Usmanov

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bosman was about Freedom of movement. Which means you trying to bring up a country's law is hysterical. The whole point is that freedom of movement within the EU supersedes an individual Country's laws.


The FA and UEFA aren't deciding who can sponsor who. They just have very clear rules about associated sponsorship and market value.


You are missing one blindingly obvious point if we were capable of attracting the 4th highest sponsorship deals then we wouldn't need fake ones in the first place. The assessors will look at what our previous deals were worth and what other companies were prepared ot offer us.


You have contradicted yourself. How can you come up with us being the fourth most successful club and deserving of the 4th biggest commercial revenues and then talk about our commercial weakness.

I think you a splitting hairs re the EU. EU laws often supersedes national law in areas. There is obviously a grey area as to where we are as a country so we can use EU law and national law interchangeably as we are currently in a fluid situation. However, the laws of a state will always supersede agreements made in football, as we saw under Bosman (amongst other examples).

The PL and UEFA are making value judgements on the worth of sponsorships. Who are they to dictate what the market should or shouldn't pay? What are their qualifications? Who elected them to do so? Why is their view more important than a company's shareholders? Why are they infringing upon the rights of a business to sponsor who they wish for the value they wish?

As for the final point, we have low commercial deals, because of appalling people at board level for 25 years have failed to sell us at the level we are at.Your logic seems to be, that if we are capable of reversing our historical underperformance in the area by attracting sponsors commensurate with where you would typically expect a club with our historical performance to be, the PL are going to try and step in and prevent this. This is not ensuring "fair" market value, this is using bureaucratic means to uphold grossly unfair historical values.

I have no idea why you believe a company sponsoring us is "fake". How is it fake when we achieve something,yet when a competitor achieves a deal it's seen as not so?

If you cannot see,threatening to punish the 4th most successful team, for acquiring commercial performance akin to the 4th team in the league when they successfully negotiate sponsorships is not just morally dubious, but will also be legally incompatible then there isn't really any hope.

As a final aside I am well aware of the discrepancy between our market performance and our on field performance. I have written at length on it, including in this thread. We should be aiming to correct that, and there's nothing wrong with attempting (or succeeding to do so). The PL?UEFA or anyone else are in absolutely no position to start issuing threats if we do so either. If they try, as indicated before, it will be a very costly exercise for them legally. I can only think "bring it on" it will be great to bring down the shower of hypocrisy that is FFP.
 
Well no, he used 150m to buy 77.2% of Everton.

The other 350m hasnt gained him any more shares.

I reckon Everton is currently worth around 200m.

Richarlison is worth £100m alone. We are worth more than £200m, I'd say £500m.

 

Everton FC is being reinvented and reborn right in front of our eyes by Moshiri and Usmanov. Boss stadium on the banks of the Royal Blue Mersey, Ancelotti is our manager etc etc. If somebody had told me 5 years ago that this was going to happen I'd have thought they were daft.

It is happening though and it is beautiful. Fast forward another 5 years and we will be regarded as a massive club once again.
Hold on tight
 
We have revenues of 180m, but we are business that loses money.

250m, max.

The £30m operating costs can be rectified and our prospects of a new stadium, value/strength of playing squad, potential, fanbase, (and I even read social media presence can play a part in the valuation of a club ;)) means we are worth far more than when Moshiri first came in. We were valued at £175m when he first bought 49.9%. We also had debt when he first came in and now have none. Interesting to me is that he sold £200m of shares in Arsenal so he hopefully has plenty more money to push Everton forward in the future aside from outside help.
 

I think you a splitting hairs re the EU. EU laws often supersedes national law in areas. There is obviously a grey area as to where we are as a country so we can use EU law and national law interchangeably as we are currently in a fluid situation. However, the laws of a state will always supersede agreements made in football, as we saw under Bosman (amongst other examples).

Bosman wasn't about Football per se. It was about employment law and an individual's right of freedom of movement.

The PL and UEFA are making value judgements on the worth of sponsorships. Who are they to dictate what the market should or shouldn't pay? What are their qualifications? Who elected them to do so? Why is their view more important than a company's shareholders? Why are they infringing upon the rights of a business to sponsor who they wish for the value they wish?

The simple answer is they aren't. They are getting professionals to assess the true value of sponsorships. They are then allowing clubs to appeal to arbitration if they disagree with the valuations. The main point though is that they aren't preventing sponsorship. All they are doing is setting ground rules that all competitors have to abide by. Your argument is similar to a poker player in a competition pulling out more money after they have blown their stack in a limited game.

As for the final point, we have low commercial deals, because of appalling people at board level for 25 years have failed to sell us at the level we are at.Your logic seems to be, that if we are capable of reversing our historical underperformance in the area by attracting sponsors commensurate with where you would typically expect a club with our historical performance to be, the PL are going to try and step in and prevent this. This is not ensuring "fair" market value, this is using bureaucratic means to uphold grossly unfair historical values.

