vandaq Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 I know besiktas did at least. What happened with metalist? They are not in europe as well because of..something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted November 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 22, 2013 I know besiktas did at least. What happened with metalist? They are not in europe as well because of..something. Match-fixing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) Just ask Paris St Germain. As recently as last month they announced they had managed to get €200m a year in 'sponsorship' from a bunch of people who are essentially the Qatari government, and they had somehow managed to get that sponsorship backdated so it would be easier to cook the books. If Bill Gates suddenly decides he wants to spend two billion pounds on Aston Villa all we have to do is get the 'sponsorship' money backdated to 1995 when we had AST Computers on our shirts and claim it was money owed to us. FFP is bullshit. This is 'allowed' under the FFP rules though because PSG are part of the established order. I very much doubt it'd go unnoticed/unchallenged if a club like ours tried the same thing. I've said it on here before - the rules were created to maintain the status quo and not to help create a level playing field. I could imagine PSG successfully arguing that they're an established CL club, and the biggest in France, so £200million can be considered 'fair' market value. We're a shit club from the Midlands, nowhere near the biggest in the country, and we haven't won anything of note for over 30 years. We'd have no argument for a blatant attempt at bypassing the rules. I don't think PSG have ever been part of the established order. They were basically created to fill a void in the market (Paris not being a football city) and had been seen as something of an underachiever until the oil money showed up a couple of years ago. They are the absolute embodiment of the nouveau riche. Edited November 22, 2013 by The_Rev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted November 22, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 22, 2013 But they're French, so Platini will consider them to have an ancient and established pedigree. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 (edited) Rev, you're right. I certainly don't disagree with that. You could say, though, that they're the French Man City, but like Man City, they got in there before the drawbridge was pulled up. Levi makes an excellent point, too. Edited November 23, 2013 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 Rev, you're right. I certainly don't disagree with that. You could say, though, that they're the French Man City, but like Man City, they got in there before the drawbridge was pulled up. I wouldn't say fully agree with the drawbridge comment. Throw enough money around and you can get away with anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.I.C.O. Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 aren't man city's owners sponsoring pretty much the entire postcode? that way there is no precedent or similar sponsorship deal in place, you cant compare it to the emirates deal for example because they sponsor more than just the stadium haven't Liverpool got a huge deal with warrior because their owners also have some fingers in that pie? Basically to circumvent the rules you need a multi-multi-billionaire ownership who can funnel the money from other interests into the club to look like impartial "sponsorship". Just a way to cook the books. FIFA/UEFA are too incompetant to crack down on it though. Pretty much all of Man City's major sponsors are connected to the Abu Dhabi royal family to some degree. Etihad is the airline owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family. Aabar is the construction company owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family. Etisalat is the mobile phone company owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family. ADCTA is the tourism agency owned by the Abu Dhabi royal family. I'm sure there are many more. PSG are being pretty blaitant about it all as well. Man Utd on the other hand are far more insidious. They are signing "commercial partnerships" with every major company from developing nations and these eclipse most shirt sponsorships (I think their "airline partnership" with Turkish Airlines is twice the size of our shirt sponsorship). Football stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villan4Life Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Apparently it's Leeds they want http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/red-bull-poised-leeds-united-2871263 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 (edited) Haha Leeds fans won't take it lying down. Might have to get the popcorn out if they make a move. Edited December 1, 2013 by LondonLax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted December 1, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 1, 2013 In a show of fan solidarity I'd be completely on the Leeds fans' side on this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avfc96 Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 In a show of fan solidarity I'd be completely on the Leeds fans' side on this. Yep, I would be equally pissed off if this were to be happening to Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted December 1, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 1, 2013 I'm pissed off it's not... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted December 2, 2013 Share Posted December 2, 2013 I don't know about being pissed off we aren't being looked at, but I'd certainly give it more consideration than most people in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisVillan Posted December 2, 2013 Share Posted December 2, 2013 What with Leeds not being in the Premier League, that obviously puts a few more teams on the table. Not sure Leeds would be the one I'd pick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islingtonclaret Posted December 2, 2013 Share Posted December 2, 2013 I don't care if it's Leeds - I'd be with the fans. Take your stupid NFL-style franchise model and bugger off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Even the shitty mascot is a red bull. They can change our name and colours but they'll have to take our mascot from my cold, dead hands. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Thats the thing with red bull, they will change everything and turn whoever they takeover into a laughing stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted December 12, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 12, 2013 We covered the whys and wherefores of that earlier. There's no precedent as they've never bought a club in a big league before. I can't imagine the money-hungry Premier League allowing Red Bull to get some unauthorised advertising like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts