Financial Fair Play: The BIG Con?

TotalArsenal

The more reasonable minded fans have stuck with Arsenal’s financial self sustainability model, and understood the need for the financial restrictions under which Arsene Wenger has had to work in the transfer market.

They, like fans at other clubs, have done so because they have also, indirectly, placed their trust in the efficacy of UEFA’s Financial Fair Play policy, which has been drawn up to bring a level financial playing field for all the Premier League clubs, and prevent them from descending into unsustainable debt, by chancing their arm in the player transfer market, or by  paying obscenely high salaries to these self same players, and also to restrict the influence of certain mega-rich owners whose largesse in providing unlimited funds seems to know no bounds and distorts the transfer market!

There is an obvious problem with this, in that the very wealthiest clubs employ the very best accountants and lawyers and it is inevitable that they will pore over the fine print and juggle their books of account accordingly.

Now most fans will nod their heads and grudgingly admit that this is a likely scenario, but touchingly wave such concerns away because they also believe that UEFA are not fools and will have anticipated this turn of events. Really?!

In part, the reason for the fans’ mindset is that most do not understand or like accounting niceties and would much rather concentrate on keeping the quality players they already have, regardless of the salaries being paid, or search longingly through the media or online outlets for news or to marvel at the fantastical players they would really like the manager to sign up, again regardless of the transfer fee, while all the time saying “within reason, of course” while not meaning a word of it.

Let’s face it, most fans, whatever they may say publicly, really don’t give a f*ck about economic reality, except when it bites them in the ass when paying for tickets, or buying a pint or coughing up £14 for indifferent fish and chips, or when they buy yet another ‘new’ team shirt. No! What the fans want is players – and in the case of Arsenal fans they want great players, like Henry, Bergkamp and Viera were – as well as the trophies those high quality players will bring, and not, in the minds of some at least, the cheap, poor quality, also ran, trophyless failures they are expected to take to their hearts.

The fact is that this desire for quality players is intrinsically tied up with the plentiful supply of that modern evil – money. Money – players! Players – money! Don’t doubt it.

But is this all that FFP involves – is there more that is not immediately obvious?

The football world in which clubs now live, post-Abramovich,  and the other ‘big money owners’ is all about making as much money as possible by maximising their worldwide revenues, and keeping non-playing costs to a minimum, while apparently keeping a beady eye on FFP.

So what do the fans think, if at all, about the Premier League chairmen rubbing their hands while sitting around a table last week to discuss the £5billion television windfall they have negotiated for TV rights, and how they will carve it up, as well as trying to reach an agreement over the EPL’s own mini FFP charter??

Do the fans imagine that the price of their seat tickets, and the extras they work so hard to afford will be reduced? Or perhaps they imagine that the clubs will set aside some extra dosh for player wages and transfer fees to keep the fans happy?

I do not think so, my friends.

The club owners/Chairmen will have thought long and hard, for about 10 seconds, before coming to the conclusion that the most deserving recipients of this bounty is ……………….. THEM!!

But hold on, how do they ‘sell’ this wonderful notion to the fans, the players and their agents who each for their own purposes will be casting covetous eyes on this pile of extra dough and, in the case of the latter, carefully perusing their contracts?

The fans will want to throw their lot in with the players, each set of fans will demand their club pay the players more to keep them, or to duff up the continental European market to grab quality players from those Spanish and Italian clubs feeling the strain from the economic crisis engulfing them and their countries.

Well, it seems that UEFA and monsieur Platini have given the club owners the perfect mushroom to hide their private desires behind – the UEFA FFP rules, and a more modest fig leaf by the supplemental Premier League version of it! Yaay!!

The owners will wring their hands, and squirm while expressing false sympathy that if only these rules did not prohibit them from paying the players more, because of the impact on their profit margins and balance sheets, which FFP specifically forbids, they would be only too happy to pass on a chunk of the new dosh to the footballing stars, who, incidentally, just happen to be the ones the fans pay to see!! And reducing the ticket prices equates to reducing their revenues. So sad!!

This ploy might just work for the owners, if they play their cards right!

No, No, I hear you chorus, Arsenal and Manure are all for the UEFA FFP and are even pressing for a modified Premier League version, but the Chavs and City won’t go along with it, and who cares about the little clubs?

Well is that argument true?

The ‘big’ clubs, that is to say the elite clubs or their clever clog accountants, including Arsenal and Manure have calculated that they will benefit hugely by complying with the FFP rule that spending (on players) must be linked to revenues earned.

Consider the current situation;

  • A club in the Champions League receives a minimum of £30 million more than a rival who is not in the CL.
  • A club like Arsenal, who have  already moved to a 60,000 seat stadium with the additional revenues derived from that, or Manure who have developed Old Trafford into a massive 75,000 seat money generating colossus already have a huge advantage over the ‘lesser’ or smaller sized clubs.
  • The Chavs and Man Shitty have oligarchs who are willing to ‘bend’ the rules and pour private money into their pet projects, when necessary.

By complying with the FFP rules, the ‘smaller’ clubs, like Stoke or Bolton, would be ceding a permanent spot at the financial high table to Arsenal, Manure, Chelsea and Man Shitty because they will have been given a legal right to spend more than the others in the Premier League based on their huge comparative revenues.

The clubs will all say that the financial fair play rules must be introduced for the good of everyone in the Premier League and for the good of the game.

We can see that the ‘winners’ in all this are the acknowledged top 4 clubs, and their owners, so who are the losers?

The answer to that is obvious isn’t it? First it will be the smaller clubs who drop in and out of the premier League. Next will be the ‘second’ tier clubs like Everton, West Ham and all the others, who will never be able to compete with the ‘top 4’ for the very best players.

And most importantly of all, and undoubtedly the biggest losers — it’s YOU the fans, who will continue to pay the top prices for your seats and all the little ‘services’ like food and drink and club shirts.

FFP – is it all it has been made out to be? You tell me!!

Written by: Red Arse.

Although some bloggers might appear very familiar and informal with each others, please never hesitate to comment if you feel like it. Bergkampesque welcomes any contributions as long as they are made in a sensible and respectful way.

65 thoughts on “Financial Fair Play: The BIG Con?”

  • What a very silly article.
    Who ever said FFP was designed to bring ticket prices down?
    It is designed to create a more level playing field.
    So we will if it is successful revert to the pre-oligarch situation.
    The big clubs with a large fan base have always had a big financial advantage the others.
    But now the big clubs will at least have to live within their means which has to be an improvement.

  • Don’t forget the potential loophole that UEFA have already decided not to close surrounding large sponsorship investments to increase revenue. Man City were given £400m in sponsor ship from Etihad which I beieve is the Abu Dhabi national airline owned if not directly my the same owners as Man City with their bottomless pit of wealth. Under FFP this would be a loop hole to exploit for owners to increase revenue through cash donations by another name. What would there be to stop them from sponsoring for example the wing mirrors on the team bus for a further £400m or the match ball for £800m or any other ridiculous item or price. Thus increasing revenue and the value per % of they can spend.

    Just a thought….

  • Jenkinson,

    Thank you for your comment.

    99% of the article was about the way in which the bigger clubs have decided that FFP can be made to work to their advantage, especially when incorporated with the new £5bn Commercial deal for TV rights.

    It also highlights the fact that a ‘level playing field’ will not be the hoped for result of FFP, and will have the completely opposite effect of effectively disenfranchising the ‘smaller’ clubs and condemning them to being just football fodder and unable to compete for players and trophies with the big boys.

    You have instead homed in on the 1% that relates to the treatment of the people that really matter, the fans, and that is fair enough if you think that those ticket paying fans do not matter.

