2015 Presidential Elections

neuro11 wrote:what angel club you mean...we are doing all kinds of corruption out there and breaking laws for fun. we get banned for 2 years and thats not a shame. but we want a very nice picture in our shirt which is UNICEF.

True! But, this all happened when Rosel came on board. So you cant really tarnish the clubs reputation permanently. Let's just call it a form, and we already have a plenty of class. Just an example, Mou made madrid look like thugs, but now they are not and they haven't been historically so they turned it around quickly.

Cruijf wrote:What exactly the big deal with Qatar sponsorship? I mean I know fans were mildly disappointed because Barca is supposed to be that angel club that donates their shirt space to UNICEF instead of taking money, but it's the 21st century and everyone needs money. Refusing to buy shirts seems a bit extreme. Or am I missing something?

Dont confuse what a club needs to do and what a club wants to do.

Dont tell me we need money when we are spending astronomical figures on star forwards, spending 5m a year on La Masia, signings random Brazilians who wont play, stocking up old Centerbacks like cans of tuna to go into an underground bunker and having probably the most expensive pair of goalies in history.

Many of these things we like, I like we care so much about La Masia to spend that money, I like having Suarez and Neymar on the same and I like we finally spent money on the CB position...however, dont tell me we need money so badly while still doing all these things and many many others (Loaning players out while still paying their salary, increasing salaries of existing players every season and so on)

We are not yet at the phase where each candidate presents his project. They are now precandidates and need an amount of signatures to be final candidates.

On Qatar, the fact that we might need money, isn't an excuse to promote an absolutist-radical islamist country. We could be promoting many other brands with better reputation. Or even better, we could wear UNICEF and have a brand sponsor the fact thta we are promoting UNICEF at the back of our shirt, instead of the front.

As has been said already, it's not so much about sponsorship but the type of sponsor you want your institution to be associated with. Qatar is currently synonym to WC bribery, corruption, lax labour laws, lack of freedom of expression etc. More importantly many members of Rosell's regime are reported to 've business interests in Qatar, which could explains the lack of dissecting other options, and settling for an unflattering deal with Qatar. The whole Qatari association so far appears to be a disreputable affair, one that favors individuals in power rather than Barca's best interest.

Cruijf wrote:What exactly the big deal with Qatar sponsorship? I mean I know fans were mildly disappointed because Barca is supposed to be that angel club that donates their shirt space to UNICEF instead of taking money, but it's the 21st century and everyone needs money. Refusing to buy shirts seems a bit extreme. Or am I missing something?

No angel club or anything... We'd be fine with any sponsor bar Qatar because they're a damn corrupt bunch

@The Franchise:

When I said need, I should have added, "to compete". The deal with Qatar Airways has given you 60 mil in the last two seasons. Now, other than that number I just googled, I know next to nothing about your finances, but it is very possible without that 60 mil you wouldn't have been able to buy Neymar or Suarez. And without those two (or even one of those two) you wouldn't be the same team and it's possible wouldn't have the treble right now. So my question is, do you really care about who gives you the money if the money lets you win the treble?

But more importantly, and this is to everyone else saying that it matters that its Qatar sponsoring you, what with their human rights record and world cup corruption: Qatar is no worse than the financial backers behind many of the top clubs in world football.

Do you want Arsenal fans to boycott their club because their money came from the Emirates (arguably worse than Qatar)? Chelsea fans to boycott their club because their success is owed to a Russian? PSG fans because they also have Qatari money? Of course not. As I'm sure their fans would say, money is money.

So once again, why get so angry at your club for playing the game the same way as everyone else?

I understood Franchise's post as fundamentally sarcastic

Cruijf wrote:@The Franchise:

When I said need, I should have added, "to compete". The deal with Qatar Airways has given you 60 mil in the last two seasons. Now, other than that number I just googled, I know next to nothing about your finances, but it is very possible without that 60 mil you wouldn't have been able to buy Neymar or Suarez. And without those two (or even one of those two) you wouldn't be the same team and it's possible wouldn't have the treble right now. So my question is, do you really care about who gives you the money if the money lets you win the treble?

But more importantly, and this is to everyone else saying that it matters that its Qatar sponsoring you, what with their human rights record and world cup corruption: Qatar is no worse than the financial backers behind many of the top clubs in world football.

Do you want Arsenal fans to boycott their club because their money came from the Emirates (arguably worse than Qatar)? Chelsea fans to boycott their club because their success is owed to a Russian? PSG fans because they also have Qatari money? Of course not. As I'm sure their fans would say, money is money.

So once again, why get so angry at your club for playing the game the same way as everyone else?

These are the precandidates so far:

Joan Laporta, Josep Maria Bartomeu, Toni Freixa, Agustí Benedito, Jordi Majó y Jordi Farré

Yesterday I heard and interview with Jordi Farré and I was gladly surprised. This man knows his shit. He is innovative: he wants us to not sign any kit deal with nike and make our clothing brand. He thinks we can get up to 150 milion€ with this idea. I'm not sure about that, but I like the idea of trying new things.

