Matthijs de Ligt

N

Newcomer

New member
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor said:
If you think PSG and City have spent over a billion on transfers and all of it has come from their sports revenue - then I am, respectfully, going to have to disagree.
Click to expand...

Of course, the fact their owners are from those countries brought them sponsorship.

However, the work of UEFA is to put a fair market value on those sponsors. Not to ban them completely. And this is what UEFA did and led PSG to sell players. What do you want UEFA to do ? We all know that the reason why UEFA can't go further is that the basis of FFP is shaky and the sheiks have threaten to go to court if UEFA pushes too far. FFP has never existed in football before and can be challenged legally. This is why UEFA introduced settlement in their rules. To find some kind of agreements with the clubs that will accept a softer punishment and don't face full battle.
So far, the only clubs that have been banned are the ones who have trouble to actually pay the salaries, transfers fee. Lot of clubs from East Europe, Turkey. Not the clubs that are too rich due to their owners.
 
Last edited:
N

Newcomer

New member
Luftstalag14 said:
Well, he was clearly in Paris today talking to PSG, he was saying that just to keep De Ligt's options open, most likely, in case there are bigger offers. However, I doubt any clubs would trump PSG's 20m gross + 5m bonuses offer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he is still keeping his auction going.

Smart guy. It is not a coincidence he gave the tip about his little holiday in Paris to Di Marzio to deny afterwards. He is basically saying : Hey guys, the new auction starts at 10 M nets + 5 bonus, get ready to put money on the line to get the lot (de Ligt)!
 
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Banned
Newcomer said:
What i'm saying is a lot of people and club claim they want the football to be fairer and they don't like the fact there are some clubs with so much money, grabbing all the quality players. But, if you want to start to be fair, you start within your own league and spread the TV rights more equally so that all clubs have better economics and better chance from the start. With Barça and Real dominating, they would inevitably get way more money than a Grenada with the cash prize for sporting merit and more money because they are broadcasted at prime time. But i get your point, however i'm sure that should PSG ask more money because they are the biggest team in France, people will start to moan.

However, to be honest, i don't really care because i'm not th one crying for "fair economics". If we start talking real, football has never been fair in terms of money distribution and it is only now that people try to villify an investor investing his money in his club. But those are the rules that have been enacted. And PSG was just under investigation and had to sell players like Lo Celso for peanuts money and Guedes and Pastore and Berchiche and etc.... So why is a sporting and economic rival is asking for sanction on another competitor ? It is UEFA work to do, not Bartomeu who has to claim anything.

And when he says the money of Barcelona is 100 % coming from football but Barcelona was taking Qatar money. Why is that same money used in another club a money coming out of football ?
If he is talking about the values, it is UEFA work to do and they have downvalued QTA sponsorship from 200 initially to 100 in 2014 to 50 M from 2015.
Click to expand...

Dude, it all comes down to revenue generated from sports and non sporting endeavours. If Barca gets a sponsorship deal with Qatar Airways, that is fine because it is sports revenue. If PSG buy a player for 100m from money generated from an oil field, then that's a problem.

You are honestly flogging a dead horse here because Barca, despite not being whiter than white, are the last club you should be trying to argue the FFP point with. Barca is unique in it's member run way. You should be arguing against the hypocritical EPL club fanboys who are just as bad as PSG in the FFP debate. Infact, most of the hate towards PSG comes from fans of EPL clubs, maybe to hide their own behaviour. I've argued on that fact here before, highlighting the hypocrisy of singling out PSG in FFP and ignoring others.
 
B

BenRobbins

New member
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor said:
Dude, it all comes down to revenue generated from sports and non sporting endeavours. If Barca gets a sponsorship deal with Qatar Airways, that is fine because it is sports revenue. If PSG buy a player for 100m from money generated from an oil field, then that's a problem.

You are honestly flogging a dead horse here because Barca, despite not being whiter than white, are the last club you should be trying to argue the FFP point with. Barca is unique in it's member run way. You should be arguing against the hypocritical EPL club fanboys who are just as bad as PSG in the FFP debate. Infact, most of the hate towards PSG comes from fans of EPL clubs, maybe to hide their own behaviour. I've argued on that fact here before, highlighting the hypocrisy of singling out PSG in FFP and ignoring others.
Click to expand...

How are English clubs as bad as PSG, just want to see from your point of view
 
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Banned
Newcomer said:
Of course, the fact their owners are from those countries brought them sponsorship.