    Go back – take a deep breath, and try and understand what is being said – or not as you wish!

  • Good point, Seymour.

    There are provisions within the FFP regulations for this type of chicanery to be penalised by an independent panel of arbiters.

    But you may well be right, because anyone who thinks that UEFA will not buckle under the legal threats or accounting machinations from the Oily baron clubs is whistling down the wind.

  • Great post Redders 🙂

    There is a lot in there that needs digesting. Tickets and food/drink prices are simply a result of what supporters are prepared to pay for them, and I am not bothered about that with regards to your post.

    Far more important is the idea that FFP will lead to the PL/CL becoming a bastion of a combination of traditionally big/rich clubs and those that became rich recently through the injection of loads of (oil) money whilst making big operational losses. Key question is then whether ‘smaller’ clubs – outside this new bastion – have a fair chance to compete for silverware in the future. I particularly would like to know whether future new owners of these clubs would be able to invest freely in structural things: like building new football grounds that will increase total income significantly.

    Although I am convinced the Board of Directors will want to profit from a significant improvement to our income streams, I am also sure that a lot of the extra money will be invested in quality new players and improvement of salaries, as per recent statement by Gazidis etc.

    At least for Arsenal, it should lead to a more level playing field, as long as loopholes are being dealt with appropriately.

  • Hi.. Jenkinson and Seymour Wang.. wellcome..
    (Seymour.. you have the same family’s name to my wife.. wang is king right?)

    RA.. I don’t really know about the rules in FFP.. but something just not correct and can be manipulated.. such as City did..

    For me.. better give an exact number..
    Example : limit for transfer is 50mill every season.. or limit for wages is 2mill/week for the whole team..
    More clear and easy to follow..

  • Boiled down, TA, my contention is based on simple maths.

    If transfer fees and player salaries are linked as a % of the commercial revenue of a club, it does not take a genius to work out that x% of 100 is greater than x% of 50.

    Look, Arsenal’s turnover, as shown in the Accounts for 2012, was £235m, and this is likely to rise in the next 2 years to around £300m with the new shirt sponsorship, kit deals and our share of the 3 year £5bn TV rights deal.

    Lets say that we are allowed to spend up to 60% of that on players salaries and transfer fees per annum, that would equate to £180m per annum.

    On the other hand the turnover for Bolton Wanderers for 2012 was £65m, and with their TV rights share and improved commercial deals, in 2 years that is likely to reach approximately £100m.

    Applying the 60% ration of player transfers and salaries to that means they could spend £60m per annum.

    I am not saying either club would spend the maximum allowed, but Arsenal’s potential £180m available funds compares with Bolton’s maximum £60m and there would probably be the same imbalance for all time.

    Where is the ‘level playing field’ in that? It does not exist, of course.

  • Hi and welcome to Jenkinson and Seymour! 🙂

    Jenkinson, you make a good point, but best not to use terms like silly when somebody has worked hard to write a debate stimulating post. I agree with you that clubs having to live within their means is a good thing in principle.

  • Henry,

    In a perfect world you are right.

    However, EU Law would probably not allow the setting of a maximum amount of ‘x’ for each club, because it would be deemed an unfair restriction of trade and you can be sure the big clubs would fight it.

  • Henry, that is a good point. Why not put a cap on spend on player purchases and salaries?! I guess it would only work if applied across the globe and the nouveau riche would not agree to it anyway. 😕

  • TA,

    You are right to welcome Jenkinson, and I don’t mind him saying the article was silly because it is perhaps difficult to get to the nub of what I am saying.

    Perhaps some of the explanatory comments will make things clearer. 😀

  • Cheers RA, but Bolton could, in principle, develop a 5-10 year plan to change this situation round. Get a big investor (oil baron), get a top manager on a long term contract, buy young and promising players, build a new stadium, work hard on increasing the fan base, etc etc. Not easy, but still possible; right?