I have no idea why you believe a company sponsoring us is "fake". How is it fake when we achieve something,yet when a competitor achieves a deal it's seen as not so?

If you cannot see,threatening to punish the 4th most successful team, for acquiring commercial performance akin to the 4th team in the league when they successfully negotiate sponsorships is not just morally dubious, but will also be legally incompatible then there isn't really any hope.

As a final aside I am well aware of the discrepancy between our market performance and our on field performance. I have written at length on it, including in this thread. We should be aiming to correct that, and there's nothing wrong with attempting (or succeeding to do so). The PL?UEFA or anyone else are in absolutely no position to start issuing threats if we do so either. If they try, as indicated before, it will be a very costly exercise for them legally. I can only think "bring it on" it will be great to bring down the shower of hypocrisy that is FFP.

The reason we have such poor commercial deals is because of our lack of success. It is our misfortune that the big bucks have arrived during one of the least successful periods of our history. If major sponsorship worth hundreds of millions had happened in the mid 80's we would of reaped the rewards.

However the horrible truth is that we haven't won a major trophy for a quarter of a century rarely qualify for Europe and have never competed in the Champions League proper.

As for your assertion that we are the 4th most successful English Club again that is one of your half truths. If you look at the combined number of trophies then we come in 7th with 24th trophies.
 
The £30m operating costs can be rectified and our prospects of a new stadium, value/strength of playing squad, potential, fanbase, (and I even read social media presence can play a part in the valuation of a club ;)) means we are worth far more than when Moshiri first came in. We were valued at £175m when he first bought 49.9%. We also had debt when he first came in and now have none. Interesting to me is that he sold £200m of shares in Arsenal so he hopefully has plenty more money to push Everton forward in the future aside from outside help.

We have a £350m shareholder loan which dramatically effects the value of the Club.
 
We have revenues of 180m, but we are business that loses money.

250m, max.

Nah.

Value of a business is the value in the business. Playing staff easily covers that valuation.

Lob in guaranteed (ish) 1/2 Billion in tv money in the next 5 years, plus a £7500000 valued stadium, plus the increased income from that. Doing ok like.
 
Bosman wasn't about Football per se. It was about employment law and an individual's right of freedom of movement.


The simple answer is they aren't. They are getting professionals to assess the true value of sponsorships. They are then allowing clubs to appeal to arbitration if they disagree with the valuations. The main point though is that they aren't preventing sponsorship. All they are doing is setting ground rules that all competitors have to abide by. Your argument is similar to a poker player in a competition pulling out more money after they have blown their stack in a limited game.



The reason we have such poor commercial deals is because of our lack of success. It is our misfortune that the big bucks have arrived during one of the least successful periods of our history. If major sponsorship worth hundreds of millions had happened in the mid 80's we would of reaped the rewards.

However the horrible truth is that we haven't won a major trophy for a quarter of a century rarely qualify for Europe and have never competed in the Champions League proper.

As for your assertion that we are the 4th most successful English Club again that is one of your half truths. If you look at the combined number of trophies then we come in 7th with 24th trophies.

In this context it was about the stupidity of footballs laws and how they crumbled when put under pressure. This process has happened before and it will happen again.

This is exactly what they do. Why do they know more about what a "market value" is than the market itself? Why are they restricting shareholders rights to have their businesses invest in who or what they wish?

Your last point kind of sums it up. You are going out of your way to argue fiction is fact. The League Cup is not of the same importance as a League title. That is the the basis of judging domestic size. We are 4th. It is not a half truth, it is a fact. We are also 2nd in terms of overall points, we won the 20th century, we have held the domestic title for as many years as any other club, we had the most points from 1967 to 2006. There are not 6 bigger clubs than us. We are the4th biggest and share a city with the 2nd biggest. Any reasonable market test would measure us to them.

But do explain to me, how Everton sitting 4th on the list of Leagues won is a "half truth" (without equating League cups as equivalent trophies).

As for your poker analogy, in a poker match, you pay your fee and you get given a set amount of chips. Under FFP, you pay your Fee and get given more or less chips depending on who you are. And when someone tries to improve their lot by negotiating a better deal, they are then told this is unfair. You then have people who support it, and try to make out it is about fairness. It's not. It's about entrenching inequality.

Unfortunately for you, the objective measure is that Everton are in the top 4 for leagues won. They are the only club to be a founder member of both the Football League and sustained members of the PL. In a legal sense, they will be able to negotiate sponsorship deals commensurate with that history, from a legal standpoint. If the PL want to hold us down from having deals commensurate with our market value, they will suffer a heavy penalty in the legal courts. Just as football has suffered before (despite you thinking litigation was an impossibility).

The laws are flimsy. The PL know this deep down. They won't be pushing this.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top