Skip to main content

Parachute payments.

Parachute payments.

Hunter Lionheart said:
Even if teams don't go out and spend 40k a week on superstars, to get a good premiership footballer, you need to ofer good wages, and a reasonable conract for his security. This is just a fact or Premiership life

You know full well that a promoted side lke ourselves needs more than a handful 15-20 grand a week (High championship wage/low prem) signings to have a hope in hell of staying up.

Basically, if you want to ditch parachute payements, then you are saying that teams who go up do not deserve to try and stay there.

You say it would even the playing field in the Championship? Possibly, but it would mean it's not even worth going for promotion at all- we'd have no chance of staying there, so why bother?
Click to expand...

I sometimes wonder at the level of intelligence of some posters on here.

Why bother?

OK then, lets not bother, lets apply for a place in the (what's it called?) the Blue Square Premiership or summat?

You talk as if no championship sides that go up NEVER COME STRAIGHT BACK DOWN.

When in fact, it is a regular occurence. My objection is that when they come back down, I don't want them to have a possible 20m (and no doubt going up eventually to 25, or 30m) head start on my football team.

If you are happy for a fresh batch of THREE TEAMS next season to be GIVEN FREE OF CHARGE OF ANY INTEREST 10m pounds, and the same the following season if they don't go straight back up again, which obviously gives them an advantage over PNE then that is your perogitive.

I will continue to be disgusted by it.
 
Albertan said:
It's always the first sign that someone on here is getting the feeling they are losing the debate when the location of the person's residence that they are debating with is mentioned.

What the fuck does it matter whether I live in Freckleton, Longridge or Canada jaymo?.................just stick to the principle of the debate or keep out of it.

And the reason why we continue to compete without the aid of parachute payments has to be because we on the whole must be a well run football club.

You say I refuse to come up with reasons about the above, well as far as I can see that is the first time I have been asked the question.

You really should stop making things up as you go along just to try and reinforce your argument.

By the same token, I could ask the question that if PNE WITHOUT PARACHUTE PAYMENTS continue to challenge for a play off place more or less every season, what would happen to our chances WITH A FREE 10M FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE SEASONS...............and please note the words FREE 10M, not borrowed, no interest to be paid, no responsibility to the doner of the money as to how it was spent etc etc.

Here is a wild guess at an answer for you:

ARE CHANCES OF PROMOTION WOULD INCREASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you agree or disagree..........no lecture about your interest in 'football politics' please 🙄.............just a yes or a no will suffice.
Click to expand...

"our" chances you illiterate idiot.

if you gave us 10m right now then th effects would probably be negligible having had to probably give a large chunck of that to uncle trev.

however I will concede that after a season in the prem it would help more, but, and this is a big but, the damage to the confidence of losing 8-0 every game (as by your rules we wouldnt be able to strengthen to get the full effect of the 10m in the championship) during a season means even an influx of 10m into the playing squad probably wouldnt help us that much.

take derby this season as an example.

CARE TO ADDRESS MY POINTS NOW??
 
Last edited:
Hunter Lionheart said:
.To be blunt, why should PNE, Leeds or Rochdale recieve the cash earned by Premiership clubs for appearing on sky/setanta/match of the day?
Click to expand...

Because in this day of people who live in Preston, Leeds or Rochdale "supporting" the big prem clubs instead of their local teams without some financial assistance, there may not be a future for clubs such as PNE, Leeds and Rochdale.

And the more that a select few receive unwarrented and unearned free cash at the expense of other clubs, the sooner that day will arrive.
 
jaymo said:
why should PNE be able to overspend year after year when other teams cant.

surely having TH willing to give us his money is unfair and should be abolished.
Click to expand...

Fuck me, daft deaf and stupid.

TH does not GIVE THE MONEY, HE LENDS IT!!!!!!!!

and if the above is not true, then your previous statement about PNE being 20m in debt must be a lie.