  • I disagree with your comments – FFP will help the top 4 stay that way. With FFP Everton have a far better chance than without it. As it stands Man City, Chelsea and whoever else wanst to can spend whatever they want. With FFP it will be capped. How on earth does FFP stand in Everton way? It means that Man City cant poach their players for 3 to 4 times the to ensure they get them.

    I have heard this argument before and think it is highly flawed. FFP will give clubs the chance to speculate but within reason.

  • Excellent post Redders.

    A big con?, well, in my eyes its definatly an extended con and those who are been fleeced is us, the supporters.

    I have always believed that FFP is a charter for the traditional big clubs across europe to protect there interests. The rise of Abramovich, City and a few other clubs across the continent has created a fear and loathing amonst the established elite which has resulted in the “political” beast of that is FFP.

    You are spot on about the new TV deal. At the inception of the premeirship owners were wringing there hands at the money, little did they realise that it would all go to the players. This time they want a slice of the pie and by creating a “structured cartel” they hope to keep players remuneration down and pocket it for themeselves.

    As for europes FFP, i have no doubt that it will make Arsenal more competitive. The extent of this advantage will only be garnered with time but i would like to make a few points if i may.

    Yes, clubs like chelsea and city will bend the rules. City in particular have enormous political power by virtue of the fact that they are now a rich oil State as opposed to a football club. To expand on this point city now have more third party sponsers than Man Utd and Real Madrid combined, and ime not talking about associated companies, these are genuine third party bodies. The reason? they weild political power across the globe and inetrnational companies want to do business with them

    The balancing act is that the oligarchs are under pressure form all the others to comply. For me political power and compromise will always override economics. in other words though i believe there will still be bending of the rules, the likes of City will more or less have to conform or run the risk of not Uefas wrath, but the anger of the established clubs combined. This force is to great and will curtail the suger daddy clubs.

    In a nutshell it will make Arsenal more competitive and at least give us a chance to compete. with our global brand and fanbase we will be right up there.

    One last point on the smaller clubs been frozen out. in many ways this is true and will prevent a metoric rise of another city or chelsea. But, i see no were in the rules, or any proposed rules, that will prohibit new owners form building new stadiums or creating world class academys etc. Thus, i feel the door is still open for a club to grow and be injected with “investors” money.

  • Agree 100%

    FFP in it’s current guise will never work correctly and the rich will get richer while the poor get poorer.

    The only way to fix football is a world wide spending cap for all teams. Not a percentage of turnover, it must be “no one in world football can spend more than £XXM per season on transfer fees and an additional £XX on wages (for their whole squad).

    Then and only then can everyone compete fairly.

    Won’t ever happen though.

  • Hi and welcome goonered 🙂

    It will indeed only work if it is implemented globally. One of the good things though is that ‘poorer’ and richer clubs cannot be made bankrupt that easily any more by unscrupulous temporary owners.

  • Hi Terry baby, 😀

    Good to see you putting your toe in the water again!!

    I knew you would understand what I was getting at.

    The big clubs were expected to object (discretely) to FFP, and use the legal process as necessary to protect their interests, because they are not interested in a level playing field, and want to stay as an elite.

    However they now realise that a breakaway nucleus of Shitty, Chelsea, Manure and Arsenal will always be the top teams, based on turnover, and all that means.
    To that extent it will be great for Arsenal, but it is not what was intended.

    With all the money flooding in to the top clubs from various avenues it would be nice to think the clubs (Arsenal in our case) would freeze season ticket prices and the costs of other facilities, but I think I would see flying pigs before that happens. 😀

  • Spot on again Redders.

    Your excellent post realy delves into the fundamentals of what football is all about from a fans perspective. A big club fan will continue paying over the odds and continue to attend (well, most anyway) as long as the product, i.e. the football is rewarding. The supporters of smaller clubs will have the security of knowing there clubs future is secure but with the caveot that there road to progression has been made a lot harder than it already is.

