Sentences with phrase «club than the debt»

We left the championship as a poorer club than the debt - ridden one that entered it not just four years previously.

Not exact matches

How many clubs have spent millions more than us, hundreds of millions in fact, whilst we've been laden with the debt of a new stadium?

And based on what i see here, some ppl are actually happy about where the club stands right now, incase of moving forward, some are ok with not having any debts than actually winning the league and spend more even before, still now.

According to the study that was just recently conducted by the Soccerex Football Finance 100, which ranks the world's top teams based on both their playing and fixed assets, money in the bank, owner potential investment and debt, Arsenal has more financial power than those big clubs:

The club needed to compensate for the huge debt they had racked up and Cazorla was seen as more dispensible than their other star player, Guiseppe Rossi.

you can google and see it for yourself more than 10 clubs that build a stadium and at the same time winning major trophies at home and in europe... its not like we finished our debt or we couldn't have afforded to keep our players, we could have but then our bank balance wouldn't be 300m euros....

The stadium debt was obviously a big priority for the club, and the transfer movements made in that time were more relevant to a mid-table club than one challenging for the title.

And i think he will go for less than that as the club is in massive debt, Portuguese clubs always put a huge buy out in before selling for less.

Well to a point they are right, maybe we are luckier than your average PL club, but then we are NOT your average PL club, we are charged the highest ticket prices of any club in the EPL for starter's and we are now apparently debt free and according to certain sources inside the clubs Hierarchy can buy any player we want, in short we are financially as big as any of our competition with regards to the ability to buy in top quality talent, and while we don't have the money to burn that Man city or Chelsea have we are in a position to spend more and spend it more often as long as there is a degree of prudence.

just reading around and all if not most rags are saying our net spend is # 46 million how can they tell that when they do nt even know what our real budget is if it was # 100 million then we are in profit by quite a bit i do nt really know what they base there assumptions on this is where you could do with swiss ramble to dissect what really was spent from what i could see most of our 5 transfers were covered by out goings and c / l monies earned debuchy - vela deal, chambers - vermalen deal, ospina - cesc and miquel deals sanchez c / l monies and other monies recovered from wages and old installment based deals this is the same with welbeck i would imagine if not then poldolski will be sold in jan to cover this as i think he was going to be sold and this would have covered welbecks transfer more or less also and people do nt always realize that arsenal have money coming in from more than one source to cover transfers not just puma and emirates deals we have property arm of the club which makes money for transfers also outstanding debts we are owed of old transfers we receive each year on song cesc maybe van persie and all other structured deals in installment payments sales we just flogged miquel as an example and all the monies from released wages and youths sold its a bit to complex to just say we have a net spend of xyz when arsenal do nt even make the budget public so they have no starting point from which to go from i bet you we have broke even or even made a slight profit as we are self sustaining it would make sense that we can break even or at least make the net spend under # 10 million each year at least screw then all we are the arsenal we do thing our way

Its not about the money he takes out of the club or that he doesn't invest, being self sufficient is not a bad thing to be... its certainly better than being loaded down with debt like some of our rivals owners have done to their clubs.

But Il Sole reported that within the last financial year, the club's total debt has risen to 637.56 million euros, which is almost 150 million euros more than the previous year.

3) Stan has made it perfectly clear that he is only keen on his own personal rewards from the club 4) Usmanov is richer than Stan and Abramovich and is prepared to spend the money the team needs to succeed 5) Man U are in far more debts than Arsenal but are still far richer, why?

We may be # 700 mill in debt and have no money to spend but we will still win more trophies than you over the next 5 years, as you are no more than one of feeder clubs!

The club even managed to pay off a hefty chunk of what they owe, bringing the debt down from more than half a billion to # 439 million over the course of 2011.

Any club in debt that spends more than 5.9 million euros on a foreign player - or 2.6 million euros on a domestic player - would have to pay the same amount to a government - run football development foundation under the control of the CFA.

While queuing to enter the Emirates I met an AAA who preferred to have a debt ridden club with trophies rather than a stable club with 4th places.

Their only hope is to sell the club to some one else for more than they bought it for and pass on the debt or help pay it off with the sale.

Rather than steering money to his friends and family club, how about paying off all the debt of Western New York municipalities?

Alia Dudum of Lending Club sheds some light on current economic conditions with a couple of solutions for managing debt and investments, «Our generation has a completely different relationship with money than our parents or grandparents did.

You have good control on your debt, and most passive investments pay jack (though Lending Club might be a bit better than most).

And though its declining fee structure means investors pay the heftiest fees in the beginning, Lend Academy's calculations show Prosper's fees are lower than Lending Club's when borrowers repay their debt during the first half of the loan period.

In the event of the dissolution of the Club, other than for purpose of reorganization, whether voluntary or involuntary or by operation of law, none of the property of the Club nor any proceeds thereof, nor any assets of the Club shall be distributed to any members of the Club, but after payment of the debts of the Club, its property and assets shall be given to a charitable organization for the benefit of dogs, which organization shall be selected by the Board of Governors.

In the event of the dissolution of the Club, other than for purposes of reorganization, whether voluntary or involuntary or by operation of law, none of the property of the Club nor any proceeds thereof nor any assets of the Club shall be distributed to any members of the Club but after payment of debts of the Club, its property and assets shall be given to a charitable organization for the benefit of dogs selected by the Board of Directors.

(d) Obligations other than dues are considered a debt to the club and must be paid in full prior to resignation.

Obligations other than dues are considered a debt to the Club and must be paid in full prior to resignation.

In the event of the dissolution of the Club, other than for purposes of reorganization, whether voluntary or involuntary or by operation of law, none of the property of the Club nor any proceeds thereof, nor any assets of the Club, shall be distributed to any members of the Club, but after payment of the debts of the Club, its property and assets shall be given to a charitable organization for the benefit of dogs selected by the Board.