Bundesliga 2013/2014

[Ryu Hayabusa]

Whoring themselves out ? In other news, I'm talking about competition in the BuLi.

Nevertheless, please be so kind to explain the ethical difference between clubs run by investment groups and clubs that are organized as stock corporations and PLCs' who have their shares owned by large-scale investors with a marginal spread, up to the magical 24 or 49 % ? Exactly, there is none. Both are funded from the outside.

btw. who is this neboulous "us" and "we" everyone keeps referring to ?

Option a) leaves the club and its members/supporters at the mercy and good will of the corporate owner. Option b) leaves the ultimate power of decision with the club and the persons appointed by the club's members.
The difference is like day and night.

Look at Liverpool and Malaga to what can happen, if the corporate owner loses interest in the club.

Also I as a supporter am spared the feeling of just supporting another billionaire arsehole's toy.

 

[Catorce]

edit: Wrong thread

 

[DennyCrane]

Option a) leaves the club and its members/supporters at the mercy and good will of the corporate owner. Option b) leaves the ultimate power of decision with the club and the persons appointed by the club's members.
The difference is like day and night.

Look at Liverpool and Malaga to what can happen, if the corporate owner loses interest in the club.

Exactly. Would be the same with Hoffenheim if Mr. SAP decides to cancel funding. Here's the problem: Clubs need to handle investment groups at their own risk since there's no adequate legal framework to prevent abrupt fund cancelling, which leaves a club like Hoffenheim in a legal twilight zone and with an irresponsible financial risk.
Abolishing the 50+1 rule while at the same time setting up an adequate legal framework solves this problem.

If things are kept as they are, the gap between Bayern and the rest is going to stretch... a lot. Which in the long-term can't be beneficial to Bayern either considering the decreasing overall league quality.

 

[Ryu Hayabusa]

I can't say I'm a fan of Hoffenheim either.
Though I firmly disagree with your notion that the league's overall quality is decreasing with Bayern as the supreme ruler. That status was Bayern's for many, many years now, and look what happened. Teams like Dortmund or Leverkusen are actually able to challange not only them, but also in Europe. If anything the Bundesliga's quality has increased over the past couple of years. And that worked without whoring themselves out to the Arabs or Russians.
(Yes, I'm aware of the ownership concerning Leverkusen and Wolfsburg )

 

[suckabov]

That might be right as such, but you have to take external factors into account. The quality might have improved temporarily, but in the long run, in sight of the current developments in international "modern football", it's financially impossible for smaller clubs to keep up with the required spending and stay competitive. Rising prices on the transfer market is just one example.

Also, clubs like Dortmund always had their temporary European glory, I wouldn't say the current situation is an indicator for an increase in strength of the Bundesliga.

 

[Ryu Hayabusa]

Also, clubs like Dortmund always had their temporary European glory, I wouldn't say the current situation is an indicator for an increase in strength of the Bundesliga.

Just compare the current level of Bayern, Dortmund, Leverkusen and Schalke with their equivalents in the mid-00's years. In those years, the level of competition compared with their European counterparts was rather... bleak.

 

[AfricanBavarian]

Exactly. Would be the same with Hoffenheim if Mr. SAP decides to cancel funding. Here's the problem: Clubs need to handle investment groups at their own risk since there's no adequate legal framework to prevent abrupt fund cancelling, which leaves a club like Hoffenheim in a legal twilight zone and with an irresponsible financial risk.
Abolishing the 50+1 rule while at the same time setting up an adequate legal framework solves this problem.

If things are kept as they are, the gap between Bayern and the rest is going to stretch... a lot. Which in the long-term can't be beneficial to Bayern either considering the decreasing overall league quality.

Their is a way around the 50+1 rule, those owners just have to own 49% of the club for an extended period of time. So technically its not impossible. In my opinion thats a safer option than what other leagues do. It makes sure these owners aren't looking for a play thing but a long term investment...

