Joan Laporta

[JamDav1982]

It's about how much do we value the essence of Barca and how and why it was created.

If we don't value the history, sure, we could be a financial giant and totally sell out to the Saudis. It's how much do you want to erode before we draw a line under it.

If it is the 100m as stated it would be a no brainer but I doubt it's near that much, we should think about it.

Laporta doesnt care about the 'values'. He never did it was all politics as was said at time.

None of them do really. They just tried to use it as a sales slogan more than anything and then politically to try and win votes as some folk just follow whatever they say.

Same folk saying it is good idea now will be waxing lyrical about how much Laporta defends 'values' of club if it doesnt happen.

 

[Porque]

City sell 49% then take huge 'franchise' fee then.

Be never ending attempts to get round the rules.

I think this deal [if true] would basically be for a first option/refusal for if/when we open up a private sale of 49% of the club in the future.

Not sure how relevant it would be to City selling a share. They have been sold before as have Newcastle, Chelsea, etc.

Artificial franchises is something for Uefa to think about and easier said than done. UEFA already has evidence of artificial sponsorships of City through their state owned companies. Whether anything comes out of it is another question. But in the end of the day it is hard to stop billionaires putting their own money into their own clubs.

Not without a European salary cap. And even that option is dead in the water now with the Saudi league bypassing it and offering salaries way higher. A Eurocentric UEFA salary cap now just makes the process of a Super League in Saudi Arabia go faster (or even in the Middle East with Qatar Barca as part of it, just as an example).

 

[JamDav1982]

I think this deal [if true] would basically be for a first option/refusal for if/when we open up a private sale of 49% of the club in the future.

Not sure how relevant it would be to City selling a share. They have been sold before as have Newcastle, Chelsea, etc.

Artificial franchises is something for Uefa to think about and easier said than done. UEFA already has evidence of artificial sponsorships of City through their state owned companies. Whether anything comes out of it is another question. But in the end of the day it is hard to stop billionaires putting their own money into their own clubs.

Not without a European salary cap. And even that option is dead in the water now with the Saudi league bypassing it and offering salaries way higher.

Giving them 'first option' doesnt achieve much and doesnt work like that if looking to sell 49%.

This would be an 'artificial franchise' as much as any other.

 

[DonAK]

It's about how much do we value the essence of Barca and how and why it was created.

If we don't value the history, sure, we could be a financial giant and totally sell out to the Saudis. It's how much do you want to erode before we draw a line under it.

If it is the 100m as stated it would be a no brainer but I doubt it's near that much, we should think about it.

It's all fine to talk about values and all that, but the moment the club starts falling behind everyone else due to the financial problems they have the fans will turn on them, and I'm not even talking about people on this forum whom they don't give a shit about, but the fans that go to games.

Selling out whether now or in five years in some way is inevitable

 

[ajnotkeith]

It's all fine to talk about values and all that, but the moment the club starts falling behind everyone else due to the financial problems they have the fans will turn on them, and I'm not even talking about people on this forum whom they don't give a shit about, but the fans that go to games.

Selling out whether now or in five years in some way is inevitable

I would say the answer is a Super League with petro clubs excluded.

Something has got to be done about it because we are getting to the point where in order for a top club to stay competitive they have to take dirty petrostate money and become the toy of some sheikh across the world.

If the authorities can't control it the clubs must. Super League will generate the money needed to be competitive itself and keep petrostates away.

Juventus, Inter, Barca... These are some of the most historic and best clubs in the world sinking because they can't keep up with sheikh money.

 

[DonAK]

I would say the answer is a Super League with petro clubs excluded.

Something has got to be done about it because we are getting to the point where in order for a top club to stay competitive they have to take dirty petrostate money and become the toy of some sheikh across the world.

If the authorities can't control it the clubs must. Super League will generate the money needed to be competitive itself and keep petrostates away.

Don't think the Super League is happening at this point sadly.

Florentino and Agnelli botched it like idiots.

 

[Porque]

Giving them 'first option' doesnt achieve much and doesnt work like that if looking to sell 49%.

This would be an 'artificial franchise' as much as any other.

There's a number of ways it could work.

Example, The money could count against their purchase price. Barcelona have to pay it back if they agree to sell to another party.

There is some value in a franchise itself for Qatar. Maybe not 100m/yr today, but a value for sure, which I could go into.

And, a bit of a difference between Barcelona (or any non oil club) selling their franchise rights to Qatar, than to City selling their franchise rights to themselves.

But you already knew that.

 

[JamDav1982]

There's a number of ways it could work.

Example, The money could count against their purchase price. Barcelona have to pay it back if they agree to sell to another party.

There is some value in a franchise itself for Qatar. Maybe not 100m/yr today, but a value for sure, which I could go into.

And, a bit of a difference between Barcelona (or any non oil club) selling their franchise rights to Qatar, than to City selling their franchise rights to themselves.

But you already knew that.

None of that makes much sense in my opinion.

Can agree to disagree.

 

[Luftstalag14]

It would go far behind just franchise rights. Would include exchange of talent (young players going to play for that side, for better or worse) coaches, traning camps, friendlies, first team player appearances, media events and whatever other added value.

