Wellington Phoenix Men

WPFC: Privately Owned or Member Owned?

93 replies · 1,041 views
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Ultimately I'd say that all Terry would want is for the club to pay for itself Like Watson at the warriors.  Ultimately the next TV deal (or any renegotiation of the existing one) will probably decide that.
 
What I'd like to know is the status of the profitablity of the A-League as a whole.  Does the A-League return a dividend to the FFA (ignoring its investment in various clubs) or does it cost the FFA money.
 
Anyone got any info on that?

Normo's coming home

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Are the Nix & Warriors the only 2 privately owned professional sporting franchises in NZ.
are the breakers run by the NZ BA, what about the netball clubs?
Rugby gets too much funding from the government considering the revenue it gets through SANZAR and the All-blacks marketing machine.
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
They (Breakers) were owned by the guy who owns Pak n Save Albany. Maybe still are?
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
james dean wrote:
Ultimately I'd say that all Terry would want is for the club to pay for itself Like Watson at the warriors.  Ultimately the next TV deal (or any renegotiation of the existing one) will probably decide that.
 
To the extent that the Phoenix could even be described as an "investment" (as opposed to pure philanthropy) then that's what Terry is investing in - the chance that the next TV deal will be significantly more money than the current one. Of course, if it is then the pressure is likely to go on the salary cap straight away, which might erode any real benefit to the owners.
 
What concerns me most is the number of people here who are relying on Terry sticking to his word. Even if he fully intends to do that, what if he's one day in a position where he just can't afford to do it anymore?
 
If Plan B is that we have a quick whip round then we're f**ked!
 

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
terminator_x wrote:
james dean wrote:
Ultimately I'd say that all Terry would want is for the club to pay for itself Like Watson at the warriors.� Ultimately the next TV deal (or any renegotiation of the existing one) will probably decide that.

�

To the extent that the Phoenix could even be described as an "investment" (as opposed to pure philanthropy) then that's what Terry is investing in - the chance that the next TV deal will be significantly more money than the current one. Of course, if it is then the pressure is likely to go on the salary cap straight away, which might erode any real benefit to the owners.

�

What concerns me most is the number of people here who are relying on Terry sticking to his word. Even if�he fully intends to do that, what if he's one day in a position where he just can't afford to do it anymore?

�

If Plan B is that we have a quick whip round then we're f**ked!

�


I'll be a Millionaire by then so it'll be fiiiine.

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
If Terry wants to do business in Asia, then the Phoenix could end up being absolute gold to him. I am sure he has thought of this fact already, and would have already made a lot of useful friends in Australia if he is clever.

If New Zealand joins Asia, and the Phoenix qualify for the ACL and are successful there, then there will be huge opportunities open up for an ambitious owner. Bones2009-11-27 17:19:27
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Boys, this thread was raised about ownership and also the future board structure.

Not saying that 20,000 members owned the club (it is an 'option' though) but yeah, think about the future direction you want the club to take.

That's the purpose of this thread.


Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
The current model seems to work...if Terry wants to keep doing it.. Great!
 If not, I hope another "wealthy philanthropist" type with a Wellington loyalty would take it on.

The current structure, from all accounts,has resulted in a well run club,with the players relatively happy with their lot. The results (excluding yesterday perhaps!) are reasonably good, placed at halfway point in top six with surely more potential to do better than previous years.

As I've indicated in earlier discussions here I love the idea of having a share, however small, in Wellington Phoenix.
 But...how workable would such an arrangement be?
It would all come down to an effective board and structure to ensure the resultant company was soundly run.
Another biggie: Profitability.Terry generously loses $2 million or so a season to keep us captivated.
Maybe its a healthy tax write-off against other areas of his business empire.

There's no way any sensible investors would buy into a loss-making venture like Wellington Phoenix, in its current form, is... is there?
Before any other structure than the current one was possible new income streams would have to be identified and developed.
One likely opportunity....Asia perhaps.
 Do you think Terry and Tony are onto it? I think so.
I would hazard a guess that the negotiating of Jiang Chen's loan to us from Tianjen Tida FC has provided them opportunities,the pre-season tour and marketing in China (including shirt front sponsor) wasn't accidental. As pointed out by Midfielder and many others in posts on these threads Asia is the biggest growth area in football globally.Caution is essential but potential is amazing.






