Revs Team Up With Sporting

[MikeDatTiger]

http://www.revolutionsoccer.net/new...be-de-portugal-announce-strategic-partnership

So Revs w/ Sporting, DC United with Sunderland. I can imagine it's only a matter of time before the Rapids announce one with Arsenal. Of course, NYCFC started this with MCFC.

Definitely seems like NYCFC started a trend.

 

[Falastur]

Orlando City are part-owned by the owner of Stoke City, too. Spurs also had a feeder agreement with San Jose Earthquakes in 2008,but that's probably not active anymore.

 

[Ahab_Flanders]

So the Revs are like, doing things?

 

[MagnusPax]

Orlando City are part-owned by the owner of Stoke City, too. Spurs also had a feeder agreement with San Jose Earthquakes in 2008,but that's probably not active anymore.

Phil Rawlins resigned as the director and seat on the board of Stoke. He is no longer an owner any more.
http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Stok...gns-director/story-20566106-detail/story.html

http://www.revolutionsoccer.net/new...be-de-portugal-announce-strategic-partnership

So Revs w/ Sporting, DC United with Sunderland. I can imagine it's only a matter of time before the Rapids announce one with Arsenal. Of course, NYCFC started this with MCFC.

Definitely seems like NYCFC started a trend.

DC United is owned by the same man who owns Inter. Rapids owner went out and bought a controlling interest in Arsenal. Both were cases where their owners went and got Euro teams AFTER they bought the MLS teams, so sorta semi-similar to NYCFC and MC. In the case of these Sunderland deals however, these MLS clubs are just forming partnerships for training and marketing, its not ownership.

 

[MikeDatTiger]

Phil Rawlins resigned as the director and seat on the board of Stoke. He is no longer an owner any more.
http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Stok...gns-director/story-20566106-detail/story.html


DC United is owned by the same man who owns Inter. Rapids owner went out and bought a controlling interest in Arsenal. Both were cases where their owners went and got Euro teams AFTER they bought the MLS teams, so sorta semi-similar to NYCFC and MC. In the case of these Sunderland deals however, these MLS clubs are just forming partnerships for training and marketing, its not ownership.

I'm not saying they'll create ownership, but I think top Europeans clubs are looking at what City is planning to do with NYCFC and thinking that MLS could be a great ground for their players to develop. That's good for MLS, because young talent, even if they won't stay here for a long time, could elevate the level of the game and make for more exciting games.

 

[413Blue]

There have been numerous partnerships like this dating back a good 10 years or so. I remember SJ & Tottenham, but there have been several others, none of which really amounted to much more than a player loan and a friendly.

 

[Paul]

In the case of these Sunderland deals however, these MLS clubs are just forming partnerships for training and marketing, its not ownership.

Wasn't there some training/marketing partnership between Real Madrid & Real Salt Lake? I seem to recall something of that nature 5 yrs or so ago.

 

[MagnusPax]

Wasn't there some training/marketing partnership between Real Madrid & Real Salt Lake? I seem to recall something of that nature 5 yrs or so ago.

Yeah but it didn't last long. Orlando has a similar agreement with Benfica.

 

[BlueWarrior]

sporting lisbon has one of the best academy set ups in the world. Good on them.

 

[Kjbert]

It has nothing to do with player development. Any potential ownership deal has to do with Financial Fair Play. NYCFC is a revenue source for MCFC. That's the goal.

 

[MagnusPax]

It has nothing to do with player development. Any potential ownership deal has to do with Financial Fair Play. NYCFC is a revenue source for MCFC. That's the goal.

Apparently someone was drinking before they started posting tonight. Are you really trolling the NYCFC forum tonight, even though you are supposedly a fan?

 

[Kjbert]

What the hell are you talking about? Do you think CFG just wanted to own soccer clubs around the world? There's a reason they purchased clubs in the markets they did. The Man Us of the world (with their debt) have 50 years of international exposure on MCFC. This is a business. And there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[MagnusPax]

I find all your rather negative posts tonight to have an agenda.

And yes CFG wants to own lots of football clubs so they can spread their brand. FFP? Seriously? MLS and Australia aren't going to help them with that. 3 players in MLS and 1 in Australia will never get them the $s they need to "hide". But thanks for thinking that the owners of NYCFC are just a bunch of shady money-embezzlers. I guess they are from the Middle East so that's fair game.

 

[Kjbert]

You're missing the point, not surprisingly.

How many kids do you see walking around in Barca, Real Madrid and Man U jerseys?

Now, how many do you see in Man City jerseys? This is about introducing Man City to the newly engaged, soccer crazy fans in 3 of the world's largest markets.

If China gave two shits about soccer, they would buy Beijing FC.

 

[Ahab_Flanders]

You're missing the point, not surprisingly.

How many kids do you see walking around in Barca, Real Madrid and Man U jerseys?

Now, how many do you see in Man City jerseys? This is about introducing Man City to the newly engaged, soccer crazy fans in 3 of the world's largest markets.

If China gave two shits about soccer, they would buy Beijing FC.

Ok, so what does this marketing aspect have to do with FFP?

 

[northernburbs]

I think the reason these clubs are investing in MLS clubs now is that as soccer grows in the US and the teams are more profitable the salary cap will rise,and at that point the financial power of the US market will draw the best players here. OR many of the teams in smaller US markets will fold and as we become a more Global society in 20 years there will be a top global league of maybe 34 teams. 10 from the US 4 from England 10 from the rest of Europe and the remaining 10 from emerging markets.

 

[Kjbert]

It's about jersey sales and ticket sales. Real Madrid, Barca and Man U have done an excellent job of executing a sales strategy in other markets.

 

[einwindir]

You're missing the point, not surprisingly.

How many kids do you see walking around in Barca, Real Madrid and Man U jerseys?

Now, how many do you see in Man City jerseys? This is about introducing Man City to the newly engaged, soccer crazy fans in 3 of the world's largest markets.

If China gave two shits about soccer, they would buy Beijing FC.

This is an insanely short sighted point of view. Jersey sales are far from the goal. If ManC fell out of top 5 you seriously think CFG would keep that team as their priority?

CFG is the company. Soccer is the product. "City" is the brand. Soriano never says "play the Manchester way". If CFG just wanted to sell ManC shirts then they wouldn't have invested 100m on a franchise fee. The countless millions on the FO and roster. And whatever fuckton millions on MelC and Yokohama.

Manchester is fish in the City pond. They might be a real big fucking fish but they're still just one.

 

[Kjbert]

Have to disagree.

This isn't about winning for winning's sake. CFG is George Steinbrenner. This is a business. Don't fool yourself guys.

It's about exposure. CFG is just trying to do what other brands do in markets around the world - sell "product" - whatever that product may be.

 

[Falastur]

CFG is George Steinbrenner? What do you mean?