#SellBeforeWeDai Action/Inaction Group

[Snowflake Royal]

Surely Dai and Pang would be ahead of you, Snowflake? And Redwood. And Steve Evans!

I'd hope the list is a lot longer than that, but complacency isn’t good for you.

[The Green Programme]

A ‘regulator’!!!!
It’s such a bizarre response.
Just think about what you are saying.
1) Who pays for it (look out for the gravy train)
2) Who decides what they regulate and what they don’t?
3) And what does it mean - another layer of bureaucracy… more cost to fans ….
Be careful what you wish for.
4)The FCA and the Labour Government (in an attempt to beat the market-end boom and bust yawn yawn) and give some real power to the regulator by employing totally inexperienced graduates……managed such levels of ineptitude that they allowed record lending to those who couldn’t afford it after the sale of all our mutual companies (bribery by shareholding) and a resultant crash of the banks….
Whilst happily raking in the taxes during the lending spree - and then managing to overspend on that….
Hurray for regulation…...
5) We will be paying for it for years and years….
We (RFC) are in the crap - it will be resolved and we will move on….
Foreign owners; relying on offshore structures for financing should not be able to purchase clubs in UK.
Some of what has allegedly gone on at City is outrageous but they will probably get away with it all, If they don’t, they’ll be going out of business.
The current ‘regulators’ won’t allow it…..
Hurray for FFP….
And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.
The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.
6)The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..
That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.
It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).
No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

I put those numbers in.

1) It will most likely be levy funded on the clubs it regulates. So lets say the regulator employs ~50 people at an average remuneration of 65k its going to cost £3.25m in fees. Some IT equipment, and some office space probably round the corner from DCMS. So could probably run this thing for about £5m a year.

2) DCMS will decide what they regulate and what they won't. Which will be set out in the legislation.
3) I imagine the fans will be able to absorb £5m cost of a regulator, given that one imagines that split between 92 professional clubs it will cost each club £50,000. And obviously the levy will be larger for the PL clubs who require more regulating than the smaller ones who do not.
4) The FCA was created by the coalition, not Labour. The FSA did prudential regulation pre-financial crisis. No real reason to assume that a regulator tasked with making football clubs sustainable will suffer from the same problems as one in the 00s tasked with prudential lending.
5) See points 1 and 3
6) Banks fail all the time. In the financial crisis they failed in the US, UK, Iceland, and Netherlands during financial crisis and beyond. Was George Bush a socialist? He was President in the US when the crisis happened?

It sounds like you think self regulation in football is better than regulation. But the clubs are already self regulating so it's clearly something the clubs want.

I share your scepticism that a regulator can prevent an owner giving up mid-season a la Dai, but its probably better to try to fix that system than leave it to the clubs to do themselves which we already know isnt working.

The issue here is the idea that a regulator brings benefit.

Where is your evidence of a regulator that has been introduced and where products and services have improved and costs reduced.

All of the hypothetical figures and estimates are exactly that.

Where is the expertise?

Intention is irrelevant - results are what matter.

I could comment in detail on the points you’ve made as to statutory regulation and the horrific mismanagement of our economy on every occasion we have had a Labour government - how ending boom and bust created one of the biggest ‘busts’ that has ever occurred and how real jobs are not ever created by governments etc etc

Pompey came up with the right solution - it’s not a regulator, it’s fan ownership.

It’s not easy but it’s under the control of those who care the most.

[The Green Programme]

You’re a fool

And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.

The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.

The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..

That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.

It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).

No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

STFU

I was right….

[Loafer]

And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.

The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.

The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..

That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.

It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).

No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

STFU

I was right….

About what Agatha Christie?

[The Green Programme]

You’re a fool

And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.

The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.

The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..

That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.

It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).

No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

Wow, someone's been reading their 'Atlas Shrugged'

It’s just common sense - it’s amazing how delegation to an untried, expensive, new layer of bureaucracy is actually seen as a solution to anything

Is just desperation borne out of helplessness whilst hoping someone else can solve our problem for us….

Of course; that always works….

