U.s. Billionaires Taking Over Top Uk Soccer Teams.

[barrywho]

It seems to me that billionaires from all over are now willing to invest in professional sports teams. It is OBVIOUS in UK soccer where Manchester United, then Aston Villa and now Liverpool have been or are about to be taken over by these very wealthy people.

SO, the QUESTION IS whether this is a coming trend? Will these be serious business investments? Can more money truly be made in such investments? OR, is this just sa hobby, a plaything by the richj and when bored, simply thrown away. Easy come, easy go! OR ????

BUT I do NEED to comment on this Liverpool takeover. In contrast to the Glazers and the Lerners, these new owners, Gillett and Hick, seem intent on championship glory with NO HOLDS BARRED! THAT is their background! Especially, HICKS!

SO, Liverpool is extremely lucky to get these americans to takeover. They own sports teams in the U.S., AND they are known not to shy away from buying superstars or even paying them. And Hicks is a builder of high-tech sports stadiums as well

This Hicks, owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team once paid US$279 MILLION for baseball star player, ALEX RODRIGUEZ, which did NOT HELP the team much as they ended in LAST PLACE in the 3 years he was there, then SOLD to the richest most lorried baseball team, the New York Yankees at a LOSS, even agreeing to PAY the player’s salary for a few more years! HAD to do it, since baseball has a salary cap and the sale allows Hicks to BUY others. Strangely, since Rodriguez left, the Rangers entered the playoffs for the so-call World Series championship. RECENTLY, Hicks tried to buy two other stars, one Japanese, and here we are talking about OVER $100 Million !!! SO, HICKS WILL CERTAINLY PROVIDE THE MONEY TO BUY SOLID STARS, is a great negotiator as well. AND GILLETT does not shy away as well in sports investments.

I expect next season to see a lot of improvements in Liverpool, provided that Benitez knows how to make use of that. He better perform! Else, out he goes...

With americans, it is either win or lose, champions or nothing. There is NO SECOND BEST!

So, let us see IF these will be so.

Your comments, feedback appreciated.

I myself was active in sports and a fan of many teams and sports. In the US. I am a New York fan, but more the underdogs. Like, the Mets, Jets, Knicks, Rangers. In Germany, I am a Schalke 04 fan having been there during the 1974 World Cup and the time when Schalke players (like Klaus Fischer) were banned for a year in a gambling scandal in which they were accused oif throwing games away. And with youngsters like Abramcik, they still manages to stay in the Bundesliga. the time of Fischer. In England am for MAN U. FYI!

Barry

[PhilHarries]

Unfortunately, in some respects, the EPL has become a magnet for investment of this kind. In theory at least it is fine for the clubs and the fans. But, as you say, these easy come easy go merchants are fair weather friends and what happens if things don't go according to the corporate strategy? How safe is the club if the owners decide to wind it up, in theory there's nothing anybody could do about it. If they are looking at maximising the investment recovery in the worst case scenario what is the market value of a prime piece of real estate like Old Trafford or Anfield?

The other downside is that all this money going in to a handfull of teams pushes up transfer fees and players wages beyond the reach of all but those elite few. Then the results of all competitions become largely irrelevant being just a carve up between the top three.

I'm inherently suspicious at these people with absolutely no attachment to the club or it's fans buying up football clubs but there is naff all anybody can do about it but hope for the best.

[manjara]

I'd say it would be considered the success of the marketing of the EPL as the 'premier' soccer league in the world.

The other leagues that compete are the Italian, which has been on the wane for a while, and the Spanish, which is the major competitor right now.

Americans probably know better than anyone how to make money out of sports, and, with the EPL brand becoming more internationally recognised, the time is right to get a stake in the game.

The only 'cloud' in this has to be that these people are in it to make money, not to support the 'beautiful game'. I don't think it 's the same attitide as Abramovich at Chelsea.

Still, it's great for the EPL, and we can expect the stakes to be upped in next seasons championship. Will the less monied clubs be able to compete?

[andyashley]

I'd say it would be considered the success of the marketing of the EPL as the 'premier' soccer league in the world.

The other leagues that compete are the Italian, which has been on the wane for a while, and the Spanish, which is the major competitor right now.

Americans probably know better than anyone how to make money out of sports, and, with the EPL brand becoming more internationally recognised, the time is right to get a stake in the game.

The only 'cloud' in this has to be that these people are in it to make money, not to support the 'beautiful game'. I don't think it 's the same attitide as Abramovich at Chelsea.

