Why are you lumping the same teams together - surely a club building through merit is what everyone wants to see ?
So it’s just Chelsea and city that have the issue then - when it was happening everyone was universal about them buying everything and wanting rules changed to stop it happening - yet when it’s happens those that complained back then now want to do the same as City and Chelsea ?
Newcastle spent fortunes during the 90’s
Forest weren’t shy when they were spending
They didn’t build on it
So basically you want to see rich owners being able to spend more - how is that fair then if your club doesn’t have a rich owner that’s willing to fund and stand up a club ?
So it’s then down to which club has the richest owner - is that fair ?
You are right - that’s how leagues work ? Why is it ok to work that way in the championship and not ok to work in the Prem ?
Is it because now the clubs that dominated in championship don’t in the Prem
Clubs are encouraged to grow
Spurs owner financed a brand new stadium at £1bn to bring in the growth , we spent 15 years building the club back up
Arsenal spent years building up
Even Man Utd earned their money by buying and selling smart and building off the field
The issue is some fans want that be at that level in an instant , there is believe that just because they have a rich owner they don’t have to be patient and build , they want it now
Rich owners of any business usually spend the bank’s money, acting as guarantors for the loans.
Even Liverpool who, allegedly, only spend what they earn took out a £300m(?) loan for infrastructure spending. It’s how big business runs. All the bank is interested in is collateral to cover the loan if there’s a default and income to service the debt.
Unfortunately, PSR only takes into account what a club earns, not what an owner earns from outside interests.
Arthur, I actually agree with some of what you’re saying. Clubs like Arsenal and Spurs didn’t spend like Chelsea or City — they built smart, invested in infrastructure, and ran sustainably. Fair play to them. But that doesn’t change the reality that all six of those clubs now benefit from rules that protect their status, because they were able to grow and spend at key times before PSR limited how others could follow the same path.
So no — it’s not just about Chelsea and City. The others are protected too, even if they got there differently. United’s commercial empire, Liverpool’s global reach, Spurs’ stadium, Arsenal’s squad value — all of that growth happened before the current caps made that kind of acceleration nearly impossible for everyone else.
And yes, of course I want clubs to be patient and build. But I also think they should be allowed to compete. Not be told to spend 15 years waiting in line behind a financial glass ceiling while others stay out of reach thanks to a head start and a locked-in advantage.
It’s not about instant success — it’s about fair access to the ladder that others already climbed.
Other clubs can try.Yes, Forest can compete — up to a point. But the reality is, we can’t build quickly, even with ambition and good ownership, because the system now blocks the kind of front-loaded investment that City and Chelsea were allowed. We fell off at the end because we had virtually zero strength in squad depth and our players all looked knackered! As an example, in the FA Cup semi final we had injuries/suspensions at full back. So we had to play our 19-year old Youth Academy centre back ant left back instead, up against Omar Marmoush! Later in the game, he went off injured and so to replace him on came our 3rd/4th choice right winger! Meanwhile, City are bringing on Gubdogan, Doku and Foden!
You’re absolutely right that clubs like United, Liverpool and Arsenal have built global fanbases over decades. But part of the reason they could do that is they were never financially capped while they grew. If today’s PSR rules had existed in the ’90s and 2000s, I doubt even they’d have risen the same way.
City and Chelsea did ‘crash the party’ — and the rules were changed after that to stop it happening again. But the problem is: now only they get to stay at the top table, while others are locked out. That’s what people are frustrated about — not the success, but the fact that no one else is allowed to try anymore.
As you said yourself, even if someone rich buys a club now, it’s unlikely they’ll catch up — because they can’t use the same tools that others did. That’s the whole point. The rules don’t create sustainability — they freeze the hierarchy.
Stadium and infrastructure expansion is something that doesnt get added into PSR
Clubs like Spurs spent a fortune ( owners money or loan ) to build a massive stadium which has helped them bring in millions
It’s what Everton are looking to do
Newcastle can spend a massive amount to extend or build a new stadium
It’s something that helps any team grow
I get that but the debt still has to be serviced. And if money is taken from income to service that debt, it isn’t being used for transfers.