    And all this while the owners pocket more of the pie which is now exclusivly dominated by players.

    The premise therefore is that as long as Clubs can get away with it, fans economic interests will always be last on the agenda.

  • Hi Herb, 🙂

    If you are out there come and chat to us!!

    Should it be the case that I am right in my opinion then Arsenal will be challenging on all fronts in a couple of years, and not just based on wishful thinking but real hard cash, and some high quality additions to the playing staff! 🙂

  • Totally agreed, Terry.

    I feel slightly guilty that our great club will benefit so much with the other ‘bad’ big clubs, but that is not Arsenal’s fault and I will cheer them on as we win trophies and think ‘what the hell’. 🙂

    Now that we have found you again, I am worried about the mirror man.
    He was last heard of sinking deeper into the mud of his love shack footings in Cornwall shouting “Not me — I am too young to die — take Terry instead!!”

    He always loved you!!!! 😀

  • Look maybe a little news item might get you out of the boozer! 😀

    The Husband Store

    A store that sells new husbands has opened in Manchester just off Deans Gate where a woman may go to choose a husband.

    Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates:
    You may visit this store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the value of the products increase as the shopper ascends the flights.
    The shopper may choose any item from a particular floor, or may choose to go up to the next floor, but you cannot go back down except to exit the building!

    So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband — oddly enough!

    On the first floor the sign on the door reads: Floor 1 – These men Have Jobs.
    Intrigued she continues to the second floor, where the sign reads: Floor 2 – These men Have Jobs and Love Kids.
    ‘That’s nice,’ she thinks, ‘but I want more.’ So she continues upward.
    The third floor sign reads: Floor 3 – These men Have Jobs, Love Kids and are Extremely Good Looking.
    ‘Wow,’ she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going, so she goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads: Floor 4 – These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Good Looking and Help With Housework……..
    ‘Oh, mercy me!’ she exclaims, ‘I can hardly stand it!’
    Growing more excited, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads: Floor 5 – These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Gorgeous, Help with Housework, and Have a Strong Romantic Streak.
    She is so very tempted to stay, but filled with curiosity, she goes on to the sixth floor this time, where the sign reads:
    Floor 6 – You are visitor 31,456,012 to this floor.
    There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please!

    Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store.

    PLEASE NOTE:
    To avoid gender bias charges, the store’s owner opened a New Wives store just across the street with the same rules.

    The first floor has wives that love sex.
    The second floor has wives that love sex and have money and like beer.

    The third, fourth, fifth and sixth floors have never been visited!!!! 😀

  • Red,
    If it’s the case that City and Chelsea will feel no restraint from FFP, how do you expect Arsenal to be challenging in a couple of years?
    Whenever we are competing for the signature of the next world class player either one of them could continue to gazump us by offering twice as much as we can reasonably afford (has anyone deluded themselves during the summer into thinking for more than ten seconds that Hazard will be playing for us?). Nothing will change there…

  • Terrymunchkins, 🙂

    This one is for you!!

    A couple was Christmas shopping at the mall on Christmas Eve and the mall was packed. As the wife walked through the mall she was surprised to look up and see her husband was nowhere around.
    She was quite upset as they had a lot to do. Because she was so worried, she called him
    on her mobile phone to ask him where he was.

    In a calm voice, the husband said, “Honey, you remember that jewelry store we went into about 10 years ago where you fell in love with that diamond necklace that we could not afford and I told you that I would get it for you one day?”

    At this the wife choked up and started to cry and said in a soft voice, “Yes, darling, I remember that jewelry store very well.”

    “Well”, he said, “I’m in the bar right next to it.”

  • My secondary point is that FFp returns us to the status quo in the pre-oligarch days when the big clubs always had a financial advantage.
    After FFP the playing field will not be absolutely level (it never has been!) it will however be MORE level as I said.