Which is it jaymo, MAKE YOUR MIND UP!!!!
 
jakehake said:
Yes, or thereabouts, 20 months probably closer

RNS Number : 2313I Preston North End PLC 14 November 2008

Preston North End plc

("Preston North End" or the "Company")

Loan Agreements

The Company confirms today that it is finalising the terms of two loan agreements to be made between the Company and (i) the Friends of Preston North End Limited and (ii) Guild Ventures Limited which will govern the terms of two loans totalling £7.1 million (the "Loans") (of which £990,000 has been advanced by Friends of Preston North End Limited and the remainder has been advanced by Guild Ventures Limited) (the "Loan Agreements").

£4.6 million of the Loans were drawn down in the financial year ended 30 June 2008, with the balance drawn down in the period since the year end date.



Isn't Gibson some form of sugar daddy to them? (No idea just thought he had chucked money at them for quite a while)
Click to expand...

fair enough.

on the boro point, you may have missed the point. The point is at what point can a promoted club spend the TV money because its within their means. after the 1st, 2nd, 3rd season in the prem. how long where birmingham in the prem under bruce before they were relegated? should they have not spent any money on premiership quality players in that time just because there was a chance they might be relegated?
 
Albertan said:
Fuck me, daft deaf and stupid.

TH does not GIVE THE MONEY, HE LENDS IT!!!!!!!!

and if the above is not true, then your previous statement about PNE being 20m in debt must be a lie.

Which is it jaymo, MAKE YOUR MIND UP!!!!
Click to expand...

we are still spending outside our means! soemthing you are strongly against from the soudns of it.


if anything its worse for us to do it because we have to pay it back eventually..
 
jakehake said:
I probably did in fairness, hard to keep track of all teh discussions in this thread
Click to expand...

let me summarise for you.

  • clubs must live within their means unless they have a benefactor
  • Clubs cannot spend TV rights money in the prem unless they are certain they can avoid relegation
  • We can tell other people how to spend money as long as we dont tell uncle trev how to
  • Parachute payments give a massive unfair advantage that they seemingly cant take advantage of
  • the whole system is out to destroy PNE if possible but valiant sir Derek is fighting against all odds to make sure that doesnt happen
  • Albertan is a cunt

hope this helps
 
jaymo said:
"our" chances you illiterate idiot.

if you gave us 10m right now then th effects would probably be negligible having had to probably give a large chunck of that to uncle trev.

however I will concede that after a season in the prem it would help more, but, and this is a big but, the damage to the confidence of losing 8-0 every game (as by your rules we wouldnt be able to strengthen to get the full effect of the 10m in the championship) during a season means even an influx of 10m into the playing squad probably wouldnt help us that much.

take derby this season as an example.

CARE TO ADDRESS MY POINTS NOW??
Click to expand...

You didn't put the 'e' on the end of 'the' in the first sentence after calling me illiterate. And there is only one 'c' in the word chunk. Sentences should start with a capital, so 'however' should really be 'However'. You missed the apostrophe out of the word 'wouldn't'. Again, the word 'take' should have a capital letter.

Adjust all those errors you illiterate idiot and then I may address your points.
 
noelpne said:
Please see responses , inserted.
Click to expand...

thanks for actually trying to address some points Noel. let me respond in kind.


firstly, let me clarify what I meant by Liverpool and United pulling the lions share of the cash in. Basically, sky punters dont want to watch hull - boro or west bom - wigan. they want to watch man utd or liverpool and whoever they are playing.

without those 2 clubs (united in particular) the TV rights for the prem would probably be a third of what it is now.


now you make a good point about the championship being of poorer quality, and I agree wholeheartedly. I dont think the standard of football is anywhere near what it was 4 or 5 years ago. But my counter argument to that would be that with all this parachute money flying about why hasnt the quality soared as you would expect. after all quality players cost.

I honestly dont know the answer to that. but agian it shows that having money doesnt necessarily make it an uneven playing field.


kudos for not regurgitating the same points in a pretentious manner though. I hope for more reasoned debate in the future.
 
Albertan said:
You didn't put the 'e' on the end of 'the' in the first sentence after calling me illiterate. And there is only one 'c' in the word chunk. Sentences should start with a capital, so 'however' should really be 'However'. You missed the apostrophe out of the word 'wouldn't'. Again, the word 'take' should have a capital letter.

