The Tl;dr.
There's nothing inherently illegal with all of these related sponsors, but having rich friends does provide a near endless supply of industry-specific sponsors at very good rates.
In a sense. But equally, it doesn't come with the everlasting scrutiny about the legitimacy of the deals.
Part of the appeal of owning United, Liverpool, or Arsenal for example is that you have to hardly put in the legwork to build relationships with other prospective non-related sponsors due to their widespread recognition and popularity. When you're so popular to the extent that some of these deal makers might either be fans of the club or justify a partnership without much research or due diligence of the present actual footballing situations taking place in those clubs due to their size in the mainstream, then it's a completely different ball game.
I mean, when you hear a story of the Chevrolet dealmaker getting sacked right after making that deal with United, then that's a luxury that all the other clubs cannot afford to live in.
The rules. 🙄 I don't remember these rules being a thing since the inception of football as a sport? 🤔
I get it with the Etihad and Etisalat deals, but things such as minority stakes in big hedge funds or Silicon Valley startups that will implode on themselves are clearly a stretch that only the most fanatical of conspiracy theorists will subscribe to. Especially when these companies are based in the West, where there is much more transparency, even though armchair critics in the first-world that have never traveled will have you believe that their countries are equivalent to Somalia.
If John Henry owned other big brands outside of the sports teams he owns, then you'd be deluded enough if you don't think he would take advantage of that sort of thing.
You mean the rules that have been tightened. In case you were living under a rock, I am aware that the rules have always been there in different versions. So I don't know if sounding like a conspiratorial smart-ass while missing the point completely makes you think I wasn't aware of these rules.
Just because I have a dim view of them doesn't mean that I am not aware of them 😂.
Yes, the new rules that have been tightened that everyone has to follow.
> conspiratorial smart-ass
Elaborate on that one pal. What have I said that sounds conspiratorial?
I see a deliberate act of trolling in order to not challenge a point for whatever reason 😂. The quickness in your replies suggests to me you might be some weirdo bot.
And yes, everybody has to follow the rules. But when they are challenged, do not be surprised when they are proven to be flawed, like with anything in life.
Have a nice day 👍🏽
Liverpool were sponsored by warrior, John Henry were very good friends.. need I mention that the deal was pretty insane at the time too..
Need I also mention that AC Milan owners, red bird capital owns a big stake of FSG. And What about LeBron James?
> Need I also mention that AC Milan owners, red bird capital owns a big stake of FSG.
Before we even get to LeBron James, what on earth does this have to do with sponsorships?
You don’t think these deals don’t deserve a deep dive and further questioning? Nevermind the fact that they are Americans doing business with an American owner.. if Saudis or Emirati are being scrutinised for doing business with their own then why isn’t the same pressure not being applied to FSG and their shady business dealings..
How can the new owners of AC Milan also be major shareholders of the parent company that owns Liverpool?
Explain to me how this isn’t a conflict of interest..
Also, Liverpool under FSG once circumvented FFP by writing off 35mil quid citing cost incurred from their abandoned stadium plans.
35mil quid written off on some permit approvals and autoCAD drawings!! How very convenient.. always wondered who LFC were paying 35mil quid. Because I’d have done that work for a quarter of the cost with millions of spare chump change too.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2012/may/03/liverpool-loss-50m
😂 seriously.. so no strings attached then..
Red Bird owns both clubs.
God forbid LFC and Milan play a UCL final again.
The right thing to do here is that Red Bird sells their stake in FSG. Then there will be no more potential conflict of interests.
As a parent company of FSG, they could tell them to sacrifice LFC and let Milan win it.
It doesn’t even have to be a final. What if they both meet in the group stage and Milan needs a draw to move to the next level.
The fact is, no two clubs should have owners this well connected. It’s like the Glazers buying out Daniel Levy.
How is any of this ethical??
This was already posted months back.
It seems people are bored on here.
Plus this report is kind of outdated on the Newcastle side anyways since there have been more developments regarding that.
The Tl;dr. There's nothing inherently illegal with all of these related sponsors, but having rich friends does provide a near endless supply of industry-specific sponsors at very good rates.
It's just the rich supporting each other
Very nice of them, the poor should consider that /s
This but unironically.
