Manchester United chief David Gill has dismissed supporters’ fears over the club’s finances and reiterated his stance that Sir Alex Ferguson has money to spend in the transfer market. It’s an increasingly tired line, coming in a week when the club posted record losses as the Glazer family’s leveraged takeover bites on United’s ability to compete.
Gill conceded that the club’s huge debt reduces the amount of money available but again denied that the £45 million per season interest payments effect United’s ability to compete in the transfer market.
It begs the question: just how foolish does the 53-year-old executive believe United’s supporters to be?
“I cannot disagree that, without the debt, we would have more money within the club, but the interest payments do no impact on the club’s ability to attract players,” he said.
“We have more than £160 million earning interest in the bank and the Ronaldo money remains largely unspent. The money is definitely there, if Alex requires it.”
It is precisely this kind of statement from Gill that the doormat tendency at Old Trafford is all too willing to follow, with some misguided – read deceived – supporters believing a challenge to the Glazer regime is akin to an attack on the club. It’s not.
It is those same fans, who slavishly follow the pronouncements from Gill and Ferguson, that the Glazer family is exploiting to prop up an ailing regime. Don’t believe the headlines, they say; it’s the anti-United media faction making the most of accounting rules to talk down the club.
Others know that Gill is telling at best half-truths.
True, remove the non-cash adjustments to United’s audited annual accounts and the club would have made a £25 million cash profit. That is, in a season where United achieved a record turnover on the back of increased ticket prices and a new television rights deal, United could afford to spend about one-third of a Cristiano Ronaldo in the market and break even.
With no growth in television or gate revenue likely in the current year, and United’s over-exploitation in the commercial market gathering pace, there is a good argument to say 2009/10 may represent the peak of the club’s financial might.
This is the rub, while United retains about £160 million in the bank, £28 million is already effectively spent on the disastrous debt-swap and £70 – £95 million will be carved off by United’s parent company Red Football Joint Venture (RFJV) to pay down the so-called Payment in Kind (PIK) debt.
Moreover, in this financial year the Glazers can also take up to another 50 per cent of United’s profits in further dividends. The family almost certainly borrowed money from the club in 2008 to buy up 20 per cent of the PIK debt and they will again. It makes no financial sense for the Americans to not draw from United’s funds once again.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, Gill says that money is there for Sir Alex to compete in the transfer market. Fans know he’ll need it, with up to four players retiring in the coming summer, while Owen Hargreaves and Michael Owen are out of contract. It’s going to take a lot more than £25 million to revitalised the Scot’s squad.
Don’t worry, says Gill, the benevolent Glazers have retained money in the business for this purpose.
“They have retained that money in the bank and it’s there for Sir Alex if he needs it for players, and for investing in the training ground and the stadium,” said Gill, who labelled debt the ‘road to ruin’ before accepting £1.7 million per season to play turncoat.
“United fans should not be concerned, we have a long-term financing structure in place, excellent revenues that are growing, we are controlling our costs – total wages are 46% of turnover – and we can afford the interest on our long-term finance.
“There is zero pressure at all to sell any star player whether it is Wayne Rooney or X, Y or Z. I can categorically say that. The philosophy is to retain and attract the best players.”
United’s ability to pay off interest is the bean-counters’ concern, of course, not the supporters’. Meanwhile, double-negative talk of United not selling star players is little more than a red herring.
United isn’t struggling to pay debt interest, as Liverpool has done in recent times. Neither is the club under financial pressure to sell Rooney or others.
However, United fans are genuinely worried about the ticket prices at Old Trafford and whether the team can remain competitive on the pitch with no significant net investment in the player squad over the past two summers.
With no plan to de-leverage in the next six years the Glazers will continue to use the Reds as a vehicle to pay interest and PIK debt. After all, RFJV owns no other asset than the club.
Supporters of a less ostrich-like ilk understand that unless the club’s ownership changes, debt will continue to play a significant role up to and including 2017. At that point the club will need to find at least £502.5 million to pay down the bond or refinance yet again. Debt in perpetuity.
If the PIK debt is no longer a factor by then it will surely mean United has been drained of a further £200 million.
This much supporters understand. At least those who have given up listening to Gill that is.