  • Xav,

    It is true that in a bidding war with either Man Shitty or the Chavs, for a particular player, we would still lose out.
    But those clubs cannot and would not want to buy every player out there.
    Both Abramovich and the Sheikh have said they want their clubs to start breaking even after the billion pounds each has put into their particular toy.

    However, there are players out there [e.g. Goetze] we would have liked to buy, but did not have the money to tempt Borussia Dortmund, and other clubs, with a realistic bid.

    With all the new cash that will be pouring into our coffers in a couple of years we will actually be able to make substantial bids for players rather than standing on the sidelines wishing we had some money.

  • hahahaha, top stuff Redders.

    Looks like TA has you busy replying to all the posts. Its fascinating how this FFP topic can polarise views between it wont work at all to those who believe it will have a major impact

    I guess only wtime will tell the full extent of its impact. in truth “nothing is certain except uncertainty”. There you go Redders, another one of my “accidently on purpose comments”. hahahaha

  • Babakrdaemi,

    Sorry, I had not seen your comment until just now.

    Your comment is a good one, however you misunderstand the FFP rules.

    The rules do not place ‘cap’ on what clubs can spend per se, except to the extent that every club is limited to a percentage of its turnover/profit.

    I do not have the latest Everton accounts to hand but the turnover is unlikely to be more than £120m.
    Therefore say 60% of that is allowed under the rules, that would mean Everton could spend £72m on transfers and or salaries, and dependent also on their breaking even, within certain margins.

    Compare that with Arsenal’s projected turnover of £300m of which 60% comprises £180m and you can see how Everton would struggle to compete.

    Against Manure or City the comparative difference would be even greater, I suspect.
    It’s just math not an opinion, and not knocking Everton or any other similar sized club.

    If you read the article you will see that is why I think FFP is a con — against clubs like Everton!

  • Terry,

    A lot of the difference of opinion as to whether the FFP will work or not, is because most fans do not know the rules other than by word of mouth and are mistaken in what they say.

    I think FFP WILL work but not in the way it was intended, and I think the smaller clubs ( as defined by turnover and profit) will suffer!

  • Yes Redders. It will crystalise the adavtage of established clubs with large turnovers to masintain there dominance.

    But as you say, who gives a stuff as long as we benefit. hahaha

  • Jenkinson @15:34

    Sorry I have only just found your reply – (a new reply system to me).

    You said – “My secondary point is that FFp returns us to the status quo in the pre-oligarch days when the big clubs always had a financial advantage.
    After FFP the playing field will not be absolutely level (it never has been!) it will however be MORE level as I said.”

    I am sorry but you are mistaken in saying things will return to what they were previously.
    If you have read my replies to others you will see that the maths do not add up.

    Taking the turnover of Club [A] with a turnover of £80m and calculating what they can spend on transfers and salaries @ 60% of that = £48m.

    Then compare that with Arsenal with a turnover of £300m and calculate 60% of that = £180m available for transfers/salaries.

    Club [A] cannot compete and never will. Even if they increase their turnover hugely, so will Arsenal, Manure and Chelsea.

    A new Sugar Daddy? That will not work either. The FFP rules will not permit another Abramovich to pour money into any club post 2011, neither as the rules stand can a Sugar Daddy get this restriction by converting non commercial loans from the hypothetical owner into the Issued share capital of the club, or its equity as it is known.

    I am sorry if you support a ‘small’ club as defined by turnover and profit as this is not what you wanted to hear – but it is true none the less!

    if you support a ‘big’ club no doubt you will be pleased, but as an Arsenal fan it leaves a slightly sour taste in the mouth.

    The level playing field is a con!!

  • Afternoon Dickerous Blogmigo`s 🙂

    First, Great to have Stretch back after being stretchered off, for too long ! . Isn`t it fitting that he supports the Arse with the amount of sick notes he sent into Total !. hahaha

    Great post from our resident Einstein, actually if Einstein was about now, he would be our resident Redders !.

