2017 Roster Discussion

[JGarrettLieb]

I've posted this before, but it's been awhile and I don't think you were here/active back then.

Honestly I was probably inactive, I subbed right after that spat with the MCFC boards occurred.

I like your analysis, but I think you have your premise wrong. CFG's number one goal isn't to make money. It's to bring a global platform for positive branding and attention to the myriad business interests of the royal family and the family/UAE itself. I'd add speculatively "and not lose a shitload of money while doing it", but I don't know if whatever loss they operate at could ever really dent their coffers meaningfully.

So on that front, it may or may not change the rest of your argument. But I think the question is what is more valuable/best return on investment: a big name to trot out, a championship-competitive squad, or some blend of both. I'm going to guess it's the latter choice because that makes me most intrigued.

I somewhat disagree with you on that one. Profitability is a highly important aspect to CFG, right now we are in the initial investment phase of the NYCFC project, outlays come more easily as setting the tone of the brand is crucial in the first few years. I remember reading that, stadium included, the total investment outlay was expected to be in the billion dollar range. So there is a real budget for this somewhere.

I can't remember if it was in an article, or a video clip but one of the CFG directors said our goal is that all CFG products deliver net income.

One does not stay titanically wealthy by needlessly pissing away money.

Now does being profitable and good marketing for the UAE's royal family's buisness interests need to be mutually exclusive? Not in the slightest. But CFG as a buisness entity is not designed to be a loss leader in the long term. Actually I believe MCFC actually recorded a profit in FY 15. Of course the large emirates sponsorship deal helped there, but to be fair those various UAE royal companies are to the scale where that level of advertising budget is appropriate anyway.

The overall wealth of the ownership and the fact that this soccer based investment vehicle is serving multiple ends at the same time, means that while we probably have a real budget somewhere, that budget is probably more malleable than most.

Though even if I reconducted the though experiment taking your belief that the team serves as a marketing vehicle more than anything, I'd still probably come to the same conclusion. As I don't believe that having 3 star DP's achieves the highest marginal utility versus having 2 star DP's and a lesser known younger player. As stated previously, if MLS publications will go through great pains to not mention 3 DP's from one team in a broader article, even when those three DP's have the largest collective star power in the league, why bother with 3 star DP's? A star DP is almost by definition worth less than his salary in terms of on field production, you can pay less and get a better player if you don't give a hoot about the name.

 

[Midas Mulligan]

I somewhat disagree with you on that one. Profitability is a highly important aspect to CFG, right now we are in the initial investment phase of the NYCFC project, outlays come more easily as setting the tone of the brand is crucial in the first few years. I remember reading that, stadium included, the total investment outlay was expected to be in the billion dollar range. So there is a real budget for this somewhere.

I can't remember if it was in an article, or a video clip but one of the CFG directors said our goal is that all CFG products deliver net income.

One does not stay titanically wealthy by needlessly pissing away money.

Now does being profitable and good marketing for the UAE's royal family's buisness interests need to be mutually exclusive? Not in the slightest. But CFG as a buisness entity is not designed to be a loss leader in the long term. Actually I believe MCFC actually recorded a profit in FY 15. Of course the large emirates sponsorship deal helped there, but to be fair those various UAE royal companies are to the scale where that level of advertising budget is appropriate anyway.

The overall wealth of the ownership and the fact that this soccer based investment vehicle is serving multiple ends at the same time, means that while we probably have a real budget somewhere, that budget is probably more malleable than most.

Though even if I reconducted the though experiment taking your belief that the team serves as a marketing vehicle more than anything, I'd still probably come to the same conclusion. As I don't believe that having 3 star DP's achieves the highest marginal utility versus having 2 star DP's and a lesser known younger player. As stated previously, if MLS publications will go through great pains to not mention 3 DP's from one team in a broader article, even when those three DP's have the largest collective star power in the league, why bother with 3 star DP's? A star DP is almost by definition worth less than his salary in terms of on field production, you can pay less and get a better player if you don't give a hoot about the name.

