I think it should be neither, It should be what the TV companies in other countries are willing to pay for Liverpool games, which quite possibly in most countries will be a lot more than what they will pay for Bolton games. Which is the point Ayre made. However you all seem to be talking about points which he didn't even say.
--
I thought Ayre didn't want this split he just wanted a 'debate'.
Mockery?
I've said you've grown on me?
Please don't feel sorry for me.. I don't live in France.
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 1 minute ago
I think it should be neither, It should be what the TV companies in other countries are willing to pay for Liverpool games, which quite possibly in most countries will be a lot more than what they will pay for Bolton games. Which is the point Ayre made. However you all seem to be talking about points which he didn't even say.
--
I thought Ayre didn't want this split he just wanted a 'debate'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes he just wants to debate for fun, perhaps they can all sit around drinking tea and eating cakes and maybe get a trampoline in, also.
Ayre is wanting debate on this to increase the financial stake Liverpool gets... Let's not forget this..
At present you get 5%..
What happens if it's established United/City/Chelsea corner 98% of the market...
Will Ayre want to stop debating it?!
Damn right he will, and you'll all shut up too..
That's a certainty.. What say you Skywalker!?
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 4 minutes ago
I think that it should be split up the same way it is in the UK.
---
So why were you arguing before that it should be based on 'support'?
I would say that the more popular a club is, the more people tune into their games, so therefore that equates to more views, therefore the TV company will show more games of that particular club and therefore support and views are concomitant.
Got it yet?
________________________________________
And LaughingBoy
Please don't mock the fact I live in France, not had a cooked breakfast in 4 months .
comment by LaughingBoy - always happy to offer a smile and a thumbs up. God allowed me to be born a Bolton fan. Thank God. (U11262)
posted 49 seconds ago
Ayre is wanting debate on this to increase the financial stake Liverpool gets... Let's not forget this..
At present you get 5%..
What happens if it's established United/City/Chelsea corner 98% of the market...
Will Ayre want to stop debating it?!
Damn right he will, and you'll all shut up too..
That's a certainty.. What say you Skywalker!?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it was, which it won't be, then of course Ayre would shut up, loike I said he is doing what is best for his company and wants to be able to sell his product individually, due to him believing we will get more income that way, which we will. What is your point?
98% of the market?
Let's keep this realistic shall we laughing boy?
How about we give Bolton 0.01% of this deal and the rest share equally? That sounds better.
I would say that the more popular a club is, the more people tune into their games, so therefore that equates to more views, therefore the TV company will show more games of that particular club and therefore support and views are concomitant.
--
ATM, it is based on both support and league position, therefore, only want it based on success is not the same.
You're being pedantic again Moses.
So support comes even if a club has no success? Look at the 5 best supported clubs on earth, Liverpool, United, Real, Bayern and Barca.
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
My point is greed...
You simply want more money to deal with the Joke the yanks left you in.. The fact we've sorted a stadium out, owned by a Bolton lad and you keep chasing the dream that's costing you!!
Get your house in order before trying to bleed dry the clubs that compete in your league..
Want more money Liverpool??
Win the Premiership & don't spend £35m on Andy Carroll..
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No, he's picking holes in the stupid idea.
( seriously sorry about the breakfast situation. Wouldn't wish that on anyone)
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No I am just showing the inconsistency in your argument ...
--
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
--
I had support in a second category, you could have chosen both ....
You know when they've gone from trying to argue a point to just being pathetic when the Andy Carroll 35m argument comes out. Quote from John Henry about that:
"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Newcastle asked for Carroll," Henry said, explaining that Liverpool wanted Carroll, plus £15m, to replace Torres. Together with the £6m sale of Ryan Babel to Hoffenheim, that effectively financed Liverpool's £22.8m signing of Luis Suárez, meaning the club bought two strikers but net, spent almost nothing. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way."
So that fee doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Why is it a pathetic idea then LaughingBoy?
And the breakfast situation is why I'm fighting this point tooth and nail.
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 3 minutes ago
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No I am just showing the inconsistency in your argument ...
--
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
--
I had support in a second category, you could have chosen both ....
