Re: If you can't beat them, buy them!

by Dnmac4 Sat 21 Jul 2012 - 18:20

Look, some of you people on here are so ignorant. Let me say I'm the last person to cry racism at any event but some of you seriously need to get over your hatred towards Arabs.

American's just bought Liverpool and spent a bunch of money and the same goes for Roma. United is owned by Americans.

Rich Italians own most of the successful Italian clubs.

Russian Billionaires have bought clubs and use the same tactics.

It's like a lot of you on here believe if your white and bought a club before a certain date then the same behaviour the Arabs are displaying now was OK then but because there not white and there doing it now instead of a decade or two ago it's "ruining football".

And for whatever reason if a club had more history like a Roma or Liverpool then they can have a rich person buy them but if it was a small club with not much history the rules change and they should be small forever.

It is the height of hypocrisy and racism. Also people on here talk like Arab
's and "oil money" is Dirty or something or like they don't deserve the money.

You would be stunned if you saw how most of the new Russian and American and Asian billionaires earned there money but for some reason it's the oil money that gets people mad. It's pathetic and small minded and again totally racist.

Also, why don't you start getting mad at the mismanagement of your club for losing players not the "Arab money." No one is forcing you to sell to them. Look at Bayern they sell when they want to, not because they have been mismanaged.

And we wont even get into the threads on here where people who support European teams think they should still have the right to rob South America blind for there talent and when they don't give up there players for cheap there called insane or greedy or overpricing there players.

Here's a news flash the most over priced players in the world are born and breed in England so to call the South American's greedy etc like I have seen on here is such a joke when Teams like Internaciaonal, Sao Paulo, Santo's etc etc just want the same amount of money for the Oscar's, Damiao's, Neymar's, Lucas' etc etc as English teams get for the likes of Rio Ferdinand, Andy Carrol, James Milner etc.

by BarrileteCosmico Sat 21 Jul 2012 - 20:23

Completely agree with every word above. Dnmac :bow:

by Dnmac4 Sat 21 Jul 2012 - 21:22

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Completely agree with every word above. Dnmac

Thanks, you just see quotes like the ones below and wonder how old or long some of these people have been paying attention to football.

Also, I just don't think they get the what another poster said that there team doesn't have to sell to these teams, it's entirely up tp them and it's there choice to make them better and line there pockets.

QSG, Man City, Malaga... Arab tactics...

Thoughts,

Ruined football.

These cluvs bought players with money they earned, not money stupid ass arab owners don't know its meaning; if you don't know what to do with your money, donate some to supply clean what to Africa or something!

At least we had achieved something before he bought us

Nah Ah if anyone ruined football its Chelsea who started this epidemic

as far as i'm concerned, 2012, with chelsea winning cl and city winning epl, was the official date when football turned from a sport to the biggest dick measuring arena in the world

by LeSwagg James Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 3:18

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Completely agree with every word above. Dnmac

by FennecFox7 Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 3:20

Dnmac; great post Thumbs up

Apparently arabs can't be rich.. oil money is dirty Laughing

Stay mad haters Very Happy

The only reason algeria is in a respectable condition is because of that "dirty" oil money

by larisano Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 4:07

don't see how it has ruined football,but rather caused a shift in the powers or expanded the footballing power base in the top leagues. Of course,the lesser leagues' powers(Salzburg,Ajax,etc.) are much less a factor than the early days,but that had started even b4 arabs and russian investment/takeovers,tbh...
Maybe taking a lesser ethical highground would ensure that the likes of Milan,Inter,etc... don't fall too far behind the others.
There is a saying which goes: "Money makes the world go round"
you can apply that to football present day football. I hope somehow the likes of Atletico,Valencia and Bilbao can get some investment from somewhere to be able to compete more in the liga,tbh.