 

[Maria]

I don't think Dortmund will be okay at all, despite Klopp. You can't lose talent like Götze, Kagawa, Lewandowski, most likely Gündogan as well pretty soon, some of them directly to their main rivals, and just keep going at the same level. Especially not when competing against financial giants like Bayern.

After seeing Sahin at Real Madrid and Kagawa at Manchester United I don't know how much is down to the players and how much to the system they play in(though I would kill to have Lewa at Barca next season). And although they are competting against Bayern with far less money, the bavarians still needed a legendary team to beat them. Also I would post a comparison with the trophies that Borussia and Real Madrid won in the last 3 years, the money they spent and the results when the 2 teams met but I'm too lazy to do it.
And despite the fact that I saw many germans being despleased with the Bundesliga, I enjoyed watching the league since Van Gaal was hired by Bayern and I can't remember the last game when I felt that I was bored(something I can't say about Premier League, for example) and that's what it matters to me.

Liverpool and City play pretty nice football, and United, Chelsea and even Spurs have the potential to but half of the time don't.

United, Chelsea and Spurs are boring as hell. I preffer watching Hoffenheim, Stuttgart or any other team from the top 6 in Serie A..I didn't watched this season Liverpool and City play nice but they are too inconsistent for the players they have and the money they spent.

La Liga has the best balance for me. It's a 2 horce race but at least it IS a 2 horce race and not a 1 horse race. Atletico have now become a proper team as well who can challenge any team. The rest might not be as good result-wise but at least they too play easy-on-the-eye and bold football, except maybe Levante.

La Liga was a one horse race last season..and I felt that as a cule. I don't know how it might have been for a neutral. Also all the complaints that the german football fans have against Bayern, you will see them against Real and Barca if you read spanish football forums. Many of them even want to play with the B team when they face the big 2 because they are unhappy with how the money from the TV deal are distributed or that only Messi/Cristiano have salaries bigger than their team's entire budget.

I have this theory that pretty much every La Liga team only lacks 1 or 2 world class strikers to convert all their chances and they'd all be able to goe toe-to-toe with any team. I wonder how Manchester United would fare against Real Sociedad if they'd swap Rooney and van Persie with Vela and Agirretxe. I'm sure Real Sociedad would create a lot more than forcing 1 own goal in 180 minutes then.

They had those players and they left in England or in Italy because of the debts their teams had(Mata, Kun, Silva, Navas, Michu, Luis Alberto, Cazorla, Joaquin, Rossi, Rondon and many other players that I can't remember right now and have left in the last 3 years). And not to mention the players that Barcelona have bought from Sevilla and Valencia in the last years. So as good as it is the football in Spain, what happens in the spanish league is just as bad as in Bundesliga(if not even worse when you see that they are using the people's money to save football clubs when the economic situation is Spain is so bad).

 

[The Observer]

After seeing Sahin at Real Madrid and Kagawa at Manchester United I don't know how much is down to the players and how much to the system they play in

Sahin didn't play 2 consecutive games at Real Madrid and Kagawa inconsistently plays at left wing in a 4-4-2 system with wingers crossing the ball to the strikers. There is no such thing as "system carrying you to a CL final". Also if you pay attention you'll notice that Dortmund's level has already taken a hit. Maybe not result wise yet (although they would have broken down Arsenal with Kagawa, Götze and Ilkay) but it's obvious their play in tight spaces has already dropped a level.

 

[DennyCrane]

Their is a way around the 50+1 rule, those owners just have to own 49% of the club for an extended period of time. So technically its not impossible. In my opinion thats a safer option than what other leagues do. It makes sure these owners aren't looking for a play thing but a long term investment...

Your chain of thought is correct, no question about that. Thing is, it won't work this way in practice since the potential investor will be looking for legal certainty considering his influence. Another strange aspect is that it is actually allowed for an investor to hold the capital majority, but not the majority of votes.

For example, Hoffenheim: The TSG Hoffenheim Fußball-Spielbetriebs GmbH (the operating company) has a distribution of votes between the Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V. with 51 %, and Dietmar Hopp (the investor) of 49 %. Considering capital majority, Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V. holds 4 % of the capital, while Dietmar Hopp holds 96 %.
It's noteworthy that Hopp doesn't hold any share or votes of the Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V (the club itself); which means he has zero official influence here.
This leads to a paradox in conclusion: The investor has no power - the investor has all the power.

One can assume that the level of influence the investor has in such a case is fully dependant on an agreeable atmosphere between investor and management - while at the same time, the investor is under no obligation to hold his shares which means he can destroy the club at will by cancelling funding.
But most importantly, the lack of official influence of the potential investor creates a repellent investor atmosphere - while at the same time the wording of the law is fragmentary and creates zero legal certainty for the club.

 

[AfricanBavarian]

Your chain of thought is correct, no question about that. Thing is, it won't work this way in practice since the potential investor will be looking for legal certainty considering his influence. Another strange aspect is that it is actually allowed for an investor to hold the capital majority, but not the majority of votes.

For example, Hoffenheim: The TSG Hoffenheim Fußball-Spielbetriebs GmbH (the operating company) has a distribution of votes between the Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V. with 51 %, and Dietmar Hopp (the investor) of 49 %. Considering capital majority, Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V. holds 4 % of the capital, while Dietmar Hopp holds 96 %.
It's noteworthy that Hopp doesn't hold any share or votes of the Turn- und Sportgemeinschaft 1899 Hoffenheim e. V (the club itself); which means he has zero official influence here.
This leads to a paradox in conclusion: The investor has no power - the investor has all the power.

One can assume that the level of influence the investor has in such a case is fully dependant on an agreeable atmosphere between investor and management - while at the same time, the investor is under no obligation to hold his shares which means he can destroy the club at will by cancelling funding.
But most importantly, the lack of official influence of the potential investor creates a repellent investor atmosphere - while at the same time the wording of the law is fragmentary and creates zero legal certainty for the club.

Their is no doubt this set up has its down sides but in the end its a matter of picking your poison. Their is no perfect system in football. Sadly with the 50+1 rule the BuLi sacrifices competitiveness but gains financial stability for its clubs which at the moment is becoming hard to find in these tough economic times. If the BuLi can avoid cases like what happened at Malaga and Anzhi when their benefactors were tired of those teams i would gladly take it. BvB has shown it is possible to rise from the ashes and build a world class team. Its ironic that a team like BvB has progressed further as Europes top teams than a club like Man C which has had twice as much funding as BvB, that for me is enough to show me the BuLi is in the right direction.

One more point i would like to add is that their will never be "fair play" in European football, like you may see in other sports. Their will always be the the elite teams like Barca, RM, Bayern, and Man U and everyone below it. Even with EPL fans boasting about how competitve their league is, its always been the same suspects since the league was founded. In my opinion their is kno true competitive league out if the top 4 leagues in Europe...

 

[DennyCrane]

Their is no doubt this set up has its down sides but in the end its a matter of picking your poison. Their is no perfect system in football. Sadly with the 50+1 rule the BuLi sacrifices competitiveness but gains financial stability for its clubs which at the moment is becoming hard to find in these tough economic times. If the BuLi can avoid cases like what happened at Malaga and Anzhi when their benefactors were tired of those teams i would gladly take it. BvB has shown it is possible to rise from the ashes and build a world class team. Its ironic that a team like BvB has progressed further as Europes top teams than a club like Man C which has had twice as much funding as BvB, that for me is enough to show me the BuLi is in the right direction.

One more point i would like to add is that their will never be "fair play" in European football, like you may see in other sports. Their will always be the the elite teams like Barca, RM, Bayern, and Man U and everyone below it. Even with EPL fans boasting about how competitve their league is, its always been the same suspects since the league was founded. In my opinion their is kno true competitive league out if the top 4 leagues in Europe...