________________________________________
Wow!!! Poor effort! Read the whole comment!!!!
I think that it should be split up the same way it is in the UK.
--
You have been arguing that it should be based solely on league position.
I can get the comment if you want .....
Do you not find it at all suspicious that as Liverpool have been replaced by City in the top 4 and need a new stadium, that the Badminton media guru has raised the issue at this time, when it doesn't seem to be an issue with any other Prem club?
Smells of desparation to me and even funnier is that all the Liverpool fans, especially the ones that don't go, are suddenly all behind it and are making any any excuse to justify the fairness of it all.
Interesting quote Fred..
Here's one
""The socialism I believe in is not really politics. It is a way of living. It is humanity. I believe the only way to live and to be truly successful is by collective effort, with everyone working for each other, everyone helping each other, and everyone having a share of the rewards at the end of the day. That might be asking a lot, but it's the way I see football and the way I see life."
Bill Shankly
Go ahead Moses.
I grow tiresome of this debate so go ahead prove me wrong.
I do not care anymore. I know what my opinion is, and nobody has said anything to convince me my opinion is wrong.
So go ahead, just show me how pathetic you really are.
Since I'm a baby at 20 I'd presume you're a fair bit older, and in that case you being sat here arguing with me just shows you really are incredibly pathetic and I do actually pity you.
Age is clearly an issue with you Fred...
Not with anyone else though.. Old enough to log on, old enough to debate..
Don't look for excuses..
You're wrong again Mr Commerce. You're 8th not 5th.
Deloitte Football Money League
1. Real Madrid: 438.6m euros
2. Barcelona: 398.1m euros
3. Man Utd: 349.8m euros
4. Bayern Munich: 323m euros
5. Arsenal: 274.1m euros
6. Chelsea: 255.9m euros
7. AC Milan: 235.8.m euros
8. Liverpool: 225.3m euros
9. Inter Milan 224.8m euros
10. Juventus: 205m euros
Source: Deloitte: 2009-10
These are revenues and are directly proportional to the popularity of a club as both footballing & non-footballing revenues are directly related to support for the club.
Bill Shankly died 30 years ago so that quote is hardly valid in the modern day world, and I don't agree with it anyway.
___________________________________________
comment by Reebok Bricks (U6418)
posted 1 minute ago
Do you not find it at all suspicious that as Liverpool have been replaced by City in the top 4 and need a new stadium, that the Badminton media guru has raised the issue at this time, when it doesn't seem to be an issue with any other Prem club?
Smells of desparation to me and even funnier is that all the Liverpool fans, especially the ones that don't go, are suddenly all behind it and are making any any excuse to justify the fairness of it all.
___________________________________
Under the previous ownership, do you really think anybody saying anything would have been taken seriously? Of course not.
And so what if I can't go to the games, am I not allowed to defend my club?
Or is that not allowed? Just like the MD of our club is not allowed to try and make more money for the club, just as the higher echelons of your club are employed to do.
Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all.
"Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all."
And so you acquiesce
Shame on you.
Reebok Bricks
Fair enough I was wrong, not far off considering I made the point off my head, and I was right about the other 4 clubs.
Nice of you to pick the year where we were absolutely crippled by interest payments and owners without a clue though, bravo .
comment by LaughingBoy - always happy to offer a smile and a thumbs up. God allowed me to be born a Bolton fan. Thank God. (U11262)
posted 22 seconds ago
"Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all."
And so you acquiesce
Shame on you.
____________________________________
Never said I was happy about it, I'd much prefer to be chatting about the performance in the recent game between us, but it's all about money now and you know that.
By the way, 3-1 .
Even Henderson scored against you guys, 16 million well spent...
Sign in if you want to comment
Just how much does history count?
Page 10 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 16/10/11
I think it should be neither, It should be what the TV companies in other countries are willing to pay for Liverpool games, which quite possibly in most countries will be a lot more than what they will pay for Bolton games. Which is the point Ayre made. However you all seem to be talking about points which he didn't even say.
--
I thought Ayre didn't want this split he just wanted a 'debate'.
posted on 16/10/11
Mockery?