53 thoughts on “Arrogant Gill playing fans for fools”
Excellent and to the point.
i seriously don’t understand united’s financial situation.we are liable to pay huge debt thus can’t spend big amounts on proven stars but we have no problem spending 7.5 mil on on certain player that sir alex has never seen in action.if we did have that money available for transfers why didn’t we spend it on buying a quality midfielder which we are badly in need of especially when likes of vdvaart and ozil were available for similar price!!!!!maybe ozil is a money grabbing cunt and thus was always going to choose real but vdvaart openly said he wanted to join us.this logic is beyond my understanding….
The importance isn’t what David Gill said, but infact what he did for the club…
In the last 2 seasons there’s no significance signing that can improve the starting 11, but on the other hand, C.Ronaldo and C.Tevez have left the club. David Gill keep saying that we have money available for SAF, but infact what happen in the last 2 summer is we only increase the quantity (to sit on the bench), but not quality of the starting 11.
It’s no point to lie yourself, and keep on praising your players which infact they are not that good. Let’s be honest to yourself, in the past, we have top class midfield players like B.Robson, P.Ince, R.Keane, A.Kenchelskies, R.Giggs, D.Beckham, P.Scholes, and eventually C.Ronaldo who are wanted by other top clubs in EPL or in Europe. And, if they make a move, with their quality, they will go straight into the starting 11 of that team easily. Nowadays however, apart from Giggs and Scholes which they are already pass 35, I don’t think that players like Park, Obertan, Anderson, Carrick, Gibson, Fletcher, etc. can go straight into the starting 11 of Chelsea, Arsenal, City, or even Liverpool (Not to mention the other top club in Europe like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Inter, B.Munich, etc.). Nani may have a good chance and potential, but need much more improvement in terms of final ball and decision making.
David Gill is working under the Glazer’s family and the Glazers known that most of United fans love and respect SAF so much. So, if they can get SAF on their side, it should be OK.
Lots of bad sigings and over-paid signings happened currently for United (Infact there’s probably only 1 signing in the last 6-7 seasons that made most of United fans really happy which is the signing of C.Ronaldo – we signed him only because he played really well against us in the friendly match and our player told SAF to sign him, not the scout). Some fans believe that there’re corruptions happen in the transfer scene (Martin Ferguson is in the scout). So, this maybe the reason that make SAF and David Gill keep saying that the Glazer’s good for Manchester United….. THAT’S ALL….
this well written piece sums up the situation regarding the club very well.as usual the propaganda department at o.t feeds the press shite so we get the usual mixed messages in the media.the point made about an attack on the glazers not being an attack on the club is obvious to most fans,some sadly fail to grasp this so traitors like gill continue to lie.
I think whichever goalie is signed will be a big clue to the direction the club is going. The best choice would be Neuer, but he would cost 12-15 million. The danish Lindegaard would be much cheaper but he was replaced by Roy Carroll at his Danish club and loaned out to Norway! Sign him and it says the price tag is more important than the quality.
I tend to agree with you.
I’m not sure whether I’m in the ‘United are skint – Fergie and Gill are talking bollocks’ group or the ‘Fergie and Gill speak the truth but Fergie chooses not to spend’ group. I think valid arguments could be made for both.
However, I’m leaning towards the United are skint argument and we’re currently approaching a critical time for United with VDS, Scholes and arguably Giggs without a current adequate replacement. Fergie’s failure to bolster the midfield since Rome 2009 appears – at this moment – such an obvious error that it supports the notion that there is no money to spend.
It will take about £60M to adequately replace those 3 and bring in an extra quality young central midfielder. Will we get 1.Neuer/Buffon/de Gea, 2.Defour, 3.Rodwell/Javi Martinez and 4.Sanchez? Or will we get Lindegarrd, unheard of youngster and unheard of youngster?
I think these forthcoming transfers – or lack of – will define United’s next five years both on and off the pitch.
God this is boring. The club is doing fine financially, despite the Glazer debt. Gill is the best CEO in the business. He isn’t lying. The Glazers are going nowhere. It’s all a sideshow being whipped up by the press.
Can we talk about football? Finance doesn’t do anything for me and no blog that I’ve read has had anything new to say for five years.
You haven’t got a fucking clue, have you sunshine? Wait, I’ll answer that for you; you haven’t got a fucking clue sunshine.
Oh, that’s very grown up. Thanks for contributing to the debate. Now, if you don’t mind, can you slip back into the primordial ooze?
I’m afraid I’m unable to cede to your request for my devolution. Hah, see what I did there? No, well.