[Snowflake Royal]

A ‘regulator’!!!!
It’s such a bizarre response.
Just think about what you are saying.
1) Who pays for it (look out for the gravy train)
2) Who decides what they regulate and what they don’t?
3) And what does it mean - another layer of bureaucracy… more cost to fans ….
Be careful what you wish for.
4)The FCA and the Labour Government (in an attempt to beat the market-end boom and bust yawn yawn) and give some real power to the regulator by employing totally inexperienced graduates……managed such levels of ineptitude that they allowed record lending to those who couldn’t afford it after the sale of all our mutual companies (bribery by shareholding) and a resultant crash of the banks….
Whilst happily raking in the taxes during the lending spree - and then managing to overspend on that….
Hurray for regulation…...
5) We will be paying for it for years and years….
We (RFC) are in the crap - it will be resolved and we will move on….
Foreign owners; relying on offshore structures for financing should not be able to purchase clubs in UK.
Some of what has allegedly gone on at City is outrageous but they will probably get away with it all, If they don’t, they’ll be going out of business.
The current ‘regulators’ won’t allow it…..
Hurray for FFP….
And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.
The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.
6)The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..
That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.
It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).
No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

I put those numbers in.

1) It will most likely be levy funded on the clubs it regulates. So lets say the regulator employs ~50 people at an average remuneration of 65k its going to cost £3.25m in fees. Some IT equipment, and some office space probably round the corner from DCMS. So could probably run this thing for about £5m a year.

2) DCMS will decide what they regulate and what they won't. Which will be set out in the legislation.
3) I imagine the fans will be able to absorb £5m cost of a regulator, given that one imagines that split between 92 professional clubs it will cost each club £50,000. And obviously the levy will be larger for the PL clubs who require more regulating than the smaller ones who do not.
4) The FCA was created by the coalition, not Labour. The FSA did prudential regulation pre-financial crisis. No real reason to assume that a regulator tasked with making football clubs sustainable will suffer from the same problems as one in the 00s tasked with prudential lending.
5) See points 1 and 3
6) Banks fail all the time. In the financial crisis they failed in the US, UK, Iceland, and Netherlands during financial crisis and beyond. Was George Bush a socialist? He was President in the US when the crisis happened?

It sounds like you think self regulation in football is better than regulation. But the clubs are already self regulating so it's clearly something the clubs want.

I share your scepticism that a regulator can prevent an owner giving up mid-season a la Dai, but its probably better to try to fix that system than leave it to the clubs to do themselves which we already know isnt working.

The issue here is the idea that a regulator brings benefit.

Where is your evidence of a regulator that has been introduced and where products and services have improved and costs reduced.

All of the hypothetical figures and estimates are exactly that.

Where is the expertise?

Intention is irrelevant - results are what matter.

I could comment in detail on the points you’ve made as to statutory regulation and the horrific mismanagement of our economy on every occasion we have had a Labour government - how ending boom and bust created one of the biggest ‘busts’ that has ever occurred and how real jobs are not ever created by governments etc etc

Pompey came up with the right solution - it’s not a regulator, it’s fan ownership.

It’s not easy but it’s under the control of those who care the most.

Pompey aren't fan owned genius

[The Green Programme]

STFU

I was right….

About what Agatha Christie?

No - about your non solution.

If we get a new owner who runs the Club properly and we get some success - the desire for a regulator will disappear.

[SouthDownsRoyal]

But did you have the covid vaccine OMA?

No I didn't have it based purely off of the advice Andrew1957 gave us.

The estimated 17,000,000 globally who died shortly after having the covid vaccines should have listened to me too.

You tell yourself that Andrew

[St Pauli]

And you are probably a Socialist who can propagate two or more totally contradictory principles simultaneously and cannot make a reasoned case for anything - and instead, simply makes silly (or worse) insulting personal comments.

The most regulated markets are often the most corrupted, the most ineffective and the most expensive.

The Banks were regulated by a socialist government…. and that went really well…..

That answer is to penalise Clubs in real time - not retrospectively.

It’s the retrospective penalties and the chance of avoiding them that leads to owners taking every risk to get to the promised land - succeed and all is fine (Villa, Bournemouth etc) fail and you become a bankrupt (Derby, Southampton, Wigan,, Reading etc).

No more quangos for us all to fund thank you.

Wow, someone's been reading their 'Atlas Shrugged'

It’s just common sense - it’s amazing how delegation to an untried, expensive, new layer of bureaucracy is actually seen as a solution to anything

Is just desperation borne out of helplessness whilst hoping someone else can solve our problem for us….

