This is not true, there was a vote among all the clubs to see if the TV rights were sold jointly or individually. And in the vote came the option to sell them individually.
And how could it be otherwise, Barcelona and Real Madrid sold their rights for much more money.
Barcelona and Real Madrid are not to blame for the fact that the other 38 clubs voted that way.
So let's stop the fake news.
Not really 'fake news'. From what I remember Real and Barca did say they wanted to sell jointly, but quickly went with the individual package. They were hardly suoer against it. Then when the realities of it became obvious, they were keen to defend it and weren't too keen on changing it. So, yeah, maybe they weren't the biggest cheerleaders when it first came in, but they sure were once they realised the benefits; hence why it stayes in place so long.
can you read the post from laliga and enumerate the points it makes that you don't agree with? or it is just pure hate?
"special tax" was a law thought from the goverment to bring talent (science) from abroad, but football clubs could use it. not their fault and the government quickly changed the rule.
the training facilities issues was investigated even from the EU (result: not guilty). i can buy that there were some "favors" but they were more related to timing than what would eventually happen.
and about tv rights, you got the story totally wrong. barca and real actually wanted to sell the complete package, but the likes of sevilla, deportivo, etc. were greedy and preferred to sell individually. it worked fine for them at the beginning but it was a disaster afterwards. deportivo is today in 3rd division.
1) La Liga were all fine and good with Real spending outrageous money on Mbappe or Haland in Feb when they thought they were going there. They also say:
"It is scandalous that a club like PSG, which last season reported losses of more than 220 million euros after accumulating losses of more than 700 million euros in prior seasons (while reporting sponsorship income at doubtful valuation), with a squad cost around 650 million for this season, can close such an agreement, while those clubs that could afford the hiring of the player without seeing their wage bill compromised, are left without being able to sign him"
Problem here is, PSG can afford to sign him because their owners can afford to pay him, sure that particular arm of their investment portfolio, PSG, isn't profitable but they can quite clearly afford to cover this.
Thusz what they're really saying is that they don't like people not playing by the rules set up to protect the biggest clubs (I will get onto this later.) So, no it isn't hate, it is just me not thinking in an, essentially free market environment, clubs should be handicapped by some rules a cartel of clubs have come up with to protect their own status.
2) Slice it which way you want, that tax rule was essentially Spanish state aid. For sure, it didn't just apply to Real and Barca but it was state aid all the same, which is why it got cut. Thus, complaining about state aid/funding when in the past you've recieved it yourself is hypocritical.
3) At least you admit there were favours. However, lets be honest, that was a case of not being able to prove wrong doing, hence no legal action, but knowing it was wrong. I mean you can try and find me another example of where else public land has been sold then brought back by a public body from a private company for over 5200% more within 14 years in Europe if you can.
4) Touched on the TV rights above.
We need a proper discussion about football finances. Despite commercial dopping, by 2024 PSG are on course to accumulate more than 1 billion euros worth of losses over a five year period. Football has to decide if that is acceptable.
Yes, football does.
It may appear I am in favour of state spending but actually I am not. What I am not in favour of is of traditionally big clubs trying to use cartel practices to keep their status locked in forever.
People talk about FFP a lot, but FFP was seriously flawed as it said that clubs could only spend what they generated. That consequently meant that the top clubs would stay top forever and lock the rest out. So, for me, I cannot get on board with that.
If people actually care about fairness then they would want fixed salary and fee caps, say something like:
All clubs in their top domestic leaguez can spend the maximum of the following each year;
1) €60m on player purcahses/signing on/agent fees.
2) €200m per year on wages.
That would be manageable of a lot of clubs, whilst it would also attwact investors to smaller clubs to give them a chance. However, clubs like Real, Barce, Utd, Bayern, Juve, Dippers etc, would never agree to it as that would be 'too much fairness'.