I've said you've grown on me?
Please don't feel sorry for me.. I don't live in France.
posted on 16/10/11
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 1 minute ago
I think it should be neither, It should be what the TV companies in other countries are willing to pay for Liverpool games, which quite possibly in most countries will be a lot more than what they will pay for Bolton games. Which is the point Ayre made. However you all seem to be talking about points which he didn't even say.
--
I thought Ayre didn't want this split he just wanted a 'debate'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes he just wants to debate for fun, perhaps they can all sit around drinking tea and eating cakes and maybe get a trampoline in, also.
posted on 16/10/11
Ayre is wanting debate on this to increase the financial stake Liverpool gets... Let's not forget this..
At present you get 5%..
What happens if it's established United/City/Chelsea corner 98% of the market...
Will Ayre want to stop debating it?!
Damn right he will, and you'll all shut up too..
That's a certainty.. What say you Skywalker!?
posted on 16/10/11
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 4 minutes ago
I think that it should be split up the same way it is in the UK.
---
So why were you arguing before that it should be based on 'support'?
I would say that the more popular a club is, the more people tune into their games, so therefore that equates to more views, therefore the TV company will show more games of that particular club and therefore support and views are concomitant.
Got it yet?
________________________________________
And LaughingBoy
Please don't mock the fact I live in France, not had a cooked breakfast in 4 months .
posted on 16/10/11
comment by LaughingBoy - always happy to offer a smile and a thumbs up. God allowed me to be born a Bolton fan. Thank God. (U11262)
posted 49 seconds ago
Ayre is wanting debate on this to increase the financial stake Liverpool gets... Let's not forget this..
At present you get 5%..
What happens if it's established United/City/Chelsea corner 98% of the market...
Will Ayre want to stop debating it?!
Damn right he will, and you'll all shut up too..
That's a certainty.. What say you Skywalker!?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it was, which it won't be, then of course Ayre would shut up, loike I said he is doing what is best for his company and wants to be able to sell his product individually, due to him believing we will get more income that way, which we will. What is your point?
posted on 16/10/11
98% of the market?
Let's keep this realistic shall we laughing boy?
posted on 16/10/11
How about we give Bolton 0.01% of this deal and the rest share equally? That sounds better.
posted on 16/10/11
I would say that the more popular a club is, the more people tune into their games, so therefore that equates to more views, therefore the TV company will show more games of that particular club and therefore support and views are concomitant.
--
ATM, it is based on both support and league position, therefore, only want it based on success is not the same.
posted on 16/10/11
You're being pedantic again Moses.
So support comes even if a club has no success? Look at the 5 best supported clubs on earth, Liverpool, United, Real, Bayern and Barca.
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
posted on 16/10/11
My point is greed...
You simply want more money to deal with the Joke the yanks left you in.. The fact we've sorted a stadium out, owned by a Bolton lad and you keep chasing the dream that's costing you!!
Get your house in order before trying to bleed dry the clubs that compete in your league..
Want more money Liverpool??
Win the Premiership & don't spend £35m on Andy Carroll..
posted on 16/10/11
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No, he's picking holes in the stupid idea.
( seriously sorry about the breakfast situation. Wouldn't wish that on anyone)
posted on 16/10/11
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No I am just showing the inconsistency in your argument ...
--
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
--
I had support in a second category, you could have chosen both ....
posted on 16/10/11
You know when they've gone from trying to argue a point to just being pathetic when the Andy Carroll 35m argument comes out. Quote from John Henry about that:
"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Newcastle asked for Carroll," Henry said, explaining that Liverpool wanted Carroll, plus £15m, to replace Torres. Together with the £6m sale of Ryan Babel to Hoffenheim, that effectively financed Liverpool's £22.8m signing of Luis Suárez, meaning the club bought two strikers but net, spent almost nothing. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way."
So that fee doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Why is it a pathetic idea then LaughingBoy?
And the breakfast situation is why I'm fighting this point tooth and nail.
posted on 16/10/11
comment by Moses'-SWA (U2460)
posted 3 minutes ago
"You're being pedantic again Moses."
No I am just showing the inconsistency in your argument ...
