ewerk

If Gudjohnsen were available for the same price then he would've been a better choice imo.

We were reported to have certain provisions in his contract should he face jail time iirc, what those provisions are and what good they would do I don't know.

Apparently Eriksson has spent his last year out of football scouting and drawing up a list of targets for whatever club he joined so when he took over he probably just handed the list to the club and told them to get the players.

Not the biggest surprise tbf, the doctors were probably sure to give him a very thorough examination.

I suppose with neither club being on the stock exchange we may not find out what the fee was.

Aye you're right, rarely do the artists actually see any of the money.

That kind of download is never legal. Only if you're a celebrity doing it for 'research' purposes.

After years of over paying for music the emergence of MP3s has been a God send. Take petrol, for example. We're getting fucked on petrol. If an illegal petrol pump was available, giving you free petrol, and it was totally undetectable that you'd used it. How many of you would still pay for petrol? Would your conscience eat at you that the multi billion dollar oil industry and our govt was losing your 95 pence per litre? Aye and if everyone did it then other taxes would go through the fucking roof wouldn't they? Yes they would. So you'd feel guilty, as an individual? Yes because at the end of the day it's stealing, whether stealing from the government, a musician or a record company it is still essentially theft. Anyway thanks for everyone's help to my original question, Toontastic to the rescue once again. While you've all been bickering I have signed up to Napster and am downloading my album for an admittedly inflated price of £8.95.

After years of over paying for music the emergence of MP3s has been a God send. Take petrol, for example. We're getting fucked on petrol. If an illegal petrol pump was available, giving you free petrol, and it was totally undetectable that you'd used it. How many of you would still pay for petrol? Would your conscience eat at you that the multi billion dollar oil industry and our govt was losing your 95 pence per litre? Aye and if everyone did it then other taxes would go through the fucking roof wouldn't they?

So you reckon you're doing your own wee bit to ensure a fairer redistribution of wealth? Ideally I should pay for all albums but I don't, as I said earlier I'll pay for albums of artists who aren't as successful as the likes of U2 because without my support of the support of others they'll not sell as many records or make enough money to satisfy their record company. For every Bono out there there are 1000's of struggling artists and if I like them I'll give them the 8 quid or whatever it is for their album, it's hardly overpriced for the use I'll get out of it.

Uh apart from the fact that the artist gets paid for the purchased copy? That's a pretty big difference.

Being a broke student I do often illegally download music if it's single tracks or albums if it's by a big artist but if it's a smaller, less well known artist then I'll pay for it. It's double standards I know and if it means I'm 'up my own arse' then so be it. I wasn't referring to you specifically, because you have explained that the music you want isn't available from other sources. More of a generalization of people who pay to download all of their tunes. So what is wrong with people paying for things they're supposed to pay for? I don't think it's socially accepted that music nowadays is totally free.

Being a broke student I do often illegally download music if it's single tracks or albums if it's by a big artist but if it's a smaller, less well known artist then I'll pay for it. It's double standards I know and if it means I'm 'up my own arse' then so be it.

It's now called alltunes.com, seeing as Russian prosecutors are after the owner of the site I reckon it's probably in a grey area of the law but that's good enough for me.

They've still got the right idea though if that's the case. Agreed, hopefully it'll be something we'll see more of in the future.

I'd doubt that their cap is effectively as low as that, I'd imagine that they'd have significant win/appearance/finish bonuses written into their contracts.

Because the album I'm looking isn't available illegally dickhead.

Anyone recommend any good sites for buying MP3s? The only one I've know if is itunes but I've seen cheaper alternatives out there but not sure how safe and reputable they are.

Uh no it wasn't, it was described as "a complete and utter fabrication" you complete cock end. Basically that story is just a copy of what appeared in The Times yesterday, it'll be interesting to see if Oliver remains in his job now that he has nothing to worth writing about, his links with the club are the only reason I could see for keeping him and now that they're gone what exactly can he offer?

I wouldn't be worrying too much about Viduka's match sharpness as he's probably been involved in tougher games with Australia than out pre-season fixtures, though it would've been nice to see how he could've linked up with Martins.

Ah right, so SLP isn't ITK at all.

The £10m figure is only a bit of 'ITK' knowledge from SLP, it hasn't been made public.

That's the problem with not having a proper wage structure in place, he's probably looking at his wages and comparing them and his contribution last season to the likes of Duff, Dyer and Owen. I'd say on the basis of his goals last season he deserved £60k pw but no way should he be getting any more and I'd be very surprised if the new regime were going to give him a significant pay rise.

Judging by the lack of money seemingly available until this review is complete I think the Ashley and Mort are looking at the club long term and don't look like being rushed into making any panic movements.