real madrid in fm 2010

[baker.simon]

So how much money is to be made by investing in a small club? That was the point being discussed. You saying banks are in it for the money, only helps my argument as thus it would make more sense to loan to Madrid. Thanks for that.

Haha, nice try. My point being that these banks that are going to the wall, are doing so through poor decision making, something they continue to do 'giving' this money to Real (Royal) Madrid.

[mackemforever]

Then who qualifies to be a "really top class team" ? The sole winner of last year's Champions League ?

The club with most domestic titles in the past five years ?

The club that produces the best players ?

Opinions aside, it's unquestionable that Real Madrid are a world class club, they're very well known, rich and have great players.

There are many clubs like Real Madrid, I'm not saying that Real Madrid are the best, far from it, personally I'm not happy about our performance last year, but that hardly means we're not "world class".

Barça can walk all over us a million times, we still have more titles in the bag than they ever will.

Bollocks to that.

Yes you were better than they were in the past and in my opinion were for a considerable period of time the best club in the world, but just because you were great in the past is no guarentee that you will be great in the future.

There is no way you can say that they will never win more titles than you, it is absolute ******** if you think that it is impossible.

[afced7]

Real Madrid won the CL in 2001/2002. Don't know if that was before or after July, but it doesn't really matter now does it.

Perez gave them MORE than he would have needed giving them than if we were fined? Wouldn't he just let them fine Madrid then and save the money? I'm wondering how far you will go with reaching when there's proof showing the contrary....ooh, maybe you'll involve aliens with your next try.

The last 5 years or so, I saw that they didn't win the league. I'm 100% sure they didn't win the CL either, as it's... well ...Arsenal.

1. Oops, my bad, I thought you said they'd won the CL twice:o

2. And here was me thinking that President's in Spain weren't allowed to fund their clubs, therefore meaning that Real paying a fine wouldn't impact on Perez's finances. The bad reputation would have been worse for Real anyway. Sorry no aliens. The point of that example was just to prove that there are other forms of corruption anyway. I just brought up a pretty unlikely example to illustrate it.

3. We built a new stadium=money (you still haven't talked about budgets). C'mon we're in a league where there are at least two billionaire owners (who can fund the club).

[ReallyMadrid]

Haha, nice try. My point being that these banks that are going to the wall, are doing so through poor decision making, something they continue to do 'giving' this money to Real (Royal) Madrid.

And your point is apprantly based on Madrid not having the income they have? Or that banks are giving us that money without interest so that they don't make money from loaning us funds? I wish I lived in your fantasy world for the second one though, it's would be like a real world FM situation after editing the database.

[afced7]

And your point is apprantly based on Madrid not having the income they have? Or that banks are giving us that money without interest so that they don't make money from loaning us funds? I wish I lived in your fantasy world for the second one though, it's would be like a real world FM situation after editing the database.

I don't think that was the point he was making...

[ReallyMadrid]

1. Oops, my bad, I thought you said they'd won the CL twice:o

2. And here was me thinking that President's in Spain weren't allowed to fund their clubs, therefore meaning that Real paying a fine wouldn't impact on Perez's finances. The bad reputation would have been worse for Real anyway. Sorry no aliens. The point of that example was just to prove that there are other forms of corruption anyway. I just brought up a pretty unlikely example to illustrate it.

3. We built a new stadium=money (you still haven't talked about budgets). C'mon we're in a league where there are at least two billionaire owners (who can fund the club).

I was hoping on the aliens dang nabbit! I'm still hoping somebody can come up with a decent explanation involving extraterrestials though. Fingers crossed.

2) If even Microsoft can't 'bribe' in whatever way the EU into not giving them fines, why would Real madrid be able to do it? I know we are one of the richest clubs in the world, but I mean come on, even we can't compete with Microsoft on a financial level.

3) You're still going at it from a point where I was comparing the 2 teams, where I was just naming a team that has been trophyless for a while. I'll say "Tottenhammed" next time, happy?

[ReallyMadrid]

I don't think that was the point he was making...

The point he's making is that the banks are making wrong decisions by "giving" us money, when we are one of the surest ways to get the bank's money back and make them more money in the progress. His point isn't based on reality, I wish it were (as mentioned above) but it isn't.

[baker.simon]

And your point is apprantly based on Madrid not having the income they have? Or that banks are giving us that money without interest so that they don't make money from loaning us funds? I wish I lived in your fantasy world for the second one though, it's would be like a real world FM situation after editing the database.

