| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
| The New York Times wrote: | | Your annual subscription to The Athletic is up for renewal and will be charged to the payment method on file for your next annual cycle. |
At £12.50 per annum, one of my better decisions. My only good decision in this area I sometimes think.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
There's nothing particularly objectionable to Gianni Infantino's plan to sell off 10% of the World Cup and spread the dosh round the various FA's. The poorer ones could do with the money now rather than wait until the long, distant future.
Except it's Gianni Infantino doing it. As soon as he announced it was going to be handled by Donald Trump's son-in-law's brother ('of all the financiers in all the world...') it didn't take UEFA long to conclude the whole thing was a money/power grab by the Bald Eagle.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
The Eddie Howe departure from Newcastle prompts two big questions, one parochial and one universal. The one affecting Newcastle alone is that their Saudi owners are having second thoughts about their headlong rush into the very un-Saudi world of big time sport promotion.
It is certainly not proving to be a money-spinner for their Sovereign Fund who have lost a reported billion dollars in their weird, and now largely abandoned, attempt to capture world golf and their boxing and Formula One initiatives have been equally unfruitful.
As for football specifically, the more they pile cash into the building of top o' the line stadiums for ersatz teams staffed by vastly expensive but fading and/or disaffected imported footballers, the more derision the whole enterprise earns from the outside world. But they can't close that down, they've got a World Cup to host in 2034. 'Thanks a bundle, Gianni.' 'No, thank you, MBS.'
What the Saudis can do is look at how well the 'Newcastle model' is working...
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Newcastle United is, technically speaking, the richest football club in the world. The Saudi Sovereign Fund puts American sports billionaires and Russian oligarchs in the deepest, darkest penumbra.
But it has proved to be of no account!
Once a little bit of cash has been splashed, and a decent outfit has been put together, you are left with both European and English spending limits to contend with. These are based on things like gate money, fan merchandising, commercial sponsorship and playing success.
Which Newcastle haven't got and never will have, the way the cards have been stacked.
When you are situated in a poor part of Britain that nobody in the world has ever heard of, you might--if you're very lucky and you have a nifty manager--get into the middle reaches of the Premier League. But even a trillion trillion riyals in the coffers won't get you any higher than that in the long run because you'll have to sell off your stars every year and buy in cheaper prospects just to avoid point deductions and Eurobans.
Come on, Crown Prince, did you really think the cartel of big clubs was going to allow any Tom, Dick or Mohammed to come along and duke it out with them just because they're rich beyond the dreams of Croesus?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
An illustration of batty football economics
Vinicius Jnr is one of the absolute elite players, worth let's say £150 million. He is happy playing for Real Madrid and they are happy for him to play for them except... he is in the last year of his contract so
* Real Madrid want him to sign a new contract or
* If he won't, sell him to another club for as much as possible whereas
* Vini wants a better contract to stay or
* If they won't offer him one, go to a club he wants to play for, which might not be the one offering the most money to Real Madrid
According to normally reliable reports, Madrid have offered him a new contract but it is 'slightly lower' than what Vini thinks it should be. Madrid have now issued an ultimatum: sign or we're selling you. So far, so normal in the commercial world of buying and selling, supply and demand, free labour and legal restraints. What takes the whole thing out of normal is that in a year's time
* Vini will still be be worth £150 million
* But his value to Real Madrid will be nil
* The difference between the two contracts is nothing compared to the difference between zero and £150 million
* So why haven't Real offered him what he wants?
* But why hasn't Vini refused to negotiate?
That £150 million theoretically goes to him, he can choose his next club without any restraints -- it could even be Real Madrid. By refusing to negotiate, Vini gets to play another season for Real Madrid, which he wants to do, and Real Madrid can't sell him if he doesn't want to go.
It is largely a matter of playing chicken. As I will describe next.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
For some reason that I have never understood, when footballers are 'out of contract' they cease to be worth their transfer fee. When they are nearing the end of their contract, that transfer fee starts going down.
The reason this is odd is that it ought to make no difference to the buying club. If Vinicius Jnr is worth £150 million, this is true irrespective of his contract-status. Yet...
* Selling clubs accept a reduced transfer fee. But why? If the player is worth more, why aren't other clubs coming in to buy the player by offering a bit more. And then other clubs until the full value is reached.
* Out of contract players accept normal wages with a top up because they have arrived 'free' but never to the extent of their transfer worth. Why don't other clubs offer him even higher wages to get such a cheap and available player? And so on until his transfer worth is reached.
In the Vinicius case, Arsenal are reported to have offered him 'stupendous wages' to persuade him to come to the Emirates. But it won't be £150 million amortised over the length of his new contract plus his normal wages, will it?
And, it is also reported, Real Madrid will let him go to Arsenal if they pay them a suitable transfer fee, but it won't be anywhere near £150 million, will it? Arsenal, of course, know that Real Madrid would prefer, say, eighty million now rather than get nothing in a year's time. But so does every other club. Why aren't Chelsea offering eighty-five million? And so on.
Somewhere money is disappearing at a rate of knots.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
If it comes down to a tug o' war between Real Madrid and Arsenal for Vinicius's hand in marriage, these are the relevant facts
| The Athletic wrote: | | Real Madrid have announced world-record revenues for a football club for the third year running. Madrid announced €1.221 billion in top-line revenues for 2025-26, well beyond anyone else in the sport and continuing to grow even in a season where they won nothing on the pitch. |
In the red corner, the team that won the lot
| In England, where much of football’s money increasingly resides, Arsenal are expected to top the revenue chart for 2025-26 with around €934m) — a long way behind Madrid’s figure. |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|