RedGed2009-11-30 23:57:30

  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
RedGed wrote:
The current model seems to work...if Terry wants to keep doing it.. Great!
 If not, I hope another "wealthy philanthropist" type with a Wellington loyalty would take it on.

The current structure, from all accounts,has resulted in a well run club,with the players relatively happy with their lot. The results (excluding yesterday perhaps!) are reasonably good, placed at halfway point in top six with surely more potential to do better than previous years.

As I've indicated in earlier discussions here I love the idea of having a share, however small, in Wellington Phoenix.
 But...how workable would such an arrangement be?
It would all come down to an effective board and structure to ensure the resultant company was soundly run.
Another biggie: Profitability.Terry generously loses $2 million or so a season to keep us captivated.
Maybe its a healthy tax write-off against other areas of his business empire.

There's no way any sensible investors would buy into a loss-making venture like Wellington Phoenix, in its current form, is... is there?
Before any other structure than the current one was possible new income streams would have to be identified and developed.
One likely opportunity....Asia perhaps.
 Do you think Terry and Tony are onto it? I think so.
I would hazard a guess that the negotiating of Jiang Chen's loan to us from Tianjen Tida FC has provided them opportunities,the pre-season tour and marketing in China (including shirt front sponsor) wasn't accidental. As pointed out by Midfielder and many others in posts on these threads Asia is the biggest growth area in football globally.Caution is essential but potential is amazing.


Asia is good for football development, but ain't the pot of gold yet (I'm talking investment wise here), aside from trade of players, no Asian money (yet) has invested into an A-League club. The money from the Gulf goes to Europe, and Japan and Korea, besides player trades, haven't directly bought into an A-League club yet.

Is Terry the richest man in Wellington? To get another 'cash donour' with his wallet would be hard as a guess.

What happens if a member-elected board was appointed to run the club? They're the types of questions I want you guys to consider here. After 5 years the MVFC board is still largely unknown to me.

Think about it.


diego's son2009-12-01 03:54:26
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
diego's son wrote:
RedGed wrote:
The current model seems to work...if Terry wants to keep doing it.. Great!
 If not, I hope another "wealthy philanthropist" type with a Wellington loyalty would take it on.

The current structure, from all accounts,has resulted in a well run club,with the players relatively happy with their lot. The results (excluding yesterday perhaps!) are reasonably good, placed at halfway point in top six with surely more potential to do better than previous years.

As I've indicated in earlier discussions here I love the idea of having a share, however small, in Wellington Phoenix.
 But...how workable would such an arrangement be?
It would all come down to an effective board and structure to ensure the resultant company was soundly run.
Another biggie: Profitability.Terry generously loses $2 million or so a season to keep us captivated.
Maybe its a healthy tax write-off against other areas of his business empire.

There's no way any sensible investors would buy into a loss-making venture like Wellington Phoenix, in its current form, is... is there?
Before any other structure than the current one was possible new income streams would have to be identified and developed.
One likely opportunity....Asia perhaps.
 Do you think Terry and Tony are onto it? I think so.
I would hazard a guess that the negotiating of Jiang Chen's loan to us from Tianjen Tida FC has provided them opportunities,the pre-season tour and marketing in China (including shirt front sponsor) wasn't accidental. As pointed out by Midfielder and many others in posts on these threads Asia is the biggest growth area in football globally.Caution is essential but potential is amazing.
[/QUOTE]

Asia is good for football development, but ain't the pot of gold yet (I'm talking investment wise here), aside from trade of players, no Asian money (yet) has invested into an A-League club. The money from the Gulf goes to Europe, and Japan and Korea, besides player trades, haven't directly bought into an A-League club yet.

Is Terry the richest man in Wellington? To get another 'cash donour' with his wallet would be hard as a guess.
 
