Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Interesting article Re: Tevez & Mascherano



Eggman

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
3,712
West Sussex
We’ve looked at Kia Joorabchian and MSI on State of the Game long before West Ham United were ever muttered in the same breath as them but it was only with the London based sports marketing company’s involvement in West Ham’s “Deal of the Century” on transfer deadline day that they stepped out of the shadows in the UK and gave us all a glimpse of what the transfer market will be like in the future.

We’ve all wondered just how did the Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano transfer to West Ham come about and what were the real motives behind MSI allowing their players to move to a safe midtable Premiership club and not one of Europe’s big spending Champion’s League everpresents and after doing some further research we’ve found out their plan to completely revolutionize the way the football clubs and players’ registrations system is run in the coming years.

From what we’ve learned from a variety of close sources it seems like the immediate paranoia about a Chelsea stitch up isn’t quite correct. In the UK, we’ve have become used to thinking that Roman Abramovich is the only Russian billionaire spreading his wings (and roubles) around the world but that’s simply not the case. The two money men involved with MSI are Russian businessman Boris Berezovsky, who is currently exiled in Britain, and his friend and business partner, Georgian businessman Badri Patarkatsishvili.

These two are the real men of power behind MSI with Kia Joorabchian becoming the increasingly more public face as they begin to move more of their operations into the UK and Europe. MSI as a business believe that they have found a way to make a lot of money out of football without actually owning football clubs which they feel is a path to financial ruin at worst and limited returns at best. Their plan instead is to control the assets needed for top flight football and to make their high returns and profits on these.

They already own several stadiums and the surrounding land in South America but the main asset they are planning on cashing in on are players, starting with Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano. The deal taking them to West Ham is quite unlike any other deal in English football history and MSI hope it becomes a blueprit for their future business.

West Ham have paid a minimal fee (believed to be around £5m each) for the use of the two players. Despite West Ham claiming that it is a permanent deal, it seems like this is more wordplay than a traditional permanent transfer as we know it. The players certainly aren’t loaned by any club to West Ham (Corinthians had “bought” them using the same deal i.e. a little money for a glorified loan of the players not from a club but from MSI and will receive only a nominal amount in compensation) but neither are they owned by West Ham United.

The players then play for West Ham for however long MSI decide to keep them there, all the time letting them acclimatise themselves to the English way of life and the Premiership and putting themselves in the shop window ready for a move from one of the bigger fish, in this case Chelsea, Manchester United or Arsenal. When a move to a bigger club does happen then MSI, as the owners of the players, pocket the transfer fee and West Ham receive nothing. The value to the club is in the extended “loan” of the players from MSI without having to pay the necessary transfer fee upfront which in this case could amount to more than £50m for the two in today’s market.

It’s certainly revolutionary and if MSI are allowed to carry on in this way then there is nothing to stop other companies setting up, funded by very wealthy people, and doing the exact same thing. The transfer system will become under more pressure than at any time in history, including Bosman, and the traditional structure of players owned by clubs disappears.

Maybe this is taking it too far but there will be a great many clubs who see this “leased” player option as a far quicker and cheaper route to challenge the big clubs and will be more than happy to play the part of parking space for these players.

Having seen how MSI plan to carve up football and how they want to make their money without the ties of a football club I’m truly astounded at the ingenuity of it all. So simple but obviosuly so effective if all goes to plan. The only spanner in the works could come from FIFA although in this day and age of mega money I can’t see FIFA standing in the way of big business and it really doesn’t get much bigger than this. Will it lead to the end of football as we know it or will the clubs band together to see off this threat to their traditional way of running their business?”
 




Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,637
Location Location
Hmmm...so we could have players owned by independent outside bodies and "leased" around the top clubs. That has all kinds of worrying implications. Money will be going out of the game meaning even less will filter down the leagues, players will be subject to transfers as and when the owning company see's fit and not the football club, perhaps it could even have implications with regard to the release of players for International commitments.

FIFA need to get a hold of this sharpish.
 




RM-Taylor

He's Magic.... You Know
NSC Patron
Jan 7, 2006
15,414
Surely FIFA must sort this out sooner rather than later.
 


Barrel of Fun

Abort, retry, fail
Very interesting. Is this a sign of things to come? I would be in favour of FIFA getting beaten at their own game, but not in this respect. This is dangerous.

Perhaps Adenstar could diversify and take out a loan and buy a decent target man.




Slightly on the subject -

This made me chuckle...

Quote from Football365.com yesterday;

"Question Of The Day
Has a West Ham fan created some kind of parallel universe where you can play Championship Manager and it comes true? "
 




Rougvie

Rising Damp
Aug 29, 2003
5,133
Hove, f***ing ACTUALLY.
But will FIFA be able to do anything about it?

While its worrying, leasing of assets is just about the only way most businesses can survive, why should it be so different in football.

I think I am right in saying Baseball and NFL have done this for a while as well, funny how there is so much interest from US billionaires in the Premiership all of a sudden !

Most clubs can no longer afford big money transfer fees unless they are being bankrolled by someone not bothered anout the loss of £100million or so, as the clubs created this ridiculous transfer situation in the first place, they only have themselves to blame if this becomes normal practise.
 
Last edited:


Brovion

In my defence, I was left unsupervised.
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
20,155
Hmm. I know it's our usual conservative and reactionary approach to abhor change of any sort - but why is it worse if players are 'owned' by big consortiums rather than by big clubs?

I reserve the right to change my mind but my first take is that I don't think it's 'The End Of Football As We Know It.' Could be some interesting times ahead.
 


Garry Nelson's Left Foot

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
13,706
tokyo
Won't this scheme ultimately become unfeasible? It's a great deal for West Ham if they are only paying 5million each. Combined that's only 4million more than they payed for Dean Ashton, so in terms of value it's absolutely outstanding. It's going to turn them into a very, very good team this season at least. If West Ham win some silverware/qualify for Europe again the two players would have payed for themselves. It won't matter too much if they then move on and West Ham don't get much in the way of compensation.

I can't see the big clubs liking it though. Why would they spend huge amounts to 'buy' players that they can't sell on. They're going to lose huge amounts in the transfer market(o.k, so Chelsea already do, but...). Will the rewards cover this deficit?
 




Brovion

In my defence, I was left unsupervised.
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
20,155
Another point - would it mean the end of Agents? After all they only exist to supposedly look after a player's interests, although we all know they engineer moves to get themselves commission.

However if the players are owned by consortiums then the organisation that owns the player and the organisation that 'looks after their interests' are one and the same. You won't get players moving just so an agent can pocket a fat fee.

Maybe.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,637
Location Location
1_smith.jpg


"Mr Andersssson. You were given ssssspecific orderssssss....."
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here