What if discussion regarding City and PSG

by futbol_bill Mon Jan 22, 2024 2:47 pm

Firenze keeps saying City will end up being relegated for the FFS charges against them. What if they implemented consistent, fair and enforceable FFS rules across all leagues in Europe. It would surely hurt both City and PSG as I believe the acquisition cost and salary escalation is primarily driven by these two teams! What do you think?

by sportsczy Mon Jan 22, 2024 7:09 pm

No. Because it's anti-competitive in a free market economy. If someone wants to invest, they should be able to invest regardless of nationality (unless the nationality is restricted) as long as it does not break illicit money laws. The only requirement, that France implements, is that an asset guarantee (like a bank guarantee) exists to cover the cost of every single obligation like player contracts.

Everything else is viewed as protectionist and would trigger retaliation by the targeted parties. I do not think Europe wants to have an economic war with Middle Eastern countries over football.

The other reason is that it protects the elite clubs against competition rising up. That's nonsense in itself.

by Turok_TTZ Mon Jan 22, 2024 7:18 pm

You say that but there's seemingly nothing thats stopping the elite from consolidating their place in football. Such is the problem of a free market without sufficient regulations.

by sportsczy Mon Jan 22, 2024 7:25 pm

Turok_TTZ wrote:You say that but there's seemingly nothing thats stopping the elite from consolidating their place in football. Such is the problem of a free market without sufficient regulations.

As they apply to sports, regulations to control spending and protect competitive integrity are... revenue sharing with a salary cap that applies to everyone and minimum guaranteed contracts for all participants (again, based on revenue). That's helping everyone. But too many moving parts in Europe.

There is no solution unless you can get all interested parties to cooperate. Europe can't cooperate on anything.

Besides the players will fight tooth and nail against blocking investments... so will the agents. Also, France is 1000% percent behind PSG's ownership so there are political barriers there as well. They have created a lot of revenue for the city of Paris, the league and France in general.

Really a non-starter.

by futbol_bill Mon Jan 22, 2024 7:35 pm

So you’re disagreeing with Firenze then, that 100+ charges against City will not hold up?

by sportsczy Mon Jan 22, 2024 7:52 pm

futbol_bill wrote:So you’re disagreeing with Firenze then, that 100+ charges against City will not hold up?

It depends if they actually broke the law and the extent of it. If they did, yes. But in my mind, they can't afford to punish City more than financial penalties (huge fine).

If it's like France... with Lille and Bordeaux as the most recent examples... they bring the charges, allow the teams to respond, and then work on restitution. Only if the financial penalties are not met will anything else be considered. The exception is match fixing and things of that nature of course. But the charges here appear to be entirely financial so the solution will be financial.

by futbol_bill Mon Jan 22, 2024 8:59 pm

In the case of Everton, which was found guilty of same charges, although not anywhere close to the 100+ charges that City has, they were deducted points, which is why Firenze is saying relegation.

These are all related to ffs.

I don’t disagree with stopping investments, but there need to be consistent financial controls. i also think the idea of bank guarantee. One control that doesn’t appear to be within French rules is controls of salary ensuring salaries plus other expenses don’t exceed football income.

by sportsczy Mon Jan 22, 2024 11:19 pm

futbol_bill wrote:In the case of Everton, which was found guilty of same charges, although not anywhere close to the 100+ charges that City has, they were deducted points, which is why Firenze is saying relegation.

These are all related to ffs.

I don’t disagree with stopping investments, but there need to be consistent financial controls. i also think the idea of bank guarantee. One control that doesn’t appear to be within French rules is controls of salary ensuring salaries plus other expenses don’t exceed football income.

Football income is irrelevant in France. It's about the owners' ability to meet its obligations. They want to promote investment... investment comes first then revenue. What you're proposing is the exact opposite of that. Every single employee's wage, including the players, needs to be guaranteed. They use 60% of the previous year's revenue and asset/bank guarantees if that doesn't cover it (assets that can reasonably become liquid if needed).

Before the summer mercato opens, Ligue 1 and Ligue 2 clubs must submit their budget including the maximum net transfer and wage additions (if any) and meet this criteria.

