It was bound to happen soon...

[kopdan]

..the end of football as we know it


Agent Zahavi behind transfer plan
Football Super agent Pini Zahavi says he is a key figure behind a £100m transfer fund designed to acquire control of the best emerging players in the world.

Zahavi says the fund is being set up by City of London investors.

"The fund is not quite complete, but we're aiming to raise around £100m in order to buy shares in players," Zahavi told the Sunday Mirror newspaper.

"They've asked me to find the players and act as advisor to the fund. The plan is absolutely legal."

Zahavi added: "We will look mainly for young players who develop and eventually play at the highest level.

"Some players will stay at their clubs and some will move.

"Already around 80% of players in South America are partly owned by investors as well as the clubs they play for."

Zahavi is the agent who organised Rio Ferdinand's transfers to Leeds United and Manchester United.

[MrMichael]

Also related to this, from yesterday's Independant

Zahavi 'linked' to new deal to own Argentine players

The trend by which promising young South American players are owned not just by their clubs, but partly or wholly by separate companies, appeared to be taken a step further yesterday when the debt-ridden Argentine club River Plate announced the sale of percentages in five of the team's most promising players to an unnamed business group. The Israeli "super agent" Pini Zahavi is thought to have brokered the dea,l said to be worth $13m (£6.8m).

The controversial trend was highlighted last week when the Argentine World Cup players Carlos Tevez and Javier Macherano joined West Ham from the Brazilian club Corinthians. The players were owned by the company Media Sports Investment and the same firm is reported by the Argentine media to be involved in yesterday's deals. Such ownership arrangements are not illegal, either in South America, or in Britain.

Jose Maria Aguilar, the president of River Plate, explained that 50 per cent of 18-year-old forward Gonzalo Higuain and 40 per cent of midfielder Fernando Belluschi have been ceded to an unnamed business group and that the deal also involves the youngsters Augusto Fernandez (20), Juan Antonio (18) and Mateo Musacchio (16).

Musacchio has yet to play for the River first team, but the talented 16-year-old is expected to be given his debut by manager, Daniel Passarella, this weekend.

Passarella is resigned to losing his best youngsters in the future, but had been particularly keen to keep Higuain for the rest of the Argentine season. "I have no doubt he will play at the top level in Europe" Passarella said last week, "but he's so young and it would be nice if we can keep him here at least until January."

Throughout the transfer window there was speculation that Higuain would be joining an English club, with Portsmouth and West Ham mentioned in the Argentine press. But when Aguilar set off for London last week, Higuain said: "It would be great for me if I could stay another year at River."

River Plate are said to incurring substantial losses each month and the deal is necessary to keep the club afloat. If either Antonio, Fernadez or Musaccchio is sold for more than $2m in the future, River will receive 30 per cent. If they are sold for $3m, 20 per cent and if it is for more than $4m, 15 per cent

However, the trend is far from new. When Aston Villa paid £9m for Juan Pablo Angel in January 2001 little of the money went to River Plate, Angel's club. Nothing came of an investigation into the transfer by the Football Association.

River Plate's city rivals, Boca Juniors, also announced yesterday that they were entering negotiations to buy up more of their star player Rodrigo Palacios. The striker, who played for Argentina in the World Cup and is a hero at Boca, is expected to be sold to a European club next summer. At present Boca, the club Diego Maradona used to play for, own only 17 per cent of the player.

The trend by which promising young South American players are owned not just by their clubs, but partly or wholly by separate companies, appeared to be taken a step further yesterday when the debt-ridden Argentine club River Plate announced the sale of percentages in five of the team's most promising players to an unnamed business group. The Israeli "super agent" Pini Zahavi is thought to have brokered the dea,l said to be worth $13m (£6.8m).

The controversial trend was highlighted last week when the Argentine World Cup players Carlos Tevez and Javier Macherano joined West Ham from the Brazilian club Corinthians. The players were owned by the company Media Sports Investment and the same firm is reported by the Argentine media to be involved in yesterday's deals. Such ownership arrangements are not illegal, either in South America, or in Britain.

Jose Maria Aguilar, the president of River Plate, explained that 50 per cent of 18-year-old forward Gonzalo Higuain and 40 per cent of midfielder Fernando Belluschi have been ceded to an unnamed business group and that the deal also involves the youngsters Augusto Fernandez (20), Juan Antonio (18) and Mateo Musacchio (16).

Musacchio has yet to play for the River first team, but the talented 16-year-old is expected to be given his debut by manager, Daniel Passarella, this weekend.

Passarella is resigned to losing his best youngsters in the future, but had been particularly keen to keep Higuain for the rest of the Argentine season. "I have no doubt he will play at the top level in Europe" Passarella said last week, "but he's so young and it would be nice if we can keep him here at least until January."
Throughout the transfer window there was speculation that Higuain would be joining an English club, with Portsmouth and West Ham mentioned in the Argentine press. But when Aguilar set off for London last week, Higuain said: "It would be great for me if I could stay another year at River."