How about you explain to us, concisely and accurately, the basis for your assertion that “the club is doing fine financially”?
If they fudge the VDS replacement issue by going the unproven & potential route then that will be the final nail in the coffin.
It is the last chance for Gill & Co to prove there is money in the bank to bring in real quality. As Ed’s previous article states – keeper is not a position to take risks.
Neil Weston – are you real?
No, I’m a virtual Neil Weston! What sort of question is that? Jeez!
Nah, that’s the account captainhormone uses when he isn’t sloshed.
Neil Weston- can we talk about football?
Well yes, we’re playing the worst shite boring wamk we have for fifteen years, paying twice the price, and being bum fucked by ginger americans xxx
Simitch, no we’re doing OK. Judge us at Christmas. We never start before then. We were worse this time last year.
awaiting moderation? it used to be about the music man, fucking fascists
so he uses it once a year?
You make some good points and for sure its a crappy situation to be in (that should never have been allowed to come to pass) but i have to say this overtone of sneering at other United fans that do not hold quite such an extreme negative viewpoint as you or agree with everything you say is very un-appealing.You did the same thing to me the other day for daring to suggest that the media are trumping up the figures and having a great time putting as negative spin on things as possible. We should remember who we are fighting not be in fighting and making snidey Ostrich comments with this holier than thou attitude.
Danny – actually my point is Gill and the club are lying to the fans and some fans, being fans, want to believe it. I’m neither intentionally sneering nor being ‘holier than thou’. I happen, through reading and research, to believe that the ‘negative spin’ – that United’s financial position is serious – is factually correct. Other people believe differently but my honest opinion is that they do so because they are misinformed or mislead.
Ed, do you have have any evidence that Gill and the club are lying or are you just blowing smoke? Because if you have proof that Gill is lying about the reported figures you can have him struck off as a director. Which I assume that you would like, even though it would be almost as bad as getting rid of Fergie. If you’ve got proof and the bottle you can achieve your goal of destablising the club. Go for it.
Neil – well let’s see, Gill keeps saying that the PIK debt is not United’s responsibility but the Glazer family took £10 million in loans at the same time they paid down 20% of the PIK debt in 2008. I’d say that’s a lie.
Let’s see – he also called the club “well run” which is interesting when posting an £83.6 million loss a quarter later.
Then there’s the one where he claimed that the “group’s debt is £340 million” conveniently ignoring RFJV accounts which posted a £716 million loss.
Then there’s the Glazer promise, endorsed by Gill, that United would have £25 million net to spend in the transfer market each season. Over the 5 years of the Glazers the net spend is just a bit less than £2 million per season.
The best is this one. Since you’re such a massive fan of the Glazers who must think this is a lie…
“We’ve seen many examples of debt in football over the years and the difficulties it causes. We know what that means and we think that is inappropriate for this business…. Debt is the road to ruin.”
Any proof that an £83.6 million loss means the club is “doing fine financially” as you said last week?
OK, I see. You don’t understand what a lie is. Well, that fits.
So, on the PIKs, if RFJV borrow money from the club, whose responsibility is it to pay the PIKs? The club’s? No. RFJV? Yes. They will also be responsible for paying back the loan to the club, although that will probably be in the form of a write off against profits. So, not a lie.
The club is well run by any measure. Gill and the club didn’t put the £500m debt on themselves and yet despite that they make impressive operating profits. So no lie there.
The club’s debt is the £500m+ and Gill said that it’s effectively that less the cash in hand. Which is one way of looking at it. Not a lie though.
I don’t believe Gill or the Glazers ever said that there would be a fixed budget for transfers. I think that was the Times touting a supposed leaked business plan. If you can find a direct quote I’d be interested but I couldn’t find one. All I can find is Gill saying that the club will support the manager with the funds he asks for. Which the club has done, as far as I can see.
And I’d like you to explain how Gill is lying when he made the debt in football comment on behalf of the plc. Do you mean that he hasn’t seen many examples and was lying? Or do you think that he didn’t know what it means? Or was he lying when he said that it was inappropriate for the plc? Obviously none of those.
So, with you trying to find a direct quotation on one and the others shown not to be lies, what do you intend doing now? Withdraw your statement or turn him into the rozzers?
So no evidence that anyone lied; just you in a temper that they didn’t say what you wanted to hear. Well done for playing down to your stereotype.