The best example is Lyon this year. They could not participate in the summer mercato until the very very end because John Tudor did not submit the proper budget. Here's the story: https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2023/lyons-transfer-activity-and-wage-bill-to-be-monitored-by-dncg/

by futbol_bill Tue Jan 23, 2024 12:36 am

I see acquisitions as part of investments, much like a capital budget with corporations and thus agree with the idea of bank guarantees. However for me, salaries are a separate matter and should be part of operating cost and budget and therefore should be under futbol revenues. As I said at the beginning the rules should be consist across all leagues.

by sportsczy Tue Jan 23, 2024 2:02 am

You invest... then you grow revenue. You can't create new IP in football. There isn't some hidden revenue stream that you can capture. The only way you can win is to attract and pay top players. And without money, you can't do that. If you happen to hit the jackpot with your academy, you can't sustain it. Since contracts are basically not respected, you would lose those players immediately to higher bidders.

So how in the world can you expect a football team to rise to the top without investment? It's just nonsense.

Get big investment to buy players and invest in the brand... and not get poached in the meantime. Once you build a brand, then you can grow organically.

by futbol_bill Tue Jan 23, 2024 1:48 pm

The brand itself builds futbol revenue thru shirt sales, tv/ media, etc.

I haven’t said anything wrong about investments, only stating that ongoing salaries need to be treated separately.

by BarrileteCosmico Thu Jan 25, 2024 12:18 am

What's really the problem here? The investments of billionaires and petrostates in English clubs have made the PL the best league in the world. Is that a bad thing? I don't think the English are complaining too much that every top player wants to move there. Why should it be curtailed? Because Madrid can no longer compete with them?

Side note, hilarious to see futbol senior complaining that City and PSG are causing price inflation when Madrid was the first club to pay 100m for a player, in the middle of a global recession too.

by El Gunner Thu Jan 25, 2024 6:53 am

Madrid fans will always be spoiled brat sore loser hypocrite haters

by Pedram Thu Jan 25, 2024 9:12 am

The only side that is crying are the losers who are jealous of our continued successes, all the Arab money in the world not enough for PSG to win a single CL so far. Laughing

Obviously it's unfair that we have to compete with the financial power of the Arab sheikhs but Real Madrid will continue to remain competitive one way or another, it's in the DNA. :coffee:

by Valkyrja Thu Jan 25, 2024 10:41 am

How come we can’t compete with PL clubs when we have England’s golden boy playing for us Laughing

Re BCs point, the problem is not that Citeh and QSG spend money on transfers, the issue is about how those transfers are financed, as the money they’re spending was not earned either on the pitch or comercially. 10/15 years ago those clubs were non-entities that no one cared about and just hit the jackpot by being the toys of some shady investors.

by Myesyats Thu Jan 25, 2024 1:46 pm

El Gunner wrote:Madrid fans will always be spoiled brat sore loser hypocrite haters

What if discussion regarding City and PSG Giphy

by Warrior Thu Jan 25, 2024 2:01 pm

Real Madrid might have been the first club to spend huge sums on a player, but they did so on CR7, Figo, Gareth Bale and Kaka !!

Inflation comes from new rich clubs and Premier League TV deal which put them in financial bubble. Now role players cost five times what they should. It's not because of Real Madrid and Florentino Perez if these days clubs have to pay 50 millions to sign a mere Kalvin Phillips.

by sportsczy Thu Jan 25, 2024 7:34 pm

If you people had any concept of inflation adjustment, revenue growth and the time value of money... you would then understand how much money Madrid spent on players then.

Notice the only people crying a river here... the hypocritical, entitled, and pansy Real Madrid fans.

And with what money did Real Madrid build their teams in the past? I dare anyone to say it was organic revenue or legitimate money.

by Arquitecto Thu Jan 25, 2024 8:44 pm

Honestly that reminds me of the similar argument that Milanisti use, who sadly have this holier than thou attitude about history, pedigree etc and yes we are easily the second greatest club historically but it came from somewhere.

Silvio Berlusconi came out of nowhere just to buy us our own Galacticos (the obvious trio).

Back in my romanticising futbol period I did the same until I realized its total hypocrisy to act as if these big clubs didn't do owner funded sprees back then.

Different era, similar methods.

by Valkyrja Thu Jan 25, 2024 11:48 pm

sportsczy wrote:If you people had any concept of inflation adjustment, revenue growth and the time value of money... you would then understand how much money Madrid spent on players then.

Notice the only people crying a river here... the hypocritical, entitled, and pansy Real Madrid fans.

And with what money did Real Madrid build their teams in the past? I dare anyone to say it was organic revenue or legitimate money.

