I don't hate Madrid anywhere near as much as Barca.
I know. You're quite famous around here.
Neymar joins PSG on a five year deal
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
- Status
I know. You're quite famous around here.
When you deal with snakes expect to get bitten.
So your main hate is because Neymar moves to a club which get their money from fake sponsorship?
How about if PSG give Barca 1 billion for Neymar? Would you still hate them?
If you were to build a European super league from scratch how many clubs would you have from Manchester?
Qatar were smart and bought a franchise in a big city with one club...
Fabregas is hardly forcing it off, is he?
Everyone does this? Like I said couldnt be happening to a better team.
And it was known for ages that Fabregas wanted out. Thats why United were always linked with him. The real tosser here is Cesc.
There are no fake sponsorship contracts.
I'm sure some of you have discovered some countries like the UAE & Qatar thanks to PSG & City.
Those who rule these countries want to diversify their revenues, prepare the post-oil (gas for Qatar) period by acquiring diverse companies, show off at the international stage, have a soft power policy...
The sponsorship contracts are simply legal. The irony is....
There are no fake sponsorship contracts.
I'm sure some of you have discovered some countries like the UAE & Qatar thanks to PSG & City.
Those who rule these countries want to diversify their revenues, prepare the post-oil (gas for Qatar) period by acquiring diverse companies, show off at the international stage, have a soft power policy...
The sponsorship contracts are simply legal. The irony is....
OK, so you posted photos from a normal sponsorship contract between Barcelona and Qatar Airways. Never said Barca refused to deal with Qatar Companies. How is that relevant.
Sources say QSI will pay Neymar for 300m. to promote Qatar's World Cup. Neymar will take that money probably and pay his clause. QSI owns PSG. Spot the difference. Qatar pays for PSG's transfer through QSI and they do that by way of fake sponsorship contracts.
Indeed, PSG acted professionally and bid the release clause Barca put into Neymar's contract. With Fabregas, Barca used every mean possible to unsettle him and lowball Arsenal.
I've always suspected Qatar wanted to buy Barcelona. When they realised it wasn't possible they bought PSG and now their trying to buy their players...
You already told me you hate Barca, no need to do it again.
I support United mate, through and through. Is that a rhetorical question?
Wouldn't stop us getting sold to Abu Dhabi, which some on here might like..,
I've had a discussion with him in this thread couple of days back. He's very sensitive re the topic to say the least.
Which part of my previous post is inaccurate in any way?
Haaaa Ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa
Barca you are a joke. By all means complain abut FFP, because its not a balanced situation. But when you do this exact thing to, say, Sevilla to claim their best players.
How can you honestly complain about being out muscled financially ? And then make some sort of plan to group all clubs against them because, (wait for it) its not fair? You and Real need a kick up the arse, good on PSG.
Barca you are a joke. By all means complain abut FFP, because its not a balanced situation. But when you do this exact thing to, say, Sevilla to claim their best players.
How can you honestly complain about being out muscled financially ? And then make some sort of plan to group all clubs against them because, (wait for it) its not fair? You and Real need a kick up the arse, good on PSG.
Qatar sponsors Barcelona. Why?
Curious to discover your (creative
Because they paid us 30 something million euros a year. It was a normal exchange of serices between two entities, FC Barcelona and Qatar Airways. Same as Madrid with Fly Emirates for example.
The Sheikh wanted to buy Manchester United but it was deemed too expensive and the Glazers weren't interested by a sale.
That episode was disgusting.
Everyone does this? Like I said couldnt be happening to a better team.
And I don't even like Arsenal but that showed a certain level of disrespect.
Well, for once, they didn't pay the release clause, so they talked with a player under contract with Barcelona without the club's consent.
Glad you understand the point I was trying to make. Also, of course, owners will never want to be out of pocket but, Abromovic being a casing point, originally it was all a play thing for him and then realised, the club had to be self sufficient. Whereas clubs like City & PSG still rely heavily in their owners.
I have written "Why?"... and not "Which consequences?"
I want you to enlighten us about the rationale of the deal: why is Qatar happy to fund Barcelona?
Because Barca was the best team in the world at the time. Not sure what you're after. When Qatar didn't want to pay more, Barca moved to Rakuten.
Gotta love seeing Barcelona getting their own medicine.
I have a bigger issue with Sheiks buying toys and messing with global Football, while exploiting poor migrant workers using the equivalent of modern day slave labor to build their own countries infrastructure instead of paying a fair wage. A country with such an appalling record of how they treat their workforce should not be paying 200m for a footballer.
feck Barca.
They are still getting 220m for a player. Take the money and feck off.
They are still getting 220m for a player. Take the money and feck off.
Or because your initial argument was false so you shifted the subject.
Do you have any proof of that? They could have only talked to his agent?
What he's getting at is that Qatar used Barca to better their own image. They're using Neymar for the same reasons with 2022 just around the corner. You might say conflict of interest, but you can't complain about shadiness of Qatari money when you've been funded by it in recent years.
There is a missing link in your way of thinking.
To sponsor a club like Barcelona and own a football club like PSG.... are part of the same strategy: develop the "Brand Qatar".
I actually think that PSG will be fine in the future, the owners are putting less money through sponsors and replace them with "normal" ones, also the club have always had a big pull in France and Qatar are exploiting it.
no...
Glass houses my friend. How did you think we got Berbatov and other players in the past... every club has done it and to deny that means you have a different view on the actual reality so there is no point discussing it much further.
I will say however that the main point is NOT the fact that another club is triggering a release clause its that another club can play by a different set of rules and spend money well above their revenue and get away with it. Let's see if you are so celebratory when they start doing it to our star players.
the end.
Legally what is preventing a company from paying a sponsorship deal to a player?
Even if it is blatantly crooked?
Even if it is blatantly crooked?
Who don't have release clauses.
I'm not complaining about the shadiness of Qatar money, only about the shady way in which they get to PSG. Namely, it's hilarious to have FFP regulations and don't take measures against fake sponsorship contracts which in the end, do what FFP tries to stop.
There's also nothing illegal about a small Qatari club paying 200m for PSG's tea lady.
Who don't have release clauses.
lol, yeah somebody else already stated but I already responded. The vast majority of players don't have release clauses and yet they still get sold. A player can ask to leave and the club have to sell as we have seen a few clubs have tried to dig their heals in but only lasted a short time because the did not want the toxic vibe in their camp.
I agree. Modern slavery in the Middle East
Very much rhetorical. Although the marketing and TV people would come up with the same answer as us.I support United mate, through and through. Is that a rhetorical question?
Wouldn't stop us getting sold to Abu Dhabi, which some on here might like..,
But the owners of PSG and Chelsea and Manchester City do seem to have the interests of their clubs at heart, whatever their motives for doing so. Is it that different to the glory years of Moratti at Inter and Berlusconi at AC Milan?
It would be dangerous for the clubs if their owners weren't to try to maximise their revenues to reinvest them - but a large injection of money at the start of a club's reinvention is almost required thanks to the way football has developed. I can't really have a problem with it as far as football is concerned (the morality of how the money was made is a different story, but then the same is true for the finances and behaviour of the sponsors and owners of previously established teams. I mean, just look at the detestable Stan Kroenke).
- Status