My point is the 'credit crunch' was caused by banks restricting the flow of lending to everyone yet Real Madrid have seemed to skirt around this issue.

[afced7]

I'll say "Tottenhammed" next time, happy?

:mad::mad:Less actually, and I reckon you know why!

[Avelives]

Waffle...

You clearly have no clue how normal bank loans to football clubs work, cause if you did you would recocgnise that normally PLAYERS are not used as collateral for loans. What this essentially means is that IF madrid defaulted on the loans then Caja Madrid and Santander would become the owners of Ronaldo and Kaka, which is highly irregular and unfair compared to how most clubs have to manage their finances.

Anyway clearly you are getting uber defensive and a bit childish and have started playing forum wars using arguing techniques and frankly I have better things to do with my time than bash my head against a brick wall of anti-logic.

[ReallyMadrid]

You clearly have no clue how normal bank loans to football clubs work, cause if you did you would recocgnise that normally PLAYERS are not used as collateral for loans. What this essentially means is that IF madrid defaulted on the loans then Caja Madrid and Santander would become the owners of Ronaldo and Kaka, which is highly irregular and unfair compared to how most clubs have to manage their finances.

Anyway clearly you are getting uber defensive and a bit childish and have started playing forum wars using arguing techniques and frankly I have better things to do with my time than bash my head against a brick wall of anti-logic.

Didn't you call me a buffoon? Yet I'm the childish one?.......alrighty then. Forum wars to boot? Damn, I'm better than I thought if I did all that in a day.

You go to a bank, try to get a loan. They'll look at what you have and what you will get in the future to base IF they give you the loan and how much they will give. This is EXACTLY what's happening over there. i can already see Sporting going to the bank and expecting the same loan as Madrid: "yeah we don't even have one tenth of the income of Madrid....nor the value in players....that'll be 100 million por favor" Get serious.

[ReallyMadrid]

:mad::mad:Less actually, and I reckon you know why!

I thought Arsenal and Tottenham were rivals? The misfortune of your rivals is a good thing.

[baker.simon]

Didn't you call me a buffoon? Yet I'm the childish one?.......alrighty then. Forum wars to boot? Damn, I'm better than I thought if I did all that in a day.

You go to a bank, try to get a loan. They'll look at what you have and what you will get in the future to base IF they give you the loan and how much they will give. This is EXACTLY what's happening over there. i can already see Sporting going to the bank and expecting the same loan as Madrid: "yeah we don't even have one tenth of the income of Madrid....nor the value in players....that'll be 100 million por favor" Get serious.

Interesting, yet Liverpool (you remember them?), one of the most succesful team teams both in Europe and domestically, with a worldwide fanbase, players (or equities as Real Madrid players are called), cant get a loan to restructure the debt. Im sure if it worked Reals "way" they could say "we have Torres and Gerrard as a deposit, can you give us a loan?"

[afced7]

Yes but I don't get the ed bit on the end. Almost seemed as though you were suggesting I wanted anything to do with Tottenham.

Other point, yes that is what should happen. But it didn't. Banks made bad decisions (like giving Madrid loans) and went bust because they couldn't get their money back. Don't know if I subscribe to that, I don't know enough about Madrid's finances to comment, but that is the point nonetheless. Although it would be stupid to say Madrid caused the financial meltdown obviously.

[ReallyMadrid]

Interesting, yet Liverpool (you remember them?), one of the most succesful team teams both in Europe and domestically, with a worldwide fanbase, players (or equities as Real Madrid players are called), cant get a loan to restructure the debt. Im sure if it worked Reals "way" they could say "we have Torres and Gerrard as a deposit, can you give us a loan?"

Santander has no simmilar money problems, in fact it increased their covering base by buying some rests of the Fortis fiasco. How exactly are the Spanish banks making worse decisions than the English ones? Didn't one of the bigger English ones need help from their government? Thought I saw that on the news some time ago. Again, what exactly are you basing your arguments on?

[ReallyMadrid]

Almost seemed as though you were suggesting I wanted anything to do with Tottenham.

I'm known to start forum wars without knowing it, but I'm not that cold hearted.

[afced7]

Santander has no simmilar money problems?

That is true. Now there is no way in hell that I want to get into a discussion about the recession or whatever, but I believe that is because due to spanish law, they are unable to invest in some sort of thing that many other world wide banks are able to invest in, and not neccessarily because of good decision making. I would know, Santander is my bank! Also, I assume some Spanish banks are in trouble?