Neil / John – you’re so keen to defend the Glazers you’ll twist any word to try and prove your point. It’s truly incredible and very sad that United fans seek to defend these carpetbaggers who’ve loaded more than £700m in debt on the club.
It’s not a semantic point though – Gill keeps saying that it is not United’s responsibility to pay down the PIK debt but it is and he’s not telling the truth. RFJV has only one asset and therefore one income stream – United. The true debt is more than £700m and to talk net debt and not include the holding company, when the cash is certainly earmarked for debt repayment, is a flat-out lie. Gill knows it and you’ve been willingly conned by it.
If United doesn’t pay down the PIK, the Glazers lose the club, much in the way Hicks and Gillett are losing Liverpool.
As for the debt quote John – well surely you think he was wrong and not telling the truth? After all debt isn’t the road to ruin, according to your special schooling in Glazernomics.
Final point – why do you two bother coming to this site. I mean, you can happily live in a rosy world where nothing is wrong over at manutd.com. You’ll find like minded people. Or do you expect to win an argument by repeating the Glazer family’s spin over and over?
If some fans feel that the Glazers pissing somewhere in the region of £300m – £500m up the fucking wall over the last few years on interest and professional fees is acceptable, hand me your debit and credit cards immediately. I’m being one hundred percent serious, because I’ll willingly piss even more of your cash up the wall on frivelous, annoying and completely unnecessary shit and at least the Glazers won’t get a penny of it.
The complete and utter nonsensical arguments about the tax effeciency of debt in business is complete bullshit in football. Football is a sport, [u]it is not a business[/u]. It is complete balls to think one can make any kind of significant return out of a club for the following reasons, amongst others:
(1) Football clubs require consistent, significant capital investment over time to make them successful and it is likely you’ll never, ever get a significant return on any investment. That investment has further complexity – because you are buying a person and specifically a footballer – that investment might not work out because of the mentality and fitness of the person, never mind anything else. Every single football transfer is risky. We could buy Messi tomorrow for £80m. The day afterwards he could break his leg, he could lose the will to live, or simply crumble under the pressure at OT. You never know. Not only this, specific to United, we have 3 – 5 key and fringe players who are likely to quit / retire in the next 12 months. We are likely to have £50m – £100m replacement bill to go with that.
(2) Clubs have a huge fixed cost base that cannot be effectively reduced. The wages of footballers are obscene, true, but they can’t be reduced or you stop being competitive. You stop being competitive, you stop being popular = the business side crumbles.
(3) Luck – while the old axiom of ‘the harder I work, the luckier I get’ is generally true in football, the fact remains results on the pitch cannot be predicted with any element of certainty. United could theoretically get relegated this season. It isn’t likely – but it could happen. United could be thirty seconds away from winning the Premier League and a simple mistake could lose that. Crucially, that could be difference between Champions League qualification and not qualifying, leaving the club with a gaping black hole of revenue to make up.
The cash balance sat on the Balance Sheet of the club may look healthy at present, coupled with the Cash Flow statement – except when you put it in context and the fact the Glazers are just about to fleece the better part of £125m out of the club.
The only way United’s future will be secured COMPLETELY is to eradicate Glazer ownership ENTIRELY and remove the most significant portion of the debt possible. If we are not careful, they will RUIN United and leave the club without cash and in a situation where significant and sustained capital investment is required to get the club competitive again. We CANNOT and MUST NOT simply rely on youth and luck to see us through because THEY WILL RUN OUT. I’m not going to go into utter doomsaying, but it isn’t unforseeable to see the ground fall into other hands. Is that what the fans really want?
Vote with your feet and your wallets. LUHG.
Ben Hulston, you sound vaguely annoyed that the club is doing so well. Why is that? Is it because you chose the wrong side and gave up your season ticket only to feel foolish once the season started?
i have nothing to add to this
You’re very good at stirring shit… not hard to do, when your only contribution is to stick two fingers up to common opinion… but the fact remains… you really haven’t said anything at all… except, this is boring, and all is well.
But since the vast majority here are justifiably (in my opinion), worried about our clubs’ future… and you seem to know better… why not ease all our minds, and explain to us how and why we needn’t worry at all.
Either that, or maybe you should join “RedCafe”… they’re a bunch of deluded twats as well.
that last one isn’t a lie, we’re travelin down said ‘road’ at a rate of knots
Actually, Neil, I have a significant and professionally recognised understanding of finance and more than just a little commercial awareness. I am also very aware of what debt can do to a football club.