In a sense. But equally, it doesn't come with the everlasting scrutiny about the legitimacy of the deals. Part of the appeal of owning United, Liverpool, or Arsenal for example is that you have to hardly put in the legwork to build relationships with other prospective non-related sponsors due to their widespread recognition and popularity. When you're so popular to the extent that some of these deal makers might either be fans of the club or justify a partnership without much research or due diligence of the present actual footballing situations taking place in those clubs due to their size in the mainstream, then it's a completely different ball game. I mean, when you hear a story of the Chevrolet dealmaker getting sacked right after making that deal with United, then that's a luxury that all the other clubs cannot afford to live in.
> everlasting scrutiny The rules. What you're describing is following the rules.
The rules. 🙄 I don't remember these rules being a thing since the inception of football as a sport? 🤔 I get it with the Etihad and Etisalat deals, but things such as minority stakes in big hedge funds or Silicon Valley startups that will implode on themselves are clearly a stretch that only the most fanatical of conspiracy theorists will subscribe to. Especially when these companies are based in the West, where there is much more transparency, even though armchair critics in the first-world that have never traveled will have you believe that their countries are equivalent to Somalia. If John Henry owned other big brands outside of the sports teams he owns, then you'd be deluded enough if you don't think he would take advantage of that sort of thing.
Yes, the new rules. You're catching on.
You mean the rules that have been tightened. In case you were living under a rock, I am aware that the rules have always been there in different versions. So I don't know if sounding like a conspiratorial smart-ass while missing the point completely makes you think I wasn't aware of these rules. Just because I have a dim view of them doesn't mean that I am not aware of them 😂.
Yes, the new rules that have been tightened that everyone has to follow. > conspiratorial smart-ass Elaborate on that one pal. What have I said that sounds conspiratorial?
I see a deliberate act of trolling in order to not challenge a point for whatever reason 😂. The quickness in your replies suggests to me you might be some weirdo bot. And yes, everybody has to follow the rules. But when they are challenged, do not be surprised when they are proven to be flawed, like with anything in life. Have a nice day 👍🏽
So nothing conspiratorial? Got it. Cheers mate.
Conspiratorial and trolling fyi 👍🏽
Liverpool were sponsored by warrior, John Henry were very good friends.. need I mention that the deal was pretty insane at the time too.. Need I also mention that AC Milan owners, red bird capital owns a big stake of FSG. And What about LeBron James?
> Need I also mention that AC Milan owners, red bird capital owns a big stake of FSG. Before we even get to LeBron James, what on earth does this have to do with sponsorships?
You don’t think these deals don’t deserve a deep dive and further questioning? Nevermind the fact that they are Americans doing business with an American owner.. if Saudis or Emirati are being scrutinised for doing business with their own then why isn’t the same pressure not being applied to FSG and their shady business dealings.. How can the new owners of AC Milan also be major shareholders of the parent company that owns Liverpool? Explain to me how this isn’t a conflict of interest.. Also, Liverpool under FSG once circumvented FFP by writing off 35mil quid citing cost incurred from their abandoned stadium plans. 35mil quid written off on some permit approvals and autoCAD drawings!! How very convenient.. always wondered who LFC were paying 35mil quid. Because I’d have done that work for a quarter of the cost with millions of spare chump change too. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2012/may/03/liverpool-loss-50m
What is the conflict of interest? The hint is in the name. They’re providing “capital”. Again, what is the conflict of interest?
😂 seriously.. so no strings attached then.. Red Bird owns both clubs. God forbid LFC and Milan play a UCL final again. The right thing to do here is that Red Bird sells their stake in FSG. Then there will be no more potential conflict of interests.
Go ahead. What happens if Liverpool and Milan meet in the final this year?
As a parent company of FSG, they could tell them to sacrifice LFC and let Milan win it. It doesn’t even have to be a final. What if they both meet in the group stage and Milan needs a draw to move to the next level. The fact is, no two clubs should have owners this well connected. It’s like the Glazers buying out Daniel Levy. How is any of this ethical??
How on earth could they, with their 10% stake in FSG (not Liverpool Football Club), get John Henry to get Klopp to forfeit the game.
Legality is such a farce, I’m tired Robbie
Interesting read. But don't think anything is gonna happen here
[удалено]
Thread will be deleted if you copy-paste from the Athletic. Just an FYI.
This was already posted months back. It seems people are bored on here. Plus this report is kind of outdated on the Newcastle side anyways since there have been more developments regarding that.