Qatar FC

[Hamzah]

Why do you hate FFP?

 

[Bertus]

Why do you hate FFP?

Because it's a joke in my opinion as long as it doesn't concern clubs with big debts.

If PSG has 30M or even 5M loss at the end of the season, it's a drama above gob, but if a club has 100-500M or even above debt, everything is fine. Also, I don't see why Al Thani can't spend all the money he wants in PSG if he wants. As a liberal, i am against this limitation.

It won't last for long imo anyways, a few years at most, since Jean-Louis Dupont and other people who got the Bosman ruling are attacking it.

 

[Jägermeister]

Because it's a joke in my opinion as long as it doesn't concern clubs with big debts.

If PSG has 30M or even 5M loss at the end of the season, it's a drama above gob, but if a club has 100-500M or even above debt, everything is fine. Also, I don't see why Al Thani can't spend all the money he wants in PSG if he wants. As a liberal, i am against this limitation.

It won't last for long imo anyways, a few years at most, since Jean-Louis Dupont and other people who got the Bosman ruling are attacking it.

Throwing private money at a club kind of ruins the pupose of success and achievements since football clubs paticipate in tornaments and their leagues to earn money and strengthen themselves. That is the original priciple, isn't it?
Clubs, teams and players should be rewarded for doing good business, winning trophys, playing great.
To a certain degree the same could be said for sponsoring deals when (example in Germany is Volkswagen) big companies give certain clubs millions and millions for marketing reasons. In many cases though those companies choose successful clubs for obvious reasons. So combined with what I explained earlier that is an addition in "price money".
Therefore people like Nasser punish those smaller clubs, who are competing for profit and in some cases for there sheer surviving.
That's why I think ffp is a very good idea, although it's current strictness (or rather the lack of it) is not as it should be.

 

[Bertus]

Throwing private money at a club kind of ruins the pupose of success and achievements since football clubs paticipate in tornaments and their leagues to earn money and strengthen themselves. That is the original priciple, isn't it?
Clubs, teams and players should be rewarded for doing good business, winning trophys, playing great.
To a certain degree the same could be said for sponsoring deals when (example in Germany is Volkswagen) big companies give certain clubs millions and millions for marketing reasons. In many cases though those companies choose successful clubs for obvious reasons. So combined with what I explained earlier that is an addition in "price money".
Therefore people like Nasser punish those smaller clubs, who are competing for profit and in some cases for there sheer surviving.
That's why I think ffp is a very good idea, although it's current strictness (or rather the lack of it) is not as it should be.

FFP too punishes smaller clubs that for 99.9% of them have no means to get bigger since the principle is to avoid people to put private money in a club. If i follow the reasoning, if i win the lotto tomorrow, i should be banned from investing my private money in a club to make it bigger, because it's unfair towards other clubs that have no people like me.

Some french people that studied on what the FFP can or can't do (here at least) even say that big clubs like RM and bayern did everything to freeze the current situation so they can avoid - with the help of the FFP - the arrival of new rivals. And that some clubs put enormous pressure on Platini to avoid to put club debts in the equation of what the FFP should be and do.

Anyways, that aside, to me it's still a joke that clubs with gigantic debts don't get any sanctions. having 500M of debts imho is way more a sign of bad business sense than the rest.

 

[Luftstalag14]

Bertus, do you think the model of whoever has money can just pour his or her money into any team will be conducive to healthy growth and healthy competition in sports in general?

If you have money you can buy any player you want by splashing your cash, you don't care about the price, you have deep pockets. What does that do to the teams and guys that have no money? Will they ever be able to afford to buy quality players?

 

[Bertus]

Bertus, do you think the model of whoever has money can just pour his or her money into any team will be conducive to healthy growth and healthy competition in sports in general?

If you have money you can buy any player you want by splashing your cash, you don't care about the price, you have deep pockets. What does that do to the teams and guys that have no money? Will they ever be able to afford to buy quality players?

What does that do to those poor teams if I buy or not?

Even if i choose to not buy that will not change their fate.

However, I see no problem if I decide to put my money in the economy. From a liberal point of view, spending money is WAY better than keeping it in the bank. It's also better for the economy in general because it usually creates jobs, activities and wealth in the concerned sector.

Nothing else to say. Stopping people from investing money is no good in my opinion whatever the area.

To me, those who think RM and Bayern, for example, act like Dukes and Barons that feel threatened are right. RM and Bayern don't care about little poor clubs. They are no angels, stop dreaming. They just care about their little circle not being threatened by new rivals.

 

[Luftstalag14]

What does that do to those poor teams if I buy or not?

Even if i choose to not buy that will not change their fate.

However, I see no problem if I decide to put my money in the economy. From a liberal point of view, spending money is WAY better than keeping it in the bank. It's also better for the economy in general because it usually creates jobs, activities and wealth in the concerned sector.

Nothing else to say. Stopping people from investing money is no good in my opinion whatever the area.

To me, those who think RM and Bayern, for example, act like Dukes and Barons that feel threatened are right. RM and Bayern don't care about little poor clubs. They are no angels, stop dreaming. They just care about their little circle not being threatened by new rivals.

