"manager magazin" reported that the meanwhile insolvent Kirch Media AG paid 20 million Euro for agreeing to an extension of the central TV marketing. Bayern meanwhile confessed to have received the money for "extensive marketing rights", which according to them are normal for every club. Kirch Group and DFL were not willing to give a statement already yet. 'manager magazin' reports that Kirch promised to pay them the difference that existed between agreeing to the centralised marketing and free marketing of every club. The magazine called it "unique perverting of competition in the Bundesliga history". For the first three years Kirch guaranteed payment of 15.4 M each, for 2003 even 25.6 M. Factually they transferred about 20 M until Kirch went bankrupt.
Looks like a sturdy fraud, and Bayern aren't even denying it. Of all clubs Bayern, who are always eager to build an image of clean business. I'm curious how they'll be punished; relegation won't happen. It's Bayern. I support an annual ten point handicap until, lets say, 2005, as well as reaching back to 2000, what would also pepper up some clubs championship sheet. Ohh, handing out two recent hostages would be mandatory either
It really seems to get a major topic: DFL doesn't accept the Bayern statement. DFL Commissioner Werner Hackmann was "very surprised" about the news. "There are things that have to be cleared", said Hackmann and demanded that the record champion fully explains the payment. DFL is especially astonished that the payment was not in the files Bayern told to the league. They now expect full details on the whole matter. The league rivals reacted surprised and angry. "I don't know a single club that signed a deal with Kirch Media", said Bayer Leverkusen's GM Wolfgang Holzhäuser. "Bayern cannot keep the money, this is a sum that has to be divided among all clubs", said Michael A. Roth, President of 1.FC Nürnberg. ==== It is highly interesting btw. that the Kirch Media dependent TV stations SAT1, Pro7, DSF as well as Internet provider www.sport1.de don't mention the matter with a single word.
Some voices: Martin Kind, Hannover: "DFL and the clubs are in trouble. The matter questions the whole construction of the league. The basic thought of solidarity is questioned to express it in a mild way." Klaus Stabach, Cottbus: "That's preverting the competition if they easily get additional 20 M. For us 2 M would already be enough. I remember that only Dortmund was against the centralised marketing and simply did not vote, but Bayern even fought for getting it - now I know why." Meanwhile it is also reported that Bayern got 15 to 30 M for terminating the contract with Kirch Media.
I read this story this morning. Bayern are claiming that this is normal for big clubs in other countries, which is true to a certain degree. The fact that this deal was with Kirch, who also held the Bundesliga TV rights, puts a different spin on things though.
This absolutely does not matter what's usual in other countries. Bayern accepted the centralised TV marketing and has to stick to this agreement. Everything else are plain and simple illegal payments that contradict the statutes of the league. The league of course has to question itself as their 100% voting system for a change is a farce, opens the door for manipulations and just guarantees the position of the market leaders as they are able to block everything endangering their position (what's good and understandable for them, but damaging league, competition and the sports itself). The Constitution can be changed with 2/3 majority in the two chambers of the Parliament, and the league has a system that thinks their statutes are more important than the constitution? That's really pervert. I could accept 3/4 votes for a change, but 100% votes usually are only common in dictatorships where the dictator has the only vote.
I agree A Bayern official this morning stated that teams like AC Milan make 100M per year from deals like this whereas Bayern have to make do with "only" 10M per year. I was just quoting one of the excuses they are coming out with. This is quite similiar to what is happening in Scotland where Celtic and Rangers try to control and keep as much income for themselves. They use the same excuse that they have more "fans" so should get much more money than the smaller clubs. The rich get richer etc. As a result of TV money the Scottish league is now dead, no other team in Scotland can get within 20 points of Celtic or Rangers, and it is about 20 years since another club has won the title there. They now want to join the English league as they can make even more money there. Lets hope the German FA take firm action here to stop this ever happening to the Bundesliga.
