Debt in Football

[SidBurns]

Heard on SS News that the EPL accounts for 56% of overall debt in European football. The debt totals £3.5b pounds.

Does anyone think more and more E**Lish clubs will go to the wall in the next few years? They can't keep throwing money at it, even Manure, their something like £750m in debt, surely that can't be right!?! If they were to go 3/4 years without any Champions League money, unlikely I know, they'd be screwed no!?!

Dunno about everyone else, but I can only see trouble ahead down south...

[MacBean]

agree whole-heartedly.

The situation down south is horrific and i feel portsmouth are the first of many clubs that will suffer this inevitable break down. that is a staggering amount of debt from 20 clubs

I still dont understand how clubs can get into this state.

[KerPlunk]

But who is going to have big enough cojones / have enough clout / support to take on the Manures / Chelski's etc ?? Platini knows what he would like to do but you can guarantee he will be voted out of office before anything that would make a difference can happen.

European football, especially the Premierpish, is completely out of control.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/feb/23/premier-league-clubs-europe-debt

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2010/feb/23/premier-league-debt-wages-uefa

"Uefa's leadership makes a marked contrast with the silence at the Premier League and the Football Association over the debts at Manchester United and Liverpool, which now add up to more than £1bn collectively. Those huge debts were loaded on to the clubs by their North American owners' "leveraged" takeovers, yet despite the furore and mass supporter protests particularly over United's £716m debts, neither the Premier League nor FA have voiced any concern." :bye:

Hope this Daily ****** link works - it's an article by Steven Thompson (Dundee Hibs chairman) re. his take on the state of the SPL.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/2010/02/21/spl-is-on-it-s-deathbed-due-to-cash-crisis-in-scottish-game-says-dundee-united-chief-stephen-thompson-86908-22058963/

We're all doooooooooomed !!!!

[Dibben]

Whats even more staggering is that Celtic & Rangers were desparate to jump to the EPL to help them 'blossom'!!

Mad!!!

BH.

[HFC 0-7]

I was listening to something on the radio this morning about a proposal by UEFA (I think) that in about 5 seasons time they will only let teams into european competitions that are breaking even or actively looking to break even by taking steps to achieve it? Did I hear this right, if so it would definately make clubs live within their means and stop the crazy wages.

[PaulSmith]

I hope that there are a large number of clubs in England and Scotland that pay the ultimate price for basically 'cheating' with debt over the last 10 years which has resulted in huge price increases for the normal fan to attend matches.

[noseyhibby]

The obscene amount of money lining the pockets of players, managers, agents, and administrators angers me, not simply because they fill their bank accounts with suitcases-full of sterling, or because they drive flash cars and own big houses, but because the man on the street, on substantially less and limited income, is expected to cough up inflated admission prices to help towards subsidising the lifestyles of all the aforementioned. I would be satisfied to see the whole football world collapse in on itself and a new beginning, where the man on the street is not exploited to the ugly degree he is now.

[stubru59]

The market down south is over-hyped, the products over-paid, and it is only a matter of time before we have a banking type fiasco on our hands.

PS. minus the bail-outs

[SidBurns]

I 100% agree with everything that has been said, especially the ticket prices...

Clubs also have far too an easy way out, what if H**rts were to be, say, 14 points ahead of Falkirk after second last match of the season, go into administration and lose their 10 points. They'd still be up and could start next season debt'ish free, with a clean slate etc...

It's not fair, these clubs in debt seem to almost prosper where as we have worked hard for 10+ years to reduce our debt only to be shat upon if the above happens...

For me, if your in administration, 25 point penalty or relegation, it's the ONLY way...

[Geo_1875]

It is a ridiculous state of affairs and is completely the fault of SKY. They have thrown so much money at the Champions League and the EPL that the "big guns" will do anything to keep their share. This includes running their clubs in a way that defies all business logic. Any ordinary business man who tried to operate in a similar manner would find himself penniless and/or in court. However, the only teams who will go to the wall are those who owe smaller amounts to British banks and HM Government. The major players are funded by huge borrowings from overseas and are not liable to the same treatment.

Thank god Hibs didn't go down the speculate to accumulate road. There lies oblivion.

[SidBurns]

The market down south is over-hyped, the products over-paid, and it is only a matter of time before we have a banking type fiasco on our hands.

