ahahahah I was just about to post a link to Swiss Ramble.
I don't get 1/3 of what he's saying most of the time but the gist is there.
ahahahah I was just about to post a link to Swiss Ramble.
I don't get 1/3 of what he's saying most of the time but the gist is there.
European teams might be occasional play toys, MLS teams are not. He isn't wrong to question long term viability or the patience of parent companies sustaining operating losses.
could you explain what you specifically mean by long term viability? Because there are lots of downfalls to European teams spending too much, pretty much all of them have to do with the financial stability of the club. That can't happen here. Club's can't take on debt. If we make a loss, the owners have to write it off. That's why, despite however stuck they may be in the older iterations of MLS, the Hunt's and the Kraft's and whatever are held in very high regard around the league because year after year they paid out of their own pocket to keep the league alive while it figured it's shit out. Pretty much every team in the league was losing cash hand over fist by 2001-2002, and those guys covered all of it.Originally Posted by ag futbol
The only thing that can happen is that MLSE get's disinterested and sells us to someone else, in which case we're in a great position because MLSE spent a ton of money on our infrastructure, making us a sought after product for investors. There's very little bad that can come of this. It's highly unlikely it'll come to that in the foreseeable future, though. MLSE sees themselves as a city wide philanthropist conglomerate as much as they see themselves as a business. They really like the idea that they're the benevolent sports gods of Toronto and they are all mighty and all powerful and yada yada
Last edited by molenshtain; 07-08-2015 at 10:41 AM.
We are fortunate to have 2 of the premier players on the USMNT in our starting lineup. I couldn't care less about the marketing implications as far as the league is concerned. Would it make more sense if they were in a large U.S. market? Of course, but both players want to be here and to help the club succeed, and that's all that matters to me as a supporter.
It would also make a hell of a lot more sense from a marketing perspective if Connor McDavid was drafted by the Leafs, but such is life.
If you want to follow a guy who knows about all the macro issues of football
Ted Philipakos @tphilipakos 2m2 minutes ago Ted Philipakos Outside the elite, the "global soccer market" is a cesspool of insolvent clubs, unpaid players and basic dysfunction
Ted Philipakos @tphilipakos 59s59 seconds ago
It's almost as if running sports leagues without reasonable revenue sharing, competitive balance, and cost control isn't sustainable. Huh.
**********
Off topic this though.
So this Swiss defender...
A CB/RB is exactly what we need so based solely on that I'm ecstatic.
Don't look at write offs - reducing tax liabilities by capturing losses lessens costs but is not something businesses do forever. I'm not sure how this notion started but it's plainly false. Bob Kraft runs a cheap set - but undoubtedly makes his money back from expansion fees and Sum. Don't ever assume losses are free when you have a larger profitable parent - they are not.
Ever hear of the tyranny of quarterly earnings? It basically says even the largest public companies occasionally struggle with the relatively short term focus of many investors. This gets downloaded to all levels of the organization. Questions like "why are we sinking money into the soccer team by running it this way?" will happen. Not saying it applies in this case, but it goes to show companies often commit to things and then lose patience. The rule I've generally heard from people doing start up type stuff within larger companies (and sustaining losses with the hope of future profits) is expect the plug to be pulled early, get a really strong sponsor in upper management, and expect people to be impatient regardless of what they were told from the outset.
I'm not questioning the existence of TFC - more so the continued commitment of spending more money on DPs than the rest of the league and generally running a high level of expenses with the hope of earning it all back later. Reverting back to a minimalist setup under a less committed management team down the road is a real risk.
Last edited by ag futbol; 07-08-2015 at 10:40 AM.
almost anyone that is a defender and isnt under 23 years old is an improvement
Not imminent according to Larson
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/07/08...-swiss-manager
this is all for another thread, but for MLSE, I think its all about building a cash cow like the leafs. Invest early, push out all competition, get the fans hooked and milk it for years to come.
This current crop of DP money is to make up for the years of abosulute garbage, and I dont expect this above all else spending to happen forever
Reeks of a technicality like "the ink wasn't dry on the contract yet". We'll see how it plays out, but my suspicion from what we've seen lately is some of the local reporters are too close to managment and get strung along.
Maybe, but keep in mind MLSE in no way created that cash cow - they just harvested it. Enterprise building is a complete 180 from how they previously operated.
And what I'm saying is that in a regular corporate environment that makes sense. But time and again our top brass have shown that money is no object, like repeatedly since Bogers took over. They spend on everything. They spend a lot on everything. I'm willing to guess that those two companies, being the billion dollar mega corps that they are, are pretty good picking what they choose to spend on. They weigh risk versus reward, and the reward seems like it's winning more than 9/10 at this point.
My point is, I don't understand the conjecture when all evidence points to MLSE being sensible about this. Like, we just keep spending ON EVERYTHING. They're not slowing down.
Last edited by molenshtain; 07-08-2015 at 10:51 AM.
Looks to me like everyone has forgotten that MLSE has $700M in debt on it. Not surprising, since they don't like to talk about it.
The difference between us and all this Euro teams is ownership, not capital structure
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.
I recall some interview or tweet last week that said they were looking to shore up the defense and the guy(s) they were looking at weren't DP level. May have been Vanney. Memory is not good now.
Can we all just enjoy what we have right now for more than two seconds. Sheesh. I like the yolo attitude of MLSE right now so excuse me for not worrying about when they will turn into Bob Kraft.
Most of which was probably locked up in building costs of all those condos and BMO that will turn profits once completed and settled.
I'm not worried about poor ol' MLSE and their 'debt'.
the wording in that is neither denying nor confirming
That debt level sounds a lot like Manchester United actually. Different situations of course as Manchester United is siphoning profits to pay that debt
Except for United the debt is on the club, not the Glazers. They're in a bit of a better position on their debt then they were 3-4 years ago, but if it hadn't changed and they started missing payments or some Bank asked them to pay up wholesale, They'd be royally, royally fucked. If the same thing happened to MLSE, they'd sell us in a second and recoup some money, no harm done to us.
MLSE's debt can't touch us.
$500K more to spend above the cap, will be interesting to see how the Reds brain trust use it.
http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-s...earning-player
Remember The Man, The Legend, The Goal 5-12-07 and All That #9 Left On The Pitch, Thanks For The Memories !!!
A. Totera @4totera 1h1 hour ago As I mentioned yesterday Reds fans spoke 2 a couple sources this morning Alberto Aqualini could be a very good addition if healthy n $ fit
6 retweets 1 favorite
Man these allocation amounts make this league so difficult to understand from a salary cap perspective.
He would definitely be an excellent addition. The guy doesn't sound like he has any concrete knowledge of a signing though.
Ditto!
Think of it this way.
Once Caldwell's cap hit is off the books, we have his 365k plus these funds to make another Cheyrou/Perquis type signing.
Wouldn't count on it happening in this window but in the offseason for sure.
I read over the press release from MLS and what I don't understand is the following: Say you use 500K this year. Is that a one time thing in the sense that for the next 4 yeras you no longer have any Targeted Allocation Money? How does this help a team to build a roster if they can only sign a player for one year using these additional funds?
Yep.
If LA use it all now to sign Dos Santos they are going to have to trade or sell Gonzalez in the offseason. Or trade other players for TAM to keep paying him down.
Signing a player in the 500-600k range and using it to pay their salary down over 2-3 years seem like the best bet.
So in general. Can TFC sign a player at say 530k right now and use 100K this year to bring them below the maximum contract of $436250... or do they still need to then trade away players so that they can fit roughly 430K in salary of this new player under the normal salary cap?
Posting Permissions
