It's Science Fiction.
Neymar joins PSG on a five year deal
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
- Status
It's Science Fiction.
If it is a hard cap, then it is. We get 600m+ revenue for year and our salary is circa ~50% of it. We have 300m per year for transfers and administrative expenses. If there is some salary cup, then there would be even more money for that. So then, instead of spending that money, it would go to the Glazers.
Soft cap is slightly less ridiculous, and I do not get why we should give money to West Ham or Everton or whatever if we do very well. And how does this gets spread when you consider that there are 53 different football association in Europe, with totally different rules and situations?
Football dwarfs basketball in every aspect. More people watch it, more players play it, more money there is on it. Why on Earth we should copy basketball's system?
It was a joke
a romantic joke...
I was joking too and I would love it if a player like Neymar ended at Napoli, the city would be over the moon.
I believe if Neymar gets the money deposited by Qatar to do it, they will class it as income and use the the world cup ambassador role and tax him.
I don't have an answer either, just trying to play devils advocate.
@Revan's plan is adressing the problem with sugar daddies leaving the club, not sugar daddies per se. His plan has the same problem with straw mans making overvalued sponsorships and imo is trying to solve a problem that isn't really a problem. No club on an international level needed to close shop because of losing the support of their patron. It happened here and there but the clubs either resized (Malaga) or changed strategy (Monaco). Besides clubs can make sure in contract details that they aren't cutting deals they won't be able to keep. No need for UEFA or FIFA to interfere in the clubs business that way.
Imo the aspect that needs adressing first is that of unfair competition because of getting gifted loads of money.
The NBA system is built on rich businessmen keeping their money.
How will that stand on court when United and Bayern did the same for Herrera and Martinez? Can Spain decide arbitrarily what player pays taxes and what players doesn't?
Which ambassador gets payed 222m?
Well, you haven't seen the contract of Neymar: so why do you want to speculate on the terms and conditions of the release clause?
Inter and Milano suffered a lot when Mancini/Berlusconi decided that they had enough. From two of the top European club, they weren't able to qualify for UCL for five years in a row or so.
Portsmouth went bankrupt, QPR got relegated, Malaga were into a bad position, and Monaco needed to sell half their squad.
Just that it hasn't happened with the big three sugar daddy clubs, doesn't mean that it isn't happening.
Indeed, nothing to do with so-called ethics considerations.
A salary cap means the expenses are limited, good news for the shareholders in order to create value.
You have no ideaI was joking too and I would love it if a player like Neymar ended at Napoli, the city would be over the moon.
And it's not for la liga president to play a ffp inspector, if psg sell their players they can balance the books or get fined for breaching the rules, the transfer can not be stopped on any legal grounds.
This.
The bitterness of La Liga is just laughable.
It's not for them to police this transfer.
Neither do you, to be honest. Its all speculation.
It's just a link on google that I found, not 100% on it's validity in all honesty.
*edit*
Just discovered that the article was written 4 years ago, so it's probably invalid at this point.
I really hope this is where UEFA make their stand on FFP. Chelski, City and PSG are killing the chance for teams to build a great team from the academy's .
We've had to get involved with throwing around silly money just to not get left behind. If these non self financed petro-dollar clubs had existed in 99 we'd have never of had the chance to develop and build a squad with Neville brothers, Beckham, Scholes, Giggs, Butt.
In a time without the ridiculous unself-sustaining clubs football would have a better link to the fans and heart of the clubs. Look at Monaco we should be watching a great young team grow and develop but we won't. No way a club that was only formed in 1970 should be financially bullying a great behemoth of a club like Barca.
We've had to get involved with throwing around silly money just to not get left behind. If these non self financed petro-dollar clubs had existed in 99 we'd have never of had the chance to develop and build a squad with Neville brothers, Beckham, Scholes, Giggs, Butt.
In a time without the ridiculous unself-sustaining clubs football would have a better link to the fans and heart of the clubs. Look at Monaco we should be watching a great young team grow and develop but we won't. No way a club that was only formed in 1970 should be financially bullying a great behemoth of a club like Barca.
Yeah, it depends on how successfully UEFA's audits can determine when a club is declaring more revenue than they earned themselves. So far they don't seem very able/willing to do it. I personally think the resources available to government owned clubs to find loopholes through any audit system UEFA establishes are just too vast.
Another way could just be to have a luxury tax system based on aggregate football revenue, a bit like the NBA. That would prevent the kind of runaway inflation we're seeing now while still allowing spending to increase naturally as the sport's commercial appeal grows. Every club would still be able to use owner funds to compete at the same level as others, but it would be very expensive to spend far in excess of the competition. Like in the NBA, the excess money gets redistributed among the other clubs so the money enters football in a healthy and fairer way.
What part is speculation, that Barca has allowed Neymar to set up his transfer to PSG? No, it's not. Neymar came, said goodbye to his teammates, and then he went to make the deal with the Qatari club.
Valverde allowed him to skip training so he can move to PSG. No manager does that if they plan to hold a player by force.
The ball is in PSG's court. It has been all along since Neymar said he wants to go. Barca can't do anything, yet people here say they are to blame for this circus. Hilarious really, and shows the insane bias you people have against Barcelona.
Neymar, his dad, PSG and now LFP are to blame for this circus.
The old training ground was in el Paseo de la Castellana,the financial part of Madrid,wasn't land without so much value,in the middle of nowhere as @SammyUnited_83 wrote before.
Anyway,It seems that this is "Madrid and Barsa did It before so everything is justifiable".