PS. minus the bail-outs

Some of the transfer fees this season are prime examples of whats wrong down south, average players going for outrageous money:-

Ched Evans - Man City to Sheff Utd - £3m
Frazier Campbell - Man U to Sunderland - £3.5m
Kevin Price-Boateng - Spurs to Pompey - £4m
Robert Huth - Boro to Stoke - £5m

[HFC 0-7]

I 100% agree with everything that has been said, especially the ticket prices...

Clubs also have far too an easy way out, what if H**rts were to be, say, 14 points ahead of Falkirk after second last match of the season, go into administration and lose their 10 points. They'd still be up and could start next season debt'ish free, with a clean slate etc...

It's not fair, these clubs in debt seem to almost prosper where as we have worked hard for 10+ years to reduce our debt only to be shat upon if the above happens...

For me, if your in administration, 25 point penalty or relegation, it's the ONLY way...

I agree and disagree. I feel sorry for the fans and the some of the staff. What angers me is the chairmen and execs at the club, as they are the people that get the clubs into debt, into administration and possibly make them cease to exist. They then leave the club and go to another club where they can do the same. Its a difficult situation, the bottom line is that the leagues chairmen should be studying the accounts of the teams in there set up and set standards around debt etc. For example, the total of the players wages should be capped at a % of the clubs income. This way the clubs and fans wont suffer and these chairmen that plunge clubs into debt can GTF!

[CheesyHibby]

I also agree with all the comments, particularly re: ticket prices. surely we aren't going to have everyone agreeing are we? :greengrin

Question: what do you think (wages wise) some of the players at say Wigan are on, an average epl club, with an avergae gate that is little more than hibs? its obscene and if, all of a sudden, sky pulled the plug or offered substantially less money, a lot of these kind of teams would be in serious doo-doo.

[HFC 0-7]

It is a ridiculous state of affairs and is completely the fault of SKY. They have thrown so much money at the Champions League and the EPL that the "big guns" will do anything to keep their share. This includes running their clubs in a way that defies all business logic. Any ordinary business man who tried to operate in a similar manner would find himself penniless and/or in court. However, the only teams who will go to the wall are those who owe smaller amounts to British banks and HM Government. The major players are funded by huge borrowings from overseas and are not liable to the same treatment.

Thank god Hibs didn't go down the speculate to accumulate road. There lies oblivion.

Completely disagree. Its nothing to do with SKY, they provide the money for getting there, but the real problem are the chairmen and owners who throw money to get there. Its a owners and chairmen that have a duty to work within their means. Only people to blame are the chairmen and owners as they become greedy, and the football authorities for letting them do it!

[Sylar]

The sooner the whole house of cards tumbles, the better.

[Peevemor]

But who is going to have big enough cojones / have enough clout / support to take on the Manures / Chelski's etc ?? Platini knows what he would like to do but you can guarantee he will be voted out of office before anything that would make a difference can happen.

I'm not sure about that. The countries with the clubs with huge debts are in the minority in terms of UEFA, and some (France for one) already penalise (relegate) clubs if they're budgets don't balance.

[cockneymike]

I'm not an accountant or a shareholder, but anyone familiar with the what the our debt is currently, and what do we think it will be when the financing of the new stand is taken into account? £5-6m now, £8m after the new build? :dunno:

I realise it's long term structured debt, but that will still incur interest payments.

[SidBurns]

I also agree with all the comments, particularly re: ticket prices. surely we aren't going to have everyone agreeing are we? :greengrin

Question: what do you think (wages wise) some of the players at say Wigan are on, an average epl club, with an avergae gate that is little more than hibs? its obscene and if, all of a sudden, sky pulled the plug or offered substantially less money, a lot of these kind of teams would be in serious doo-doo.

Bet you the likes of Scharner (sp?), Kirkland, Caldwell etc are on £25k a week, easy!

[HFC 0-7]

I also agree with all the comments, particularly re: ticket prices. surely we aren't going to have everyone agreeing are we? :greengrin

Question: what do you think (wages wise) some of the players at say Wigan are on, an average epl club, with an avergae gate that is little more than hibs? its obscene and if, all of a sudden, sky pulled the plug or offered substantially less money, a lot of these kind of teams would be in serious doo-doo.

