comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
Fifa have five or six ‘top tier’ partners. One of which is Visa (since 2007).
I believe some haven’t considered the wider implications if the likes of Visa remain a business partner (of Fifa’s).
Imagine Visa launch a new consumer fraud protection product. While at the same time senior Fifa executives are in court facing fraud/money laundering charges. The reputational impact to Visa would be catastrophic.
Their global worth losses would be far in excess of any revenue from Fifa.
If Fifa lose Visa (which I believe they will) as a top tier partner, there will be immense pressure on others to follow suit.
Are you suggesting that no one will fill that void?
Come on, there are people lining up to take VISAs place which they will not give up.
I'm not trying to sound rude here, but do you guys work or are you students?
The banks in the UK, US and Asia have been found guilty of money laundering, rate fixing and even hiding terrorists money.
They still exist, took a hit temporarily in share price but bounce back.
Corporations are not charities and have no consciences, they will support FIFA until someone with a better deal comes in
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
Bob's Burger Van will take advantage of the discounted rates.
ManUtdDaredevil
In regard to Visa they will have no option (I suspect also bearing in mind their regulatory obligations) to end their relationship with Fifa.
You may be right that Fifa will find another partner but they will not be from the financial services industry – or not until Fifa is perceived and shown to be an honest and scrupulous organisation.
Any perspective ‘top tier’ partner will find it incredibly difficult to begin a business relationship with Fifa until the conclusion of the US/Swiss investigations.
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 11 minutes ago
Are you suggesting that no one will fill that void?
Come on, there are people lining up to take VISAs place which they will not give up.
I'm not trying to sound rude here, but do you guys work or are you students?
The banks in the UK, US and Asia have been found guilty of money laundering, rate fixing and even hiding terrorists money.
They still exist, took a hit temporarily in share price but bounce back.
Corporations are not charities and have no consciences, they will support FIFA until someone with a better deal comes in
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
FIFA will always get sponsors, even if it's at a lower value it will still be worth a lot of money.. but sponsors will always be there regardless of who the president is so it's not that relevant. The pressure from blatter to leave will come from within football not from sponsors.
comment by internal solutions (U19964)
posted 20 seconds ago
FIFA will always get sponsors, even if it's at a lower value it will still be worth a lot of money.. but sponsors will always be there regardless of who the president is so it's not that relevant. The pressure from blatter to leave will come from within football not from sponsors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly.
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Other sponsors who would have had to have paid even more before.
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Other sponsors who would have had to have paid even more before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get top dollar, no matter who it is
It would appear some have missed the severity of the situation Fifa find themselves in.
Fifa are being investigated by the IRS as well as FBI and Swiss authorities. As the US prosecutors believe they have substantial evidence of corruption they can freeze Fifa’s bank accounts, and all transactions, and suspend Fifa from entering into any new commercial contracts.
How they do Fifa tender new partners with no resources?
What jurisdiction does the FBI have over FIFA?
The FIFA members they arrested are all part of CONCACAF. FIFA are the ones who got the Swiss involved.
Appears to me a lot of people are hoping and wishing for things to happen as opposed to dealing with facts.
Hot off the presses;
"4:30 a.m. (0230 GMT, 10:30 p.m. EDT)
The Asian Football Confederation says it still supports Sepp Blatter's bid for another term as FIFA president, and opposes any move to delay Friday's scheduled elections in the wake of a string of corruption arrests of some of the federation's top officials.
In a statement on its website, the AFC expressed its "disappointment and sadness" at Wednesday's events but also said it "reiterates its decision taken at the AFC Congress in Sao Paulo in 2014 ... to support FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter."
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
The reality is though when the next world cup comes around everyone will just enjoy the football and billions of ppl will see the brand names of all the sponsors which is all they care about. Look at all the controversies leading up to Brazil about venues not being ready, people dying and corruption there as well but once the football started nobody talks about that.
comment by internal solutions (U19964)
posted 24 seconds ago
The reality is though when the next world cup comes around everyone will just enjoy the football and billions of ppl will see the brand names of all the sponsors which is all they care about. Look at all the controversies leading up to Brazil about venues not being ready, people dying and corruption there as well but once the football started nobody talks about that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It amazes me how people do not get this. The product is not damaged.
Starbucks, Amazon got bad press, product not damaged, still making money
BP in the US, still making money after Macondo
Banks destroyed the economies of many countries in Europe, still got bad press, still raking it in.
