Question is - would we rather see the rags dragged round the outposts of Europe in the Mickey mouse, tinpot, not good enough for the champions league competition of which they will enter in the final qualifying round at the end of July???aguero93:20 said:?? Fair enough, come on the toffees then. Although imo Hull will tear them a new one anyway.kippaxking79 said:This was asked on Talksport the other night, Adrian Durham didn't know so they got clarification. The reporter and back with this!aguero93:20 said:Nope, if Arsenal finish fifth, they qualify for EL through the league and Hull qualify for EL through the cup, If Arsenal finish top 4, they qualify for CL and Hull through the cup for EL, we've already done this to death on here.
If arsenal finish 5th and WIN the fa cup 7th place in the league opens up to a Europa league spot.
Plus they're G14 and Arsenal have just signed a £30m p/a deal. UEFA won't challenge that one imo, although it's funny that they even dared question a deal for stadium, academy and shirt sponsorship for £35m p/a when there's shirt sponsor deals floating round worth nearly that from teams who operate in the same competitions as us and therefore have similar levels of exposure.<br /><br />-- Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:01 pm --<br /><br />BoyBlue_1985 said:Not really no as Liverpool are still one of the most marketable teams in the world they probably sell 3x as many shirts as us worldwideNervous Nedum said:aguero93:20 said:No, but the E.C. is looking into state aid to football clubs in all countries at the moment. That one probably depends on what they're paying in the lease and whether the fee involved was fair market value i.e. if the Municipality actually stand to profit from the deal it can't be regarded as state aid but rather PSV taking the opportunity to get a fund injection and MoE seeing a good business opportunity.
Does that same notion of fair market value apply to sponsorship deals? Adidas were paying a reported £13mil a year to Liverpool up until the 11/12 season , when they decided not to renew because:
'There was a gap between their performance on the field and what the numbers should be.
'It all depends on the success and the effort and the popularity, the exposure on TV and revenue you can generate by merchandising.
'This all has to be brought in line between what you offer and what you get. We thought what Liverpool were asking was not... right, then we said we will not do it - that’s the end of the story.'
Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2088761/Liverpool-branded-failure-Adidas.html#ixzz2z2omGCYD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z2z2omGCYD</a>
They finished 8th in the league that year, but then announced a £25mil a year, 6 year deal with Warrior Sports. Comparatively, United who finished second and had won the league the previous year were getting £23mil a year from Nike.
Surely that Warrior deal could be deemed above fair market value?
Is it really though? a question?kippaxking79 said:Question is - would we rather see the rags dragged round the outposts of Europe in the Mickey mouse, tinpot, not good enough for the champions league competition of which they will enter in the final qualifying round at the end of July???aguero93:20 said:?? Fair enough, come on the toffees then. Although imo Hull will tear them a new one anyway.kippaxking79 said:This was asked on Talksport the other night, Adrian Durham didn't know so they got clarification. The reporter and back with this!
If arsenal finish 5th and WIN the fa cup 7th place in the league opens up to a Europa league spot.
Or jet off round Asia to play lucrative friendlies in front of their 659 million fans??
BoyBlue_1985 said:Not really no as Liverpool are still one of the most marketable teams in the world they probably sell 3x as many shirts as us worldwideNervous Nedum said:aguero93:20 said:No, but the E.C. is looking into state aid to football clubs in all countries at the moment. That one probably depends on what they're paying in the lease and whether the fee involved was fair market value i.e. if the Municipality actually stand to profit from the deal it can't be regarded as state aid but rather PSV taking the opportunity to get a fund injection and MoE seeing a good business opportunity.
Does that same notion of fair market value apply to sponsorship deals? Adidas were paying a reported £13mil a year to Liverpool up until the 11/12 season , when they decided not to renew because:
'There was a gap between their performance on the field and what the numbers should be.
'It all depends on the success and the effort and the popularity, the exposure on TV and revenue you can generate by merchandising.
'This all has to be brought in line between what you offer and what you get. We thought what Liverpool were asking was not... right, then we said we will not do it - that’s the end of the story.'
Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2088761/Liverpool-branded-failure-Adidas.html#ixzz2z2omGCYD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z2z2omGCYD</a>
They finished 8th in the league that year, but then announced a £25mil a year, 6 year deal with Warrior Sports. Comparatively, United who finished second and had won the league the previous year were getting £23mil a year from Nike.
Surely that Warrior deal could be deemed above fair market value?
