Super League Aftermath.

[dadnlad]

I can see why we did get involved. Easy to say in hindsight but we should be at the table when these things are being discussed. No doubt Bayern and PSG were at the table and refused to sign on, well played them but its a balance. Change is needed (the new CL format is worse than the current one - that needs stopping as well).



This was a gift for them but in reality they are in a mess as it stands so it can't get much worse can it?

Bayern and PSG in one team leagues in reality so no rush to jump on board they would never of turned them away city and chelsea's place under bigger threat

 

[lcfc_chump]

Yes, we need a root and branch review, but this farce has shown one thing. You are much better to have vanity owners and I do not mean vanity in a disrespectful way, as surely your and Chelsea owners aren’t here to make money but to promote their brand.

Infinitely preferable to those chasing the profit above all else.

 

[IH8MUFC]

Yep. Liverpool fans have turned against Henry and The Glazers and Kroenke have always been hated. This last 72 hours have shown how much American owners could care less about actual football and for them it's just about money. I reckon all 3 will be gone from those clubs within a year

Wait so only American owners hate losing money? Also what part of America are Perez, Levy, Sheikh Mansour, Roman Abramovich, Agnelli, Laporta, Marin and Jindong from?

 

[nyCITY]

This was a move about money by the owners for themselves. I think that context is important.

Firstly, I see no reason that these clubs can’t be compelled to turnover information that led to the formation of the Super League - ie meeting transcripts and videos, legal memoranda etc. I think fans and the current establishment should know exactly how these clubs planned to circumvent obligations etc. My hope here is that maybe it will help show some of the nefarious behaviour in the sport that remains out of the public’s view and afford the governing bodies the opportunities to clean some of it up. I know, this very altruistic of me, but there is romance in sport and these owners were predatory.

Secondly, Florentino, Agnelli and the rest of the individuals that were selected for vice chairmen/managing director roles are banned from the game for life. Owners may place their ownership stake into a blind trust or sell their stake.

This was a move about money by the owners for themselves. I think that context is important. All of these clubs’ OWNERS should be required to make a £250 million payment to their respective country’s football association. That £250 million payment will be over two years and count against club revenue for FFP outlay determination during those two years.

Furthermore each club will be required to incur a £125 million per year accounting “penalty” against their revenues for the purpose of spending on wages and transfers. Stated differently, the clubs during years 3/4 will need to generate in excess of £125 million of profit if they would like to use the transfer market. The excess profit held on the books during all four years may only be used to fund club infrastructure or repay debt. These clubs hatched this plan because of their poor economic stewardship.

 

[East Level 2]

R Madrid and Barcelona are financially feked. I've been saying it in the various transfer threads for months. They needed this money.

It's a pity the rest of La Liga need them as much as they do.

 

[mexico1970]

The mutterings today from Spain centering around how they can't buy big players without this SL is damning really. What they really mean is that they want to continue to inflate players prices and keep buying galactico teams without actually having the money to pay for it.

Why should anyone help them with their sick obsession, I hope the clubs fold.

 

[Clevers]

So Everton, West Ham, Leicester take advantage, what's not to like.

Everton

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Yes, we need a root and branch review, but this farce has shown one thing. You are much better to have vanity owners and I do not mean vanity in a disrespectful way, as surely your and Chelsea owners aren’t here to make money but to promote their brand.

Infinitely preferable to those chasing the profit above all else.

Sorry but that's not accurate. Sheikh Mansour has made serious money from his investments in City and the surrounding area. The club is now worth about £3.5bn so he has tripled the value of his investment. On top of this he recouped £654m when he sold 13 per cent of the club to US-based Silverlake and 11 per cent to a Chinese consortium. He also stands to make at least £1bn profit from his developments and other investments in the Manchester area.
It is just a media myth that the CFG football group is a vanity project. Why would he buy football clubs in Ukraine and Uruguay if it was a vanity project? City have got a fantastic business model but it is never reported properly or fairly in the media. I suspect the same is true of Leicester City.
The reason Sheikh Mansour has done all this is because, like all big businesses in the Middle East, he needs to diversify away from reliance on dwindling fossil fuels. He is also a huge investor (one of the biggest in the world) in renewable energy for the same reason.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

This was a move about money by the owners for themselves. I think that context is important.

Firstly, I see no reason that these clubs can’t be compelled to turnover information that led to the formation of the Super League - ie meeting transcripts and videos, legal memoranda etc. I think fans and the current establishment should know exactly how these clubs planned to circumvent obligations etc. My hope here is that maybe it will help show some of the nefarious behaviour in the sport that remains out of the public’s view and afford the governing bodies the opportunities to clean some of it up. I know, this very altruistic of me, but there is romance in sport and these owners were predatory.

Secondly, Florentino, Agnelli and the rest of the individuals that were selected for vice chairmen/managing director roles are banned from the game for life. Owners may place their ownership stake into a blind trust or sell their stake.

This was a move about money by the owners for themselves. I think that context is important. All of these clubs’ OWNERS should be required to make a £250 million payment to their respective country’s football association. That £250 million payment will be over two years and count against club revenue for FFP outlay determination during those two years.

Furthermore each club will be required to incur a £125 million per year accounting “penalty” against their revenues for the purpose of spending on wages and transfers. Stated differently, the clubs during years 3/4 will need to generate in excess of £125 million of profit if they would like to use the transfer market. The excess profit held on the books during all four years may only be used to fund club infrastructure or repay debt. These clubs hatched this plan because of their poor economic stewardship.

Thank God you won't be deciding.
Overly vindictive.

 

[nyCITY]

Thank God you won't be deciding.
Overly vindictive.

How is it overly vindictive? The punishment is aimed at ownership, the individuals that plotted the system and the excesses in the transfer market that created debt-laden clubs that are overly-reliant on said market supporting their asset values.