Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

Eliasson - Departure confirmed


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Which is a farce in itself!

In theory, what’s to stop SL from saying that him or one of his businesses is going to sponsor Messi? Job done, FFP bypassed! It’s a sham, Morris sold their stadium to himself at an inflated price, now has someone else paying a player that shouldn’t be playing for them & yet they are still shit! But what is to stop anyone else from doing this? It’s ridiculous!

As long as the sponsorship is “fair market value” then he could.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

As long as the sponsorship is “fair market value” then he could.

But what’s fair market value when sponsoring a footballer? I’d hardly say £100k+ p/w is legit for a Championship player.

So ‘Sponsoring’ Messi would be seen as fair? And who decides what’s fair?

And how many players are allowed to be ‘Sponsored’?

Me Bet365 at Stoke could just sponsor every player at Stoke & not have to worry about FFP by the looks of it? Hell, he could even say that Bet365 bought the players for their work team & then loan them to Stoke, that would surely help them get around FFP, wouldn’t it?
 

I hope I haven’t just given Mel Morris an idea for his next trick to get around get caught for his underhand football financial dealings!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Which is a farce in itself!

In theory, what’s to stop SL from saying that him or one of his businesses is going to sponsor Messi? Job done, FFP bypassed! It’s a sham, Morris sold their stadium to himself at an inflated price, now has someone else paying a player that shouldn’t be playing for them & yet they are still shit! But what is to stop anyone else from doing this? It’s ridiculous!

In Derby’s case their sponsor is , as far as I am aware, an unrelated third party company and as such will be regarded as having entered into a genuine arms length commercial deal with Derby - as our shirt sponsor has with us - so the additional sponsorship income will be allowed under ffp.

If one of SL’s businesses did the same they would be classed as a related third part company and as a result  the transaction would not be regarded as a genuine arms length commercial transaction. It doesn't mean it would not be allowed, but I am certain that under ffp any such transaction would be looked at to determine whether it’s monetary value represented fair value. 

It is of course ironic that the question of fair value is the one the EFL used when they investigated Derby’s “sale” of Pride Park to another of Mel Morris’s companies. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, downendcity said:

In Derby’s case their sponsor is , as far as I am aware, an unrelated third party company and as such will be regarded as having entered into a genuine arms length commercial deal with Derby - as our shirt sponsor has with us - so the additional sponsorship income will be allowed under ffp.

If one of SL’s businesses did the same they would be classed as a related third part company and as a result  the transaction would not be regarded as a genuine arms length commercial transaction. It doesn't mean it would not be allowed, but I am certain that under ffp any such transaction would be looked at to determine whether it’s monetary value represented fair value. 

It is of course ironic that the question of fair value is the one the EFL used when they investigated Derby’s “sale” of Pride Park to another of Mel Morris’s companies. 

So what about if SL just slips £100m into an imaginary company run by Maggie? Could she then ‘sponsor’ Messi under ‘Maggies Cleaners’ (for example, I assume she does some form cleaning at the mansion so she could get ‘paid’ for washing a cup up?) & then go on to pay Messi to turn out for us & when that £100m runs out, she just washes another cup, that should do the trick right?

At least that’s way it’s not involving any company that SL is involved in unlike the snake Morris at Derby who just sells things to himself under different guises.

How many more ways will Morris find to be able to bend the rules to suit?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tipps69 said:

But what’s fair market value when sponsoring a footballer? I’d hardly say £100k+ p/w is legit for a Championship player.

So ‘Sponsoring’ Messi would be seen as fair? And who decides what’s fair?

And how many players are allowed to be ‘Sponsored’?

Me Bet365 at Stoke could just sponsor every player at Stoke & not have to worry about FFP by the looks of it? Hell, he could even say that Bet365 bought the players for their work team & then loan them to Stoke, that would surely help them get around FFP, wouldn’t it?
 

I hope I haven’t just given Mel Morris an idea for his next trick to get around get caught for his underhand football financial dealings!

I suspect it would be easily argued that 32red regard it as excellent commercial value to increase their sponsorship deal by £100k per week if it means a player of Rooney’s status and media exposure is seen wearing the number 32 shirt on the back of Derby’s shirt on the front of which is their brand. I also suspect that the way their sponsorship deal is worded avoids any suggestion that they are “sponsoring Rooney, as this would come very close to third party ownership, which is not allowed.

They and Derby will say that 32bet sponsor Derby County FC not Wayne Rooney, as they did prior to Rooney joining them.  Both sides would also would undoubtedly argue that Derby’s acquisition of such a high profile player as Rooney was justification in itself for an increase in their sponsorship, notwithstanding that I suspect that Derby approached the sponsor to arrange such a deal, without which they could not have afforded to bring him in in the first place!