Cant be certain of this at all clubs, but I know some players contracts are dependant on TV money and it says so in their contract, so, if Sky pulled out they wouldnt get paid the full amount, which is agreed in the contracts when the player signs. This has probably happened in Scotland more since Setanta pulled the plug, but I wouldnt be surprised if some clubs in England have put it in their contracts.

[cockneymike]

Cant be certain of this at all clubs, but I know some players contracts are dependant on TV money and it says so in their contract, so, if Sky pulled out they wouldnt get paid the full amount, which is agreed in the contracts when the player signs. This has probably happened in Scotland more since Setanta pulled the plug, but I wouldnt be surprised if some clubs in England have put it in their contracts.

There is the thing about Sol Campbell and his 'image rights' which is probably part of what you're talking about.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/feb/23/portsmouth-sol-campbell-image-rights

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Its like a computer game - no not Championship Manager or whatever its called but Lemmings.

[PaulSmith]

I'm not an accountant or a shareholder, but anyone familiar with the what the our debt is currently, and what do we think it will be when the financing of the new stand is taken into account? £5-6m now, £8m after the new build? :dunno:

I realise it's long term structured debt, but that will still incur interest payments.

I think that most of the funding will be in place for the East Stand already, IIRC around £2m of the Fletcher money was still to be shown in the accounts and this would be the ring-fenced element IMO. Reckon total cost must be circa £4m?

£2.5m due in July 2020 for part of the mortgage. Flat fee incurring no interest.
£3.25m due to be paid at £250kpa until repayed at a variable interest rate. Current rate being 0.5% so maybe paid off sooner than expected if it works the same as my mortgage!
£2m - East Stand shortfall = Sol Bamba :devil:

So there you go, not getting shafted for a few million pounds of interest to any Bank per annum unlike other Edinburgh based clubs

[jdships]

It is a ridiculous state of affairs and is completely the fault of SKY. They have thrown so much money at the Champions League and the EPL that the "big guns" will do anything to keep their share. This includes running their clubs in a way that defies all business logic. Any ordinary business man who tried to operate in a similar manner would find himself penniless and/or in court. However, the only teams who will go to the wall are those who owe smaller amounts to British banks and HM Government. The major players are funded by huge borrowings from overseas and are not liable to the same treatment.

Thank god Hibs didn't go down the speculate to accumulate road. There lies oblivion.


:top marks
I played in the days when there WAS a salary cap and most of the full timers were on a max of around £8/9a week (plus bonus) and had "second jobs" to keep things going .
We had a situation where players like Bobby Flavell of Hearts and De Stefano went off to Bogota , Colombia , in the 1950's for a signing on fee of £5000 and £5000 a year !!!!!!
I earned £4.10.0d per week plus " £1 a point" bonus ( two points for a win then !!) playing in the old 1st Division as a part timer
At that time a shipyard fitter had a basic wage of around £5 plus overtime therefore with two jobs I was relatively better off than my full time mates !!.

Salary caps in football were abolished after a player revolt in the 1960s, leading to the exorbitant wages paid out in the modern game.
If wage capping is to be brought in again it will have to be 100% across all the leagues or the same will happen as in 1960 .

:confused:

I forecat that within five years we will have lost three ir four top flight clubs both in England and Scotland

[1875godsgift]

:top marks
I played in the days when there WAS a salary cap and most of the full timers were on a max of around £8/9a week (plus bonus) and had "second jobs" to keep things going .
We had a situation where players like Bobby Flavell of Hearts and De Stefano went off to Bogota , Colombia , in the 1950's for a signing on fee of £5000 and £5000 a year !!!!!!
I earned £4.10.0d per week plus " £1 a point" bonus ( two points for a win then !!) playing in the old 1st Division as a part timer
At that time a shipyard fitter had a basic wage of around £5 plus overtime therefore with two jobs I was relatively better off than my full time mates !!.

Salary caps in football were abolished after a player revolt in the 1960s, leading to the exorbitant wages paid out in the modern game.
If wage capping is to be brought in again it will have to be 100% across all the leagues or the same will happen as in 1960 .

:confused:

I forecat that within five years we will have lost three ir four top flight clubs both in England and Scotland

Who did you play for, if you don't mind me asking?