FIFA will continue, the product, football will not die or lose value.
All this wishful thinking is just that
MUDD
Fifa are registered (as a charity!!) and based in the tax haven of Switzerland. The US have a treaty with the Swiss (which was initially set up to clamp down on offshore banking by US citizens).
The US authorities therefore have full jurisdiction in regard to Fifa.
The difference is though that FIFA isn't a corporation and so many people love the game and recognise that they needs to change, so there could be enough momentum to force change I just don't think it will have anything to do with sponsors imo.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
MUDD
Fifa are registered (as a charity!!) and based in the tax haven of Switzerland. The US have a treaty with the Swiss (which was initially set up to clamp down on offshore banking by US citizens).
The US authorities therefore have full jurisdiction in regard to Fifa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They do not, what do the FBI do? What has prompted the FBI to investigate these CONCACAF members? The IRS, what does the IRS do?
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't disagree with any of my paragraph then.
ManUtdDaredevil
If the US did not have jurisdiction they would not have been able to apply for extradition orders via the Swiss authorities, nor issue arrest warrants for the Fifa officials.
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't disagree with any of my paragraph then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree with it completely. FIFAs position is not weakened because the product is not damaged
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
ManUtdDaredevil
If the US did not have jurisdiction they would not have been able to apply for extradition orders via the Swiss authorities, nor issue arrest warrants for the Fifa officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the officials from? What FAs do they represent?
Sign in if you want to comment
FIFA officials arrested
Page 19 of 21
17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21
posted on 29/5/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
posted on 29/5/15
Fifa have five or six ‘top tier’ partners. One of which is Visa (since 2007).
I believe some haven’t considered the wider implications if the likes of Visa remain a business partner (of Fifa’s).
Imagine Visa launch a new consumer fraud protection product. While at the same time senior Fifa executives are in court facing fraud/money laundering charges. The reputational impact to Visa would be catastrophic.
Their global worth losses would be far in excess of any revenue from Fifa.
If Fifa lose Visa (which I believe they will) as a top tier partner, there will be immense pressure on others to follow suit.
posted on 29/5/15
Are you suggesting that no one will fill that void?
Come on, there are people lining up to take VISAs place which they will not give up.
I'm not trying to sound rude here, but do you guys work or are you students?
The banks in the UK, US and Asia have been found guilty of money laundering, rate fixing and even hiding terrorists money.
They still exist, took a hit temporarily in share price but bounce back.
Corporations are not charities and have no consciences, they will support FIFA until someone with a better deal comes in
posted on 29/5/15
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
posted on 29/5/15
Bob's Burger Van will take advantage of the discounted rates.
posted on 29/5/15
ManUtdDaredevil
In regard to Visa they will have no option (I suspect also bearing in mind their regulatory obligations) to end their relationship with Fifa.
You may be right that Fifa will find another partner but they will not be from the financial services industry – or not until Fifa is perceived and shown to be an honest and scrupulous organisation.
Any perspective ‘top tier’ partner will find it incredibly difficult to begin a business relationship with Fifa until the conclusion of the US/Swiss investigations.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 11 minutes ago
Are you suggesting that no one will fill that void?
Come on, there are people lining up to take VISAs place which they will not give up.
I'm not trying to sound rude here, but do you guys work or are you students?
The banks in the UK, US and Asia have been found guilty of money laundering, rate fixing and even hiding terrorists money.
They still exist, took a hit temporarily in share price but bounce back.
Corporations are not charities and have no consciences, they will support FIFA until someone with a better deal comes in
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 29/5/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
posted on 29/5/15
FIFA will always get sponsors, even if it's at a lower value it will still be worth a lot of money.. but sponsors will always be there regardless of who the president is so it's not that relevant. The pressure from blatter to leave will come from within football not from sponsors.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by internal solutions (U19964)
posted 20 seconds ago
FIFA will always get sponsors, even if it's at a lower value it will still be worth a lot of money.. but sponsors will always be there regardless of who the president is so it's not that relevant. The pressure from blatter to leave will come from within football not from sponsors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Other sponsors who would have had to have paid even more before.
posted on 29/5/15
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm pretty sure that ads for mcdonalds and coke are about making you want one more than they are letting you know they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this, what company in its right mind will miss the opportunity of presenting itself to the largest global audience on the planet?