EARTHQUAKE: THE LEAGUE IS IRRITATED – LAWSUIT THREATENS FC Bayern only sent a short notice that confirmed a contract between Bayern Munich and the Kirch Group for common marketing rights. Uli Hoeneß added that there was no perverting of the competition in any way, the 18 pages contract is legally fully okay. Further statements were refused. Officials of other clubs reacted astonished, but not silent. Dr. Gerd Niebaum did not want to believe the story in Madrid as they were the only ones not voting for the centralised marketing in 2000. Bayern voted for it. As they earned 40 M with this decision. Franz Beckenbauer rejects such thoughts. It was only about “some tournaments and friendly games. As we have, any club has someone for these marketing rights.” For the officials of the German pro soccer the matter is not that easy. DFL demanded a full clearance of the whole matter. One team boss is even speaking about an earthquake and a member of a pro club plans a lawsuit against FC Bayern if he finds a possibility in the contract. INTERVIEW DR. DIETER HAHN, EX-VICE PRESIDENT KIRCH MEDIA K: How did it come to this agreement? DH: We wanted to do with FC Bayern what UFA did with Dortmund and Hamburg. We wanted to have a contract for single games and for the case that Bayern only makes the UEFA Cup. Then we would have owned the rights for marketing. Additionally we wanted to do a pre-cautious measure for the case of decentralised TV marketing. K: And this was worth 20 M Euro for two years? DH: We wanted to secure the rights. And we would have opened an own channel for FC Bayern. I can’t do a comment about the sums, but this were substantial amounts. Uli Hoeneß has never been cheap. COMMENT: SELFISH SOLIDARITY Bayern Munich taught us selfish solidarity. Yes for centralised TV marketing, the leader in the soccer business was celebrated for this decision. “We earn our money in the Champions League and pay the biggest amount for solidarity”, said Karl-Heinz Rummenigge and Uli Hoeneß on and on again. Applause! Now we know: the solidarity was easy for FC Bayern. The record champion also did singular marketing next to the centralised TV marketing and earned 20.5 M Euro for two years with it. No wonder that the club praised the Kirch empire also in times of their crisis. Whistles! The Bundesliga was fooled, a new affair in Munich questions the system of the centralised TV marketing that is working well since decades. The individual TV marketing now seems to be only a matter of time. Then a new solidarity concept on the base of licence fees for taking part in the competition depending on the budget of the clubs has to come. FURTHER REACTIONS: Michael Meier, Dortmund: “I can’t imagine that Bayern is corrupt. You can’t be that impudent. We were consequent and honest until the end.” Edgar Geenen, Nürnberg: “I am still that shocked that I hardly can give a comment. I can only say that we neither have nor had such a contract. Unfortunately, otherwise we’d have some sorrows less now.” Manfred Müller, Bremen: “It’s a legal business, in which Bayern used their good market position. We should talk about with DFL in a calm atmosphere.” Reiner Calmund, Leverkusen: “We never got a single cent extra. If this happened in Munich, then I got full understanding for all clubs, who don’t see this justified on the base of the solidarity, But: before someone raises a stone and starts throwing at Bayern, they should ask themselves what they had done in this situation.” Further current news: Michael Pfad, DFL: “We will have to check, in how far the contract must have been handed out to us in the licensing. We also got to check, in how far the league as a group was damaged.” Frank Mackerodt of Hamburger SV suggested to annul Bayern’s championships during this time additional to repayment of the sum to the league. Also, little explanation of the TV money system in Germany: Contract: 290 M Euro 2.Bundesliga: gets 20% Bundesliga: half of the remaining sum (so, 40%) is divided by 18, so that every club gets 6.4 M. The remaining 116 M are divided according to the positions of the last three years.
New developlment: Bayern was sued today by an independent lawyer. "In the interest of a clean and fair competition all incidents have to be cleared. I did that because of own motivation, there is no client behind it. I'm acting in the interest of many soccer fans, who are shocked about the happenings and don't have any trust left in DFB and DFL." The lawsuit is aimed on hidden kickback payments
Bayern scheduled a press conference for today, admitted to have received 20.5 M (according to Süddeutsche Zeitung 50 M), but declared that everything was fully legal. Later today DFL made a press release stating that the contract must have been added to the licensing. And they also said that many questions remain open.
Bayern's response http://www.fcbayern.t-online.de/en/club/archive/news/09614.php?fcb_sid=SESSION_ID_66
That was a very subjective Hoeneß press conference that IMO even worsened Bayern's situation as he had some questionable comments that absolutely did not hit the core of the whole matter. Instead he rather tried a helpless strike against all other clubs that have no justification and are an entirely different matter. The DFL press release was later than Bayern's press conference. Already the simple fact that they kept silence about the contract and did not mention it to DFL for the licensing procedure, can justify that the league cancels the licence. This surely won't happen here as Bayern still would be economically very well off even without the money, but already based on that there has to be a penalty. If the contract is legal, then they just face some fine or maybe some points reduced, but if it in fact is a TV contract - what Hoeneß and Beckenbauer indirectly declared without wanting it - then Bayern is in deeper trouble. This would mean that they have to pay back the whole sum to the league plus they'd face a major fine that practically can't be under reducing some points.
As punishment, I think Bayern should forfeity their 1993/94 title they robbed from 1.FCK. The bogus goal against Nurnberg and winning the replay is a travesty.
At matchday number 1 after the incidents, there is general agreement among all GMs (except Uli and Dieter Hoeneß of course) that the contract had to be told to DFL and that Bayern at least acted morally wrong. Dr Reinhard Rauball, former President of Borussia Dortmund and Germany's sports lawyer no.2, explained that according to the rules all contracts of this kind have to be told to DFL already before signing to get the permit; this goes hand in hand with DFL's exclusive right to check whether this contract is legal - this clause causes that nobody can claim to not have known that the contract had to be declared to the league. Rauball expects an internal trial with major consequences for Bayern Munich as the public eye is on them and cares for big pressure.