Adjust all those errors you illiterate idiot and then I may address your points.
Click to expand...

this is geting pedantic but typos really dont compare to getting a whole word wrong like a massive spaz.
 
jaymo said:
Quote Jaymo - "Firstly, what the fuck does the fact they are bigger have to do with it? in fact, As I stated previously (and you failed to aknowledge ... AGAIN) most of the yo yo clubs are bigger then us, and they are yo yo clubs for that reason, not because of the PP."

Noelpne - I acknowledge it - but then why defend t'other factor, which componds that difference ?

I'd be pleased to read your response ?

I say that the PP money should be given to the 3 upwardly-succesful Champ. clubs - not to the 3 that were relegated.

What say you?



Q.Jaymo -" As for your second statement, show me anywhere were I've said I dont think the influx of money into football is a problem (dont waste your time, you wont be able to because i havent), but im a realist and I can see what happening and I can see that PPs are a necessary evil until somethings done about it. "


Noelpne - I can only repeat that SKY should consider payments to the 3 clubs going up & not to the Clubs coming down.

Reward success, & not failure - and stop trying to maintain poorly -managed/poor-players (& also sometimes badly run club - that make up the status quo.

Surely ?






Q.Jaymo " You accuse me of not reading your posts, well there you go, right back at you you moronic cunt."

Noelpne - uh...'no comment' - (hey I know it's 'personal' with you & Albie - but tbh it doens't do anyone any justice)


Q.Jaymo "Yet again you've said that are pushing small clubs like PNE further and further back and yet agian you've failed to even attempt to explain how clubs like us, swansea, cardiff, bristol city, burnley are here again, competing for promotion? and why clubs like Norwich and Soton are battling off relegation? and that a division with a mix of teams who benefitted from PPs and those who havent is more competitve then ever?"

Noelpne's speculations / My attempt to explain, etc.
I'd suggest we are perhaps overachieving, with a talented manager ? And that's despite limited input from the board, added to dwindling attendaces ?

Swansea - Perhaps still got the new-kid-on-the-block factor - plus a Continental Manager that I'm betting will move on at the end of the season.(maybe)
Cardiff - Hammann dealings are a bit dodgy , I'm sure you're aware ?
Bristol City - Dunno, tbh
Burnley - Almost identical crowds. Definately a Good Manager (ie better than Ternent or Cotterill , I believe ) Have their board invested more heavily than the PNE board, - I genuinely don't know.)



Q.Jaymo "You cant answer these questions, thats why your argument about them being completly unfair (in the current climate) is complete bollocks."
Click to expand...


Do you want to respond to my (I dare say) part - bollocks ?
 
Last edited:
Albertan said:
You didn't put the 'e' on the end of 'the' in the first sentence after calling me illiterate. And there is only one 'c' in the word chunk. Sentences should start with a capital, so 'however' should really be 'However'. You missed the apostrophe out of the word 'wouldn't'. Again, the word 'take' should have a capital letter.

Adjust all those errors you illiterate idiot and then I may address your points.
Click to expand...


Two peoples (purely - yet not actually confusing anyone, tbh now,were they ?) grammatical wrongs don't make a right , Albie.
 
jaymo said:
this is geting pedantic but typos really dont compare to getting a whole word wrong like a massive spaz.
Click to expand...

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones........and you my friend are throwing boulders, and telling lies at the same time to boost up your argument.

You say that PNE have an unfair advantage over some clubs because Hemmings GIVES the club money, yet then go on to say that we are 20m in debt.

You my friend are telling lies.

If Hemmings GAVE the money, we would not be in debt to him, isn't that correct?

Now all other clubs can BORROW money if they wish, JUST LIKE PNE ARE DOING.

If you were honourable, you would now come back on here and apologise for either:

a) making a big mistake, or

b) telling lies.

Guess what though, I won't be holding my breath.
 
In realation to your 2nd paragrph, Albie - I've STRONGLY suggested to Jaymo that
he was (simply) playing the Devils Advocate to us all on that one - it has after all long been 'normal' to be a benefactor of 'your local' Club, if you are rich enough.

I've also said that it's a 'whole new ball game' for a Competition-Sponsor (SKY) to 'reward' failure-to-maintain Premiership status.
 
