Joan Laporta

[Luftstalag14]

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.

It sounds interesting and exciting on paper to have the elite teams play against one another week in and week out, but the reality is, once you take away that wow factor which comes with them facing off once in a while, people will get bored sooner or later.

Yes, as I understand it, the current ESL proposed is backed by either JP Morgan or some other American funds. I question where they will get so much money from to pay the clubs. Right now the US market (NFL and NBA in particular) pays the most money because of the sheer purchasing power of the Americans and the huge amount of money spent in advertisement in American sports that dwarfs sports elsewhere in the world, I doubt the ESL will draw anything close to what the NFL or NBA is getting in the US hence I question how it is going to make a profit for the ESL's backers and how it is going to be sustainable.

 

[Gnidrologist]

They can just print the money, when want.

 

[BJJ]

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.

I'm sure they will have to run it through the members.

I don't even know what to make of it. I'm kinda upset that we have to resort to this shit to make money but it's our new reality.

 

[frog-fcb]

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.

Maybe the Qataris will buy a lot more club names over the next few years and start a super league of there own

 

[Rory]

Do we need to rely on 100m? Why isn't the plan to keep reducing salaries of overpriced shite. Get back to producing record levels of revenue. Spend money wisely with a competent world class manager in charge. Not rocket science. I feel like deals like this just let us continue to be reckless with our money and hope throwing hundreds of millions around will equal success.

 

[BJJ]

Do we need to rely on 100m? Why isn't the plan to keep reducing salaries of overpriced shite. Get back to producing record levels of revenue. Spend money wisely with a competent world class manager in charge. Not rocket science. I feel like deals like this just let us continue to be reckless with our money and hope throwing hundreds of millions around will equal success.

Good point.

The problem with us getting 100 million is we will probably blow it on some duds and be back to square one.
World class manager. I totally agree. Xavi has been pathetic in Europe and I hope this is last chance saloon for him.

How much money did we lose with all these early European exits? Must have been around a 100 million minimum.

 

[Porque]

Why can't we do both?

Anyways, what happens when FC Barcelona Qatar offer higher wages than FC Barcelona?

Which team will then be the franchise?

Can they loan players to us?

I'd think twice about getting in bed with the Qatari's given how they run PSG compared to Abu Dhabi in City and Saudi in Newcastle personally.

Tiny dick, I mean tiny island syndrome.

 

[Rory]

Why can't we do both?

Anyways, what happens when FC Barcelona Qatar offer higher wages than FC Barcelona?

Which team will then be the franchise?

Can they loan players to us?

Sure it's not necessarily one or the other. But I feel choosing the easy 100m increases complacency and reduces determination for us to stand on our own two feet. Whereas generating the money ourselves is a self sufficiency thing. Real Madrid just spent 100m+ on Bellingham and can afford to spend more in other areas. A few years ago we were generating more revenue than real madrid. We don't need an easy 100m from Qatar.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Do we need to rely on 100m?

Absolutely.

Why isn't the plan to keep reducing salaries of overpriced shite.

It is the plan, but no one wants to reduce his salaries.
We are still paying Busquets and Alba good money even after what they gave up.
We still pay only one guy 30% of Basketball section money, and he is telling us he won't forgive a penny.
We still have massive contracts of Umtiti, Lenglet and they won't accept just leaving for less money.
We don't succeed in our plan, a plan we submitted in liga in official way. Barca is blocked entirely from registration of players in 2024.

We need alternatives.

Get back to producing record levels of revenue.

So, basically getting creative in increasing revenue? Accepting offers that will get us 100M seems like first step to do so.

Spend money wisely with a competent world class manager in charge. Not rocket science.

Why we don't see everyone doing it then?

Maybe because it is actually hard to do? It isn't Rocket science, it is inexact science which makes it worse.

I feel like deals like this just let us continue to be reckless with our money and hope throwing hundreds of millions around will equal success.

This deal, at best, will make us able to compensate for our revenue loss due to levers and being able to do 1:1 salary cap after making essential cuts, which we didn't do yet. We aren't throwing money on anyone.

100M annual (which is likely overblown figure) means 70M in salary cap. We are over 100M excess in salary cap atm thanks to us balloning it for 1 year using levers.

 

[Porque]

Sure it's not necessarily one or the other. But I feel choosing the easy 100m increases complacency and reduces determination for us to stand on our own two feet. Whereas generating the money ourselves is a self sufficiency thing. Real Madrid just spent 100m+ on Bellingham and can afford to spend more in other areas. A few years ago we were generating more revenue than real madrid. We don't need an easy 100m from Qatar.

I think if we can establish a franchise system then it is a positive. It would be a first. Think of it like this, with the levers pulled, we have reduced our domestic tv rights income season to season by around 20m. Then there is a drop of ticket income with moving to the mountains. And lastly, there are salary issues where we face the usual problem, we have overpaid talent that they can not receive equal offers in other climates.

