Strange description considering that in a ponzi scheme none of the money is invested and the investors are hoodwinked through fake reports.
I don’t think MLS is a ponzi scheme but I think the OP was referencing that money from the newest entrants goes out the door to the older ones. It works well until there aren’t new members. As the original article showed, the new TV contract will be a critical component of how the league fares as the gravy train of new clubs entrance fees is nearing its end. That being said, it’s a huge vote of confidence that investor are willing to pay what they are to join the MLS club.
There is no salary cap (maximum expenditure) in MLS only a salary budget (minimum expenditure) and allocation (pocket) money. The restrictions are on how many players can earn more than a certain amount. MLS is owned by it's teams' owners. They could remove all spending restrictions tomorrow if they wanted. However, I do see some sort of salary cap being attractive to Liga MX investors.
thats a non-answer. Ponzi schemes (which ive said MLS is not) don’t do that either. however, if a meaningful amount of any cash taken out of the business each year is from new entrants then it has similarities.
There are no indications that a meaningful amount of money is being taken out of the business each year.
Fifa has a duty to study plans that can line their pockets. If there is truly a will and the money is there, fifa will do what they can to make it happen.
To tell you the truth, I don't know the mechanisms involved in the relationships between the leagues and fifa, but I asume/guesed that there would be fees involved that fia would be able to collect. The larger the amount of money involved, the large the fees. I believe that a combined liga MX/North Amercian league could prove to be pretty lucrative and that could possibly bode well for fifa. i could very well be pretty far off base. The above is, of course, above board money and fees. The other, more cynical view is the that there very well could be fees that are somewhat less above board. If fifa looks at it and there is no significant money in it for them, they sure wont' put too much effort into helping to make it happen.
First of all, take anything I say with a grain of salt. I havn't even read the linked articles. My only response to that is that the current levels of MLS vs Liga Mx are irrelevant to a businessman that is looking toward the future. If he believes he will be better off in 2-5 yrs (or whatever his timeframe), he may very well want to join together with another league. Also, it could also depend upon how the league is formed...ie if it is limited to a few teams in each league, it would likely be far more lucrative to an individual team owner in MX than if it were to combine all the teams.
It's the same thing, cap or budget, it limits and puts restrictions on how you build your roster. And no, MLS owners won't get rid of it if not they would have done so already. Same thing with Liga MX, if a salary budget is what benefits them they would have done it already. I don't see teams like Tigres agreeing to a salary "budget". Too many restrictions plus you can't buy players to later loan them out and make profits of off loans like they do and MLS teams can't do. Someone gotta give at the end in order for something to work, if they are serious about merging. Some type of middle ground or all agreeing to go completely like Liga MX or vice versa.
I’d say do away with the CCL which is NEVER going to be the UEFA CL. in its place, I’d advocate for the top 18 in MLS, top 18 in Liga MX, top 2 in CPL, and top 2 in the rest of CONCACAF play in 40 team tournament. 8 groups of 5 teams. Hypothetical Model: -MLS West: LA Galaxy, Los Angeles FC, Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers, FC Dallas, Houston Dynamo, Real Salt Lake, Sporting Kansas City, Minnesota United -MLS East: Atlanta United, Inter Miami, Charlotte, NY Red Bulls, NYCFC, DC United, Philadelphia Union, Columbus Crew, Toronto FC -Liga MX: Chivas, UNAM, Santos Laguna, Pachuca, Puebla, Cruz Azul, Club America, Toluca, Tigres, Necaxa, Leon, Atlas, Queretaro, Atletico San Luis, Monterrey, Club Tijuana, Monarcas, Ciudad Juarez -CPL: Valour FC, FC Edmonton -Rest of CONCACAF: Deportivo Saprissa, Olimpia *Randomly selected groups. *8 games. 1x February, 2x March, 2x April, 2 June, 1x July *Only Champion from group advances *Playoffs: 2x August, 2x September, 1x Final
It's being recycled into things like salary budgets and allocation money. The combined salary budget MLS made available to it's 24 teams in 2019 was $101.76 million, plus they received at least that allocation money. But MLS is a good deal for those who got in early. Both Orlando City and DC United have traded shares in real money at a valuation of around $500 million. We're talking about a hypothetical joint venture with Liga MX. If it's a viable option then MLS owners will make decisions that will ensure that their teams are competitive. The biggest problem of all would be weather. Mexican teams don't want to play in the summer while teams in the Northeast, Canada and the Midwest can't host games in the winter.
Yeah, but the CCL can be made irrelevant. In truth, despite all sorts of tries, it has never been genuinely relevant.
Yeah, but MLS/Liga MX could just treat the CCL as a reserve tournament and focus primarily on this competition. Ultimately, both MLS/Liga MX are going to pursue the path that makes the most money, and there’s a lot more potential for money when those two leagues just play each other.
Entertaining read...but never will happen. CONCACAF are adamant at making the CCL work and to their credit, CL has been very entertaining so far...just need to find the right formula for CCL