But you said profit was more important? The team doesn't get paid based on how many player names are in an article. That's a stupidway to evaluate it differently than I do.

Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying. my premise is actually backed up by journalistic research. Believe it or don't. But you're seriously overestimating the impact of a couple of billion dollars (of which we're a drop in the bucket).

Basically, you think coverage here is equal with 2 or 3 dps. But if the goal is spreading the brand GLOBALLY, and you can increase the audience by 1/3, a small premium ain't shit. I think you're thinking like an accountant, and not like a strategic business and cultural leader.

 

[Midas Mulligan]

Is Klinsy in there with you?

 

[Gotham Gator]

I expect that CFG is happy for NYC to be a loss leader for quite a while. They will absorb losses so long as the team and the league are continuing to grow and become more valuable. If you believe the franchise valuations that were thrown around over the summer, it's working out so far.

They will want NYC to be the pre-eminent franchise in a world class soccer league. The Yankees of MLS. That's a franchise valued in the billions, but it will take a long while to get there - both in terms of club and league. Fortunately for them, they have the bank account necessary to be patient.

To get there, they need soccer to continue its growth in this country, both in terms of popularity and quality. They also need a club that is a leading brand, both for its star players, and for winning. Star players gain attention for the Club, and are particularly valuable in the early years to help attract fans. Eventually, however, they are going to need to compete for and win titles, and that means finding, signing and developing the best younger players.

My guess is that we will start seeing a mix of big name veterans and up-and-comers as DPs. Hoping it is this year, but we will see.

 

[NickA]

Is Klinsy in there with you?

God damn should be...but he's never responsible for any failure, it's always on the "talent"

 

[JayH]

Yes, please.

http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-...-replace-frank-lampard-rather-than-dp-sources

 

[Kjbert]

Loss leader depends on whether or not you include the initial franchise fee. Add that extra $100 Million in, and we're losing money. That's fair accounting.

But my understanding is that the financials have been better than they even expected. We won't lose money.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Loss leader depends on whether or not you include the initial franchise fee. Add that extra $100 Million in, and we're losing money. That's fair accounting.

But my understanding is that the financials have been better than they even expected. We won't lose money.

No, that was a capital investment, on which they should be getting a return and which they can earn back whenever they sell the franchise.

 

[Midas Mulligan]

http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-...-replace-frank-lampard-rather-than-dp-sources

We're going high-level younger, or at least trying to.

Oops. Jay beat me to it.

 

[sbrylski]

http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-...-replace-frank-lampard-rather-than-dp-sources

We're going high-level younger, or at least trying to.

Oops. Jay beat me to it.

Everyone is younger than Frank.

But this is encouraging.

 

[gbservis]

Yes, please.

http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-...-replace-frank-lampard-rather-than-dp-sources

While exciting, what is that article based on? It doesn't have a single quote.

 

[NYCFCfan]

Everyone is younger than Frank.

But this is encouraging.

That was my reaction.

No shit, you can't really get much older than Lampard can you?

 

[JayH]

While exciting, what is that article based on? It doesn't have a single quote.

Top secret unnamed sources.

 

[JayH]

That was my reaction.

No shit, you can't really get much older than Lampard can you?

Can't even post a picture of Ronaldinho in response to this, since he's two years younger than Frank.

 

[NickFromAstoria]

Top secret unnamed sources.

 

[Tom in Fairfield CT]

They said they wanted to go younger right before they got Pirlo

 

[joe]

I'm younger than Lampard and I have a home authentic. Let's do this.

 

[ktdNYCFC]

Gabriel Jesus on loan, please. He's young.

 

[JayH]

I'm younger than Lampard and I have a home authentic. Let's do this.

I propose two new Forums acronyms for future use where applicable: OTF (older than Frank) and YTF (younger than Frank).

 

[Fantazma]

speaking of younger....we have three draft picks this year for the MLS Draft.....how many of those do you think we will keep 1? all three?