight for it again.
And 2 consecutive CL appearances.
If they continue with that momentum/performance,
"If they somehow manage to make a profit, then they have pulled a trick, which I'm sure Chelsea can replicate"
Nope.
They can look baggage-free at your lot and see how not to do it. You have 9 yrs of baggage that you cannot ditch to copy them, even if their grand plan works.
"Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal?"
Plasticity probably obeys a distance "square law" .
The demographics in N London are quite steady.
Tis the fan in Saigon with the (illegal) fake replica club shirt others have to worry about.
"Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal?"
-----------------------------------------------------
It depends why people support the team they do...if you're a plastic then no doubt this logic applies.
AC and Inter Milan don't seem to find it problematic though...both huge global brands and you couldn't get more local
They have gone from 0 to PL champions in 4 yrs.
And are in the fight for it again.
And 2 consecutive CL appearances.
If they continue with that momentum/performance,
------------------------------------------------
City were taken over in the 2007/08 season so it took them a full 5 seasons to lift the PL crown.
Chelsea were taken over in 2003/2004 and it took them a full 2 seasons to lift the crown.
Added to that Chelsea had already made the Champions League 4 years before a take over and made it again qualifying for the knockout stages for the next 8 years.
Based on those facts and whats already set in stone, if City can pull off whatever they have up their sleeves, Chelsea, who have greater leverage need not worry.
As for local rivalry. The fanbase I'm mentioning is outside of North London as thats where the money comes in. Outisde of London and overseas, most people would just rather support Arsenal rather than Spurs just because of the brand name and modern history.
The Milans are unique in that they have both been competing at the top for many years and there has been no sustained period in a gulf in class between the two sides in the modern era unlike Arsenal/Spurs, Liverpool/Everton and United/City.
I reach that <Citeh> will reach financial stability far quicker than Chelsky could ever hope to.
And given that they started from a far weaker football position (no CL piggie trough incumbency etc) , that will make the achievement even more credible.
And yes you are right, there are many replica shirts but there are also many authentic shirts which I have seen in cities like Toronto, Cagliari and Brussels to name a few
I don't understand how City who have spend more than Chelsea in a shorter period with far less income can achieve financial stability quicker than Chelsea?
"I don't understand how City who have spend more than Chelsea in a shorter period with far less income can achieve financial stability quicker than Chelsea?"
Impulse momentum.
The story some of us have been spun is that they front-loaded the investment for the huge initial impulse. Now there will not be silly money Sugga Daddy investment, and the club will have to manage its (already impressive) squad in the context of monies coming in from actual football success and outside interest (sponsorships etc) therein.
And going back to my original entry into this article, my understanding was that Chelsky had a grand plan of doing this by 2008. If so, then you failed bigtime.
Whether <Citeh> succeed, or fail as badly, we will know in a couple of years.
Chelsea planned to break even between 2008-2010 and the club failed in doing that.
Regardless of how profit was made this season and how little it was, at the end of the day its still a profit and they can look onwards and upwards on how to sustain that. You may not be aware but the club have made some mega sponsorship deals over the past year which should also increase their revenue streams more than ever before.
Comment deleted by Article Creator
All I know is that <Citeh> are going to try it their way.
Their supporters have said we should judge them on that basis at some point in the near future. Fair enough.
However, we do have a Sugga Daddy FC precedent to use as a basic yardstick to gauge their yearly progress. And that is your lot.
squad in the context of monies coming in from actual football success
--------------------------------------------
You can't make mega bucks by just being a football success in England alone, you have to make it into the Champions League and then next of all make the knockout stages. Surely missing out on that extra money for 2 years running is damaging for City?
Sign in if you want to comment
Premier League clubs agree new cost control
Page 16 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 18/12/12
No you just listen to a idiotic campaign that claims he's a bad defender and try to twist anything to make him look bad. I remember Hansen tried to twist the first 2 goals you scored against us as somehow Luiz's fault
posted on 18/12/12
No, I watch the games and think that. He's just too error prone for me and always out of position. If he can sort that out he may be a decent enough cb but for the moment hes not really that good.