He is also a pacifist: he wants to embrave the good things of Nuñez, Rosell-Barto and Laporta and don't choose sides. I liked all his ideas a lot. I will probably vote for Laporta but so far he would be my 2nd favoruite candidate.

sounds odd to me, how can you make a bigger profit by taking out sponserships on the shirt?
i'm not an expert on finances but that sounds rather unbelievable.

Donuts wrote:sounds odd to me, how can you make a bigger profit by taking out sponserships on the shirt?
i'm not an expert on finances but that sounds rather unbelievable.

Not sponsorship, but a Kit deal. Basically, instead of asking Nike to produce the kit, Barça would make their own brand and produce and sell it's own kit.

Laporta needs to bring back vertical stripes, he'd never allow the hoops to happen

free_cat wrote:

Donuts wrote:sounds odd to me, how can you make a bigger profit by taking out sponserships on the shirt?
i'm not an expert on finances but that sounds rather unbelievable.

Not sponsorship, but a Kit deal. Basically, instead of asking Nike to produce the kit, Barça would make their own brand and produce and sell it's own kit.

A kit deal is a sponsorship deal too.

Nike doesn't pay you millions and millions to 'produce' the shirts and sell them.
They pay because they produce and sell the shirts as well as having their logo visible on Barca jerseys.

if making our own kit was so easy, I think every club would of already been on it and dropped Nike/Adidas along time ago. Also, we are getting good money from Nike from our current deal, market our brand and they make good quality shirts (even if people dont like the designs)

windkick wrote:if making our own kit was so easy, I think every club would of already been on it and dropped Nike/Adidas along time ago. Also, we are getting good money from Nike from our current deal, market our brand and they make good quality shirts (even if people dont like the designs)

Agreed, it's not sure we'd get more revenue. There's a risk involved also. But I like that he thinks further than what we are currently doing.

Because the sponsorship with Qatar has been and still is creating a separation between "mes que un club" and what Barcelona is actually doing. Just because Real Madrid or Chelsea or other despicable institutions are getting money from equally corrupt/awful sources does not mean we should or that we should be fine with it.

The fact of the matter is since the sponsor of the shirt and Rosell coming in, the club has been marred by scandals and corruption and incompetent management. These are things that have looked bad for Barca and have been bad for Barca.

It's safe to say that while perhaps it's not the biggest deal in the world, perhaps you can understand why fans of this club want to keep traditions around like the vertical stripes (as opposed to hoops) and no sponsor on the shirt. These are the things that I came to love about the club in the first place, I would like to see them stick around.

And no doubt the club is enough of a financial powerhouse that Barca can do without the sponsor. We did it before, we can do it again.

Selling our own shirts seems like a dumb idea.

Let's start off with some basics. Barca right now sells about 1.15m shirts per year at about 100m euros a shirt. That's 115m euros in total revenues. Let's be generous and assume Barça could get a 50% profit margin on the new enterprise. So that leaves us with 57.5m euros. BUT the assumption that a new enterprise by Barça could sas many shirts as Nike, who has a worldwide network, is laughable. So let's again be generous and assume a 50% cut. That leaves us with 28.75m per year. Not enough.

Barca right now sells about 1.15m shirts per year at about 100m euros a shirt.

That seems somewhat overpriced

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Selling our own shirts seems like a dumb idea.

Let's start off with some basics. Barca right now sells about 1.15m shirts per year at about 100m euros a shirt. That's 115m euros in total revenues. Let's be generous and assume Barça could get a 50% profit margin on the new enterprise. So that leaves us with 57.5m euros. BUT the assumption that a new enterprise by Barça could sas many shirts as Nike, who has a worldwide network, is laughable. So let's again be generous and assume a 50% cut. That leaves us with 28.75m per year. Not enough.

Well, we were currently around the 35 milion mark with Nike, so we would kind off break even, and have the potential to improve in years to come.

I'm not saying is a surely can't miss idea, but I like people who tinks out of the box and is innovative.

Majo (presidential candidate): "Sergio Ramos has been offered to my candidacy, but we won't play that game organized by him or his agent."

LOL.

Ramos + Unzue = 30 goals from set pieces in a season. Do it, nonexistent sports director!

Majó will name Michael Laudrup sporting director if he wins the election according to Laudrup's agent.

Freeza wrote:Majó will name Michael Laudrup sporting director if he wins the election according to Laudrup's agent.

Looks like Majó is an idiot. Naming Laudrup as his sporting director is only slightly more appealing for Barca socios than naming Figo as sporting director.

do we have any debt right now?? how much is that???

Majo sounds like a mega idiot. How in the world is he 3rd in the polls? lol