I’m not criticising any club, or business, that spends money, only highlighting where money comes from, i.e. from bank loans secured by collateral and/or guaranteed by rich owners.
I agree that two of the top 6 got ehre undeserved, and that it is hard to get into there for any team because they can't pump in money.
But, I wonder what could happen long term to a club like Wrexham?
They are pumping in limited surplus of money, but a huge amount of publicity. They not having ManU, Liverpool or Arsenal cloud, but are they the next thing after them? What could this be worth? If a good player has the choice between Wrexham and Norwich, where do they go? Will that turn into Wrexham or Everton next, then Wrexham or Brentford, ...
I like our 50+1 in Germany, it's just 1 club that is wrecking everything instead of 6. And they currently don't get their way every time, see Wirtz going to Liverpool and Stuttgart playing hardball on Woltemade.
It’s the PL that have put those rules in not the “ cartel”Sure, Forest were badly run for a long time. I would never and have never attempted to suggest otherwise. It’s exactly why we fell behind. But bad ownership in the past shouldn’t mean you’re permanently locked out of competing in the future.
The issue isn’t about who messed up 20 years ago — it’s that clubs who were allowed to spend huge losses during their rebuild (like Chelsea or City) are now protected by rules that stop anyone else doing the same.
Look at Man United — they’ve been badly run for years now, but their legacy wealth keeps them competitive and commercially dominant. That kind of safety net isn’t available to clubs trying to grow now under PSR. If any club outside the Sky Six was run the way United have been for the last few years, they would be struggling in League Two.
Legacy wealth is now being treated as something that must be preserved — while others are told to just ‘earn it’ with one hand tied behind their back. How’s that fair competition?
The Cartel like to lecture other teams about earning success - right after they locked and bolted the gates behind them.
That’s what we had for a few years , we had to service the two loans to build up the stadium and that money was coming out of the clubs coffers - it was something some fans moaned about - why wasn’t the owners just paying the loan , why was the club having to pay the loan themselves
Owners can turn debt into shares.
Why did I think he was like 24??
Decent player and a huge improvement on what you have in midfield at the moment. Will be an interesting season for spurs extra pressure of added CL games on a still pretty thin squad. But Franck will have you more organised that Ange ever could and I think you’ll finished around 8th.Why did I think he was like 24??I guess he made it to the big leagues pretty late. Anyway, defensive midfielder is what we needed the most, hopefully he can strike up a good partnership with Sarr.
I'd agree with that assessment. We have quite a large squad actually, but some of the back-ups are maybe of debatable quality, particularly in defence.Decent player and a huge improvement on what you have in midfield at the moment. Will be an interesting season for spurs extra pressure of added CL games on a still pretty thin squad. But Franck will have you more organised that Ange ever could and I think you’ll finished around 8th.
They can - ours didn’t , again something else some moaned about
When it comes to infrastructure I think an owner can spend whatever they like and then how they service that debt or money will be key
Some know that a massive stadium adds value for any potential sale , it also helps bring in much needed revenue
There are lots of avenues out there for clubs to increase their revenue - it just takes a bit of time and these days people don’t have paitence
Numbers wise it’s a big squad but back up quality is thin is what I meant. There’s definitely some real potential there and hopefully they give Franck time to settle and build as you’ve got some good youth coming thru as well.I'd agree with that assessment. We have quite a large squad actually, but some of the back-ups are maybe of debatable quality, particularly in defence.
Increase the capacity by 20,000 then times that by £50 a ticket then times that by 19 league matches = £19,000,000. Paying off £300m, without interest, at £19m a year will take over 15 years. There’s CL and cup games to add to that but only the extra revenue the extra seats will bring in.
Once you’re on the CL wheel great but fall off it, as Utd has, sees a drop in income of over £3,000,000 a match + a share of CL prize money.