--
Fair bit of success between them wouldn't you agree?
--
I had support in a second category, you could have chosen both ....
________________________________________
Wow!!! Poor effort! Read the whole comment!!!!
posted on 16/10/11
I think that it should be split up the same way it is in the UK.
--
You have been arguing that it should be based solely on league position.
I can get the comment if you want .....
posted on 16/10/11
Do you not find it at all suspicious that as Liverpool have been replaced by City in the top 4 and need a new stadium, that the Badminton media guru has raised the issue at this time, when it doesn't seem to be an issue with any other Prem club?
Smells of desparation to me and even funnier is that all the Liverpool fans, especially the ones that don't go, are suddenly all behind it and are making any any excuse to justify the fairness of it all.
posted on 16/10/11
Interesting quote Fred..
Here's one
""The socialism I believe in is not really politics. It is a way of living. It is humanity. I believe the only way to live and to be truly successful is by collective effort, with everyone working for each other, everyone helping each other, and everyone having a share of the rewards at the end of the day. That might be asking a lot, but it's the way I see football and the way I see life."
Bill Shankly
posted on 16/10/11
Go ahead Moses.
I grow tiresome of this debate so go ahead prove me wrong.
I do not care anymore. I know what my opinion is, and nobody has said anything to convince me my opinion is wrong.
So go ahead, just show me how pathetic you really are.
Since I'm a baby at 20 I'd presume you're a fair bit older, and in that case you being sat here arguing with me just shows you really are incredibly pathetic and I do actually pity you.
posted on 16/10/11
Age is clearly an issue with you Fred...
Not with anyone else though.. Old enough to log on, old enough to debate..
Don't look for excuses..
posted on 16/10/11
You're wrong again Mr Commerce. You're 8th not 5th.
Deloitte Football Money League
1. Real Madrid: 438.6m euros
2. Barcelona: 398.1m euros
3. Man Utd: 349.8m euros
4. Bayern Munich: 323m euros
5. Arsenal: 274.1m euros
6. Chelsea: 255.9m euros
7. AC Milan: 235.8.m euros
8. Liverpool: 225.3m euros
9. Inter Milan 224.8m euros
10. Juventus: 205m euros
Source: Deloitte: 2009-10
These are revenues and are directly proportional to the popularity of a club as both footballing & non-footballing revenues are directly related to support for the club.
posted on 16/10/11
Bill Shankly died 30 years ago so that quote is hardly valid in the modern day world, and I don't agree with it anyway.
___________________________________________
comment by Reebok Bricks (U6418)
posted 1 minute ago
Do you not find it at all suspicious that as Liverpool have been replaced by City in the top 4 and need a new stadium, that the Badminton media guru has raised the issue at this time, when it doesn't seem to be an issue with any other Prem club?
Smells of desparation to me and even funnier is that all the Liverpool fans, especially the ones that don't go, are suddenly all behind it and are making any any excuse to justify the fairness of it all.
___________________________________
Under the previous ownership, do you really think anybody saying anything would have been taken seriously? Of course not.
And so what if I can't go to the games, am I not allowed to defend my club?
Or is that not allowed? Just like the MD of our club is not allowed to try and make more money for the club, just as the higher echelons of your club are employed to do.
Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all.
posted on 16/10/11
"Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all."
And so you acquiesce
Shame on you.
posted on 16/10/11
Reebok Bricks
Fair enough I was wrong, not far off considering I made the point off my head, and I was right about the other 4 clubs.
Nice of you to pick the year where we were absolutely crippled by interest payments and owners without a clue though, bravo .
posted on 16/10/11
comment by LaughingBoy - always happy to offer a smile and a thumbs up. God allowed me to be born a Bolton fan. Thank God. (U11262)
posted 22 seconds ago
"Football is a business, wake up boys, it's all about money. That's the sad fact of it all."
And so you acquiesce
Shame on you.
____________________________________
Never said I was happy about it, I'd much prefer to be chatting about the performance in the recent game between us, but it's all about money now and you know that.
By the way, 3-1 .
Even Henderson scored against you guys, 16 million well spent...
Page 10 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12