Bet365 cannot do the same with Stoke’s players because they are owned by Stoke’s owner(s). As such they are a related third party company, so doing the same as Derby would mean having to jump through hoops.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tipps69 said:

So what about if SL just slips £100m into an imaginary company run by Maggie? Could she then ‘sponsor’ Messi under ‘Maggies Cleaners’ (for example, I assume she does some form cleaning at the mansion so she could get ‘paid’ for washing a cup up?) & then go on to pay Messi to turn out for us & when that £100m runs out, she just washes another cup, that should do the trick right?

At least that’s way it’s not involving any company that SL is involved in unlike the snake Morris at Derby who just sells things to himself under different guises.

How many more ways will Morris find to be able to bend the rules to suit?

The EFL have proved their ineptitude over the last couple of years with ffp issues, but even at their worst they might be able to work out that a company owned by Maggie Lansdown , resident in Guernsey, might just have some connection with a football club owned by Steve Lansdown, also resident in Guernsey.

It was the fact the Derby “sold” Pride Park to another of Morris’s company’s that caused the EFL to question the transaction. It was because his involvement in both buyer and seller that the EFL investigated whether the sale was at fair value., which they concluded it was.

If City wanted to buy Messi in on a free transfer, but struggled to meet his £30m pa wages, Maggie’s cleaners couldn't help. However,  if MA could sell the benefit of such a high profile player wearing their logo on his shirt to Mansionbet, and for this additional benefit Mansionbet agreed to increase their sponsorship by £30m pa then I think it would be OK under ffp. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, downendcity said:

The EFL have proved their ineptitude over the last couple of years with ffp issues, but even at their worst they might be able to work out that a company owned by Maggie Lansdown , resident in Guernsey, might just have some connection with a football club owned by Steve Lansdown, also resident in Guernsey.

It was the fact the Derby “sold” Pride Park to another of Morris’s company’s that caused the EFL to question the transaction. It was because his involvement in both buyer and seller that the EFL investigated whether the sale was at fair value., which they concluded it was.

If City wanted to buy Messi in on a free transfer, but struggled to meet his £30m pa wages, Maggie’s cleaners couldn't help. However,  if MA could sell the benefit of such a high profile player wearing their logo on his shirt to Mansionbet, and for this additional benefit Mansionbet agreed to increase their sponsorship by £30m pa then I think it would be OK under ffp. 

Right, now where did I put Lionel’s landline number to? I’ll get him onside & I’m sure I could of organised ‘Maggie’s Cleaners’ to find the spare change down the back of the sofa that would be required but seeing as you poo pooed that idea, can I leave you to speak to Mr Mansionbet? We can agree things with Lionel in January officially & that should allow MA time get Eliasson out of the door (keeping the post on topic😉) & job’ll be a good ‘un. I mean, what can possibly go wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, downendcity said:

I suspect it would be easily argued that 32red regard it as excellent commercial value to increase their sponsorship deal by £100k per week if it means a player of Rooney’s status and media exposure is seen wearing the number 32 shirt on the back of Derby’s shirt on the front of which is their brand. I also suspect that the way their sponsorship deal is worded avoids any suggestion that they are “sponsoring Rooney, as this would come very close to third party ownership, which is not allowed.

They and Derby will say that 32bet sponsor Derby County FC not Wayne Rooney, as they did prior to Rooney joining them.  Both sides would also would undoubtedly argue that Derby’s acquisition of such a high profile player as Rooney was justification in itself for an increase in their sponsorship, notwithstanding that I suspect that Derby approached the sponsor to arrange such a deal, without which they could not have afforded to bring him in in the first place!

Bet365 cannot do the same with Stoke’s players because they are owned by Stoke’s owner(s). As such they are a related third party company, so doing the same as Derby would mean having to jump through hoops.

So while what you say doesn’t change my opinion of Mel Morris of being a fraud & a cheat.

With regards to Stoke & Bet365, what would happen if as has happened with Bristol City, SL was to hand over the club as he did with the chairmanship to Jon? SL did that reportedly so that he had very little to do with the day to day running of the club while still paying the electricity bill when required, so could he in theory hand over the club to Jon & then have Hargreaves Lansdown ‘sponsor’ some ridiculously expensive player? As then SL technically wouldn’t be anything to do with club right while still being involved in a company that has a couple of quid sat in the bank. Or would that be seen as it still being a family thing?

And back on the Stoke thing, who’s to say what is fair valuation for them to have the naming rights of the stadium & where any extra funds that may go with that should go, seeing as Bet365 probably wouldn’t notice the odd £100m disappear from their bank & as it’s a sponsorship deal, they probably get a bit of that back or something through HMRC?

And while I maybe cross mixing our posts, didn’t Reading & Sheffield Wednesday also sell their stadiums just to themselves, the same as Morris / Derby? So we could (if required) still use that gem of rule?

I’m genuinely intrigued as to how these crooks are able to get away with it & thank you for educating me on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Last time I looked they had a squad of 38!