So atleast a franchise deal will go a long way to cover those drops.

Your right that we have to continue to detox the finances and get the wage cap sustainable so that we can compete on transfers- to an extent- with the rest of Europe. And by that I mean be able to sign the Vitor Roque's and Arda Gulers without worry.

Lastly, I think that our actual football (LaLiga first team squad) is actually the second highest in Spanish football, and that is before we drop the wages of Umtiti, Lenglet, etc. So basically our wagebill is lower than Madrids, we just have way too much other fat costing us. Bad loan repayments, other sport sections (Mirotic on the basketball earning 10m/yr, which is on the highend of our football wage scale), and our salary cap taking the whole institutions income and expenditure into account. Mainly because other sections are not sustainable so the football section is bleeding their income to these other sections- for whatever reason we decide to account that way.

 

[Rory]

Absolutely.




It is the plan, but no one wants to reduce his salaries.
We are still paying Busquets and Alba good money even after what they gave up.
We still pay only one guy 30% of Basketball section money, and he is telling us he won't forgive a penny.
We still have massive contracts of Umtiti, Lenglet and they won't accept just leaving for less money.
We don't succeed in our plan, a plan we submitted in liga in official way. Barca is blocked entirely from registration of players in 2024.

We need alternatives.



So, basically getting creative in increasing revenue? Accepting offers that will get us 100M seems like first step to do so.




Why we don't see everyone doing it then?

Maybe because it is actually hard to do? It isn't Rocket science, it is inexact science which makes it worse.



This deal, at best, will make us able to compensate for our revenue loss due to levers and being able to do 1:1 salary cap after making essential cuts, which we didn't do yet. We aren't throwing money on anyone.

100M annual (which is likely overblown figure) means 70M in salary cap. We are over 100M excess in salary cap atm thanks to us balloning it for 1 year using levers.

Absolutely.

Why is 100m essential? And I mean, essential or we have to shut the club down, not being able to register x or y players can be resolved by other means. Also we have a good enough squad to challenge for the league again and easily have a strong enough squad to get out of ucl group. That is enough on a sporting level if we are restricted financially. We've seen that throwing 100s of millions at this squad doesn't change the outcome of european football not sure why another 100m changes things.

So, basically getting creative in increasing revenue? Accepting offers that will get us 100M seems like first step to do so.

There's nothing creative or innovative about this. Just seems like a cheap way out.

Why we don't see everyone doing it then?

Maybe because it is actually hard to do? It isn't Rocket science, it is inexact science which makes it worse.

Plenty of clubs do. I expect one of the biggest clubs in the world to put the correct people in place to make these decisions.

We aren't throwing money on anyone.

We're signing plenty of free transfers. Free meaning no transfer fee, they're anything but free.

Just don't think it's a good sign that Laporta is busy trying to make these kind of deals that may or may not become regulated at some point (so who knows how long we can even do this for). Meanwhile not focusing energy in other areas that could improve revenue. Real Madrid have updated their stadium and signed Bellingham for 100m+ and haven't had to sell their name unless I missed something.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Why is 100m essential? And I mean, essential or we have to shut the club down, not being able to register x or y players can be resolved by other means.

By this definition, non of those revenues are essential then. Barca isn't going to shut down the club.

There's nothing creative or innovative about this. Just seems like a cheap way out.

Seems? Based on what? Seems just like a personal bias based on feeling of Moral superiority if I may say. This seems to be based on us being "holier " than that. Which is total bs. Unless you buy in the whole "this is what Barca stand for" type of bs that is used for cheap marketing purpose.

We are business entity that is owned by members, and board can't turn down money like that, money that can make a better squad and save non football sections.


And it allows the club to stop acting like thugs who have been harrasing their own labour in past 2 years so that they forgive money they are owned. I mean that is what it it really is when we say "overpriced shit". A club who willingly signed contracts and isn't willing to fulfil them. We are already low in the moral section thanks to that. It is just about which morals we can break with least PR disaster.

Plenty of clubs do. I expect one of the biggest clubs in the world to put the correct people in place to make these decisions.

Who? And how many tries and fails most of the time?
I mean Liverpool did it, winning a hopping 1 league title in 33 years.
Chelsea tried it before, no league title in 7 years.
Only City is having success in EPL clubs, they are overspending their rivals and dominating them with money (and that money bought them Barca best executives and best coach in the world), Bayern and PSG are dominating their leagues with their financial resources, Barca and RM are dominating Liga with their resources and overspending other clubs.

I am really curious who are those shrewd clubs who are winning during financial turmoil on consistent basis?
Who are those clubs who ever turned down 100M offers due to moral high ground? 🤔

Just don't think it's a good sign that Laporta is busy trying to make these kind of deals that may or may not become regulated at some point (so who knows how long we can even do this for).

Based on what? How do you think Laporta (a lawyer) is risking to get unregulated deal? A deal with the country that has the European Club association president? They own UEFA man and there is zero ground to think it is going to stop it from being regulated.