    I should imagine the full document of FFP is over a thousand pages long, so I`ve got as much chance of understanding it as of finding a happy family living in N17. !

    Like I take people at face value ( lets face it…..the value of this handsome bastard goes up by the second ! hahaha ), I take FFP at the face value it is portrayed as, so I expect it too work in our favour. I agree that the little clubs will not benefit as much as us, but they were and always will be small clubs !.
    I`m not getting to the point where I think stuff all the rest as long as we are ok, because I`ve always felt that way anyway !. hahaha
    I would love us to go out and buy a “Super Quality” player for once, ” a Neymar “, someone, which makes a statement to the rest, to say, ” we`ve been watching from the sidelines, but now were back and we mean business, out the way you c**ts ” !.
    The news of new sponsorship`s and plenty more to come, cries out to me that we will be in the position to do this in a couple of years time, but will we do it ?.

    I tried Racing Pigeon`s , but the pain of falling of my roof every time my missus shouted, ” On your marks, get set, go ” !, meant that I had to retire early . If we were meant to fly, we would have been born with wings !.

  • Hi Total

    Not resolved yet, I know what has to be done, but cant do anything `till the water table drops, which should be over the next couple of day`s as sunshine is predicted !. 🙂
    Once fixed It should be better than before as the new Sheriff in town will have fixed John Wayne`s cowboy builder work !. hahaha

  • Total, according to my BBC weathersite, the next six days are dry for my post code area . They are never wrong are they ?. hahaha

  • I`ve also checked with another site that in the next six days the sky will be clear !. They are not called Sky News for nothing !.

  • Hi Glicster, 🙂

    Are you sure it is a sceptic tank? That sounds like a doubting tank – they don’t believe anything those bloody tanks. 🙂

    Now a septic tank – ugh a tank that likes collecting crappers! 🙂

  • Hi Redders 🙂

    The reason I called it a Sceptic Tank was because, I was doubting calling it a Septic Tank as It is Cockney rhyme and slang for ” Yank ” and didn`t want to offend you !. Now if you believe my reasoning for my wrong spelling you`ll believe anything !. hahaha

  • In my teens i used to know this geezer who was obsessed with Tommy Tank. Everytime he saw a nice bird he would say “ohhhh gona have a tommy tank over that” or “check that out ohhhhh worth a couple of Tommy tanks that”

    dont know wether this is true but i heard that he and this other bloke puled a couple of sorts and when they were round there place he ruined it by not getting into bed with his one, rather he stood at the end of the bed saying “ohhhhh ime having a tommy tank over that one” hahahahaha After the girls had thrown them out, the other bloke swears he said to him “ohhhhh thats the best tommy tank ive ever had” hahahaha

  • But it is a silly piece and so is his condescending reply.
    He must learn to read more carefully.

  • hahaha Know what you mean Stretch. I went in to Barclay`s the other day and there was the two best looking sorts I had ever seen working behind the screen. Sadly I`m no longer a Barclay`s Banker !,… I`m now a Black Horse Banker……it`s their eye`s, I swear it !. hahaha

  • I reckon when Joey Barton phones home from France, his Mum doesn`t realize it`s him and starts to play with herself thinking it`s Sacha Distel !

  • hahahaha, he sounds like a cross between Phil Thompson and Inspector Cleuso

  • VCC thanks for your message the other day, i realy apprceiate it.

    Are you suggesting cornwall enjoys a bit of Tommy Tanking whilst admiring himself full frontal in his mirror? hahahaha

  • TA, if its ok with you i would like to do a post for your site? Will try and put something together on the weekend?

  • I have a full length mirror next to my computer ( true ! hahaha ). I`m currently watching BabeStation whilst typing to you lot with my left hand with one eye on the mirror !. hahaha

    When Stretch was young he was always told that, God was watching when he was having a Barclays Bank , when infact it was Uncle Stavros !. hahaha

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *