Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: marathon
Date: 02-08-2006, 18:42

in a few of the latest topics within this forum it has been discussed about giving the possibility even to lower clubs to gain more points or to play more rounds and thus gain experience.
i strongly believe that one true chance lies beneath the determination of some economically powerful companies or better men etc to invest to smaller clubs and in this way to create stronger championships and in conclusion stronger clubs that can participate in a stronger european tournament.
since i'm Greek i could speek of my experience and my favourite club
AEK Athens. although Greek football is yet to not only recover from the latest negative results in europe the football system in its globality is getting to a higher level. there have been some important investements towards a few smaller clubs and plus from this year there will be the 1st Super League with econimical advantages to all. AEK Athens came out from a difficult period thanks to the devotion and care of one of the mist important players in its roaster that bought the team and began almost from zero to create now a competitive club that could probably play in this year's champions league.

write and share your experience from your country's status and reality i mean the lucks of chelsea or spartak moscow or the latest
salzburg etc what if this could be extended to further nations?
wouldn't that increase quality in european football games?

Re: investement could raise quality and competitivity
Author: levski.bg Date: 02-08-2006, 22:36	If we are happy to see Europe in peace and economic prosperity in the future, I think competition will be stronger. Just imagine after 20 years.... Business realise that football, can return investments for more than 400% (world cup investments for example). I hope that not ruin the fair play. There is alot of companys for sporting bets, who invest this year.

Author: panda
Date: 03-08-2006, 11:05

Well, I think we have to see, in a long-term way, because this sort of new investment has not been for many years yet.

Glazers at Man U - Is it good they have no football background?
Abramovich at Chelsea and on a smaller scale Romanov at Hearts- if thier money stays, they make a real difference to the strength of the league they have invested in.

Of course there are potential big negatives, same as for public company of any kind, but more exaggerated. Company exists for the benefit of its shareholders, NOT the customers (=fans)

Author: badgerboy
Date: 03-08-2006, 12:18

It could be argued that allowing anyone to investment any amount they want actually kills competitiveness.

Look at Abramovich at Chelsea. Yes for a year or two it's not so bad - makes a nice change for someone different winning the league.

But if the same situation continues for five or ten years? It's like the guy at the poker table with more money than all the other players. He can just keep on throwing money in until all the other guys run out and if he loses the odd hand he just shrugs and pulls another thick wad out of his back pocket.

I'd be in favour of some kind of salary cap based on turnover. Though there would also have to be an allowance for a certain amount of capital investment on top of this. The opportunity for a new investor to revitalise a struggling club, or to allow an unfashionable one to live a dream, has to remain but has to be limited so that it doesn't destroy competitiveness all together.