[cockneymike]

I think that most of the funding will be in place for the East Stand already, IIRC around £2m of the Fletcher money was still to be shown in the accounts and this would be the ring-fenced element IMO. Reckon total cost must be circa £4m?

£2.5m due in July 2020 for part of the mortgage. Flat fee incurring no interest.
£3.25m due to be paid at £250kpa until repayed at a variable interest rate. Current rate being 0.5% so maybe paid off sooner than expected if it works the same as my mortgage!
£2m - East Stand shortfall = Sol Bamba :devil:

So there you go, not getting shafted for a few million pounds of interest to any Bank per annum unlike other Edinburgh based clubs

Thanks. So essentially as I thought, we're about £5.75m in debt now, and there will be another £2-3m or so still to pay for the stand, after the Fletch cash, and I think you'd be right that will be any Sol money.

So much better than it was, and yet still we owe the bank a decent chunk of change! I guess like all businesses we'll always carry some debt, but we don't need to look far for evidence of how much worse it could be.

[jdships]

Who did you play for, if you don't mind me asking?

Queens Park and Third Lanark in a career that lasted all of three seasons !!!!!!!!!!
As I have said previously I was one of many who/have " showed great potential" at 18 and never got any better !
Did get to play " down the slope" which was my cup final .

Am now "pleading the fifth amendment" ! :wink::greengrin


:flag:

[son of haggart]

Queens Park and Third Lanark in a career that lasted all of three seasons !!!!!!!!!!
As I have said previously I was one of many who/have " showed great potential" at 18 and never got any better !
Did get to play " down the slope" which was my cup final .

Am now "pleading the fifth amendment" ! :wink::greengrin


:flag:

Please tell me you scored against Hibs :devil:

[jdships]

Please tell me you scored against Hibs :devil:

I " couldn't have scored in a brothel" :greengrin
As someone with family who had played for Hibs just to be on the same park as
Smith, Johnston,Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond et al was as I say my "cup final"

:cool2:

[Geo_1875]

Completely disagree. Its nothing to do with SKY, they provide the money for getting there, but the real problem are the chairmen and owners who throw money to get there. Its a owners and chairmen that have a duty to work within their means. Only people to blame are the chairmen and owners as they become greedy, and the football authorities for letting them do it!

I think it's all to do with SKY. They have taken viewer subscriptions and thrown this money at a competition which has completely devalued national championships to the point where former top clubs know they don't need to win to cash in. How the "Champions" league can allow 4 teams from the same country to compete is beyond me. A straightforward knockout with no seeding between the Champions of each EUFA member country. That way each club knows they have to win their league. Surely the football would be better. I seem to remember it was like that in the past and I enjoyed the game more.

[son of haggart]

I " couldn't have scored in a brothel" :greengrin
As someone with family who had played for Hibs just to be on the same park as
Smith, Johnston,Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond et al was as I say my "cup final"

:cool2:

..ah well

Must have been a great experience for you. I never saw any of them play but my uncle was a season ticket holder at that time and no doubt watched you play, which is a odd thought!

[HFC 0-7]

I think it's all to do with SKY. They have taken viewer subscriptions and thrown this money at a competition which has completely devalued national championships to the point where former top clubs know they don't need to win to cash in. How the "Champions" league can allow 4 teams from the same country to compete is beyond me. A straightforward knockout with no seeding between the Champions of each EUFA member country. That way each club knows they have to win their league. Surely the football would be better. I seem to remember it was like that in the past and I enjoyed the game more.

Thats still not got anything to do with SKY. The Champions league isnt run by SKY, its run by UEFA, they decide how many teams get through etc. Do you think SKY want to throw this much money at it? No! Blaiming SKY is what bad chairmen and owners will do. No one is asking the chairmen and owners to spend more money than they can afford. In regards to how much money the teams get for finishing wherever is nothing to do with SKY its the chairmen, owners and the football associations. For what you want, all it would take is the football authorities to say only one person gets into the champions league, dont spend more than you earn.

Remember its the football associations that broker the rights to the TV deals, I hardly think SKY have thought to themselves, we arent paying enough, lets pay more. Sky are serving the needs of the viewers, what happens to the money and how many people get into europe is nothing to do with them, its ll down to the authorities.

