> > Dortmund = In the Ruhr area, the most populous area in Germany, with
> > plenty of economy to sponsor them
> > Bremen = port city in rural area with low population and low incomes.
> > Bremen is notorious for its relative poverty, its by some distance the
> > poorest West German state.
> That is news to me? You ever been down to the Mannheim Ludwigshafen
> There is plenty of poverty in places like Frankfurt as well, even if
> you only see a lot of nice cars driving around. I dont know where you
> are coming up with your ideas? You have to factor in income as well
> as cost of living, housing, transport, utilities etc to get an idea of
> what is poor, not just a bunch of rich people living in a city
> boosting up numbers. Hamburg is an expensive place to live. I can
> get a lot more with my Euro elsewhere, even Berlin.
Unemployment figures for German countries:
Bremen has always been the top one for Western Germany.
The cost of living matters as well, as you say - there where there is no
work the CoL will be low, and with it the ticket prices. Ticket prices
in Hamburg can be much higher than in Bremen.
> > It's like comparing Manchester or London with Ipswich or Norwich or
> > Middlesbrough.
> > Other places that could challenge Bayern at some point:
> > Schalke is similar (even more popular), but Dortmund has a more
> > cooperative media environment, I think, or at least a more professional
> > club structure - they generally seem to be more focussed than Schalke,
> > where there's more often turmoil within the club.
> The Ruhr has lots of resources, it does not always mean that the
> people have a higher standard of living.
There are lots of companies willing to sponsor football, and even more
people to pay high ticket prices. Of course Dortmund's ticket prices are
relatively low, but that is a policy of hte club, they could make much
more money if they wanted to.
> > Berlin is of course the largest German city with 3m+ people, but suffers
> > from a similar situation as Bremen - the area around it is poor and not
> > populous. The biggest problem though is that in Berlin nobody can work
> > with numbers, the city is notorious for wasting and losing money, and so
> > are its clubs. Berlin is a disgrace for Germany. There are 2 clubs of
> > note: Hertha and Union. If either would somehow manage to work
> > consistently and professionally they could challenge Bayern in the long
> > run. But as I said, the city (and its media) are not conducive for
> > focussed, structured, professional work (don't ask me what I think that
> > means for Germany in the long run, after all this money drain is our
> > capital...).
> > Hamburg. Hamburg has always been independent (read about Germany's free
> > cities if you like) and proud of that and its Hanseatic (business)
> > traditions, and is more English than any other German city. Due to trade
> > and the port its the richest major city in Germany, if not Europe
> > (depends on how you measure that, I guess), so it's easy to find
> Bremen is also a Hanseatic state, even if the Port is smaller, it is
> kind of like saying Rotterdam must be more wealthy then Amsterdam or
> Hamburg because it has a bigger port. Bremen is smaller but has
> universities and other business, yes Hamburg is big and has most of
> the German media outlets and some big businesses and whatnot, and
> probably does have more wealth, but it also has a lot more poorer
> people then Bremen. Bigger divide in Hamburg between the poor and the
Yeah, it's too simplistic to say it's down just to the port. You are
probably right regarding the divide.
> You are making it sound like Bremen is Greece.
But Bremen is Germany's Greece (Berlin is Germany's Cyprus ;)). It has
been verging on bankruptcy on and off for 20 years now. The social
payments due ot the high unemployment rate *** the city.
> > sponsors and to sell business seats. Population is large enough (1.8m)
> > and the surrounding area is richer than e.g. Bremen's due to Hamburg's
> > economy, and of course the draw is much stronger. So, the environment is
> > great, why does HSV not challenge? There's always something going on in
> > or around the club, and Hamburg's media tries to keep the fires going.
> > We had a professional management in the past (2003-2011 or so, B
> > Hoffmann and until 2007 D Beiersdorfer), but their personalities clashed
> > and the first team and trainers suffered from that. Our current
> > management is bollox, our board too large, incompetent and publicity
> > ***ed - I don't have much hope that this will change any time soon.
> > There are internal power struggles in the club, too many pulling in too
> > many directions at once. It's one of the risks of being a membership
> > club. :) As long as that is the case HSV will be mediocre. As soon as
> > that changes HSV will start to challenge for the top.
> You are just making up reasons now. Sort of like you were making up
> your economic forecast of Bremen. Mannheim and Ludwigshafen must be
> rich too, according to your rationale?
Both Mannheim's and Ludwigshafen's unemployment rates are barely more
than half of Bremen's.
Avoid Santander, the magic bank that makes money disappear.