Addidas are hardly going to say much else than that on there behalf
kippaxking79 said:This was asked on Talksport the other night, Adrian Durham didn't know so they got clarification. The reporter and back with this!aguero93:20 said:Nope, if Arsenal finish fifth, they qualify for EL through the league and Hull qualify for EL through the cup, If Arsenal finish top 4, they qualify for CL and Hull through the cup for EL, we've already done this to death on here.mancity dan said:If arsenal finish 5th and win the FA Cup, their Europa league place goes to 7th place in the league and not the runner up in the FA Cup. If Arsenal win the FA cup and are in 4th then Hull will get Europa League spot.
If arsenal finish 5th and WIN the fa cup 7th place in the league opens up to a Europa league spot.
aguero93:20 said:Plus they're G14 and Arsenal have just signed a £30m p/a deal. UEFA won't challenge that one imo, although it's funny that they even dared question a deal for stadium, academy and shirt sponsorship for £35m p/a when there's shirt sponsor deals floating round worth nearly that from teams who operate in the same competitions as us and therefore have similar levels of exposure.BoyBlue_1985 said:Not really no as Liverpool are still one of the most marketable teams in the world they probably sell 3x as many shirts as us worldwideNervous Nedum said:Does that same notion of fair market value apply to sponsorship deals? Adidas were paying a reported £13mil a year to Liverpool up until the 11/12 season , when they decided not to renew because:
They finished 8th in the league that year, but then announced a £25mil a year, 6 year deal with Warrior Sports. Comparatively, United who finished second and had won the league the previous year were getting £23mil a year from Nike.
Surely that Warrior deal could be deemed above fair market value?
-- Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:01 pm --
Is it really though? a question?kippaxking79 said:Question is - would we rather see the rags dragged round the outposts of Europe in the Mickey mouse, tinpot, not good enough for the champions league competition of which they will enter in the final qualifying round at the end of July???aguero93:20 said:?? Fair enough, come on the toffees then. Although imo Hull will tear them a new one anyway.
Or jet off round Asia to play lucrative friendlies in front of their 659 million fans??
Big difference between buying a jersey/going to matches and vaguely recognising the team name or crest/pretending to recognise it so the annoying **** with a clipboard will leave you be so you can go back to trying to feed your family.tolmie's hairdoo said:So in a country of 65m and a supposed worldwide supporter base of 656m, the mighty United sold a paltry 1.4m shirts?
There is no money in shirts, apart from the margin from the sweat shop labour.
And about half of them will be to kids who will never set foot inside the shit tip.
Liverpool? 800,000?
What's the population of Merseyslide, 200k?
Again, it would suggest these supporter bases are a myth.
Manchester City have been left reeling after learning that struggling's David Moyes will be installed as manager at the Etihad next season.
The savage sanction-rap shows that Uefa mean business on Financial Fair Play, and will not stand idly by as teams flaunt the proud amateur status of professional football.
“It is simply unfair that some get to buy success thanks to obscene amounts of money, often emanating from ethically dubious sources,” said a Uefa official as he licked great dollops of caviar off a Rolex given to him by a Qatari well-wisher.
“All this money they’re spending is being funnelled away from the true heartland of the game: brown envelopes for hard-working delegates. Something has to be done.”
That something, it appears, is hobbling City with their neighbours’ beleaguered Scottish manager.
“Fair competition is absolutely vital for our sport,” said a Fifa statement. “For instance, anyone from any country can attempt to bribe a Fifa delegate in order to get on board the World Cup gravy train. Big country, small country, country which is just a desert with no interest in football whatsoever, it’s a level playing field."
The news was described as “a shock” to City, who had initially attempted to outfox meddling Europrats with a brilliant scheme of sponsoring themselves. Against the odds, Uefa brainboxes managed to foil this cunning plan.
“We did have an inkling that the Sheikh giving us ten gazillion quid out of thin air might attract attention," admitted a Manchester City executive. “So we did this scheme where Martín Demichelis would do a sponsored moustache-growing contest and every time he cocked it up the Sheikh would donate a million quid.
“Demichelis kept shaving it off by mistake, getting confused and growing a beard instead, having his toilet parts waxed, setting his face on fire and so on.
"The Sheikh eventually forked over about three-and-half billion for Demichelis’s facial hair foolishness, and we thought we were sorted.
“But apparently Mr Platini says that’s not within the rules.”
David Moyes’s Sky Blue Very Unhappy Army, as they will be known, can count themselves unlucky because previous sanctions for breaching FFP have ranged from “basically sod all” to “absolutely sod all”.
Chelsea, also under threat, were initially ordered to make Arsène Wenger their new manager, on the grounds that he never spends any money at all.
However, the West Londoners successfully argued on appeal that the purchase of Fernando Torres for £50 million was “evidence of good faith that they are trying to keep football competitive.”