Now It's Barsa but tomorrow can be some Madrid player with a "low" clause before renewal,or in English teams players refusing to renew or demanding transfer requests.
And since United have the enemy in front of the door their position should be also critical with all this.
You see that every sponsor is valuable,even tinder. Big clubs,with history but without magical sponsors to balance the accounts
Why was the buyout fee taken to La Liga instead of Barcelona? I'm admittedly not sure how the money actually normally changes hands in transfers
Please trust me.
1. I don't think PSG has a player whose contract has a release clause.
2. No French articles about Cavani in the last weeks
3. Cavani is the only one scorer so he will be blocked. He also renewed his contract last season.
The PSG players who might move are: Aurier, Krychowiak, Lucas Moura, Ben Arfa, Di Maria (unlikely IMO)
What a weird move for the league to reject this. Makes them look so petty and small time. Yes, we all have doubts about where the money is coming from but UEFA won't do anything about it until the end of the financial fair play period, so it's a worthless move that clearly won't be upheld legally.
Because buy out clauses are meant to allow a player to unilaterally break his contract and cancel his registration. It's a clause agreed between three parties, the player, the club and the LFP.
But then your system is even worse. So you want to create a system that would allow clubs that could overspend because of sugar daddies (and thus creating unfair competition) to get some sort of parachute in case they lose this advantage. I'd have some sympathy if you wanted to protect clubs from having to close shop, not getting relegated or being out of UCL for some time (disclaimer: I don't know the story of Portsmouth). Doesn't make much sense for me.
Those clauses aren't legal in France, no player have them in their contract. Some players have agreement on the side with their clubs, but those agreements are also illegal because you are not supposed to hide clauses to the LFP.
No, it's a clause agreed in the contract by the club and the player because la Liga rules state that only then they will only issue a licence to play.
You know the bias against Barca and Madrid has spun out of control when you have fans of United being happy about a dangerous situation for their own club, just because right now it is more damaging to Barcelona.
You have City being the better team in Manchester for the most part of the last decade FFS, through unfair sponsorships. And you side with oil clubs like PSG in situations regarding obvious violations of financial fair play?
Last edited:
Gotcha. I appreciate the info!
I'm no legal expert but wouldn't that mean the contract itself is void then Neymar could just join for free?
La Liga are salty
What are they gonna do next, hide his passport?
What are they gonna do next, hide his passport?
La Liga are salty
What are they gonna do next, hide his passport?[/QUOTE]
Qatar won't be surprised
....No, if we look at precedents it would mean that a judge will have to reevaluate that clause. Barcelona do not want that.
Because?
Exactly. I believe that every club on which is invested a lot of money, sooner or later can become self-sustainable, so my system would ensure that this happens. If some rich owner throws money to a club, but later changes his mind, my system would allow that club to continue being rich for another few years and in that way to have the needed time to either become self-sustainable (like Chelsea are now), or to get adjusted to the new reality, sell some players etc. It would totally ensure that even on worst case, the clubs won't go bankrupt or forced to sell their biggest assets.
I don't believe that money coming from wealthy owners to football is a bad thing in any aspect, and I was happy to see that FFP isn't hurting the likes of City and PSG.
La liga making a fool of themselves, just take the L.
I think the idea of a free market is a bit of a joke at this stage and I'm surprised you're not more cynical of it having worked in marketing for so long, given the explicit goal of advertising is to undermine one of the fundamental principles of a market economy (informed consumers).
Ignoring that, Man City should be allowed to value their own media property based on a set of agreed basic valuation methods. The reason the price of sponsorship is going up is because there aren't any agreed valuation methods and, as a result, sports sponsorship is mostly a sham with people paying money for things they don't understand.
Having worked within it I find it very hard to believe you don't feel the same way. All stakeholders admit they don't have any useful evidence of the value of sponsorship beyond cheap advertising, yet all stakeholders agree that the aim of the sponsorship is to achieve much broader objectives. Removing that logical fallacy from the decision-making process would only ever drive the price down. The reason it doesn't happen is because sports rightsholders know it would mean they get less money.
You know the bias against Barca and Madrid has spun out of control when you have fans of United being happy about a dangerous situation for their own club, just because right now it is more damaging to Barcelona.
You have City being the better team in Manchester for the most part of the last decade FFS, through unfair sponsorships. And you side with oil clubs like PSG in situations regarding obvious violations of financial fair play?
The last 4 years maybe. In the last decade Utd have won twice as many league titles as City and an European Cup.
Because if no one can afford that clause, it means that it's not fulfilling its mission which is to allow players to break their contract without cause while allowing their clubs to be fairly compensated. If the clause makes that impossible then we have a problem.
....and you think football isn't. As I said earlier I'm not in favor of FFP but IF you are going to institute it then a luxury tax and NO hard cap is one way to go. Basketball had more players in the top 10 of highest earning athletes in the world than any other sport for 2017 so while the owners are making money so are the players. If the luxury tax money was put into a pot and revenue shared in some way that would be another route of possibly helping to restore some equality across the board.
What I mean is that in the last 6 seasons results are, overall, better than United's. Even if you don't see it, it's a trend already. If the prices go up, and FFP is worth shit, City won't be bothered. Barca, Madrid, Bayern, and yea, even United, will have problems. Barca and Madrid can still draw great players from Spain and South America where they will hold the no1 joint position for years to come.
United has been able to attract some great players by paying a lot of money. If your money won't be good enough, prepare to drop even lower in your fight with City.
- Status