by Blue Barrett Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 4:56

che wrote:nothing to do with match fixing, the simple fact is that before abramovich et al started pumping money into individual clubs to feel better about themselves and/or be less bored, the aforementioned clubs tended to be completely irrelevant

pre-takeover chelsea? as relevant as spurs
pre-takeover city? dunno, i'd say everton would be an appropriate simile but they weren't in the championship 10 years ago
pre-takeover malaga? midtable team, if that
pre-takeover psg? laughing stock of all of france

enter unearned money and boom, instant title/european contenders

This all stinks jealousy Laughing

Tell me you would stop supporting Valencia if a rich owner bought the club and pumped a lot of money in, so much so that you won the league the next year. Tell me you'll quit being a supporter. Say it! What a Face

by che Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 7:28

dnmac4 wrote:Look, some of you people on here are so ignorant. Let me say I'm the last person to cry racism at any event but some of you seriously need to get over your hatred towards Arabs.

oh yaaaay, look everyone, it's the race card!

first of all, in my post i clearly mentioned abramovich and the italians so maybe read previous posts before going on a rant

secondly, my problem is with clubs spending unearned money, not where that money comes from... i couldn't give a single *bleep* if it's from an oil rich arab or a born and bred englishman who earned billions working as a luxury manwhore... it just so happens that the most megalomaniacal "investments" right now are being done by arabs

and comparing city or psg to liverpool and roma is completely idiotic considering how much they spent, i'm not even going to justify that with a response

by Zealous Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 15:30

Spending 65 million on Silva and Ibra is more financially sound than 55 on Carroll and Henderson.

In any case poor people will never be able to recognise an investment when they see one Sad

by che Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 16:37

yea, and financially illiterate people will never understand that spending a huge amount of money on something doesn't necessarily equal investment... chelsea were taken over almost a decade ago and they're still posting massive losses, and they're working with a better previous market (and sporting) pre-takeover position

it doesn't matter whether the players bought were worth the money or not, that's not the issue here... like i said about a hundred times, the problem is that the likes of psg are spending money they simply didn't earn, or earned through the means of a rich guy getting bored collecting bentleys or whatever and deciding to get into this whole football thing

liverpool are pulling in more than 200 mil a year in revenue, and they had a massive inflow from the torres transfer... i can't be arsed looking up the actual figures but i'm pretty sure their net spend on players since the americans took over is somewhere around 30-40 mil... like i said, not remotely comparable to the biggest spenders

by Dnmac4 Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:05

che wrote:
dnmac4 wrote:Look, some of you people on here are so ignorant. Let me say I'm the last person to cry racism at any event but some of you seriously need to get over your hatred towards Arabs.

oh yaaaay, look everyone, it's the race card!

first of all, in my post i clearly mentioned abramovich and the italians so maybe read previous posts before going on a rant

secondly, my problem is with clubs spending unearned money, not where that money comes from... i couldn't give a single *bleep* if it's from an oil rich arab or a born and bred englishman who earned billions working as a luxury manwhore... it just so happens that the most megalomaniacal "investments" right now are being done by arabs

and comparing city or psg to liverpool and roma is completely idiotic considering how much they spent, i'm not even going to justify that with a response

Ah, so it's not racist. Answer me one question and I will be totally satisfied that people who act and post like this are not racist.

1) Why do they keep bringing up oil money?

2) Do you ever see anyone refer to any of the other billionaires who bought clubs as to how they got there fortune?

Most Russians got it through raw materials when the Soviet Union broke up but I never see anyone say damn that Abromovich and his Aluminium and Gas money (which BTW he went to prison for) or to Prokhorov )who bought the Nets here in the states and owns teams in Europe for his Nickel and precious metals empire.

But no, the ONLY difference are these people are white, plain and simple. Both of these groups of people are tasking advantage of there countries natural resources and selling it off to create a huge fortune for themselves.

But the only time we hear where the money came from is when it's oil money. You don't see anything wrong with that?

by kiranr Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:12

che wrote:yea, and financially illiterate people will never understand that spending a huge amount of money on something doesn't necessarily equal investment... chelsea were taken over almost a decade ago and they're still posting massive losses, and they're working with a better previous market (and sporting) pre-takeover position

it doesn't matter whether the players bought were worth the money or not, that's not the issue here... like i said about a hundred times, the problem is that the likes of psg are spending money they simply didn't earn, or earned through the means of a rich guy getting bored collecting bentleys or whatever and deciding to get into this whole football thing

liverpool are pulling in more than 200 mil a year in revenue, and they had a massive inflow from the torres transfer... i can't be arsed looking up the actual figures but i'm pretty sure their net spend on players since the americans took over is somewhere around 30-40 mil... like i said, not remotely comparable to the biggest spenders

I agree with the sentiment but not the logic.