Still, it's great for the EPL, and we can expect the stakes to be upped in next seasons championship. Will the less monied clubs be able to compete?

Bolton, Porthsmouth with not as big money bags are able to so far. But yes, I question the ability of clubs that don't have money to be able to compete with these big clubs with money as well. It will be true that it will get better for most viewers since the top teams will get better and games featuring top teams VS top teams will be more fun (actually, not necessarily, but should be). Lets just hope the likes of Bolton, Spurs, Villa etc will be able to keep up with the money bags!

[endure]

Moved to the Sports forum...

[samtam]

Wasn't Liverpool the team Thaksin wanted to buy on behalf of Thailand?

[lomatopo]

Gillett and Hick, seem intent on championship glory with NO HOLDS BARRED! THAT is their background! Especially, HICKS!

How many World Series' have the Texas Rangers won? None.

How many Stanley Cups have the Stars and Habs won (with Hicks and Gillett as owners)? One (1999) and none

But it's probably good news for Liverpool fans. I honestly don't know who owned Liverpool before and if they had enough money to continue to stay competitive?

EPL clubs are attractive to American investors for appreciation and tax benefits.

[TRIPxCORE]

This Hicks, owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team once paid US$279 MILLION for baseball star player, ALEX RODRIGUEZ, which did NOT HELP the team much as they ended in LAST PLACE in the 3 years he was there, then SOLD to the richest most lorried baseball team, the New York Yankees at a LOSS, even agreeing to PAY the player’s salary for a few more years! HAD to do it, since baseball has a salary cap and the sale allows Hicks to BUY others.

That is not necessarily true. First of all the contract was for a total of $252 million for Rodriguez, not $279. Then when he went to the Yankees, the Texas Rangers were on the hook to pay for one-third of his salary each year for the remainder of the contract, not all of it.

It's probably good Americans are buying EPL teams. Maybe they will turn the sport into something watchable finally!

[steveromagnino]

Without introducing caps and equitable revenue share, it is bad, because some teams are more markadable than others; without restriction, you relegate many of the london city and city teams from the other cities (say, ManC, Everton) to an even more precarious position than they are in now, where they cannot hope to win against ManU and so on.

Without restriction, the best players can be bought at ever increasing amounts, which removes one of the great things of sport, the dynasty and the desire to support a local team - witness the effect on yachting once the billionaires got into AmCup - 2 from USA, 1 Swiss. They raised the level of competition by poaching and tearing about the NZ team; stealing information (OneWorld got caught) and just outspending their way to victory. Since then, the cost of sailing has shot up astronomically, and is headed for rough times should the idiocy of these rich people run out at some point. The richest have also been able to buy their way to change the rules, as Ernesto has for instance not only be able to choose the place to hold his defense (the place paying him the most) but also to include himself in the challenger series (the Acts) thereby massively increasing his chances of holding the cup.

What happens in Football when the top 5 teams say just decide to go and influence the EPL to tilt the revenue share agreements even more? When the next few teams down realise they can never win anything ever again? When every decent player can just be poached by someone with a massive amount of money and no sense? Or what happens when the money stream dries up; as happened with leeds - without building in checks and balances such as exist in Rugby league in Aussie, and already exist in most American sports?

In the case of sailing, unlimited spending will occur, and one day a billionaire from China will emerge and just outspend everyone else, set himself up with a team of New Zealanders and win it, then the cup will go to China. Right around that time, I can just see the Europeans getting all nationalistic, and complaining. better to avoid such a scenario, with checks and balances for the good of the sport.

Incidentally, it does seem somewhat abhorant that the Americans are buying teams when they don't even own their own teams in the same code in USA; they should learn how to promote the sport in their own country or be made to, if they want to be part of the EPL as well.

[lomatopo]

Without introducing caps and equitable revenue share, it is bad,

Incidentally, it does seem somewhat abhorant that the Americans are buying teams when they don't even own their own teams in the same code in USA; they should learn how to promote the sport in their own country or be made to, if they want to be part of the EPL as well.

The Liverpool Football Club was going to be sold. The original deal, all but inked, involved Dubai International Capital. It's not clear to me how important the source of the money is in these deals, when discussing preserving the entire league and the small market clubs? As far as I know the only requirement to purchase a professional sports team is money? (Although I can imagine some countries have protectionism.)

I believe the Americans only purchased a 51% interest in Liverpool?

You abhorrence should also be directed at the seller(s) of course.