You disagree, fair enough. Must be off anyway, have a good evening.
posted on 19/12/12
Luiz.. fecking laughing stock.. always when they lose
posted on 19/12/12
Daaammmmmn what an article I have created
Great debating and great reading with sensible arguments and the occasional re-tarded, yet humourous comments from wearethefamous.
posted on 19/12/12
If only was still in University, I would have aced my financial accounting exam. I now know about profit and loss, balance sheets, cumulative profits/losses, going concerns, liquidation and all that malarky
posted on 19/12/12
Weare made this article what it is
posted on 19/12/12
"I now know about profit and loss, balance sheets, cumulative profits/losses, going concerns, liquidation and all that malarky"
And can you make all that cursory info Companies House spewed out on Chelsky come out equal to no "debt" ??
I'll be effed if I can (I tried the same thing o my own company and the data matched the reality perfectly) .
posted on 19/12/12
I'm sure Chelsea's accountants and Roman has everything under control.
Chelsea are now a global brand, and have made their mark at just the right time with globalisation at its peak. I think it will be harder for City to break into that brand success as Chelsea have done. Same goes for Spurs who like it or not, live in Arsenals shadow. Thats the price you (Spurs and Man City) pay for being 2nd best in a local rivalry during the recent football era.
All Chelsea need to do is sort out their wage bill and at least ensure that a players wages matches his value to the team because at this moment Torres is a debt to the club every week.
posted on 19/12/12
Any business model that requires the owner putting his hand in his pocket on a regular basis isn't self-sufficient or 'under control'.
As for the global brand bit, you're way off the clubs with real pedigree and history such as Man Utd, Barca, Real and the Milan clubs in being a global brand leader. At the moment you're second tier at best with a whole stack of other clubs with a global following but not necessarily a high brand equity.
All Chelsea actually need to do is ensure they generate increased revenue both on and off the pitch, further improve their brand to increase merchandise revenues, and as you've already alluded ensure their outgoings do not exceed their revenue whilst still trying to compete with City and Man Utd.
If it was as easy as some of you think you'd have been in profit years ago
posted on 19/12/12
"I think it will be harder for City to break into that brand success as Chelsea have done."
Will be very easy for them.
Their business model seems to be on track. I would expect them to break even overall far quicker than Chelsky managed to even make just one annual profit.
"Same goes for Spurs who like it or not, live in Arsenals shadow. Thats the price you (Spurs and Man City) pay for being 2nd best in a local rivalry during the recent football era."
Local rivalry is irrelevant.
Usurping Sky 4 incumbents from the CL piggie trough is all that is necessary. One has been forced away. Another has had a summary warning.
posted on 19/12/12
Chelsea do not have the history and pedigree of the like of the clubs you've mentioned but in 20 years looking back what Chelsea have won, the new generation of fans will see Chelsea with alot of history and pedigree.
With regards to global brand strength, there are only 3 clubs Chelsea are way off from and that is Real, Barca and United.....and lets just say Bayern too for arguments sake.
Apart from Real Madrid, Chelsea sell more Adidas branded shirts than any other football team in the world and certainly above any Italian team. I would have to say given Chelsea's commercial success and well known global following, their brand equity is very strong. Wherever you go in the world, you will see a Chelsea shirt (well I have anyway).
The only issue now is getting the finances in check and making sure the players on field value match their wages. Chelsea are definetly moving in the right direction.
posted on 19/12/12
It won't be easy for Man City. They have spent more in wages and players than Chelsea over a shorter period with less success in that period. Added to that they have failed to even make the knockout stages of the Champions League since they were taken over.
If they somehow manage to make a profit, then they have pulled a trick, which I'm sure Chelsea can replicate (Gazprom deal?).
Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal? Why support La Clippers with their new superstars when the La Lakers are more fashionable? Why support the Mets when you can support the Yankees? Why support Brooklyn when you can support the Knicks?
posted on 19/12/12
There's a lot more to brand equity than seeing a football shirt in another country. Spurs have a great following in many countries but we're not a brand leader any more than yourselves. Selling more Adidas shirts than any other team would only be a good indicator if everyone wore Adidas!
Being £1.5 million in profit doesn't really show commercial success, especially given the losses you've posted since Roman took over. Who is to say whether the tiny profit posted isn't just a blip given your recent financial results?...fact is you need at least 3 good years of solid growth to know whether you're moving in the right direction
posted on 19/12/12
"It won't be easy for Man City. They have spent more in wages and players than Chelsea over a shorter period with less success in that period."