I’m not annoyed, in the slightest, that the club is doing well. What I can forsee is that the second the club stops doing well, where well is defined as ‘qualifies for the Champions League’, the club will have a significant and brutal cash flow crisis on its hands.
This situation would not be here if it wasn’t for the Glazers. So much money wouldn’t have been pissed up the wall on interest repayments – part of it may have gone on dividend payments, but quite frankly it wouldn’t have been anything like the cash that goes out of the business on interest and professional fees. So there would be money available for any kind of purchase United might want to make.
If you want to talk about the football side – fine. But don’t make out like the state of the finances at Old Trafford aren’t important. No cash, no club, no United.
If you want to talk about football, fine
– Do you think Gibson is going to suddenly blossom into a world beater? Insert Anderson (fitness, form, mentality) / Carrick (form, mentality) in there too.
– Do you think Hargreaves is likely to actually recover?
– How much do you think we’ll need to spend to replace Hargreaves, Owen, Scholes, Giggs and Van Der Sar?
I do, controversially, agree that Gill is actually a good CEO. He’s just protecting his position, not the clubs, at present which isn’t a good thing. I also agree that the removal of Gill would unnecessarily destabilize the club. Removing the Glazers, however, would be the best thing that has happened to the club since Eric Cantona first turned up the collar on his no 7 shirt.
Does anyone give a fuck what this cunt says anymore
He may be a cunt but it’s still his blog. If you don’t like it go to Red Cafe, they’re a bunch of deluded twats there, so I’m told.
Neil – goodbye, I’d say it was nice having you but it wasn’t. As wrong as I think you are, I didn’t and don’t regress to the playground.
Yeah, the club is doing so well.
Remind yourself who is picking up the tab.
was that for me Neil?
@John Smith… So… because you can’t find a direct quote of Gill saying “black is white”, you reckon that’s proof that he’s being “honest” with the fans?
I really fail to see the point of people like you… only a complete fuckin idiot would think that spending such a large chunk of our profits to repay a loan we don’t need… is good for the club… or even just acceptable.
Unless of course, you’re actually against the idea of the debt, in which case, what point does it serve arguing the more petty aspects of the issue?… except to direct attention away from what really matters.
United doesn’t NEED the Glazers…. we’re stuck with the fuckers, and as long as there are people like you willing to argue on their behalf, we will struggle to get rid.
And to Neil Weston… excellent Mate… the quality of your argument is there for all to see.
The whole thing with the Glazers makes my blood boil – the injustice of them being here is getting too much for me. I’m not a business person but I’m not niaeve enough to think that a certain amount of debt is not normal. But I’m not having that its ‘normal’ for the most profitable, well-run & relatively prudent club in the world to have an £80million annual loss SOLELY cos of a debt pumped in by an external source. We’re being majorly buttfu*ked! Our wages are less than 1/2 our turnover & we’re skint, City’s wages are more than their turnover & their rich – how can that be right?! In the summer the club had its chance to prove theres money to spend (Ozil, Van Der Vaart, Sneijder) & they did f*c* all – Gill is a bare faced lyer, I can live with that. What I struggle with is that fergie isnt far behind him. Fergie has enough credibility to say ‘We’re skint’ & deal with the consequences – the Glazers need him more than he needs them as its only because of him that we havent regressed more. We needed to add to the squad after the 2009 Champions League final (thats with Tevez & Ronaldo still there) but we’ve lost key players & spent no decent money in replacing them – so what do we expect on the pitch but a downward turn? The fact Fergie goes on as if we still have the same expectations as always is an insult to the people that have supported him for 24 years. Crazy team selections & mad media comments are par for the course & generally he has come up trumps & made people eat humble pie – me included. But, to lie to the fans is unforgiveable. I don’t know where this is going to end
Funny how the cunt had fuck all to say after I posted the above comment.
Sheesh – well I stuck him on the auto moderation (unsafe) list to see what he came up with next because history has taught me that somebody like Neil, who always has to have the last say, will probably resort to streams of insults. Lo and behold a series of rants about me stuck in the queue. It’s always the same with these guys, when they can’t win an argument with facts they resort to insults.
Oh and Neil, since you’ll be reading. The PIK notes are secured against RFJV’s assets – which is one: Manchester United. So if the PIK notes (of which the Glazers do not own 80%) aren’t paid down from RFJV’s only income source (Manchester United) then the hedge funds will own the club and can do whatever they want with it. That’s a fact, it’s why Gill’s a liar and why you, my dear friend, are not only deeply and embarrassingly wrong but part of the problem.