Revenue sharing, TV contract sharing, drafts, free-agent signings, franchise designees and salary caps/luxury taxes have proven effective in the U.S.A. by allowing small-market teams (Green Bay Packers, Milwaukee Brewers) to remain in business and be competitive.

Dynasties can still be built in this modern era, witness the New England Patriots.

[steveromagnino]

Without introducing caps and equitable revenue share, it is bad,

Incidentally, it does seem somewhat abhorant that the Americans are buying teams when they don't even own their own teams in the same code in USA; they should learn how to promote the sport in their own country or be made to, if they want to be part of the EPL as well.

The Liverpool Football Club was going to be sold. The original deal, all but inked, involved Dubai International Capital. It's not clear to me how important the source of the money is in these deals, when discussing preserving the entire league and the small market clubs? As far as I know the only requirement to purchase a professional sports team is money? (Although I can imagine some countries have protectionism.)

I believe the Americans only purchased a 51% interest in Liverpool?

You abhorrence should also be directed at the seller(s) of course.

Revenue sharing, TV contract sharing, drafts, free-agent signings, franchise designees and salary caps/luxury taxes have proven effective in the U.S.A. by allowing small-market teams (Green Bay Packers, Milwaukee Brewers) to remain in business and be competitive.

Dynasties can still be built in this modern era, witness the New England Patriots.

Good point, although it is somewhat amusing that the Americans are buying it , simply because it isn't exactly a soccer playing nation - AFAIK Americans aren't even that interested in soccer (unlike say, Dubai, Russia, Thailand, etc). The way American sport is put together, it seems to be where the 'entertainment spectacle' of it overshadows the sport itself. Where ad breaks are signaled and control play. Where players play to the cameras, rather than for their community (witness the cross city derby rivalries). But who knows, that may be nothing to do with these guys, and in fact they do bring some great experience to the table, let's hope they can use it for the good of the sport (although I don't think they will!).

Sounds like NFL have at least some of the elements in place for levelling the playing field a bit. I think Rugby at a club level in NZ or league in Australia is probably an equally good model for ensuring fairness, there will always be some stronger teams as not everyone would ever want to live in Scunthorpe, but the aim needs to be to maintain the strengths of EPL which at least from where I sit, is in some ways more successful than some of the American codes in so far as it is popular around the world; has depth through the other divisions, and incites something in the hearts of people who live and breathe the sport that exists within their communities.

Rugby used to be like this where i grew up, before it went super professional.

[calibanjr.]

This Hicks, owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team once paid US$279 MILLION for baseball star player, ALEX RODRIGUEZ, which did NOT HELP the team much as they ended in LAST PLACE in the 3 years he was there, then SOLD to the richest most lorried baseball team, the New York Yankees at a LOSS, even agreeing to PAY the player’s salary for a few more years! HAD to do it, since baseball has a salary cap and the sale allows Hicks to BUY others. Strangely, since Rodriguez left, the Rangers entered the playoffs for the so-call World Series championship. RECENTLY, Hicks tried to buy two other stars, one Japanese, and here we are talking about OVER $100 Million !!! SO, HICKS WILL CERTAINLY PROVIDE THE MONEY TO BUY SOLID STARS, is a great negotiator as well. AND GILLETT does not shy away as well in sports investments.

I expect next season to see a lot of improvements in Liverpool, provided that Benitez knows how to make use of that. He better perform! Else, out he goes...

With americans, it is either win or lose, champions or nothing. There is NO SECOND BEST!

No salary cap in baseball. That's why the Yankees are the dynasty that they are, always highest payroll. Texas overpaid for ARod, couldn't afford a good pitching staff, and subsequently stunk up the joint. That was mismanagement of available resources by Texas. Liverpool take note of that, but I assume that Hicks will defer to the more knowledgeable advisors over there, maybe that's cool.

That being said, don't really think it makes a difference between "furriners" owning the EPL teams. Abramovich, a Russian billionaire (at this epoch in history, denotes "organized criminal"), is respected in the EPL for his pocketbook and willingness to open it.

[lomatopo]

No salary cap in baseball. That's why the Yankees are the dynasty that they are, always highest payroll.

True it is no longer called a salary cap, now it is called a "competitve balance tax threshold". Threshold being another word for cap. So last season the cap was 136.5 million USD, anything over that you pay a 40% tax. I think the Yankees payroll was ~ 195 million so they paid a luxury tax of ~ 25 million. {The Yankees also pay a lot into the revenue sharing pool, ~ 60 million.} This is all covered in the collective bargaining agreement which expired in Dec. 2006. I honestly do not what the status of the negotiations on a new agreement or if one has already been signed? The Luxury tax and revenue sharing monies get re-distributed to other clubs.