They have gone from 0 to PL champions in 4 yrs.
And are in the fight for it again.
And 2 consecutive CL appearances.
If they continue with that momentum/performance,
"If they somehow manage to make a profit, then they have pulled a trick, which I'm sure Chelsea can replicate"
Nope.
They can look baggage-free at your lot and see how not to do it. You have 9 yrs of baggage that you cannot ditch to copy them, even if their grand plan works.
"Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal?"
Plasticity probably obeys a distance "square law" .
The demographics in N London are quite steady.
Tis the fan in Saigon with the (illegal) fake replica club shirt others have to worry about.
posted on 19/12/12
"Local Rivalry is very relevant. Why support City when you can support United? Why support Spurs when you can support Arsenal?"
-----------------------------------------------------
It depends why people support the team they do...if you're a plastic then no doubt this logic applies.
AC and Inter Milan don't seem to find it problematic though...both huge global brands and you couldn't get more local
posted on 19/12/12
They have gone from 0 to PL champions in 4 yrs.
And are in the fight for it again.
And 2 consecutive CL appearances.
If they continue with that momentum/performance,
------------------------------------------------
City were taken over in the 2007/08 season so it took them a full 5 seasons to lift the PL crown.
Chelsea were taken over in 2003/2004 and it took them a full 2 seasons to lift the crown.
Added to that Chelsea had already made the Champions League 4 years before a take over and made it again qualifying for the knockout stages for the next 8 years.
Based on those facts and whats already set in stone, if City can pull off whatever they have up their sleeves, Chelsea, who have greater leverage need not worry.
As for local rivalry. The fanbase I'm mentioning is outside of North London as thats where the money comes in. Outisde of London and overseas, most people would just rather support Arsenal rather than Spurs just because of the brand name and modern history.
The Milans are unique in that they have both been competing at the top for many years and there has been no sustained period in a gulf in class between the two sides in the modern era unlike Arsenal/Spurs, Liverpool/Everton and United/City.
posted on 19/12/12
I reach that <Citeh> will reach financial stability far quicker than Chelsky could ever hope to.
And given that they started from a far weaker football position (no CL piggie trough incumbency etc) , that will make the achievement even more credible.
posted on 19/12/12
^reach ^think
posted on 19/12/12
And yes you are right, there are many replica shirts but there are also many authentic shirts which I have seen in cities like Toronto, Cagliari and Brussels to name a few
posted on 19/12/12
I don't understand how City who have spend more than Chelsea in a shorter period with far less income can achieve financial stability quicker than Chelsea?
posted on 19/12/12
"I don't understand how City who have spend more than Chelsea in a shorter period with far less income can achieve financial stability quicker than Chelsea?"
Impulse momentum.
The story some of us have been spun is that they front-loaded the investment for the huge initial impulse. Now there will not be silly money Sugga Daddy investment, and the club will have to manage its (already impressive) squad in the context of monies coming in from actual football success and outside interest (sponsorships etc) therein.
And going back to my original entry into this article, my understanding was that Chelsky had a grand plan of doing this by 2008. If so, then you failed bigtime.
Whether <Citeh> succeed, or fail as badly, we will know in a couple of years.
posted on 19/12/12
Chelsea planned to break even between 2008-2010 and the club failed in doing that.
Regardless of how profit was made this season and how little it was, at the end of the day its still a profit and they can look onwards and upwards on how to sustain that. You may not be aware but the club have made some mega sponsorship deals over the past year which should also increase their revenue streams more than ever before.
posted on 19/12/12
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 19/12/12
All I know is that <Citeh> are going to try it their way.
Their supporters have said we should judge them on that basis at some point in the near future. Fair enough.
However, we do have a Sugga Daddy FC precedent to use as a basic yardstick to gauge their yearly progress. And that is your lot.
posted on 19/12/12
squad in the context of monies coming in from actual football success
--------------------------------------------
You can't make mega bucks by just being a football success in England alone, you have to make it into the Champions League and then next of all make the knockout stages. Surely missing out on that extra money for 2 years running is damaging for City?
Page 16 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17