Just because these teams have been posting losses over the past few years, it does not mean they are not serious about their "investment". They may just have a really long-term horizon over which they plan to make it a sustainable business and earn a respectable return over all the money put into the club.

by Blue Barrett Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:13

che wrote:yea, and financially illiterate people will never understand that spending a huge amount of money on something doesn't necessarily equal investment... chelsea were taken over almost a decade ago and they're still posting massive losses, and they're working with a better previous market (and sporting) pre-takeover position

Man United are the most valuable sports team in the world yet their debt dwarfs Chelsea's debt by a long mile.

che wrote:it doesn't matter whether the players bought were worth the money or not, that's not the issue here... like i said about a hundred times, the problem is that the likes of psg are spending money they simply didn't earn, or earned through the means of a rich guy getting bored collecting bentleys or whatever and deciding to get into this whole football thing

Why does this bother you? You still haven't answered my question. If this happened to Valencia will you be complaining? Will you stop supporting your club?

che wrote:liverpool are pulling in more than 200 mil a year in revenue, and they had a massive inflow from the torres transfer... i can't be arsed looking up the actual figures but i'm pretty sure their net spend on players since the americans took over is somewhere around 30-40 mil... like i said, not remotely comparable to the biggest spenders

Yeah yeah Liverpool.

Yet some how Chelsea is still a more valuable sports team than they are... Rolling Eyes

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlm45edfgm/1-manchester-united/#gallerycontent

by Abramovich Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:13

Easter Europeans have a rep of being racist. #Stereotype dun dun dunnnnnnnnnnn

by Dnmac4 Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:14

che wrote:yea, and financially illiterate people will never understand that spending a huge amount of money on something doesn't necessarily equal investment... chelsea were taken over almost a decade ago and they're still posting massive losses, and they're working with a better previous market (and sporting) pre-takeover position

it doesn't matter whether the players bought were worth the money or not, that's not the issue here... like i said about a hundred times, the problem is that the likes of psg are spending money they simply didn't earn, or earned through the means of a rich guy getting bored collecting bentleys or whatever and deciding to get into this whole football thing

liverpool are pulling in more than 200 mil a year in revenue, and they had a massive inflow from the torres transfer... i can't be arsed looking up the actual figures but i'm pretty sure their net spend on players since the americans took over is somewhere around 30-40 mil... like i said, not remotely comparable to the biggest spenders

Also, I guess you have never heard the saying don't buy a football team if you're looking to make money.

Even most of the top earning teams in the world still operate at a debt so just because you make X dollars a year doesn't mean that's profit you can go spend on players, you still have a huge debt you're sitting on.

So when they buy players it comes from there billionaire owners or loans from banks who give them deals they don't give to normal people or business'.

The way your talking is that teams should be in the black before they spend a dollar on transfers and that is just not how it works or ever will they just keep floating debt because they know they can.

So don't give me this holier then thou nonsense. Almost every team is doing it, there just spending there own money NOW instead of the banks money and paying it off later.

They knew going into it that they would lose a good amount of money but they don't care and there is no law against it so why should you? Just because there doing it on a bigger scale then other peoples favorite teams.

To me it's actually more honest to spend your own money then leverage your team to the brink of collapse.

by che Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:25

dnmac4 wrote:

Ah, so it's not racist. Answer me one question and I will be totally satisfied that people who act and post like this are not racist.

1) Why do they keep bringing up oil money?

who are the biggest players right now? psg and man city
how did their owners get rich? oil
why do people keep calling it oil money? because it IS oil money, durr

2) Do you ever see anyone refer to any of the other billionaires who bought clubs as to how they got there fortune?

a) don't know what rock you're living under but "abramovich's oil money" was an extremely frequent sentiment
b) what other billionaires are there to talk about? liverpool and roma are undertaking perfectly reasonable long-term rebuildings, even malaga aren't spending ridiculous money but even what they are is above their means since they're a village club

see, you've got this entire thing backwards... most money pumped into clubs from third parties comes from natural resources, and from that, the biggest part is oil, that's a simple fact so no need to pull the "everyone's racist" bullshit

dnmac4 wrote:
Also, I guess you have never heard the saying don't buy a football team if you're looking to make money.

indeed, hence my "it's not an investment" statement

So when they buy players it comes from there billionaire owners or loans from banks who give them deals they don't give to normal people or business'.