3 of which (Michael Hefele, our mate Zach Clough & Gaetan Bong) haven’t even been given squad numbers & despite the sale of Matty Cash, in the last fortnight alone they have brought in Cyrus Christie, Harry Arter, Luke Freeman, Scott McKenna & some bloke from Cyprus.

They have signed 12 players in total, including Lyle Taylor who probably got an enormous signing on fee as he was out of contract, plus Jack Colback who was on a fortune at Newcastle and a lad from PSG for £4.5m.

Their owner was trying to do what Watford do with Udinese & sell players to his other club (Olympiakos) but none have left Forest yet, I cannot believe they are operating inside of FFP.

They've just shipped out their record signing  Joao Carvalho out on loan to Almeria as well.

That was £13m well spent then.

They have wasted so much money trying to replicate the Wolves/Watford model.

In regards to FFP. I think Forest were on a transfer embargo back in 2016; that they were in for a few years. They've come out of that; with almost a free hand for 3/4 years. They must of budgeted on getting into the PL during that period of time; and must have been guttered after the playoffs last season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

They've just shipped out their record signing  Joao Carvalho out on loan to Almeria as well.

That was £13m well spent then.

They have wasted so much money trying to replicate the Wolves/Watford model.

In regards to FFP. I think Forest were on a transfer embargo back in 2016; that they were in for a few years. They've come out of that; with almost a free hand for 3/4 years. They must of budgeted on getting into the PL during that period of time; and must have been guttered after the playoffs last season.

They really are a mess.

Rumour is their current manager has now made all their 5 Portuguese signings train away from the first team, plus Albert, who is there too..

Not exactly Wolves, are they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, James54De said:

 

Happy to get some of these fringe players away on a Permanent.

He had a fantastic season, last year. But doesn't fit into the new system; which seems to be initially working well.

We need to get the squad down to around 26-28 I reckon. It's near on impossible getting rid of players like Watkins; and Adelenkum(sp); due to the wages they're on.

No doubt, we are heavily subsidising their wages out on loan as well. Just like we did with Wright, and Taylor last season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, James54De said:

 

Interessant!

Nimes aren't a club I'm too familiar with so had a little look. They call themselves Les Crocodiles! Despite that, they play in red. They just escaped relegation from Ligue 1 last season by one place.

Looks like a hell of a place to live. Down on the south coast, and full of ancient ruins. I'd go and play there!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

They really are a mess.

Rumour is their current manager has now made all their 5 Portuguese signings train away from the first team, plus Albert, who is there too..

Not exactly Wolves, are they?

Albert is being linked with a move to QPR which would suit him down to the ground on a personal note. Cardiff are also interested after his loan last season, I guess that could be to replace the sacked Mendez-Laing? Or was it Hoilett they sacked?

Edited by Tipps69
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eastside Moonwalker said:

Fair play, seems to not fit into any real formation. Wouldn't get a look in at Villa either. Think this is a sensible move for his career

Seems about right, Rowe is doing a good job and with Jay Dasilva back in contention and Cameron Pring waiting to breakthrough as well, we are well served for wide left players. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

Seems about right, Rowe is doing a good job and with Jay Dasilva back in contention and Cameron Pring waiting to breakthrough as well, we are well served for wide left players. 

Its right that he goes given his contract situation, it is a wory that we will be left with any out-and-out wingers in the squad (O'DOwda at a push), maybe some of the money from him, Fam and a midfielder or two will be re-invested in a rigt sided winger just so we have the option as the season progresses

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

Its right that he goes given his contract situation, it is a wory that we will be left with any out-and-out wingers in the squad (O'DOwda at a push), maybe some of the money from him, Fam and a midfielder or two will be re-invested in a rigt sided winger just so we have the option as the season progresses

Weimann will be that option if required.

I really don’t see us spending any money now, not until all the financial uncertainty is cleared up or we get promotion anyway.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Albert is being linked with a move to QPR which would suit him down to the ground on a personal note. Cardiff are also interested after his loan last season, I guess that could be to replace the sacked Mendez-Laing? Or was it Hoilett they sacked?

Mendez-Laing, mate.

Be nice for Albert to finish his career at QPR, as he is a big fan.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, mozo said:

Interessant!

Nimes aren't a club I'm too familiar with so had a little look. They call themselves Les Crocodiles! Despite that, they play in red. They just escaped relegation from Ligue 1 last season by one place.

Looks like a hell of a place to live. Down on the south coast, and full of ancient ruins. I'd go and play there!

Lovely city in egg chaser country. If ever down that way visit the Pont du Gard, huge Roman aqueduct. Very best to Nic. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

Its right that he goes given his contract situation, it is a wory that we will be left with any out-and-out wingers in the squad (O'DOwda at a push), maybe some of the money from him, Fam and a midfielder or two will be re-invested in a rigt sided winger just so we have the option as the season progresses

Opi Edwards anyone? Bring another young un through. Not loaned far as I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • phantom changed the title to Eliasson - Departure confirmed

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...