[Avelives]

Didn't you call me a buffoon? Yet I'm the childish one?........

Actually if you read what i wrote i said

Only a buffoon would suggest that in todays climate loans of this nature to big clubs for single players aren't obscene.

So no i didnt call you a buffoon, if however you think its fine for clubs to be going into debt and going under while one club (the ONLY club) can secure loans for individual players based on its connections to government and financial institutions then YES you are!!

[ReallyMadrid]

I'm sure there are, as this crisis isn't any country exclusive. But that an English bank won't do the same to Liverpool, as what a Spanish bank does with Madrid, has no bearing on the "wrong" decision making of Spanish banks, as they certainly aren't doing worse than what's happening elsewhere. Santander is one of the biggest in Spain, and instead of asking support from the government, they have bought a greater share in the South American market on the cheap when Fortis had to sell their divisions. If anything they have showed to know when to spend and where.

[baker.simon]

That is true. Now there is no way in hell that I want to get into a discussion about the recession or whatever, but I believe that is because due to spanish law, they are unable to invest in some sort of thing that many other world wide banks are able to invest in, and not neccessarily because of good decision making. I would know, Santander is my bank! Also, I assume some Spanish banks are in trouble?

Yes, BBVA, the Spanish league sponsors and Spain's 2nd largest bank are currently undergoing massive restructuring as they are losing a lot of money.

Santander has no simmilar money problems, in fact it increased their covering base by buying some rests of the Fortis fiasco. How exactly are the Spanish banks making worse decisions than the English ones? Didn't one of the bigger English ones need help from their government? Thought I saw that on the news some time ago. Again, what exactly are you basing your arguments on?

My point is, note i said point and not argument, the fact that Real have somehow managed this finance by securing it against players, yet other more succesful teams, with equally great players (deposits) are struggling to secure backing. If Real can do this then why cant other teams? Unless they have their hand in the pot or are being 'helped' out somewhere.

[afced7]

@ Really Madrid. That was the point though. Not mine, but somebody's and it was that Spanish banks may be affording Madrid concessions that banks won't give to any other club, which is rather suspicious. Not my point you understand, but that was the point that was made.

[ReallyMadrid]

My point is, note i said point and not argument, the fact that Real have somehow managed this finance by securing it against players, yet other more succesful teams, with equally great players (deposits) are struggling to secure backing. If Real can do this then why cant other teams? Unless they have their hand in the pot or are being 'helped' out somewhere.

Can't say I know much about Liverpool's situation, but using Google: LINK

Shows that the owners (which in essence is Liverpool) DID loan money from the bank and that they can not pay their interests on those loans.

So they *can* loan money as Madrid do, only unlike Madrid they don't pay their interests. I can imagine why a bank would not loan more money then.

[afced7]

Realistically, I think a lot of the problems are the owners' problems, not Liverpool's

[Avelives]

Can't say I know much about Liverpool's situation, but using Google: LINK

Shows that the owners (which in essence is Liverpool) DID loan money from the bank and that they can not pay their interests on those loans.

So they *can* loan money as Madrid do, only unlike Madrid they don't pay their interests. I can imagine why a bank would not loan more money then.

Of course all teams loan money from banks, thats not in dispute. Whats in dispute here (and its even upset some Spanish officials) is that the nature of the loans Madrid secured are not available to other clubs.

If they were I'm sure Valencia would have secured considerable loans to keep the likes of Villa at the club rather than having to offload him.

Also to address the Liverpool point, what happened there was that the two American owners transferred huge debts (as did Man Utds owners) into the clubs name, IF they defaulted on these loans the entire club would become the property of the bank.

If Madrid default on these loans it loses just two players who then (rather oddly) would become the property of the bank.

Im not saying anything overtly illegal has occured but its definately not 'the norm' or even replicated anywhere else in European football and as such does afford them huge advantages in the transfer market.

[Pope of Pot, King of Nothi]

Before a bank loans money to an organisation they'll stringently check the risk involved in that loan. They'll ask to see the financials (this point is to counter the loan to R.M. vs. Valencia) of the firm, and base their decision on a) ROI, b) chance of risk and c) size of the loan. Short of getting into an economic debate, they'll notice that the revenue of Real Madrid indicates that the burden of risk is less than it would be with another club. Secondly, the greater the loan, depending on fixed or variable interest (I'm guessing fixed) - the compound interest would amount to a greater return on investment. The risk and size of the loan go hand in hand. Valencia could probably borrow £10m (plucking a figure here) if they could demonstrate that they could service their debt. Real Madrid, taking the size of the club into relativity of the loan would have a higher borrowing limit because they are able to demonstrate that based on their revenue, they could service their debt.