The St. Louis Cardinals won the 2006 World Series, with the 11th highest payroll at ~ 68 million, downright miserly when compared to the Yankees payroll at 195 million. The Oakland Athletics ( 62 m payroll in 2006) are generally considered to be the model for payroll performance, getting the most with the least expense.

The New York Yankees have not won a World Series since 2000. The bulk of their 26 World Series victories (20 ~ 22) came during a time when owners restricted the movement of players and worked together to limit salaries. In 1922 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that MLB was exempt from the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. AFAIK, they still are? The Yankees worked hard to find and develop young players, but also took advantage of weaker clubs by taking their best players in trade for cash. The Yankees pretty much sucked until Boston Red Sox owner Harry Frazee started selling his best players, including a great pitcher named George Herman Ruth, Jr., to them begining in 1919. In 1923 the Yankees one the first of their World Series' and the Red Sox didn't win again until 2004.

...it is somewhat amusing that the Americans are buying it , simply because it isn't exactly a soccer playing nation - AFAIK Americans aren't even that interested in soccer (unlike say, Dubai, Russia, Thailand, etc).

What an odd perception to have? I'd venture to say that more people play soccer in the U.S.A. than just about any other country in the World? Many, many more people play soccer than American football. In just about every town and city you will see thousands of boys and girls playing organized soccer. Pee Wee/squirt leagues start with 4 and 5 year olds.

Changing demographics in America indicate that Soccer will only grow in popularity.

Does the EPL, or other professional leagues, currently do anything to address competitive imbalances?

[Crow Boy]

...it is somewhat amusing that the Americans are buying it , simply because it isn't exactly a soccer playing nation - AFAIK Americans aren't even that interested in soccer (unlike say, Dubai, Russia, Thailand, etc).

What an odd perception to have? I'd venture to say that more people play soccer in the U.S.A. than just about any other country in the World? Many, many more people play soccer than American football. In just about every town and city you will see thousands of boys and girls playing organized soccer. Pee Wee/squirt leagues start with 4 and 5 year olds.

Changing demographics in America indicate that Soccer will only grow in popularity.

Does the EPL, or other professional leagues, currently do anything to address competitive imbalances?

This is an interesting point and one with which I agree. The populaion of the USA is currently approximately 250million people. This gives them a huge potential growth market at home. Tactics such as buying David Beckham are just the start, I think that we will see this as the start of a long and concerted plan to import high profile players who have in all reality passed their use by date as players but will become icons for the game in the US.

Look back only 10 years ago to Japan and Korea with baseball - ex pro players were traded out there and the game grew around them. The US has a tendency of getting behind a sport and then they dominate it for years to come. The same thing happened in Motorbike racing which until guys like Kevin Swanze got into it AND started to win.

I think the European teams will be the next lot to be looked at very closely by monied and shrewd business men from the USA - get a couple of the Spanish and Italian teams with American business skills behind them and it will open up the game. Then the teams start doing promotional games in the US - American clubs buy players, home grown talent gets into it and I would be thinking that within the next ten years you can expect a really top line American team vying for the world cup.

[steveromagnino]

Look back only 10 years ago to Japan and Korea with baseball - ex pro players were traded out there and the game grew around them. The US has a tendency of getting behind a sport and then they dominate it for years to come. The same thing happened in Motorbike racing which until guys like Kevin Swanze got into it AND started to win.

I agree with everything you mention, and while many Americans 'play' soccer, I don't think that many watch it. Bad writing on my side. I can see it getting big with some handsome reality TV type stars like Beckham.

However, to suggest Americans will 'dominate' a sport seems like a odd choice of words. You mean financially right?

Because despite massive budgets, other than sports which pretty much only USA plays or has a controlling interest in vai media, (e.g. AFL, basketball, baseball, ice hockey) I don't really see much dominance in American team sport play. For this reason alone, I am unsure whether America will ever become strong at soccer worldwide; I can see them more being like America in rugby; a good second rung team, but the best/fastest/fittest will end up in other codes or individual sports, where America is dominant.

[mrbojangles]

Personally i don't give 2 hoots about the politics and economics at the moment. I just know that MAn City are falling further and further behind due to lack of funds. So, if there's an American out there who wants pile a load of Dollar into our club, i will gladly accept it.

P.S. Mods, should this be put in the football forum? I didn't see the thread until just now.