As for how long, Laporta is banking on new Camp Nou being saviour and wants to keep the brand high till that time. We have 3-5 years till we reach that point.

Meanwhile not focusing energy in other areas that could improve revenue.

How do you know that? I am really interested to know if you have an inside info . What is he ignoring?

Real Madrid have updated their stadium and signed Bellingham for 100m+ and haven't had to sell their name unless I missed something.

You clearly missed the part where RM didn't suffer the amount of losses we had, didn't have same bad contracts we gave, renewed their stadium in perfect time, sustained sporting success, and have bigger revenues than us, has less sporting team to be subsidised by football team.
There is a price to pay for mismanagement, and that price could be long lasting. No one will turn a way out. And I don't see where other ways we turned down, to claim we are choosing the "cheap" way.
We don't even know the details yet to know what is this all about to make such harsh claims.

We're signing plenty of free transfers. Free meaning no transfer fee, they're anything but free.

Not sure what you are trying to say here?
We should stop signing free agents? Or what exactly?

 

[wisconsincule]

Take the money. Sell off a portion of the club. Do whatever it takes to get some of that oil money now.

 

[Rory]

By this definition, non of those revenues are essential then. Barca isn't going to shut down the club.

If the club had no revenue it wouldn't shut down? I think it would.

Seems? Based on what? Seems just like a personal bias based on feeling of Moral superiority if I may say. This seems to be based on us being "holier " than that. Which is total bs. Unless you buy in the whole "this is what Barca stand for" type of bs that is used for cheap marketing purpose.

We are business entity that is owned by members, and board can't turn down money like that, money that can make a better squad and save non football sections.


And it allows the club to stop acting like thugs who have been harrasing their own labour in past 2 years so that they forgive money they are owned. I mean that is what it it really is when we say "overpriced shit". A club who willingly signed contracts and isn't willing to fulfil them. We are already low in the moral section thanks to that. It is just about which morals we can break with least PR disaster.

It seems like a cheap way out because we are selling what exactly? Our name. With our name comes the history attached to it. Shouldn't sell something like that imo, to whoever. Don't care if they're in Qatar or if they're in the UK. What does the club in Qatar have to gain from this? Are you not asking these questions? It's very weird for a business to pay 100m out and receive little in return, what is it they want to gain? Nice straw man claiming I'm going down the holier than thou route though.

Who? And how many tries and fails most of the time?
I mean Liverpool did it, winning a hopping 1 league title in 33 years.
Chelsea tried it before, no league title in 7 years.
Only City is having success in EPL clubs, they are overspending their rivals and dominating them with money (and that money bought them Barca best executives and best coach in the world), Bayern and PSG are dominating their leagues with their financial resources, Barca and RM are dominating Liga with their resources and overspending other clubs.

I am really curious who are those shrewd clubs who are winning during financial turmoil on consistent basis?
Who are those clubs who ever turned down 100M offers due to moral high ground? 🤔

Liverpool only very recently had the right people in and the right manager in to get the best out of any money they're willing to spend. In that recent run they've won an EPL, UCL, reached 2 more UCL finals and a couple of domestic cups too. How awful. Only been pipped to the league by an out of control City with Guardiola in charge.

Chelsea have spent money in an awful fashion for years, not sure this is an example of putting the right people in charge, not sure what point you're making with Chelsea really.

Only City is having success for outspending rivals is half of the truth isn't it. Utd have spent similar. But Utd have had terrible people making decisions meanwhile City have excellent people making those decisions. You've just made my point for me.

How do you know that? I am really interested to know if you have an inside info . What is he ignoring?

If we're having to rely on this as revenue then it shows we're not doing a good enough job in other areas.

You clearly missed the part where RM didn't suffer the amount of losses we had, didn't have same bad contracts we gave, renewed their stadium in perfect time, sustained sporting success, and have bigger revenues than us, has less sporting team to be subsidised by football team.
There is a price to pay for mismanagement, and that price could be long lasting. No one will turn a way out. And I don't see where other ways we turned down, to claim we are choosing the "cheap" way.
We don't even know the details yet to know what is this all about to make such harsh claims.

Real Madrid didn't suffer the same losses correct. They made decisions that really helped them move forward though. Meanwhile whilst we're pulling levers sacrificing future revenue we're blowing 200m+ on average players or players way past their prime.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Do we need to rely on 100m? Why isn't the plan to keep reducing salaries of overpriced shite. Get back to producing record levels of revenue. Spend money wisely with a competent world class manager in charge. Not rocket science. I feel like deals like this just let us continue to be reckless with our money and hope throwing hundreds of millions around will equal success.

We should do both, cutting cost (which is what they are doing now, across all sections of the club, whether willingly or reluctantly) and broadening the revenue streams. Of course, we should not resort of extravagant spending and unwise planning which got us here in the first place, even with the extra income.