Are 12 American owners a serious threat to our game ?

[mexico1970]

"What the issue here? They cant offer Mbappe 4m a week"
No, the issue here is that they can't compete with the "elite"

They can compete let's face it their owners are certainly wealthy enough but they don't have to if they fix the other clubs spending so that they can compete by spending less.

 

[Chris-NCL]

Looks like you are on your own, just like City are. No other club supported City over ffp.
Your club got into bed with the red cartel the hateful 8 club and wrote to CAS trying to get us banned.
There is no reason for our club to help your club is there.
Newcastle got into bed with the red cartel when they were skint. Now you have money you don't agree with the red cartel and even moan about City voting lol.

Personal I think all financial control should be scraped and owners can invest or take out what they want.
It worked for over a 100 years.

I haven’t complained about Man City voting, my responses on here have never been an attack on Man City, or your fans.
The response you quoted in me was in response to an Arsenal fan.

Additionally, may I have it noted that under our previous owners, the club was ran on a shoestring budget, and Mike Ashley would have voted for anything that would help him sustain a Premier League club, without much outlay, much like the likes of Crystal Palaces’s, Brightons, and Brentford’s owners do now. From a fans point of view, we had so much apathy. Matchday attendance by the end was out of habit, anything off the field largely wasn’t really considered. I doubt anyone actually gave a fuck what Man City were spending, in fact if anything it was envy as Ashley has a meeting to sell to your owners before they bought you, but he by his own admission didn’t turn up, and just drank in the hotel bar in Dubai saying ‘If they want to buy the club, they can meet me here’.
For all interned and purposes, what you Man City were spending and doing was as far out of reach for us as when Chelsea were doing it, Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool etc all before them as well. It was simply not relevant, as so long as that fat **** owned us, it was a matter of time until we slid down the leagues.

 

[Gordyola]

They can compete let's face it their owners are certainly wealthy enough but they don't have to if they fix the other clubs spending so that they can compete by spending less.

Heard of PSR? Owner investment is limited
Ashley was tight as a nut I doubt there was any wasted spending

 

[mexico1970]

Heard of PSR? Owner investment is limited
Ashley was tight as a nut I doubt there was any wasted spending

I wasn't talking about Newcastle I was talking about Arsenal, it's not to Arsenal owners advantage to open the floodgates they'd have to pay even more for players than they do now.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I think we're missing the point in talking about nationality. You don't have to be very old to remember English businessmen like Ken Bates, the Oystons, etc.

And I know people don't like to hear it but 15 different teams have won the World Series in the past 25 years. 6 have won the Premier League. Six have won the Bundesliga, 4 have won La Liga. Of the top 100 sports contracts historically, only two have been given out in Europe, the rest are American, except a handful in Saudi. The idea that American owners don't like competition and don't invest in their players doesn't bear scrutiny.

The reality is that wherever they're from, the people who now have the money to own a top-flight football club a) don't care about the local community, and b) are out to make as much money as possible off the club, or greenwash their image, and don't care what they destroy in the process. I don't have a solution but I do think it involves government regulation and some form of salary cap.

While your “statistics” might be right, you’re talking about sports contracts in sports that play over 162 games in a season, often playing for 3 days in a row, with multi-billion dollar TV contracts, across multiple channels, and TV time outs every few mins to get the ad dollars flowing. They also have wall to wall TV talk programming about each game for a couple of hours before and after the game, AND this all takes place both regionally and nationally.

Ergo, you can’t compare US sports with UK sports on the metrics you describe.

However, how would you like NO TRANSFER FEES, which keep small clubs alive?

How about revenue sharing?

A draft, where the worst team get the best players next season, and only being able to protect “franchise players” every year?

A salary cap?

No relegation or promotion, just the same teams in the same league every year?

Or billionaire owners who decide all these rules, with a “League CEO” who is in their pocket to protect the billions that keep flowing TO THEM?

How about $130 (£100) tickets?

Oh and those tickets require a “seat licence” that “entitles” you to buy that ticket?

How about £10 for a 12oz beer?

How about £10 for a hot dog?

How about $250 for a parking spot for 9 games?

If we are going to laud a few things, let’s talk about the whole package, shall we?

 

[WT86]

While your “statistics” might be right, you’re talking about sports contracts in sports that play over 162 games in a season, often playing for 3 days in a row, with multi-billion dollar TV contracts, across multiple channels, and TV time outs every few mins to get the ad dollars flowing. They also have wall to wall TV talk programming about each game for a couple of hours before and after the game, AND this all takes place both regionally and nationally.

Ergo, you can’t compare US sports with UK sports on the metrics you describe.

However, how would you like NO TRANSFER FEES, which keep small clubs alive?

How about revenue sharing?

A draft, where the worst team get the best players next season, and only being able to protect “franchise players” every year?

A salary cap?

No relegation or promotion, just the same teams in the same league every year?

Or billionaire owners who decide all these rules, with a “League CEO” who is in their pocket to protect the billions that keep flowing TO THEM?

How about $130 (£100) tickets?

Oh and those tickets require a “seat licence” that “entitles” you to buy that ticket?

How about £10 for a 12oz beer?

How about £10 for a hot dog?

How about $250 for a parking spot for 9 games?

If we are going to laud a few things, let’s talk about the whole package, shall we?

You have too many points to address. We can always cherry pick. Football does some things right that American sports do wrong, no question. Yes, relegation adds competition and should stay. But there's also another side that belies this nonsense about American sports being uncompetitive and American owners not investing in players, and you're not really addressing my point about competition. In every American sport more teams win and the players make more.

And to be clear I don't think football should be changed in any way or changed by foreign owners. As I said these people just want to make money and we shouldn't let the fact some of them are on our side blind us to that. I do think the government should address massive spending to make it more competitive. It's not good for the game.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

But there's also another side that belies this nonsense about American sports being uncompetitive and American owners not investing in players, and you're not really addressing my point about competition. In every American sport more teams win and the players make more.

And, you are ignoring the fact that American sports is how it is for two main reasons:

Complete control of the game by billionaire owners who enjoy MONOPOLY status and, in baseball (where the biggest long term contracts occur), they play a 162 (minimum) game season with no relegation…and then the worst teams get the best players next year!

You cannot separate your points from the actions that create them, then tell ME that I’M the one cherry-picking!

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I do think the government should address massive spending to make it more competitive. It's not good for the game.

I think government should stay out of the game, considering the objectionable things have been found to be unlawful.

The reason it’s “uncompetitive” (even though the rest of the world thinks we have the most competitive League in the world!) is because a small cartel is dictating rules, policies and finances to the smaller clubs to ensure the big can get bigger, while trying to limit the growth opportunities of others.

 

[BrianW]

American influence over this country has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

 

[WT86]

And, you are ignoring the fact that American sports is how it is for two main reasons:

Complete control of the game by billionaire owners who enjoy MONOPOLY status and, in baseball (where the biggest long term contracts occur), they play a 162 (minimum) game season with no relegation…and then the worst teams get the best players next year!

You cannot separate your points from the actions that create them, then tell ME that I’M the one cherry-picking!

That's not really true. A fair number of NFL players make more than Haaland, for example, to play 16 "guaranteed" games. Same with MLB pitchers, who will play about 30 and rarely finish those games. Haaland plays 40-50 a year.