Generally, I agree with you. Changing the ruleset could lead to a boom or it could mean opening Pandora's Box; but in essence, it's all dependant on finding an appropriate balancing of interests which would work if the DFB functionaries weren't so difficult about this. They point the finger at Malaga as the deterrent example but they are unwilling to set up a proper legal framework - while at the same time they complain about their legal framework being de facto bypassed by clubs like Hoffenheim or the infamous RB Leipzig ("Officially", RB stands for Rasenballsport, inofficially it stands for Red Bull).
The fact that it's mostly the representatives of the established clubs who block a possible reform of the law leaves a bitter taste as well.
Then again, considering the juristic "quality" of the more recent changes in rules and regulations, it's probably better if the current functionaries keep their hands off the matter.

I agree fully on the second paragraph. All signs are pointing towards European Super League.

 

[AfricanBavarian]

Generally, I agree with you. Changing the ruleset could lead to a boom or it could mean opening Pandora's Box; but in essence, it's all dependant on finding an appropriate balancing of interests which would work if the DFB functionaries weren't so difficult about this. They point the finger at Malaga as the deterrent example but they are unwilling to set up a proper legal framework - while at the same time they complain about their legal framework being de facto bypassed by clubs like Hoffenheim or the infamous RB Leipzig ("Officially", RB stands for Rasenballsport, inofficially it stands for Red Bull).
The fact that it's mostly the representatives of the established clubs who block a possible reform of the law leaves a bitter taste as well.
Then again, considering the juristic "quality" of the more recent changes in rules and regulations, it's probably better if the current functionaries keep their hands off the matter.

I agree fully on the second paragraph. All signs are pointing towards European Super League.

Actually i think if FFP becomes fully implemented it will prevent a European Super League. Like i said before the elite clubs have a lot of power and UEFA know this very well. FFP is just to make sure the big clubs or status quo dont defect or make their own super league by making sure clubs like PSG and Man C dont start upsetting the balance. Thats the only way to get clubs like RM and even Chelsea to agree to such a financial plan. If UEFA really cared they would put some type of salary cap or implement stricter rules to curb spending but their is no doubt in my mind the big clubs would break away and make their own league. At the moment i dont see a European Super League happening cause at the moment UEFA seems to be appeasing the big clubs with how much the Champions League brings to them but dont expect much parity in football cause of FFP....

 

[DennyCrane]

Actually i think if FFP becomes fully implemented it will prevent a European Super League. Like i said before the elite clubs have a lot of power and UEFA know this very well. FFP is just to make sure the big clubs or status quo dont defect or make their own super league by making sure clubs like PSG and Man C dont start upsetting the balance. Thats the only way to get clubs like RM and even Chelsea to agree to such a financial plan. If UEFA really cared they would put some type of salary cap or implement stricter rules to curb spending but their is no doubt in my mind the big clubs would break away and make their own league. At the moment i dont see a European Super League happening cause at the moment UEFA seems to be appeasing the big clubs with how much the Champions League brings to them but dont expect much parity in football cause of FFP....

That's the thing. FFP means maintaining status quo for the top level; and that is my main concern.

Looking at the contract player budget

- Bayern have a budget of ~140 mil. Financially, the most healthy club in Germany and Europe. Given their success, expect this number to increase in the following years.

- Schalke have a budget of ~ 80 mil, and this is where the problems start, because Schalke is actually a debt ridden mess. Thankfully, german clubs don't have to present a group balance sheet in order to take part in UEFA competitions, so the fact that Schalke hides debts in subsidiary companies goes unnoticed. Yet, they are not very successful on the athletic level and are sitting on a financial time-bomb. Combined with some home-made problems like the kinda awkward club environment and a chairman with delusions of grandeur, you have a recipe for disaster. In the long run, there's only one realistic direction: downhill.