So you censored someone for having a different opinion to yours? Wow! That’s pretty childish. Maybe you should add me to that list too because I don’t agree with your nonsense either. You and your little mates can have the forum all to yourselves. Tumbleweed and all.
John – Not all all John and you know it so don’t try and blow smoke up my arse. I’ve given you and Neil a platform to talk ill informed nonsense for months. I’m happy to have the debate, it’s just shame you can’t bring any facts to the table. I put Neil in the moderation queue for calling me a cunt and there was a lot more in my inbox this morning. I enjoy the debate but I don’t see why I should be subject to insults because of it.
Ed, reading back it looks to me like Sidders called Neil Weston a cunt and he just responded with a joke. Two things: why isn’t Sidders on the moderator queue and why are you so extraordinarily thin-skinned that one insult gets a person banned.
I think I can answer those. First, Sidders has the identikit United Rant opinion and Neil Weston doesn’t. Second, Neil Weston doesn’t have the identikit United Rant opinion and is therefore a threat to you.
You are probably feeling a little bit silly right now.
John – You’ve got a different view and you’re allowed to make it, as have many thousands of others on this website over the years. The issue with Neil, born out in four additional comments in my inbox this morning that I did not publish, is that he’s turning it into a personal insult. I won’t take that and nor should I have to. Neil can defend himself against others but I’ve had enough of being insulted myself. I don’t have to defend my actions when I’m called a cunt. It’s as simple as that. This is the end of the conversation.
It’s very misguided to criticise Gill and Fergie for staying in their jobs, they’re helping the club. How much worse would things be if they were replaced by Glazer appointees?
Gill’s certainly not giving us his uncensored opinion, but he’s not talking total BS either. Nobody disputes that the debt is a terrible shame and waste of money, but the fact is that we are not headed for a financial meltdown unless things change drastically. If anything, our financial situation is much improved over the past few years. We should be able to motor along, paying off the debt while still staying competitive on the pitch. That’s not to say we wouldn’t be much more competitive on the pitch without the debt, because we probably would be (although it is worth noting that we’ve been much more successful in the post-glazer years than in the 4-5 years pre-glazer). I just think that Fergie and Gill have been doing a good job of keeping the ship afloat. I think they’re saving up a big war chest in case they need to splash out big time to replace Scholes, Giggs etc.
Is the debt an unneccesary burden? absolutely
do Fergie and Gill genuinely think they can manage to stay competitive anyway? yes I think they do, and they’ve done better than that up to last season
would we be worse off without either Fergie or Gill? I definitely think we would
Why would Fergie and Gill want to quit and leave the club they’ve helped build totally in the hands of the Glazers and a very uncertain future? Anger at the Glazers is completely justifiable, I just think it’s misguided to direct that anger at the wrong people.
The most important thing is that whoever eventually buys the Glazers out doesn’t do it by leveraging the club even further. Until then, I think we’ll be alright.
I agree with some of what you say, Bman, but I highly doubt there will be a big transfer warchest.
We can only hope.
flattering your site with that ‘many thousands’ bit there ed
LOL – LKHF
knob – cheeky fuck! Actually traffic doing pretty good these days since I don’t chase clicks with shite stories about transfers that are never going to happen.
is the most accurate and balanced position, nice one
As things stand, yes, we are ‘motoring along’ (commercially we are doing better than ever) but to what expense? Look at the net investment in the team.
I think a lot will ride on how successful we are on the pitch. It will be a big ask for the next manager (whoever he is, even Mourinho) to deliver instant success.
Don’t forget that we should also be concerned about how much we receive from future TV deals. There’s a case that’s being brought before the courts that could ultimately have huge implications on TV rights held by Sky:
Player salaries aren’t likely to go down any time soon.
There are a lot of variables that we should be concerned about, going into the next few years.
sheesh – yeah the pub/rights case is interesting, could open up the grey market for everybody but there’s still a technical barrier most people won’t get past. Easier just to stream it over the net. The more interesting issue is after the next rights deal runs out in 2014 – Sky is currently being squeezed on the wholesale side after OFCOM ruled that they had to cut prices for BT, Virgin and other providers buying wholesale. Sky may well not pay as much next time.