Joan Laporta

[iniestaGOAT]

Whatever they did it's a positive for us as they took away greizman from us

 

[Luftstalag14]

In the case of Atletico it is not as easy as "owners added money". Atletico has had a capital injection from private equity investor Ares Management who will take a 33.96% stake of the Spanish' new holding company.

https://en.atleticodemadrid.com/not...ng-agrees-181-8-million-euro-capital-increase

Right, but either way the 181.8m is not going to be counted as income/revenue for them, is it?

 

[behindbrowneyes]

Right, but either way the 181.8m is not going to be counted as income/revenue for them, is it?

The 181,8M is a rise of capital gains for the holding. If I read and understand this part correctly:
"Miguel ?ngel Gil has assured the shareholders that Atl?tico HoldCo will exercise its pre-emptive subscription right in the capital increase agreed by the General Meeting, which will mean that, in the coming days, Atl?tico HoldCo will contribute almost 120 million euros to Club Atl?tico de Madrid."

120M will go the club (which are the Atletico HoldCo 65,98% of those 181,8M) and this should be counted as income/revenue.

Could be wrong though.

 

[Luftstalag14]

The 181,8M is a rise of capital gains for the holding. If I read and understand this part correctly:
"Miguel ?ngel Gil has assured the shareholders that Atl?tico HoldCo will exercise its pre-emptive subscription right in the capital increase agreed by the General Meeting, which will mean that, in the coming days, Atl?tico HoldCo will contribute almost 120 million euros to Club Atl?tico de Madrid."

120M will go the club (which are the Atletico HoldCo 65,98% of those 181,8M) and this should be counted as income/revenue.

Could be wrong though.

I still find it hard to believe the 120m would be considered income/revenue. Typically revenue for a football/sport club falls under three categories: matchday (ticketing and catering etc.), broadcast (TV money, prize money and other distributions from UEFA and other governing bodies) and commercial (sponsorship and merchandising). Owner's money injected, or injection of capitals from other sources, or money borrowed don't fall under any of these categories and if they do count as income/revenue, they can freely pump money into clubs and move money around at will. I believe UEFA's investigation of City several years ago sought to address this very issue, right? If I am not mistaken City tried to get around the FFP by having their UAE owners draw up some fictitious and questionable sponsorship deals because they couldn't openly get money from the owners and count that as income/revenue. Also, in the wake of Newcastle, the recent EPL proposal to restrict business dealings and sponsorship contracts from owners of the clubs is along the same lines, I think.

If this is considered income/revenue then the state-clubs, among others will easily get around the FFP. Just keep pumping money to maximize the club's revenue so they will have a huge spending cap.

 

[Luftstalag14]

The Spanish government approved the draft of the new sports law which eliminates the 15% guarantee for non-SAD (sports company) entities like us, Real Madrid, Athletic Bilbao and Osasuna. Now these non-SAD clubs can decide the amount of their guarantees on their own (Athletic Bilbao will lower it to 5%).

A big win for Laporta.

 

[DonAK]

We'll likely lower it to 5% too.

 

[FinBarcelonafan]

The Spanish government approved the draft of the new sports law which eliminates the 15% guarantee for non-SAD (sports company) entities like us, Real Madrid, Athletic Bilbao and Osasuna. Now these non-SAD clubs can decide the amount of their guarantees on their own (Athletic Bilbao will lower it to 5%).

A big win for Laporta.

15% guarantee of what? Can someone explain what this is?

 

[Luftstalag14]

15% guarantee of what? Can someone explain what this is?

15% of the budget when taking over the club. Laporta had to secure enough money to meet the guarantee after he won the election, otherwise he wouldn't be able to take over officially, apparently. Jordi Roura, the head of Mediapro contributed the most at the time I believe, backed out later because of some differences or fallout with Laporta, which had to be replaced and filled by money from other sources.

Something in the Spanish sports law that stipulated that incoming president/head of non-SAD entities must meet, as far as I know. A way to make sure they had the means and capacity to be in the roles they wanted to be in, I suppose.

 

[FinBarcelonafan]

Thanks. How does it help Laporta? He already raised the money for this.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Thanks. How does it help Laporta? He already raised the money for this.

Because first off he had difficulty to meet the 15% after Jordi Roura withdrew, also La Liga opened an investigation not too long ago on the basis to calculate his guarantee money and indicated that he might have to guarantee potentially 100m more or something like that. Dropping this requiremyent from the sports law is a great relief for Laporta.

 

[FinBarcelonafan]

Because first off he had difficulty to meet the 15% after Jordi Roura withdrew, also La Liga opened an investigation not too long ago on the basis to calculate his guarantee money and indicated that he might have to guarantee potentially 100m more or something like that. Dropping this requiremyent from the sports law is a great relief for Laporta.

Okay I didn't know that. I thought he got it no problem. Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[Gari]

Tebas: "I told Laporta what to do to sign Haaland."

 

[mc_lovin]

CVC? ;d

 

[Gari]

Yes, he stands his ground. "Barca have to release high chips and raise revenues or accept the CVC agreement if they want to sign Haaland"

 

[iniestaGOAT]

We would probably be selling GAVI and PEDRI at this stage if barto was still incharge to keep the club afloat

Laporta is literally gods gift to Barcelona