- Dortmund have a budget of ~ 68 mil. 3rd on the list, and already at about 50 % of what Bayern have in store. Successful in the recent past and on the way to financial stability after coming back from the (almost) dead. I'd still put a question mark behind a forecast because this can go either way.

- Wolfsburg is at ~ 50 mil. 100 % owned by Volkswagen AG.

- Leverkusen is at ~ 48 mil. 100 % owned by Bayer AG.

The rest range somewhere between 15 mil (Braunschweig) and 40 mil (Hamburg). There is already a noticeable gap between Bayern and the rest, and given that domestic TV income is already fairly distributed (so this set screw is already used), one can only expect the difference to grow in the future.
Don't get me wrong; because all things considered Bayern worked hard to get to the top of the food chain - the problem for me is that there is no way out of this situation for the other clubs in the long run, which is mostly down to the 50+1 rule. Just like in economics, where the existence of a giant monopoly slowly suffocates the other participants of a free market, a football superpower will slowly suffocate the competitors in the league.

Back to the FFP; the question for me is whether fans,especially foreign ones, will find it interresting to watch Bayern rampage through the league year after year in the future. Making a daring guess, I'd say that in 10-15 years from now, the top level clubs will be so far away from everyone else that the ESL basically becomes a necessity if the UEFA aims to keep things interresting. And, in my opinion, that's a direct and intended consequence of FFP.

 

[AfricanBavarian]

That's the thing. FFP means maintaining status quo for the top level; and that is my main concern.

Looking at the contract player budget

- Bayern have a budget of ~140 mil. Financially, the most healthy club in Germany and Europe. Given their success, expect this number to increase in the following years.

- Schalke have a budget of ~ 80 mil, and this is where the problems start, because Schalke is actually a debt ridden mess. Thankfully, german clubs don't have to present a group balance sheet in order to take part in UEFA competitions, so the fact that Schalke hides debts in subsidiary companies goes unnoticed. Yet, they are not very successful on the athletic level and are sitting on a financial time-bomb. Combined with some home-made problems like the kinda awkward club environment and a chairman with delusions of grandeur, you have a recipe for disaster. In the long run, there's only one realistic direction: downhill.

- Dortmund have a budget of ~ 68 mil. 3rd on the list, and already at about 50 % of what Bayern have in store. Successful in the recent past and on the way to financial stability after coming back from the (almost) dead. I'd still put a question mark behind a forecast because this can go either way.

- Wolfsburg is at ~ 50 mil. 100 % owned by Volkswagen AG.

- Leverkusen is at ~ 48 mil. 100 % owned by Bayer AG.

The rest range somewhere between 15 mil (Braunschweig) and 40 mil (Hamburg). There is already a noticeable gap between Bayern and the rest, and given that domestic TV income is already fairly distributed (so this set screw is already used), one can only expect the difference to grow in the future.
Don't get me wrong; because all things considered Bayern worked hard to get to the top of the food chain - the problem for me is that there is no way out of this situation for the other clubs in the long run, which is mostly down to the 50+1 rule. Just like in economics, where the existence of a giant monopoly slowly suffocates the other participants of a free market, a football superpower will slowly suffocate the competitors in the league.

Back to the FFP; the question for me is whether fans,especially foreign ones, will find it interresting to watch Bayern rampage through the league year after year in the future. Making a daring guess, I'd say that in 10-15 years from now, the top level clubs will be so far away from everyone else that the ESL basically becomes a necessity if the UEFA aims to keep things interresting. And, in my opinion, that's a direct and intended consequence of FFP.

I dont think UEFA really cares about making it interesting as long as the competition is profitable. Even the way the UCL is now the same clubs are always winning it or are in the final four so i doubt the lack of parity of the tourney will cause a ESL to start. Unless you UEFA try to make some game changing reforms would it force a ESL to start because like i said those big clubs would feel threatened and be forced to start their own league so they can remain at the top.....