PIF and RB Sports & Media

[Whitley mag]

3 hours ago, Groundhog63 said:

Yes there is. It's wrong. Hypocritical and perverse. 

It's like setting fire to someone's house then giving yourself a huge pat on the back when you hand them a bucket of water. 

Tories AND tory voters shouldn't be anywhere near charities defending swathes of the population from the very misery they, themselves, voted for. 

Tosh over half the population should never donate to a charity, what a load of rubbish.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by Whitley mag

[Ronson333]

16 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Interesting read 

Cracking article, explains it all very well.

[Turnbull2000]

Didn't realise the payment gap between the 'establishment' clubs and newcomers was so big. That's fucking scandalous. Not sure I'd be particularly bothered any more if PIF manage to artificially juice up our commercial income - Real Madrid, Juventus, Liverpool, Bayern have all collaborated to inflate their own incomes as well. So fuck em.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by Turnbull2000

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

18 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Interesting read 

 

Pure corruption.  They also make it more difficult for us to improve our coefficient by making the competition harder for us by being in pot 4.  

 

This is where it shows that pushing the commercial revenue to the absolute limit  is necessary to even have a chance to succeed.  

 

[Yorkie]

Yeah, good write-up from Samuel there. It's why my excitement and pride at this season's finish is probably more about the contained achievement of doing well in the Premier League and finishing above Liverpool et al, than it is about qualifying for the Champions League. It's a mostly hideous competition and represents something different to what it did in 2002/03. I'll still enjoy being there of course, and I'll take pride in watching the club measuring up against the very best.

[FloydianMag]

18 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Wasn’t expecting this from Samuel, he is of course right FFP is such a scam. 

A legal challenge is required, FFP and FMV are undoubtedly a restriction on trade, who though goes for the potential nuclear option, City or us or even both?

[christ]

Always an experience to read about how UEFA and other European leagues divvy up their money, then realise the PL definitely isn’t that bad in comparison.

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

If we won the champions league and Real Madrid lost every game and went out at the first group stages how much would we both get in prize money?  

 

It cant be a million miles apart.  It looks like you get about 20 million for winning it and thats the amount they get more than us just for participating.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald

[ponsaelius]

38 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Wasn’t expecting this from Samuel, he is of course right FFP is such a scam. 

 

Martin Samuel is a slug who does talk a lot of shite but he has been writing these pieces on FFP and the protectionist nature of football finance for years tbf. Very consistent with his opinion.

[ponsaelius]

30 minutes ago, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

 

Pure corruption.  They also make it more difficult for us to improve our coefficient by making the competition harder for us by being in pot 4.  

 

This is where it shows that pushing the commercial revenue to the absolute limit  is necessary to even have a chance to succeed.  

 

 

I have no issue with us being in pot 4. That's absolutely fair enough as we have not been in Europe for a decade. Indeed the fact we get straight into the group stages and get given a load of coefficient points based purely on the league we are in (which puts us ahead of Celtic) is unfair in itself. It represents the way European football has already been skewed against smaller leagues, mirroring the way the finances are shared out.

 

Really if we finish fourth we should be playing a qualifier and starting with zero points. If we get dumped out by Partizan Belgrade then that's fair enough - we have enough of a financial advantage that we should have to deal with that. Instead clubs from the big leagues don't even have that risk anymore. 

 

The distribution of financial revenue based on previous performance is scandalous when you accompany it with a coefficient system, though. It basically rigs the entire thing in favour of clubs who are already there.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by ponsaelius

[Matt1892]

I was listening to talksport last weekend and they had guest on the show that was advocating doing away with FFP and instead replacing it with a rich owner tax, so that those with deep pockets could spend what they wanted but a tax would be levied on that with all money raised going to lower league football. The latter part of that was something the government was onboard with previously.

 

you would still have the issue of UEFAs version of FFP though.

 

 

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

I was listening to talksport last weekend and they had guest on the show that was advocating doing away with FFP and instead replacing it with a rich owner tax, so that those with deep pockets could spend what they wanted but a tax would be levied on that with all money raised going to lower league football. The latter part of that was something the government was onboard with previously.

 

you would still have the issue of UEFAs version of FFP though.

 

 

The big 6 would never allow that. 

[Danh1]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

The big 6 would never allow that. 

Aye, that wouldn’t stop them having any competition. Which let’s face it, is the real reason FFP exists. 

[Stifler]

4 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

The big 6 would never allow that. 

They would as soon as they got rich owners.

If Man Utd get bought by that guy who is acting as a front for Qatar, then you’ll probably see them start to advocate for unlimited spending, indeed the ESL was effectively a move towards it. ‘Let us spend what we want, but lock the others out so they will never be a threat if they win the lottery’.

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

10 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

I have no issue with us being in pot 4. That's absolutely fair enough as we have not been in Europe for a decade. Indeed the fact we get straight into the group stages and get given a load of coefficient points based purely on the league we are in (which puts us ahead of Celtic) is unfair in itself. It represents the way European football has already been skewed against smaller leagues, mirroring the way the finances are shared out.