The way your talking is that teams should be in the black before they spend a dollar on transfers and that is just not how it works or ever will they just keep floating debt because they know they can.

So don't give me this holier then thou nonsense. Almost every team is doing it, there just spending there own money NOW instead of the banks money and paying it off later.

no, they're not spending their own money, they're spending someone else's money, i feel like i'm repeating myself here

They knew going into it that they would lose a good amount of money but they don't care and there is no law against it

except there is, specifically against it, but uefa are too much of a bunch of incompetent imbeciles to enforce it

by BarrileteCosmico Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:37

Che you can't deny the fact that everyone cares when foreign owners come in and buy everyone in sight, yet when locals did exactly the same years ago or even now they care quite a bit less. Berlusconi broke the world record transfer fee in 1987 to bring Gullit, yet no one here accused him of "ruining football", for one example. This seems to me to a be a very xenophobic stance.

by julias Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:43

dnmac4 wrote:Look, some of you people on here are so ignorant. Let me say I'm the last person to cry racism at any event but some of you seriously need to get over your hatred towards Arabs.

American's just bought Liverpool and spent a bunch of money and the same goes for Roma. United is owned by Americans.

Rich Italians own most of the successful Italian clubs.

Russian Billionaires have bought clubs and use the same tactics.

It's like a lot of you on here believe if your white and bought a club before a certain date then the same behaviour the Arabs are displaying now was OK then but because there not white and there doing it now instead of a decade or two ago it's "ruining football".

And for whatever reason if a club had more history like a Roma or Liverpool then they can have a rich person buy them but if it was a small club with not much history the rules change and they should be small forever.

It is the height of hypocrisy and racism. Also people on here talk like Arab
's and "oil money" is Dirty or something or like they don't deserve the money.

You would be stunned if you saw how most of the new Russian and American and Asian billionaires earned there money but for some reason it's the oil money that gets people mad. It's pathetic and small minded and again totally racist.

Also, why don't you start getting mad at the mismanagement of your club for losing players not the "Arab money." No one is forcing you to sell to them. Look at Bayern they sell when they want to, not because they have been mismanaged.

And we wont even get into the threads on here where people who support European teams think they should still have the right to rob South America blind for there talent and when they don't give up there players for cheap there called insane or greedy or overpricing there players.

Here's a news flash the most over priced players in the world are born and breed in England so to call the South American's greedy etc like I have seen on here is such a joke when Teams like Internaciaonal, Sao Paulo, Santo's etc etc just want the same amount of money for the Oscar's, Damiao's, Neymar's, Lucas' etc etc as English teams get for the likes of Rio Ferdinand, Andy Carrol, James Milner etc.

Lol I think that just ended the thread

Dat Post :bow:

by Abramovich Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:43

RACIST RACIST RACIST RACIST!!!

by che Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:47

of course noone accused him of ruining football, he was the only one doing it large-scale for more than a decade in pre-internet age... not comparable to the current influx of bored billionaires

and it's definitely more forgivable if a local does it, berlusconi is a lifelong milan fan, the hoffenheim guy supports a club he used to play for... you can understand they feel passion for their team... meanwhile i'd hazard a guess that mansour wasn't going to sleep in man city pyjamas 30 years ago

by Blue Barrett Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:51

Why does it bother you, che? Worry about Barca and Madrid destroying your league first.

by Abramovich Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:53

Aka you have to be a true fan with ties to the club to be a true fan scratch

, only true fans of the club can spend shit loads of money on their club because they are true fans :bow:

by izzy Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:55

Barrettinator wrote:Why does it bother you, che? Worry about Barca and Madrid destroying your league first.

Got nothing to do with the point he's making at all.

by che Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:57

i never said anything about "only" great reading comprehension job there

do you seriously think there's no difference between financially supporting a club you grew up with because you want them to do well and financially supporting a team you chose because you want to own a football club?

by Lex Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:58

Chelsea fans up in arms over this looool Laughing

by Abramovich Sun 22 Jul 2012 - 17:59

Someone wants the Berlin wall back silent

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com