River Plate are said to incurring substantial losses each month and the deal is necessary to keep the club afloat. If either Antonio, Fernadez or Musaccchio is sold for more than $2m in the future, River will receive 30 per cent. If they are sold for $3m, 20 per cent and if it is for more than $4m, 15 per cent

However, the trend is far from new. When Aston Villa paid £9m for Juan Pablo Angel in January 2001 little of the money went to River Plate, Angel's club. Nothing came of an investigation into the transfer by the Football Association.

River Plate's city rivals, Boca Juniors, also announced yesterday that they were entering negotiations to buy up more of their star player Rodrigo Palacios. The striker, who played for Argentina in the World Cup and is a hero at Boca, is expected to be sold to a European club next summer. At present Boca, the club Diego Maradona used to play for, own only 17 per cent of the player.

http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/internationals/article1431097.ece

[Guest]

Is that an excerpt from your book ?

[kopdan]

flmao

ye.....I mean no

[Guest]

flmao

ye.....I mean no

Is that statement mutually exclusive ?

[kopdan]

[scully]

****ing leeches.

[rnm]

i think it's a good thing - enabling smaller clubs to own bigger players, for a period, and they gain if the players increase in value too

it's a bit like a housing agency

[Tom]

It isn't anything of the sort. Ask corinthians. They've just lost their 2 best players - except they weren't "their" players, they were owned by MSI who only have one interest - maximising their profit margins...

[rnm]

It isn't anything of the sort. Ask corinthians. They've just lost their 2 best players - except they weren't "their" players, they were owned by MSI who only have one interest - maximising their profit margins...

So they weren't Corinthians players but they had the benefit of them for less money than normal and as we/they live in a capitalist country, profit maximisation is a given.

[Tom]

" profit maximisation is a given." That's a very naive statement. Profit maximisation doesn't have to be a given. There are many institutions in "capitalist countries" (whatever that's supposed to mean - last time I looked we lived in a democracy, "captialism" is just the economic system we use to govern exchange) whereby "profit maximisation" isn't a given. Would you say that Liverpool FCs reason for existance is "profit maximisation"? What about the public sector (education, health etc.) do those institutions exist for "profit maximisation"?

What I'm saying here is that football needs to protect itself as an institution from these "profit maximisers" - and as an institution it can do so if it chooses to. Fifa, eufa etc. own the game and legislate against parasites like MSI - who don't have the game nor clubs, nor fans in the best interest.

[G_Man]

@ rnm

I think most players will see through this idea. They basically give up a lot of their choices by entering into deals like this. I think it'll continue in South America but I doubt it'll really catch on in Europe.
Ask Tevez and Maschareno if they wanted to join West Ham or SCUM, we all know the answer

[rnm]

" profit maximisation is a given." That's a very naive statement. Profit maximisation doesn't have to be a given. There are many institutions in "capitalist countries" (whatever that's supposed to mean - last time I looked we lived in a democracy, "captialism" is just the economic system we use to govern exchange) whereby "profit maximisation" isn't a given. Would you say that Liverpool FCs reason for existance is "profit maximisation"? What about the public sector (education, health etc.) do those institutions exist for "profit maximisation"?

What I'm saying here is that football needs to protect itself as an institution from these "profit maximisers" - and as an institution it can do so if it chooses to. Fifa, eufa etc. own the game and legislate against parasites like MSI - who don't have the game nor clubs, nor fans in the best interest.

If you think my point is naive then I can only counter that your understanding of my point has not taken into account the depth of thinking necessary to understand it fully; it is your swipe that is in fact naive.

I am sure you will appreciate, given some thought, that I wasn't defining the entire economic structure in one fell swoop. If you want to enter into a debate, grant the reader with a modicum of intelligence.

I understand full well the various sub-systems in society which include hospitals, schools and the army (for example) which do not share the objectives of commercially driven organisations.

I don't want to get into an extended debate which will move away from the key central point, so take it as a given that I understand economic systems and that all 'gatherings' do not yearn for increased wealth!

Football, however, has developed and they now balance commercial interests within a wider stakeholder context (fans, employees, local government, investors).

The management of these football clubs is now necessarily about income streams and financial survival; these income streams include gate money, hospitality, sponsorship and naming rights (plus others including gains/losses on player transfers).

Is your fear that the money moves out of the game by giving it to these 'profit maximisers', where do you think this money goes other than into the wider society.

This money is spent by the investors on goods and services which passes down into wages for others and is in return spent on further goods and services - all necessary for the working of the capitalist economy we enjoy.

Why should rich clubs like Chelsea, Manchester and Liverpool enjoy expensive players rather than clubs like West Ham, this shared ownership puts these types of player within the range of the second tier clubs of the premiership - which I, for one, think is great for the football that is now - not the football from 40+ years ago .

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

****ing leeches.

Ken Bates called Pini Zahavi a dickhead.

Just look at what happened at Leeds. Apparently that imbecile Risdale threw away over £25m quid of the clubs money on agents fees during his time there. Scandalous.

[Redlife]

@ rnm

I think most players will see through this idea. They basically give up a lot of their choices by entering into deals like this. I think it'll continue in South America but I doubt it'll really catch on in Europe.
Ask Tevez and Maschareno if they wanted to join West Ham or SCUM, we all know the answer

True. I wonder how players will feel about being 'owned' by a corporation. It sounds different from being owned, ie, merely under contract, by a club.