Of course; that always works….

Couldn’t you make this argument about any type of regulation?

’Where is the evidence that criminalising murder STOPS MURDER?!1!1!1!


Where is the evidence that creating a professional police force to replace the nightwatchmen and magistrate system ACTUALLY REDUCES URBAN CRIME?!?!?111?

[The Green Programme]

Wow, someone's been reading their 'Atlas Shrugged'

It’s just common sense - it’s amazing how delegation to an untried, expensive, new layer of bureaucracy is actually seen as a solution to anything

Is just desperation borne out of helplessness whilst hoping someone else can solve our problem for us….

Of course; that always works….

Couldn’t you make this argument about any type of regulation?

’Where is the evidence that criminalising murder STOPS MURDER?!1!1!1!


Where is the evidence that creating a professional police force to replace the nightwatchmen and magistrate system ACTUALLY REDUCES URBAN CRIME?!?!?111?

Policing criminality is one thing and regulating a sport is something a little different….. obviously.

[St Pauli]

It’s just common sense - it’s amazing how delegation to an untried, expensive, new layer of bureaucracy is actually seen as a solution to anything

Is just desperation borne out of helplessness whilst hoping someone else can solve our problem for us….

Of course; that always works….

Couldn’t you make this argument about any type of regulation?

’Where is the evidence that criminalising murder STOPS MURDER?!1!1!1!


Where is the evidence that creating a professional police force to replace the nightwatchmen and magistrate system ACTUALLY REDUCES URBAN CRIME?!?!?111?

Policing criminality is one thing and regulating a sport is something a little different….. obviously.

Why?

The bill is creating a situation in which certain actions would become crimes, as I understand it, through legislation creating regulation.

[rabidbee]

They won't be crimes, will they? Breaches of licensing regulations and/or breaches of competition rules.

[Snowflake Royal]

They won't be crimes, will they? Breaches of licensing regulations and/or breaches of competition rules.

Yeah.

[St Pauli]

They won't be crimes, will they? Breaches of licensing regulations and/or breaches of competition rules.

Yeah.

True but what happens if you breach those repeatedly, doesn’t it eventually become a crime?

[WestYorksRoyal]

If I was in government I'd make it a crime and as a penalty bring back the stocks for fans to get their own back for all the harm you've done to the community. I'm sure Dai would draw quite a crowd.

[Snowflake Royal]

They won't be crimes, will they? Breaches of licensing regulations and/or breaches of competition rules.

Yeah.

True but what happens if you breach those repeatedly, doesn’t it eventually become a crime?

Not if you haven't broken the law. Increasing levels of enforcement action. Depends on the framework.

I mean, the fundamental principles are the same. Independent oversight to enforce minimum standards of conduct. Why anyone would think that concept is bad is beyond me, and suggests some.form of brain damage.

[Mr Angry]

Hopefully this WILL be a piece of legislation that gets through before the dissolution of Parliament and a GE; with opposition support it should go through relatively quickly.

Whether its a good thing or not depends upon your viewpoint; if you are a PL team, clearly it isn't a good thing, but I would argue that that says far more about the greed and avarice of those teams in the Premier League than any considerations they have for the rest of the football pyramid.

I am (as one or two of you may know) NOT a supporter of the Labour Party, but if they support the Government to bring the Regulator in, or, after a GE, bring it back and create a quango that an earlier poster seemed to get triggered by, I will be 100% supportive.

Why?

Because the current self regulation has utterly failed for all but a small minority of massive businesses (sorry, "football" clubs) and if there is to be competitive, sustainable football for the next 100+ Years, an Independent Regulator - and one with genuine teeth - is absolutly needed.

[72 bus]

Disband the police and the courts, survival of the fittest/strongest is the way forward after all, that was the way we moved on from being monkeys.

[LUX]

“We”

[Greatwesternline]

They won't be crimes, will they? Breaches of licensing regulations and/or breaches of competition rules.

Yeah.

Providing false information to the Regulator will be a criminal offence, or not complying with information requests.

So the nuclear options are you comply with the parameters set out by the IFR and if you fail to do so you eventually will have the club taken off you.

Or the other nuclear option is if you fail to provide information when required you face criminal prosecution which if found guilty would be grounds to have your club taken off you.

These would both I'm sure only be used in extreme circumstances.