They basically ripped off Barcelona for free with Aspire, so why not get paid for it? But it won't be a free lunch, that's for sure.

Said it before, but talking is easily than reality, but it would have been better to deal with the Saudi than the Qatari's.

And also, Laporta was always inclined to the franchise model, he just wasn't rich enough and Barcelona is the wrong club for it being socio owned and not Oil owned. Barcleona Miami project was well ahead of it's time, and everything the City Group has achieved is what Barcelona's Laporta led team wanted to achieve with a far better brand (stuck in an admittedly worst country and league).

What you said above about what they will get in return makes sense, essentially it is another way to tap into our resources and advertise for them, almost like another sponsorship deal.

To me the Qataris and the Saudis are no different, perhaps the latter are more ambitious about their league and more resources.

I'd have thought to get a franchise club or team in another country, we will have to invest money as they would be considered somewhat owned by the club or affiliated with the club. But I am guessing the franchisee, whoever it is would have to pay the franchisor (Barça) to use our name.

 

[Luftstalag14]

In the sense that looking at their club you would 100 percent consider them to be associated with us, likely in the same way as this Qatari club. But the Qataris will pay us for it.

Yes, I think with all the rhetoric around the Middle East right now and the dirty money they are investing into football Barca taking it would kind of betray those mes que un club values we always talk about, and we would get backlash for that, but we already accepted Qatar Airways before I suppose.

Nah, I think Barcelona SC is not really infringing on our rights and there is no real harm done.

 

[Luftstalag14]

It's about how much do we value the essence of Barca and how and why it was created.

If we don't value the history, sure, we could be a financial giant and totally sell out to the Saudis. It's how much do you want to erode before we draw a line under it.

If it is the 100m as stated it would be a no brainer but I doubt it's near that much, we should think about it.

I agree that such deals need to be scrutinized to the finest details to make sure we are not handing over any rights or it will not be a prelude to the club's stakes being sold to them to anybody.

Again the 100m per year figure is too good to be true for just a franchise in Qatar but if it is truly just a fattened or reconfigured sponsorship deal involving us lending our brand name, players, resources etc. with them with no other strings attached, I'd take it.

 

[Luftstalag14]

I would say the answer is a Super League with petro clubs excluded.

Something has got to be done about it because we are getting to the point where in order for a top club to stay competitive they have to take dirty petrostate money and become the toy of some sheikh across the world.

If the authorities can't control it the clubs must. Super League will generate the money needed to be competitive itself and keep petrostates away.

Juventus, Inter, Barca... These are some of the most historic and best clubs in the world sinking because they can't keep up with sheikh money.

I don't think Super League is the answer. Where will the huge amount of money promised come from? American funds? American investors? Where will they get the money from and how do they make that ROI?

The whole ESL thingy, as it stands, sounds like empty promises to me.

 

[Don Juan Laporta Estruch]

I don't know why this forum seems to be drowning in negativity, but this is great news if true.

People questioning how it will affect Barca PR and morality? Hahaha. Where have you been? Newsflash folks, other fanbases HATE us no matter what we do. And spin anything we do into the utmost negative version of that event.

Win the league this year? Ah it's Because of Negreira. Lose in Europe? Universally mocked. Win in Europe during Peps years? Ah they only win because they are taking PEDs. And yes this is repeated by Utd fans to this very day.

Morality in football left the building years ago. No one gives two shits Barca are trying to avoid selling out and staying as 100 percent member owned. Infact they mock Barca humiliations in Europe which that same membership model has significantly contributed to.

Get this over the line by any means necessary , for whatever amount that is somewhat significant. Couldn't care less what other fans think or how hypocritical it makes Laporta or anyone else look. Real fans understand the politics game and nobody is playing it better than the Don Laporta.

 

[FinBarcelonafan]

Great opportunity for us, if true. Not sure if legally there will be challenges and hurdles to jump through. We are getting the much needed funds while elevating the Barça brand name in the Middle East, it is a win-win for us.

Gone are those days that we can pick and choose based on perceived morality.

True. If we want to compete we probably have to do this.

 

[ajnotkeith]

I don't think Super League is the answer. Where will the huge amount of money promised come from? American funds? American investors? Where will they get the money from and how do they make that ROI?

The whole ESL thingy, as it stands, sounds like empty promises to me.

ESL would probably make a remarkable amount of income, possibly the highest earning competition in the history of sport maybe (off pure revenue).

For example look at the EPL and how much it draws in TV rights and viewerships and that's including the Burnley's, the Everton's, the Wolves etc that play relatively defensive and shitty football. They make that money simply because of an entertaining product from the top10 teams or so that play high quality fast football.

Then imagine all the best teams in the world grouped together, with all the superstars in the world almost, grouped together, with huge and high quality battles between giants every week, with what is likely to be a unified fee to watch the games, or at least one that isn't more than what it costs to watch football in several different leagues now. How many people will pay for that, if people already pay in their masses to watch domestic leagues?

Winning the Super League could have become even more important than the Champions League.

I think JP Morgan was the backer for the initial project.