However, the work of UEFA is to put a fair market value on those sponsors. Not to ban them completely. And this is what UEFA did and led PSG to sell players. What do you want UEFA to do ? We all know that the reason why UEFA can't go further is that the basis of FFP is shaky and the sheiks have threaten to go to court if UEFA pushes too far. FFP has never existed in football before and can be challenged legally. This is why UEFA introduced settlement in their rules. To find some kind of agreements with the clubs that will accept a softer punishment and don't face full battle.
So far, the only clubs that have been banned are the ones who have trouble to actually pay the salaries, transfers fee. Lot of clubs from East Europe, Turkey. Not the clubs that are too rich due to their owners.
Click to expand...

Actually agree on this - FFP is probably not something that would win in a court of law. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't happen though. I personally find it distasteful that some rich guy can come in and buy Monaco and buy all the players and make them win a league. (Did not use PSG as an example as I remember they were still a good club before all this Qatar money with Lama, Weah, Rai, Ginola, Loko etc).

Same reason why I stopped watching F1, when I realised it was just the team with the most money and best car that won every time.
 
S

stb_1

Senior Member
PSG have changed the game. They are even blowing City, Real and Barca out of the water.

Only way to stop them is if UEFA actually do something with FFP. If Man City are getting kicked out of Europe, PSG should be too. Man City's record signing is what? 65-70 mill? PSG blew 220 on Neymar and 180 on Mbappe.
 
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor

Banned
BenRobbins said:
How are English clubs as bad as PSG, just want to see from your point of view
Click to expand...

Well Chelsea started the whole thing off for starters. As mid table a club as could be and were sold for £1 in the not too recent past. City have a higher net spend than any other club on the planet, including PSG. Everton have a net spend of more than 300m in the last few seasons - I repeat EVERTON :lol:

Arsenal less so because they don't spend big, but they are still owned and funded by foreign billionaires. And then there's Utd and Liverpool who despite being huge clubs, with huge fanbases who could run fairly comfortably on their sports revenue, are only as powerful as they are in the transfer market due to being owned by American billionaires.
 
Z

Zidane82

Well-known member
stb_1 said:
PSG have changed the game. They are even blowing City, Real and Barca out of the water.

Only way to stop them is if UEFA actually do something with FFP. If Man City are getting kicked out of Europe, PSG should be too. Man City's record signing is what? 65-70 mill? PSG blew 220 on Neymar and 180 on Mbappe.
Click to expand...

Didn’t they get Mbappe ‘on loan ‘ ( somehow )
 
N

Newcomer

New member
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor said:
Actually agree on this - FFP is probably not something that would win in a court of law. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't happen though. I personally find it distasteful that some rich guy can come in and buy Monaco and buy all the players and make them win a league. (Did not use PSG as an example as I remember they were still a good club before all this Qatar money with Lama, Weah, Rai, Ginola, Loko etc).

Same reason why I stopped watching F1, when I realised it was just the team with the most money and best car that won every time.
Click to expand...

Truth is it is what happened most of the time.

Milan clubs were bankrolled by Berlusconi and Morratti and went to shit when they lost their sugar daddies.
Juventus was and is bankrolled by Agnelli family.
Parma got their good period being backed by Parmalat.
Arsenal was once called a money club.
Blackburn got their good period thanks to money.
Everton was a money club. And apparently, Liverpool was created and funded because of money and Everton not wanting to play at Anfield anymore. They went on to be one of the most succesful club afterwards thanks to Moores family.

People have their bias and forget that their club that are getting "money only from football" have benefitted from the outside money investment that helped win trophies and build legacy, fanbase and ultimately sponsorship.
 
B

BenRobbins

New member
Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor said:
Well Chelsea started the whole thing off for starters. As mid table a club as could be and were sold for £1 in the not too recent past. City have a higher net spend than any other club on the planet, including PSG. Everton have a net spend of more than 300m in the last few seasons - I repeat EVERTON :lol:

Arsenal less so because they don't spend big, but they are still owned and funded by foreign billionaires. And then there's Utd and Liverpool who despite being huge clubs, with huge fanbases who could run fairly comfortably on their sports revenue, are only as powerful as they are in the transfer market due to being owned by American billionaires.
Click to expand...

What a load of Shit haha

City and PSG are as bad as each other by making up shady sponsorship deals etc, the rest is a load of bollocks, they can spend that due to their revenues, mainly due to the TV deal which is all earnt from being the most popular and watched league in the world.
 
N

Newcomer

New member
stb_1 said:
PSG have changed the game. They are even blowing City, Real and Barca out of the water.

Only way to stop them is if UEFA actually do something with FFP. If Man City are getting kicked out of Europe, PSG should be too. Man City's record signing is what? 65-70 mill? PSG blew 220 on Neymar and 180 on Mbappe.
Click to expand...

You don't know the numbers then.

City is by far the biggest spender because they buy a lot of players for 30/40/50 M and sell very few.
PSG make big transfers balanced with cheap or free signing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Home of Barca Fans

Top