[Geo_1875]

Thats still not got anything to do with SKY. The Champions league isnt run by SKY, its run by UEFA, they decide how many teams get through etc. Do you think SKY want to throw this much money at it? No! Blaiming SKY is what bad chairmen and owners will do. No one is asking the chairmen and owners to spend more money than they can afford. In regards to how much money the teams get for finishing wherever is nothing to do with SKY its the chairmen, owners and the football associations. For what you want, all it would take is the football authorities to say only one person gets into the champions league, dont spend more than you earn.

Remember its the football associations that broker the rights to the TV deals, I hardly think SKY have thought to themselves, we arent paying enough, lets pay more. Sky are serving the needs of the viewers, what happens to the money and how many people get into europe is nothing to do with them, its ll down to the authorities.

I believe that SKY put a huge carrot in front of EUFA, who are run by and for the benefit of the big clubs/countries, and they have arranged a tournament to meet their requirements. The fact that some clubs have overstretched to reach that level is a direct result of that financial carrot.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Thats still not got anything to do with SKY. The Champions league isnt run by SKY, its run by UEFA, they decide how many teams get through etc. Do you think SKY want to throw this much money at it? No! Blaiming SKY is what bad chairmen and owners will do. No one is asking the chairmen and owners to spend more money than they can afford. In regards to how much money the teams get for finishing wherever is nothing to do with SKY its the chairmen, owners and the football associations. For what you want, all it would take is the football authorities to say only one person gets into the champions league, dont spend more than you earn.

Remember its the football associations that broker the rights to the TV deals, I hardly think SKY have thought to themselves, we arent paying enough, lets pay more. Sky are serving the needs of the viewers, what happens to the money and how many people get into europe is nothing to do with them, its ll down to the authorities.

Some slightly (in)coherent thoughts

Sky have created the needs of their viewers. Close to saturation point now with multiple football slots across leagues and several days during the week. I don't imagine that 30 years ago supporters (and their wives!) through what I need is...

At what price?
- the live match (in stadium) experience? lower gates poor atmosphere as chairmen go for the TV money. impacting STs crowds where clubs become increasingly reliant on TV money?
- the competition - have SKY killed off the competition with their buying power? And if so to what degree is this scary (calling ALL the shots - EPL must accept the OF as it makes commercial sense to SKY? :devil:)

I wonder - did Chairmen always spend more than they earned and if they did did they do it to massive excess?

OK pandora's box was opened and the genie is out the bottle but

What if the SKY/big broadcasting money was not there across the board?
- less revenues from TV
- lower salary demands
- if across the board would standards suffer or are heightened skill levels (if indeed there are) directly due to excessive salaries?

But the clubs need that level of money to compete!!! - ask Rangers, Man Utd and Liverpool fans where that leads to.

Donno what the answer is all I can see is a mess. SKY/chairmen/football associations have all been complicit.

Why did football need to get into bed with business again? Did it get what it wanted?

[SidBurns]

I think it's all to do with SKY. They have taken viewer subscriptions and thrown this money at a competition which has completely devalued national championships to the point where former top clubs know they don't need to win to cash in. How the "Champions" league can allow 4 teams from the same country to compete is beyond me. A straightforward knockout with no seeding between the Champions of each EUFA member country. That way each club knows they have to win their league. Surely the football would be better. I seem to remember it was like that in the past and I enjoyed the game more.

Sooo true by the way! It's the CHAMPIONS LEAGUE not the TOP TEAMS FROM EACH COUNTRY LEAGUE! Will NEVER happen though as too much money in the competition nowadays.

Must say I'm slowly falling out of love with the beautiful game. Jacked in my season ticket some 9 years ago, jacked in playing a couple of years ago, took up golf and now I'm doing my referee course! God, I MUST be falling out of love with it!

[HFC 0-7]

Some slightly (in)coherent thoughts

Sky have created the needs of their viewers. Close to saturation point now with multiple football slots across leagues and several days during the week. I don't imagine that 30 years ago supporters (and their wives!) through what I need is...