You are missing the point again.

What does that do the poor teams? You raise the price of quality players for everyone so poorer clubs won't be able to afford them.

I am the last person to defend Bayern, but they are not Real Madrid. They don't have deep pockets or high debt like Real Madrid does. In Germany they have the 50+1 rule and Bayern happens to be one of the healthiest, best run clubs (financially) in the world.

 

[Bertus]

You are missing the point again.

What does that do the poor teams? You raise the price of quality players for everyone so poorer clubs won't be able to afford them.

I am the last person to defend Bayern, but they are not Real Madrid. They don't have deep pockets or high debt like Real Madrid does. In Germany they have the 50+1 rule and Bayern happens to be one of the healthiest, best run clubs (financially) in the world.

you're the one missing the point. I am against stopping people or companies to invest money.

You only see one face of the coin because it pleases your morals. When PSG invests money, some clubs gets richer and develop more and faster. Napoli for example. And that's just an example since each time the qataries invest money in PSG, there are people and companies or even states (in the case of France) that get something out of it. Money circulation is not bad. Rich people/companies keeping their money in the bank instead of investing is.

You will always find clubs that are too poor to buy quality players. Even before the rise of clubs like chelsea or PSG, there were clubs that were too poor to buy or retain quality players.

Your moral on this story is based on your own value of things and where you put the bar on a ladder. There's no point in continuying this discussion since we think totally differently. It's done, I listened to what you had to say, I disagree with you, and you disagree with me. we dragged it in two threads already.

And I don't want to mess up this thread with that anymore since we already got moderated in the marquinhos thread in case you didn't see.

I posted that news about the FFP to talk about how it will be easier for us to be competitive in the CL, not to spam this thread with anti rich people spending their money discussion.

Continue if you want, till Galning comes by and deletes it all again. As for me, I'm out.

 

[Luftstalag14]

you're the one missing the point. I am against stopping people or companies to invest money.

You only see one face of the coin because it pleases your morals. When PSG invests money, some clubs gets richer and develop more and faster. Napoli for example. And that's just an example since each time the qataries invest money in PSG, there are people and companies or even states (in the case of France) that get something out of it. Money circulation is not bad. Rich people/companies keeping their money in the bank instead of investing is.

You will always find clubs that are too poor to buy quality players. Even before the rise of clubs like chelsea or PSG, there were clubs that were too poor to buy or retain quality players.

Your moral on this story is based on your own value of things and where you put the bar on a ladder. There's no point in continuying this discussion since we think totally differently. It's done, I listened to what you had to say, I disagree with you, and you disagree with me. we dragged it in two threads already.

And I don't want to mess up this thread with that anymore since we already got moderated in the marquinhos thread in case you didn't see.

I posted that news about the FFP to talk about how it will be easier for us to be competitive in the CL, not to spam this thread with anti rich people spending their money discussion.

Continue if you want, till Galning comes by and deletes it all again. As for me, I'm out.

I am NOT missing the point. The point is financial fairplay. When you have teams like PSG with their rich owners injecting money at will, without being subjected to any scrutiny and sky is the limit, these teams are given a huge head start ahead of other teams because they can buy any player they want in the world with their unlimited supply of funds. This is about having a level playing field. Not to mention it does raise the price of players for other clubs. So in the end it stymies competition and undermines the health of the sport.

I am not against investment, of course. I am against not having all teams subject to the same rules. That's it.

 

[Jägermeister]

What does that do to those poor teams if I buy or not?

Even if i choose to not buy that will not change their fate.

However, I see no problem if I decide to put my money in the economy. From a liberal point of view, spending money is WAY better than keeping it in the bank. It's also better for the economy in general because it usually creates jobs, activities and wealth in the concerned sector.

Nothing else to say. Stopping people from investing money is no good in my opinion whatever the area.

To me, those who think RM and Bayern, for example, act like Dukes and Barons that feel threatened are right. RM and Bayern don't care about little poor clubs. They are no angels, stop dreaming. They just care about their little circle not being threatened by new rivals.

The economy and a sporting competition are two totally different things.

 

[Bertus]

It's official, via a press release, UEFA confirmed the sanctions against PSG and City are watered down.

They confirmed PSG and City will have to register 5 homegrown players instead of 8.

 

[linetty]

They should totally ban them from CL football.

 

[Bertus]

They should totally ban them from CL football.

As long as UEFA makes money on the back of them, they will not i think :3

So far it's kind of a victory for us anyways.

PSG confirmed on RMC that they plan to register: Matuidi, Douchez, Cabaye, Digne, Rabiot or Carama but the later is said to be closer of being part of the staff than still being a player to use in competition. They will use Camara to fill the form if Rabiot leaves PSG this summer, tho.

Marca also reported that when PSG rejected RM offer for Verratti, they mentionned how they don't need to sell any foreign players anymore, since UEFA sanctions got watered down \o\

 

[Bertus]

Let's start the world cup, woohoo /o/

 

[Galning]

Well done UEFA