At the end of the day, loaning money with low levels of risk is what rescues an economy. That, of course, is relative depending on how the Government exercises its funds - infrastructure, etc. Money flows from the banks, to Real Madrid, who buy players, who have agents, former clubs, etc. They buy Ferraris, who pay their engineers, designers and mechanics. Those employees go to the stores and fuel the economy by purchasing more realistic essential goods.

In short, big loans by big banks assure the general economy - I'm not surprised by big money lending being thrown around in the current climate as governments support things like this to raise confidence in their economies.

[18-WATP-73]

Some one mentiond glory hunting in this thread.. Vrisk where you born in Isreal? if so then why support madrid?

[Avelives]

Before a bank loans money to an organisation they'll stringently check the risk involved in that loan. They'll ask to see the financials (this point is to counter the loan to R.M. vs. Valencia) of the firm, and base their decision on a) ROI, b) chance of risk and c) size of the loan. Short of getting into an economic debate, they'll notice that the revenue of Real Madrid indicates that the burden of risk is less than it would be with another club. Secondly, the greater the loan, depending on fixed or variable interest (I'm guessing fixed) - the compound interest would amount to a greater return on investment. The risk and size of the loan go hand in hand. Valencia could probably borrow £10m (plucking a figure here) if they could demonstrate that they could service their debt. Real Madrid, taking the size of the club into relativity of the loan would have a higher borrowing limit because they are able to demonstrate that based on their revenue, they could service their debt.

At the end of the day, loaning money with low levels of risk is what rescues an economy. That, of course, is relative depending on how the Government exercises its funds - infrastructure, etc. Money flows from the banks, to Real Madrid, who buy players, who have agents, former clubs, etc. They buy Ferraris, who pay their engineers, designers and mechanics. Those employees go to the stores and fuel the economy by purchasing more realistic essential goods.

In short, big loans by big banks assure the general economy - I'm not surprised by big money lending being thrown around in the current climate as governments support things like this to raise confidence in their economies.

Im not debating that, to be fair eveything you say is 100% correct. My issue with the loan/s they took (and it seems certain spanish officials issue as well) is the nature of the loan.

Rather than securing the loan against the clubs name as is the case with all other bank-to-club loans, the Madrid loans are secured against the two actual players, AND lets not forget that the RM president is a person with a lot of financial clout who no doubt 'pulled a few strings' to make sure these irregular loans went through.

My point is that if the banks were lending money based on the clubs then sure Madrid could obviously get more than a team like Valencia, BUT if those loans are secured against the value of the players themselves then surely someone like Villa could command around 35 to 40mill Euros.

I also realise that Madrid are easily able to make those payments but the irregular nature of the loans seems very unfair to me.

[Remco]

Madrid will have plenty of money left over, last season they made a profit of E100m, add that to there balance they already had of E92million. They are also predicted to make at least another E100million this year, so all the players they buy are catered for with money left over. All this without debt, ManYoo should take a look at this!

It's clear that you didn't have had much education in economics. This is one of the most senseless and untrue post i've ever seen. Show me where you've got this information, but I'm sure you missed a lot of things. Real Madrid has one of the biggest debts in the world, but it's clear that they don't care about that in Spain.

[Blacksquare]

It doesn't matter if Real Madrid win anything. Its all about making money. Though this time it seems it will be a bit different as Perez seems to want to sign players that will actually help the squad and not just big shots as CR and Kaka are all investment players.

[erik86]

Surely signing 2 of the best players in the world means you want to win football matches, the fact that the amount of money is so high means they have taken in to consideration how much revenue it will bring.... Good luck to them I say. I still think Barcelona will be better. Their passing is just phenomenal.

[tomtuck01]

2 leagues and a CL and some side trophies? I wonder how you describe the act of a team that really won nothing.... "Arsenaled"?

In the 6 year Galactico period (2000-2006), Real won 2 LA Liga titles, and one Champions League trophy. These so-called "side trophies" you speak of have little meaning when you spend millions of pounds, it is the major trophies that the fans crave, not the Spanish Super Cup.

Comercially the Galactico period was a success, but on the field, it really wasn't.