Third party player ownership

[Stuckey]

Just a thought.
In Portugal and Spain it is allowed that a player can be owned or part owned by a third party.
This means that if for example my company bought 50% ownership of some young kid then AUFC wanted to buy that kid they would only have to pay the agreed percentage that the club he plays for currently owns. So say the player is valued at $50,000 AUFC would only pay $25,000 for that player and then pay them their agreed wage. If all goes well in two season this kid is the next Nathan Burns and AEK Athens come along and want to sign him for $590,000 then AUFC get half that fee and my company can either sell my half to AEK or hold on to him in hope he'll maybe sign in the EPL is a few seasons.

Would anyone know if this is possible in the A-league? I think this could be a nice money saver for AUFC?

[shinAUFC]

So basically its a form of sponsorship?

I wouldnt go copying much the spanish do interms of money wise , most clubs struggle to pay wages over there, or so we hear atleast.

It sounds alot like tekken to me lmao, corporations owning players/ fighters

[BC]

The amount paid by the company would still have to be included in the salary cap.

[lufcmike]

Two words of caution: Leeds United

[Agostinho]

Going down the route of third party ownership is very dangerous indeed. The English FA have wisely disallowed it in their leagues and I hope others follow suit.

I hope we never see it here.

[terry tibbs]

On a similar but different note, Doncaster have handed control of their tranfers to an agent working on a minimal retainer. He wants to set the club up as a shop window for disgruntled players not getting game time at their clubs.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/spo ... _1_3896144

[Stuckey]

On a similar but different note, Doncaster have handed control of their tranfers to an agent working on a minimal retainer. He wants to set the club up as a shop window for disgruntled players not getting game time at their clubs.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/spo ... _1_3896144

And they just sign El Hadji Diouf. Who scored a double on debut.

It wouldnt effect the salary cap as third party companies dont pay the players salary they just receive a percent of the transfer fees.

[BC]

On a similar but different note, Doncaster have handed control of their tranfers to an agent working on a minimal retainer. He wants to set the club up as a shop window for disgruntled players not getting game time at their clubs.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/spo ... _1_3896144

And they just sign El Hadji Diouf. Who scored a double on debut.

It wouldnt effect the salary cap as third party companies dont pay the players salary they just receive a percent of the transfer fees.

So what's the risk then? Less income through player sales?

[Stuckey]

Basically yes. The club would still make money off the player from shirt sales and what not. Also then the club could probably leave it up to that third party to broker a deal moving them on. Especially if that third party is well connected.
Personally we have to be realistic and realise that someone like Marcos Flores is extremely rare and we are more likely going to be like Diego and play for the money first and shirt second so if we can get a player of their calibre or better basically half price they sign for three years and play for 1-2 whats wrong with that? Then in time if we do sell these players on we can use that cash to fund youth development then in time we won't need to sign big stars we will just promote them from our own youth team!
Who knows in ten years time we might be selling a Burns or a Leckie every season!

[Agostinho]

Go and find Episode 8 of this season's 'TheGame' podcast (from The Times and hosted by the incredibly irritating Gabriele Marcotti). There's a debate about it which starts around 22 minutes in.

Strongly agree with Paddy Barclay's on this one.