Last edited:
Albertan said:
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones........and you my friend are throwing boulders, and telling lies at the same time to boost up your argument.

You say that PNE have an unfair advantage over some clubs because Hemmings GIVES the club money, yet then go on to say that we are 20m in debt.

You my friend are telling lies.

If Hemmings GAVE the money, we would not be in debt to him, isn't that correct?

Now all other clubs can BORROW money if they wish, JUST LIKE PNE ARE DOING.

If you were honourable, you would now come back on here and apologise for either:

a) making a big mistake, or

b) telling lies.

Guess what though, I won't be holding my breath.
Click to expand...

to me its just pedantry. Ok i admit theat from what I wrote if you were being pedantic or stupid you would take that i said TH loans were a gift. But i never meant it. But I can understand why some one would think that.

by the same token were i to be a pedantic **** i could say that in the process of loaning us money TH still had to give (i.e. pass on) the money to us, but im not a pedantic ****, so i wont point that out.

that fact is though, no one else has the ability to make soft loans like we do, its not just borrowing money is it because

a) we are paying minimal interest on it and

b) we will most probably not go into administration if we dont pay it back.

is it fair that we have the facility of interest free (comparitively) and risk free loan when other clubs dont? does that make it an uneven playing field?

Noels right, I am playing devils advocate, but im doing it to hopefully make people think a little bit.

and yet agian albertan, you have still failed to come up with even an attempt to prove how teams without PP can compete with teams with them, despite them being "totally unfair".
 
noelpne said:
Do you want to respond to my (I dare say) part - bollocks ?
Click to expand...

firstly noel, I can see where you and everyone is coming from re rewarding failure, but you have to remember that the PP are rewarding 3 upwardly mobile champ club, they just do it at a later stage to enure they dont become insolvent.

everyone seems to be thinking in terms of clubs who go up and come straight back dont. please dont forget that its not only these clubs who get PPs is any club that goes down. should Newcastle go down this season, they would be very much in need of the payments. Its not really a reward as such.

thin of it like working a month in hand when you start work. The money is already yours (or the clubs).

On to your next point, ok thats fair enough, at the moment we are pretty well managed and have been in the past, as are burnley and swansea (still dont think Jones (Cardiff) is that good IMO), but any club needs good management to do something in this division and IMO PP dont change that. For instance are wolves a better team now under mick mcarthy or when they got relegated under dave jones. Were Sheff UTd a better team 3 season ago under Warnock when they got promoted or now with Blackwell and the benefit of parachute payments.

plus like i said earlier it could be argued that only 3 out of the top half of the table are there with the benefit of PP worst case scenario 5 (when did wolves and ipswich get relegated, certainly more then 5 years ago for ipwich, probably 5 years ago for wolves), and the bottom 3 have all benefitted from them, and not forgetting the teams that have been relegated.

its that that makes me think they cant have skewed the playing field to the extent that some people would have you believe.

But saying all that, i can categorically say I do not agree with clubs like brimingham or sheff utd or charlton last season or leeds that abuse them in an attempt to get promoted again.

Charltons disbanding of the womens team as soon as they got relegated was dispicable in the extreme as far as im concerned because IMO thats what the payments are for.
 
jaymo said:
that fact is though, no one else has the ability to make soft loans like we do, its not just borrowing money is it because

a) we are paying minimal interest on it and

b) we will most probably not go into administration if we dont pay it back.
Click to expand...

Utter, utter bollocks Jaymo. Plenty of clubs have some kind of benefactor or trust who can loan or give them money. If they have, lucky for them. The point is parachute payments are made whether or not you have other means. And given that many of the teams who've been promoted ahead of us in recent years are 'bigger' e.g. bigger crowds, richer backers etc, that make parachute payments EVEN MORE unfair on the clubs who can't call on that money. Once again, the payments are given whereas our money from TH is loaned. TH could die or lose all his money tomorrow and we'd be up shite river without a paddle. Whereas Reading's money is guaranteed for 3 years unless they go straight back up, which they probably will do because of the parachute payments! How is that right?
 
Back
Top