At what price?
- the live match (in stadium) experience? lower gates poor atmosphere as chairmen go for the TV money. impacting STs crowds where clubs become increasingly reliant on TV money?
- the competition - have SKY killed off the competition with their buying power? And if so to what degree is this scary (calling ALL the shots - EPL must accept the OF as it makes commercial sense to SKY? :devil:)

I wonder - did Chairmen always spend more than they earned and if they did did they do it to massive excess?

OK pandora's box was opened and the genie is out the bottle but

What if the SKY/big broadcasting money was not there across the board?
- less revenues from TV
- lower salary demands
- if across the board would standards suffer or are heightened skill levels (if indeed there are) directly due to excessive salaries?

But the clubs need that level of money to compete!!! - ask Rangers, Man Utd and Liverpool fans where that leads to.

Donno what the answer is all I can see is a mess. SKY/chairmen/football associations have all been complicit.

Why did football need to get into bed with business again? Did it get what it wanted?

I agree that because money is there the wages are higher, but my point is that the powers that be have CHOSEN what to do with the money. Sky is a symptom not the cause, clubs and owners are greedy, they have driven up the prices of the TV rights, not SKY. If you look at it, SKY have done it as a business hence the profits they are making, the clubs have been greedy, gambling by spending lots of money to try and get a bigger slice of the money, and most cases it has back fired. Even the big clubs are begining to feel the pressure when it comes to money. Owners are now having to plough millions into the clubs because whats on offer from SKY isnt enough.

The fact is that clubs got greedy, they spent and spent and they are now billions in debt.

All you need to do is look at how hibs have been run, like a business, and they are managing there finances. Clubs get greedy and spend above their means and end up in debt. SKY has nothing to do with it.

You are talking about how TV money has ruined it for clubs because they are getting reduced gates, I am sorry but the reduced gates were well before SKY started snatching everything up. Clubs get more for TV money than they would with full stadiums every week.

Bottom line is, if the wages were capped and the spending was regulated, ot wouldnt matter who was throwing money where, they would need live within their means. I am sorry but blaming SKY for debt in football is crazy, the problem is there is no one governing the debt because there are too many people having their pockets lined!

[1875godsgift]

I " couldn't have scored in a brothel" :greengrin
As someone with family who had played for Hibs just to be on the same park as
Smith, Johnston,Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond et al was as I say my "cup final"

:cool2:
You lucky bugger! Or, sorry, lucky maybe ain't the word... you skillful bugger!

[AgentDaleCooper]

Heard on SS News that the EPL accounts for 56% of overall debt in European football. The debt totals £3.5b pounds.

Does anyone think more and more E**Lish clubs will go to the wall in the next few years? They can't keep throwing money at it, even Manure, their something like £750m in debt, surely that can't be right!?! If they were to go 3/4 years without any Champions League money, unlikely I know, they'd be screwed no!?!

Dunno about everyone else, but I can only see trouble ahead down south...
christ on a bike - does that mean that man utd's debt accounts for over 10% of ALL the debt in european football?!:dizzy:

[s.a.m]

:top marks
I played in the days when there WAS a salary cap and most of the full timers were on a max of around £8/9a week (plus bonus) and had "second jobs" to keep things going .
We had a situation where players like Bobby Flavell of Hearts and De Stefano went off to Bogota , Colombia , in the 1950's for a signing on fee of £5000 and £5000 a year !!!!!!
I earned £4.10.0d per week plus " £1 a point" bonus ( two points for a win then !!) playing in the old 1st Division as a part timer
At that time a shipyard fitter had a basic wage of around £5 plus overtime therefore with two jobs I was relatively better off than my full time mates !!.

Salary caps in football were abolished after a player revolt in the 1960s, leading to the exorbitant wages paid out in the modern game.
If wage capping is to be brought in again it will have to be 100% across all the leagues or the same will happen as in 1960 .

:confused:

I forecat that within five years we will have lost three ir four top flight clubs both in England and Scotland

I once had a long and interesting conversation about this with Johnny Haines (sp?),at a party. He and Jimmy Hill were at the helm of the campaign for abolition.

I don't have anything useful to add here - I'm just name-dropping. :greengrin

[SidBurns]

christ on a bike - does that mean that man utd's debt accounts for over 10% of ALL the debt in european football?!:dizzy:

Correct! It is VERY scary! Thing is, the only way it'll stop is if a big club (ie Chelsea, Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal) go bust otherwise it'll go on and on and on.......