This is an interesting question.  My gut instinct would be 'no' he's probably not the richest man in Wellington but then I would struggle to think of who to put in front of him.  I reckon there are richer ones out there though.
 
[quote=diego]
What happens if a member-elected board was appointed to run the club? They're the types of questions I want you guys to consider here. After 5 years the MVFC board is still largely unknown to me.
 
If you were Terry would you put the Fever in charge of your money?
 
 
 

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

 Just to clarify, Diego's Son, the business opportunities are not necessarily just in Football, as others have said.
Terrry S has other businesses.In the process of establishing football connections via the A-League and, if Bin Hammam relents, eventually AFC, the opportunity to do business in other trade realms is immense, all through Football interaction initially. (Midfielder keeps hammering this point out,among others!)
That's probably part of the long term strategy ,first piece of the puzzle... extended  long term A- League contract.
If Terry let it go and a member-elected board was appointed...who would we vote for?
EXEC MEMBER YF ..step right up!
(as if ya didn't have enough to do! ;)

If it came down to  a member-elected board I would suspect Terry's money wouldn't be at risk!


  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
diego's son wrote:

Is Terry the richest man in Wellington? To get another 'cash donour' with his wallet would be hard as a guess.

You would probaly have to say the Todd family, then there are the guys who own the companies Terry borrows his capital from.
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Plus Bob Jones, and Peter Jackson.

  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
see below for comments.

RedGed wrote:

 Just to clarify, Diego's Son, the business opportunities are not necessarily just in Football, as others have said. That's right I suppose, the off-field stuff would have a lot to do with it.
Terrry S has other businesses.In the process of establishing football connections via the A-League and, if Bin Hammam relents, eventually AFC, the opportunity to do business in other trade realms is immense, all through Football interaction initially. (Midfielder keeps hammering this point out,among others!) Seems to be more 'indirect' business opportunities have resulted. e.g. a game is held and the big-wigs say 'what do you do?' that kind of jazz. Direct investment in the A-League at present (apart from buying players) from Asia has been miminal as such, or not much that I can find. Someone like Terry may look at ways to improve his lot, but in termsn of DIRECT investment, I haven't seen much to date int he A-League.
That's probably part of the long term strategy ,first piece of the puzzle... extended  long term A- League contract. FFA seems to be on your side, maybe more will be said after this week when a lot of people ar ein South Africa.
If Terry let it go and a member-elected board was appointed...who would we vote for? Up to you blokes, maybe an administrator would get nominations and go from there.
EXEC MEMBER YF ..step right up! Why not.
(as if ya didn't have enough to do! ;)

If it came down to  a member-elected board I would suspect Terry's money wouldn't be at risk! That's part of the reason for this thread, you have to think about whether you want a privately-owned and run club, or whether you want a member-elected board overseeing the 'public' funds the club generates. That's the whole point of this thread.




Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Democracy is all very well and good  but my biggest fear  with massive multiple shareholding and a member elected board would be too many voices and opinions, factions in-fighting and the efficient running of the club getting bogged down in internal politics and petty slanging matches.

At least with the current single owner model the system of running the club seems to be effective.

It would all come down to the rules of governance and management structure  laid down prior to any transfer of ownership status.

Those more versed in the ways other member-elected football clubs are run may be able to guide us with this.

  Improving,,on the up, a work in progress from Italiano and the Nix. Bring on the bathroom bling in '24! COYN!

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Bump, ahead of my time!

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3195553/Apprentice-stars-cash-woes-hit-players

The future host of The Apprentice NZ, Terry Serepisos, is suffering "liquidity" issues within his Phoenix football club, with players' wages and hotel bills going unpaid.

The Wellington property magnate became owner of the city's major football club in 2007, and paid for its re-entry into the Australian A-League, saving the club from extinction. It has run at a loss since.

In The Apprentice NZ, which screens next year, he takes the role made famous by Donald Trump in the American original.

Phoenix's communications manager John Mitchell confirmed that there had been late payments. "There is a liquidity issue... it's not easy for Terry," Mitchell said.

"Players haven't been paid on time around four or five times this season. It's even impacted me but it's not something that I'm concerned about."