No one, that is why I asked you to read the statements they put out, they have given themselves a lot of wiggle room
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What company in its right mind would miss the opportunity to gain this sort of exposure at a discounted rate due to the weakened bargaining position of the other party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You think FIFA's bargaining position for its product, the most valuable entity in the sports world is weakened?
Good one, FIFA can tell them to do one and find other sponsors in a heartbeat who would pay more
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Other sponsors who would have had to have paid even more before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They will get top dollar, no matter who it is
posted on 29/5/15
It would appear some have missed the severity of the situation Fifa find themselves in.
Fifa are being investigated by the IRS as well as FBI and Swiss authorities. As the US prosecutors believe they have substantial evidence of corruption they can freeze Fifa’s bank accounts, and all transactions, and suspend Fifa from entering into any new commercial contracts.
How they do Fifa tender new partners with no resources?
posted on 29/5/15
What jurisdiction does the FBI have over FIFA?
The FIFA members they arrested are all part of CONCACAF. FIFA are the ones who got the Swiss involved.
Appears to me a lot of people are hoping and wishing for things to happen as opposed to dealing with facts.
Hot off the presses;
"4:30 a.m. (0230 GMT, 10:30 p.m. EDT)
The Asian Football Confederation says it still supports Sepp Blatter's bid for another term as FIFA president, and opposes any move to delay Friday's scheduled elections in the wake of a string of corruption arrests of some of the federation's top officials.
In a statement on its website, the AFC expressed its "disappointment and sadness" at Wednesday's events but also said it "reiterates its decision taken at the AFC Congress in Sao Paulo in 2014 ... to support FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter."
posted on 29/5/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
posted on 29/5/15
The reality is though when the next world cup comes around everyone will just enjoy the football and billions of ppl will see the brand names of all the sponsors which is all they care about. Look at all the controversies leading up to Brazil about venues not being ready, people dying and corruption there as well but once the football started nobody talks about that.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by internal solutions (U19964)
posted 24 seconds ago
The reality is though when the next world cup comes around everyone will just enjoy the football and billions of ppl will see the brand names of all the sponsors which is all they care about. Look at all the controversies leading up to Brazil about venues not being ready, people dying and corruption there as well but once the football started nobody talks about that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It amazes me how people do not get this. The product is not damaged.
Starbucks, Amazon got bad press, product not damaged, still making money
BP in the US, still making money after Macondo
Banks destroyed the economies of many countries in Europe, still got bad press, still raking it in.
FIFA will continue, the product, football will not die or lose value.
All this wishful thinking is just that
posted on 29/5/15
MUDD
Fifa are registered (as a charity!!) and based in the tax haven of Switzerland. The US have a treaty with the Swiss (which was initially set up to clamp down on offshore banking by US citizens).
The US authorities therefore have full jurisdiction in regard to Fifa.
posted on 29/5/15
The difference is though that FIFA isn't a corporation and so many people love the game and recognise that they needs to change, so there could be enough momentum to force change I just don't think it will have anything to do with sponsors imo.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
MUDD
Fifa are registered (as a charity!!) and based in the tax haven of Switzerland. The US have a treaty with the Swiss (which was initially set up to clamp down on offshore banking by US citizens).
The US authorities therefore have full jurisdiction in regard to Fifa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They do not, what do the FBI do? What has prompted the FBI to investigate these CONCACAF members? The IRS, what does the IRS do?
posted on 29/5/15
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't disagree with any of my paragraph then.
posted on 29/5/15
ManUtdDaredevil
If the US did not have jurisdiction they would not have been able to apply for extradition orders via the Swiss authorities, nor issue arrest warrants for the Fifa officials.
posted on 29/5/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand what you're arguing with me about really. All I have said is this weakens their bargaining position. Either existing sponsors will be able to negotiate a lower rate or outside sponsors who would have had to have paid more to hijack a bid would now be able to pay an equivalent rate. It's all based on the self interest of corporations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is this, the product has not lost its value.
FIFA will not sell it below its value, if current sponsors want to renege on current contract, FIFA will open themselves up to ITTs.
What do you think will happen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't disagree with any of my paragraph then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree with it completely. FIFAs position is not weakened because the product is not damaged
posted on 29/5/15
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
ManUtdDaredevil
If the US did not have jurisdiction they would not have been able to apply for extradition orders via the Swiss authorities, nor issue arrest warrants for the Fifa officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the officials from? What FAs do they represent?
Page 19 of 21
17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21