 

Really if we finish fourth we should be playing a qualifier and starting with zero points. If we get dumped out by Partizan Belgrade then that's fair enough - we have enough of a financial advantage that we should have to deal with that. Instead clubs from the big leagues don't even have that risk anymore. 

 

The distribution of financial revenue based on previous performance is scandalous when you accompany it with a coefficient system, though. It basically rigs the entire thing in favour of clubs who are already there.

 

 

 

 

In isolation it is fine.  But it is the combination of these two things that makes the seeding worse.  Seeding IMO is in itself a commercial decision.  It should not exist but they want a Real vs Liverpool final.  They want something similar every year.  It makes more money.  I prefer the FA cup where through a bit of luck and a good game or two you see a team from a lower league getting through to the later rounds.  I'd love an early group with Real, Man City, Bayem and Milan.  Then in another group a couple teams form less favoured league getting through and making it to the semi/final.

 

Imaging how crap the FA cup would be if it was seeded.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

They would as soon as they got rich owners.

If Man Utd get bought by that guy who is acting as a front for Qatar, then you’ll probably see them start to advocate for unlimited spending, indeed the ESL was effectively a move towards it. ‘Let us spend what we want, but lock the others out so they will never be a threat if they win the lottery’.

Unlikely, even at extreme wealth we are talking levels. VIllas owners are extremely wealthly for example but they are literal paupers when compared with the PIF. 

[Danh1]

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

They would as soon as they got rich owners.

If Man Utd get bought by that guy who is acting as a front for Qatar, then you’ll probably see them start to advocate for unlimited spending, indeed the ESL was effectively a move towards it. ‘Let us spend what we want, but lock the others out so they will never be a threat if they win the lottery’.

FFP suits Man United as their commercial income and ticket sales etc dwarfs everyone in the PL, or should anyways.

 

Getting rich as fuck owners like ours helps them as they can spend unlimited amounts on infrastructure and their academy without it impacting FFP. 

[ponsaelius]

Just now, KetsbaiaIsBald said:

 

In isolation it is fine.  But it is the combination of these two things that makes the seeding worse.  Seeding IMO is in itself a commercial decision.  It should not exist but they want a Real vs Liverpool final.  They want something similar every year.  It makes more money.  I prefer the FA cup where through a bit of luck and a good game or two you see a team from a lower league getting through to the later rounds.  I'd love an early group with Real, Man City, Bayem and Milan.  Then in another group a couple teams form less favoured league getting through and making it to the semi/final.

 

Yeah I don't disagree. Personally I'd have an open knockout draw with very limited seeding but that's not what the 'product' wants. And I'd have the revenue split exactly equally amongst all participating clubs. There's obviously the question of how that impacts smaller leagues with the champion hoovering up huge revenue and winning every year - but that could be dealt with by distributing revenue to the leagues themselves perhaps.

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

20 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Yeah I don't disagree. Personally I'd have an open knockout draw with very limited seeding but that's not what the 'product' wants. And I'd have the revenue split exactly equally amongst all participating clubs. There's obviously the question of how that impacts smaller leagues with the champion hoovering up huge revenue and winning every year - but that could be dealt with by distributing revenue to the leagues themselves perhaps.

 

Where FFP would actually be good would be something like a prize cap.  No mater what you do the most you can win is say 20 million.  After that the money gets distributed in the league placings.  Its pointless spending too much mental energy on how that could be used to be fair as it will simply never happen ?

 

For all that America does wrong with its competitions/franchise's etc the draft pick looks excellent (at least from the outside).

 

On a different note I was thinking how coefficient points most likely contribute to the value of a club.  I always felt we were undervalued at 300 million but when you see how these work they are probably worth billions in themselves.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald

[Groundhog63]

1 hour ago, Whitley mag said:

Tosh over half the population should never donate to a charity, what a load of rubbish.

 

 

 

You can tell you're a brexshitter with maths like that. 

"Over half the population" don't vote tory. One of the many failings of FPTP as it goes. 

 

[TRon]

4 hours ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Martin Samuel is a slug who does talk a lot of shite but he has been writing these pieces on FFP and the protectionist nature of football finance for years tbf. Very consistent with his opinion.

 

He just needs to apologise for telling us we should have appreciated having Fat Sam as our manager.

 

We were right, he was wrong. He never did it even when the fat bastard was inflicted on his own club.

[Whitley mag]

5 hours ago, Groundhog63 said:

You can tell you're a brexshitter with maths like that. 

"Over half the population" don't vote tory. One of the many failings of FPTP as it goes. 

 

Aye we’ll change the rules just to let the looney left in like you in pal.

[Groundhog63]

2 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Aye we’ll change the rules just to let the looney left in like you in pal.

Watch the match, snowflake

[Shearergol]

4 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Aye we’ll change the rules just to let the looney left in like you in pal.

And of course you’re a Tory. Makes perfect sense

[Whitley mag]

10 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

Watch the match, snowflake

Far from it not me complaining about folk donating to charity you whopper.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by Whitley mag