We are a fan-owned club. We raised debt in 2009 in order to finance the transfers of CR, Kaka, Benzema and Alonso. And in 2001 at the beginning of Florentino’s first stint we sold our training ground in order to cover for the mess left by Sanz and finance the following transfers of Los Galacticos. Check your facts before spitting shit and comparing us with fake clubs financed by Arab ‘investors’.

by sportsczy Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:25 am

Valkyrja wrote:
sportsczy wrote:If you people had any concept of inflation adjustment, revenue growth and the time value of money... you would then understand how much money Madrid spent on players then.

Notice the only people crying a river here... the hypocritical, entitled, and pansy Real Madrid fans.

And with what money did Real Madrid build their teams in the past? I dare anyone to say it was organic revenue or legitimate money.

We are a fan-owned club. We raised debt in 2009 in order to finance the transfers of CR, Kaka, Benzema and Alonso. And in 2001 at the beginning of Florentino’s first stint we sold our training ground in order to cover for the mess left by Sanz and finance the following transfers of Los Galacticos. Check your facts before spitting shit and comparing us with fake clubs financed by Arab ‘investors’.

Most recent example in 2016: https://www.ft.com/content/750e14a2-3f94-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a

Real Madrid would get "breaks" from the government, country and local, to subsidize their deals throughout their history.

Tax privileges, which allowed players' income to have a huge advantage in Europe, existed until it was abolished not too long ago. It was a Spain advantage... but really one designed for Real Madrid and later Barca since it mostly benefitted huge contract sums.

In the late 1990s, which saw Real Madrid transfer part of its old training ground to the city for redevelopment. In return, Real Madrid was handed other plots of land throughout the city, including next to Bernabéu stadium. They were "traded" as having similar value. Later they were revalued — to the financial advantage of Real Madrid. I'm talking exponentially. The over-inflated valuations were used to get "loans" at little to no interest rate.

In essence, took money from shareholders and taxpayers without telling them.

Etc.

by Arquitecto Fri Jan 26, 2024 11:04 am

It's time to say that Sport's heel villainous turn against Real Madrid is one of the finest sagas in GL history, if not its last.

by futbol_bill Fri Jan 26, 2024 2:50 pm

Sports putting up false info that was previously debunked. The 2016 was a bank loan and Sports insisting the government controls the banks! Lol

The property deal was no different that what regularly happened in the USA, the city makes a deal, to keep the team as they get lots of business for having the team in their city. Atleti got similar concessions when their stadium was built. And land value owned by a large popular company of course is worth more than just a vacant lot.

He is insisting that government gives them, money whenever they ask, but fact is it is a very successful private company and certainly not depended nor controlled by anyone.

As to his previous statement or should I call it rant, the escalation of cost of players, both acquisition and salaries from RMad was no where close to what is occurring with City / PSG. Not even in the same ballpark. Sports says taking inflation into account. You would have to use quadruple rates to arrive at that conclusion!

And he speaking of shareholders! Lol, it’s a non profit organization. If by shareholder he means socio, I’m a socio and nothing was taken from me. It’s not as if we get dividends!

He talks about tax break, that wasn’t implemented for futbol players at all, although they certainly took advantage of it. He says it was only removed recently, lol. It has been gone for well over a decade!

His rants and name calling is looking very much like Trump behavour!

by titosantill Sat Jan 27, 2024 2:43 pm

I'm a little late. If we're doing the age old debate of how dare investors take over City and Psg and spend astronomical sums of money? Its here to stay, we need to get over it. Every great club has overspent - you spend money to make money. The world is now global and that's actually as big a reason for overpaying of players and transfer fees as it is new money entering the business.

If there's a talent that comes out in South Africa for example, more eyes see him compared to 20, 30, years ago. An Arsene Wenger could get George Weah at relative ease without competition from other clubs cos not many clubs saw him or even heard of him. In today's time, word would have gone out, and a host of clubs would have their eyes on him. Whoever takes the first risk to sign him, if it pans out could then charge a huge amount.

Every big club has gotten a bit of a break, that's not what necessarily makes them great. Its one thing to catch a break its another to capitalize on it and build your portfolio. Which is something clubs like Lazio, Parma, Blackburn, Depor didn't do. They caught a break, kept thinking like small clubs and some of them had presidents/owners who knew little about running a business in football.

In sports, you spend money to make money but then again you still have to be able to justify it. The club still has to see where the money goes to, but attracting talent goes a long way in attracting a market share. Chelsea under Roman, City and PSG are just following the blueprint laid by the Madrids, Uniteds, Barca, Juve, Bayern (we see how they get when a rival side develops stars), Milans etc....

by Sponsored content

What if discussion regarding City and PSG

What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG

Re: What if discussion regarding City and PSG