He said the payments usually arrived in players' bank accounts two or three days late. "For Terry, there are probably some recessionary issues going on � everyone is struggling at the moment, Terry included. He is obviously dealing with a lot of third parties so if they are delaying payment to him that affects his liquidity."

But Serepisos denied the delays were longer than one or two days.

"Paying wages late by a day is some sort of crucifixion? That is ridiculous," Serepisos said.

Phoenix chief executive Tony Pignata said he was not convinced the club was suffering what could be described as a financial crisis. "If we had `liquidity issues' that would mean players aren't being paid for a month."

He admitted some hotel bills had gone unpaid but said he was comfortable with the arrears.

This month Serepisos was left thousands of dollars out of pocket when production company South Vineyard Ltd made a last-minute cancellation at the millionaire's Century City hotel. Film crew of the $180 million movie Kingdom Come were due to stay at Serepisos's Tory St hotel.

Meanwhile, Serepisos has hit back at Mitchell for commenting to the Star-Times about the club's financial issues.

"John Mitchell wouldn't have a clue whether my club was having liquidity issues... He shouldn't be commenting on things like that; he's out of line," Serepisos said. "The reality is the club loses $1 million a year. I believe in what I've done and I believe in giving something back to the community. I've done it for the right reasons, which is to give something back to New Zealand."

Ad Feedback < id="_STORY" ="http://inl.adbureau.net/h/acc_random=3784533323/site=s/area=s.stuff.s.football/aamsz=300x250/POS=STORY/SOURCEDOMAIN=www.stuff.co.nz/KEYWORD=Phoenixfootballclub+TerrySerepisos+TheApprenticeNZ/pageid=2485966450/?http://www.stuff.co.nz/s/football/3195553/Apprentice-stars-cash-woes-hit-ps" noresize="" ="0" ="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" width="300" border="0" height="250">&lt;SCRIPT SRC="http://inl.adbureau.net/jnserver/acc_random=3784533323/site=s/area=s.stuff.sport.football/aamsz=300x250/POS=STORYBODY/SOURCEDOMAIN=www.stuff.co.nz/KEYWORD=Phoenixfootballclub+TerrySerepisos+TheApprenticeNZ/pageid=2485966450"&gt;&lt;/SCRIPT&gt;</>
<!-- $( () { PushHAd('STORY', 6, 300, 250, '300x250'); }); //-->

The Kiwi version of The Apprentice, in which Serepisos sets competitors tasks to prove their worth in the world of business, is in production, and will screen next year on TV2. TVNZ had no comment yesterday.



Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Telethon? Jokes. Does Bob Jones like football? He seems like an old grumpy man when i saw him interviewed on Good Morning one time.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
One owner if poss.   Even shareholder meetings are a bun fight.
Deciding on the basics is surprisingly hard e.g. don't spend more than you have, the manager has three games to get a string of wins after x losses in a season otherwise he is out, the captain is removed after x yellow cards from his players, even these are hard fought questions.edward l2009-12-28 17:21:52
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
edward l wrote:
One owner if poss.   Even shareholder meetings are a bun fight.
Deciding on the basics is surprisingly hard e.g. don't spend more than you have, the manager has three games to get a string of wins after x losses in a season otherwise he is out, the captain is removed after x yellow cards from his players, even these are hard fought questions.


True.  Barcelona would have been much more successful last season if they'd had just one man calling the shots.  They might even have soared to the dizzying heights achieved by Newcastle under Mike Ashley's leadership!
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Bob Jones turns me into an angry old man
every time I see him I think how is he not in jail

E's Flat Ah's Flat Too

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
He reminds me of the old man in simpsons
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Barca are fairly unique, 170,000 members pay 140 Euros a year that's 24 million. The club earn 308 million Euros annually. Two other spanish clubs have the same structure. Part of the German league must have 51 percent member owners.
If the 5,000 YFites were the members it would cost you $1,200 each per year. Not sure we would always agree.

For the rest of the world without a massive fan base, we need to rely on benevolent capitalism to see us through I.e. Rich families paying to keep the local club afloat.

For those who are interested in how we arrived at our current structure , it goes back to the Bradford stadium fire and the Popplewell report which gave clubs about five years to start building all seater, safe grounds. Then along came pay tv with an income stream and banks would only lend to companies with formal structures. Prior to that clubs were just regular clubs. Only two or three made a profit in the English league. Players were really badly paid. It wasn't uncommon to read of fans being crushed, trampled, burned alive.

We've come a long way in twenty years.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
edward l wrote:
Barca are fairly unique, 170,000 members pay 140 Euros a year that's 24 million. The club earn 308 million Euros annually. Two other spanish clubs have the same structure. Part of the German league must have 51 percent member owners.
If the 5,000 YFites were the members it would cost you $1,200 each per year. Not sure we would always agree.

For the rest of the world without a massive fan base, we need to rely on benevolent capitalism to see us through I.e. Rich families paying to keep the local club afloat.

For those who are interested in how we arrived at our current structure , it goes back to the Bradford stadium fire and the Popplewell report which gave clubs about five years to start building all seater, safe grounds. Then along came pay tv with an income stream and banks would only lend to companies with formal structures. Prior to that clubs were just regular clubs. Only two or three made a profit in the English league. Players were really badly paid. It wasn't uncommon to read of fans being crushed, trampled, burned alive.

We've come a long way in twenty years.
 
Two points, really:
 
Firstly, the finances were not your original basis for suggesting that WPFC ought to have one owner if possible - rather, it was that the club needed a single mind and purpose.  (This is, of course, a fantastic interpretation of what a single owner means, because there are sponsors, banks, the stadium, etc. sticking their oars in.)  Barcelona's 170,000 owners squabbling doesn't seem to stop the club from succeeding, whereas there's no shortage of rubbish solo owners.
 
Secondly, I don't know how you can type "benevolent capitalism" after the last two years.  Do you read any non-sports news?
Stripes2009-12-29 09:28:46
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
The point is with 308 Euros of income it wouldn't matter if Barca was a club or a company. Barca also represents a region with nationalistic tendencies. Seriously I don't see WPFC being the symbol of some seperstist movement.
As for the recession, it hits members and companies.
But who is best placed to ride the economy
? The capitalist because they have built up capital over time to fall back on. A bit like families buying a house over time and passing that wealth from generation to generation.
Either you pay for it personally or you get real.
As a season ticketholder for the Knights, let me tell you how fast the membership collapses when you have poor results. Would you really pay for it?


Until then it's one man, one direction.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
TBH this thread is stupid.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
So really just like all the other threads then.

"Phoenix till they lose"

Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion. 

Genuine opinion: FTFFA

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
edward l wrote:
The point is with 308 Euros of income it wouldn't matter if Barca was a club or a company. Barca also represents a region with nationalistic tendencies. Seriously I don't see WPFC being the symbol of some seperstist movement.
As for the recession, it hits members and companies.
But who is best placed to ride the economy
? The capitalist because they have built up capital over time to fall back on. A bit like families buying a house over time and passing that wealth from generation to generation.
Either you pay for it personally or you get real.
As a season ticketholder for the Knights, let me tell you how fast the membership collapses when you have poor results. Would you really pay for it?


Until then it's one man, one direction.
 
So, you're saying that Barca is mismanaged and directionless but gets by on the strength of its finances?
 
And that New Zealand isn't a region with nationalistic tendencies?
 
And that no capitalist would rip off a club they owned?  Especially not if they were Texan and owned a club based in Liverpool?
 
I hate to say this, but whoooo is coming across as the voice of reason right now.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Junior82 wrote:
So really just like all the other threads then.


no, no. just this one.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
for those interested in how we arrived at our current structure it goes back to Margret Thatcher getting into bed with Rupert Murdoch far more than any H&S concerns in Bradford. The peoples game was stolen from us by the Capitalist's and the MUFC method of spend to win has ruined the game , hopefully not irreparably.

"football supporters are the enemy within"
she turned on them as she did the Trade Unions and the economic and social cost of that is clear to see for anyone even remotely associated with (once) Great Britain.


as for those most likely to rebound from the recession, words fail me. Those most determined to truncate the State's role in society and to dismantle or demand any and all of our Community funded gains were first in the cue, cap in hand. The hypocrisy of the new-right is truly a staggering sight.

E's Flat Ah's Flat Too

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I'm saying a donkey would have a hard time messing up buying the world's best players with an annual income of 308 million Euros.
Barcas structure has b all to do with it.
And no, it is ludicrous to think WPFC has even a fraction of Barcas nationalism or passion.
As for modernising clubs not being a health & safety thing, jeez, isn't Heysel, Hillsborough and Bradford enough? Without it we'd still be going to old wooden Victorian death traps.
In Off Topic, we need another thread for paranoid anti-capitalist nonsense for those who think the world owes them a living and are about 30 years out of date.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Thatcher needed as many Heysel, Hillsborough and Bradford until she got what she wanted, the law for all-seaters which dramatically changed the ownership structure of the clubs and stadiums. But the ability to comprehend such things is not normally kinown of the far-right apologists, so I'll let it slide, Teddy.

In off-topic, we need another thread  for decietful and inaccurate free-market acoylotes to ignore everything they have was built up by the community they so shamelessly now bludge off.

E's Flat Ah's Flat Too

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
whooooooo wrote:
TBH this thread is stupid.

Yes, but I do find it intriguing
You know we belong together...

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
foal30 wrote:
Thatcher needed as many Heysel, Hillsborough and Bradford until she got what she wanted, the law for all-seaters which dramatically changed the ownership structure of the clubs and stadiums. But the ability to comprehend such things is not normally kinown of the far-right apologists, so I'll let it slide, Teddy.In off-topic, we need another thread� for decietful and inaccurate free-market acoylotes to ignore everything they have was built up by the community they so shamelessly now bludge off.


Without wanting to get too far off-topic, can I just try and understand your thinking here...

Free Market Capitalists, who like freedom, liberty, a smaller, less powerful state and fewer laws... want a government to regulate that all stadiums must be all-seater, and force clubs to pay for all this red tape, to ensure the safety of the fans?

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
way off the topic lol
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Well it wouldn't be the first time someone has acted in an opposite manner to their previously stated ideologies.  Rodney Hide and his perks anyone?
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Everybody's talking about
Bagism, Madism, Dragism, Shagism, Ragism, Tagism
This-ism, that-ism
ism ism ism
 

 

"Phoenix till they lose"

Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion. 

Genuine opinion: FTFFA

Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
edward l wrote:
I'm saying a donkey would have a hard time messing up buying the world's best players with an annual income of 308 million Euros.
Barcas structure has b all to do with it.
And no, it is ludicrous to think WPFC has even a fraction of Barcas nationalism or passion.


Are you actually saying that Barcelona's owners are a pack of asses?  You need to make that move in order to hold up your case.  (If they are not, then we ought to conclude that democratic control of a football club is not inherently inferior to the 'one man, one vote' system of which you are so fond.)

As regards nationalism, you're again trying to shift the ground by slipping "passion" in: you claimed that Barca is popular because it is a national symbol in contrast to WPFC.  This has to compete with a standard explanation for the clubs' relative popularity: that Barca plays better football, has advertising and marketing advantages, etc.  Is there any evidence for the nationalist explanation?  How can this accommodate Barcelona's legions of non-Catalan fans?  Finally, is there any evidence for Catalan nationalism being stronger than Kiwi nationalism?
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
whooooooo wrote:
Junior82 wrote:
So really just like all the other threads then.


no, no. just this one.


You're missing the point then.
Permalink Permalink
about 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Free Market Capitalists claim to want freedom, less state interference and less laws.All 3 of these things remain subservient to profit.

This may not be a bad thing, or ideology, but dressing it up as something it is not remains as intellectually dishonest as Rodney Hide's and Bill English's actions post election.

part of Barca's charm/popularity can be explained by it's relationship with Fascist Franco. It was permissible as a "harmless" outlet of Catalonia Nationalism.

E's Flat Ah's Flat Too

Permalink Permalink