Bundesliga's 50+1 Rule

[nudge+]

7 minutes ago, Batard said:

That was the case in Britain until the late 80s, the Premier League and saturation of glory hunters really upped it from the Liverpool glory hunting of the 80s. Football became more about identifying with success than locality 

Was it? I thought the majority of English clubs were pretty much private companies owned by some local businessmen from the very start of their existence?

[Batard]

Just now, nudge said:

Was it? I thought the majority of English clubs were pretty much private companies owned by some local businessmen from the very start of their existence?

Not at all, many were setup as local amalgams of cricket and rugby clubs who were purchased over time. 

[nudge+]

1 minute ago, Batard said:

Not at all, many were setup as local amalgams of cricket and rugby clubs who were purchased over time. 

Sellouts from early on then 

[Batard]

Just now, nudge said:

Sellouts from early on then 

Indeed 

[Spike]

Britain was always interested in profit, that is why they treated their colonies as factories of labour more than anyone else. 

[Batard]

18 minutes ago, Spike said:

Britain was always interested in profit, that is why they treated their colonies as factories of labour more than anyone else. 

It's to be expected from a country that was heavily invaded, colonised and ethnically altered by Europe. 

[Spike]

3 minutes ago, Batard said:

It's to be expected from a country that was heavily invaded, colonised and ethnically altered by Europe. 

You be surprised that with recent DNA sampling that Britain's DNA hasn't really changed at all in the last millennium. They are still largely the same genetic set as pre-Anglo invasion. I'll have to find the article I read. Much to the chagrin of the Irish they sets are nearly exactly the same.

[Batard]

5 minutes ago, Spike said:

You be surprised that with recent DNA sampling that Britain's DNA hasn't really changed at all in the last millennium. They are still largely the same genetic set as pre-Anglo invasion. I'll have to find the article I read. Much to the chagrin of the Irish they sets are nearly exactly the same.

This might also surprise, the original inhabitants of Britannia as it was then called were displaced and moved to Wales (Wales means foreigner in old English).

[Eco]

So how do teams like Turkgucu Muchen get away with having ZERO members (according to TransferMarkt)? 

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, Eco said:

So how do teams like Turkgucu Muchen get away with having ZERO members (according to TransferMarkt)? 

Because they are Turkish not German

[nudge+]

5 minutes ago, Eco said:

So how do teams like Turkgucu Muchen get away with having ZERO members (according to TransferMarkt)? 

The problem with clubs like that is not that they do not have members (they do - even if transfermarkt don't have an actual number haha), but that the power lays de jure in the hands of e.V. (member association) in order to comply with the rules, but de facto it's in the hands of a single private entity, in this particular case Hasan Kivran and people loyal to him in the supervisory board.

[Eco]

2 minutes ago, nudge said:

The problem with clubs like that is not that they do not have members (they do - even if transfermarkt don't have an actual number haha), but that the power lays de jure in the hands of e.V. (member association) in order to comply with the rules, but de facto it's in the hands of a single private entity, in this particular case Hasan Kivran and people loyal to him in the supervisory board.

The e.V. is how Wolfsburg operate as well correct? 

[nudge+]

4 minutes ago, Eco said:

The e.V. is how Wolfsburg operate as well correct? 

I think the only 1. Bundesliga clubs that still operate as pure e.V. are Union, Schalke, Freiburg and Mainz. Others have their football teams converted into public or private limited companies (GmbH, GmbH & Co KGaA, or AG), with the original e.V holding the controlling stake (that's what 50+1 is essentially about - the member association (e.V.) is required to hold the majority of voting shares).

[nudge+]

@Spike 

Thought you might find this interesting: the infographic of domestic TV money distribution in 1. and 2. Bundesliga:

[Spike]

4 hours ago, nudge said:

@Spike 

Thought you might find this interesting: the infographic of domestic TV money distribution in 1. and 2. Bundesliga:

What a terrible disparity between top and bottom, though surprisingly close at the top.

[Eco]

12 hours ago, nudge said:

@Spike 

Thought you might find this interesting: the infographic of domestic TV money distribution in 1. and 2. Bundesliga:

I still can't understand how these are spread out? It's not league position, so what allows it to be broken up this way? Would certainly love to see some more structure to it, though. 

[nudge+]

33 minutes ago, Eco said:

I still can't understand how these are spread out? It's not league position, so what allows it to be broken up this way? Would certainly love to see some more structure to it, though. 

It is distributed using four criteria ("pillars"): the five-year league performance ranking (70% of the total) with a factor 5:4:3:2:1 (i.e. latest league position weighs more than the previous one), the five-year ranking for both divisions (23%); the 20-year ranking for both divisions (5%); and the playing time of German U23s (2%). 

[Rucksackfranzose]

50 minutes ago, Eco said:

I still can't understand how these are spread out? It's not league position, so what allows it to be broken up this way? Would certainly love to see some more structure to it, though. 

It's rather complicated.

Speaking simplifying: The distribution of TV money is resting on four pillars:

1) Duration-70%:

The distribution of 70% of TV-money complies with the club's league positions of the last 5 years, the years are weighted as follows: last season factor 5, the season before factor 4, the season before that factor 3, and so on.

2) Competition - 23%

See above with the difference, that the percentage of money gained for the spot you reached differs, and that the first 6 spot get exactly the same money.

3) Sustainity - 5%

The contribution of money in this pillar complies with the club's performance througout the last 20 years. Here all the years count for the same.

4) Use of U23-players - 2%

The distribution complies with the grade of use the club made of that part of his U23 players, who already played in Germany before they finished their 18th year of life.

 

As I said it's straight forward. Hope my bad English wasn't too detrimental.

[Rucksackfranzose]

DFB task force recommended to weaken the 50+1 rule, arguing an adaption of the existing rule could be beneficial for competition within the DFL leagues. Here is the wording of their recommondation:

 

8. Evaluierung von Strukturen für kontrollierte strategische Investitionen im Rahmen von 50+1

• Die 50+1-Regelunghat aus Sicht vieler Teilnehmer*innen der Taskforce wesentlich zur Stabilität des deutschen Profifußballs beigetragen und sollte deshalb beibehalten werden.

• Beispiele in anderen europäischen Ligen haben jedoch gezeigt, dass das Engagement von professionellen Investoren für mehr Wettbewerb sorgen kann.

• Eine unvoreingenommene, offene Prüfung, ob unter Vorgabe transparenter Bedingungenbestimmten Investierenden, die ESG-Kriterien erfüllen oder verfolgen, der Weg in den Profifußball erleichtert werden kann, wird als sinnvoll erachtet.

• Ziele und Vorgaben für mögliche strategische Partnerschaften müssten von der DFL festgelegt werden (transparente Due Diligence Prozesse zur Überprüfung der Seriosität/ Integrität der Investoren).Dabei sollte auch auf nicht monetäre Unterstützung, wie z.B. zur digitalen Weiterentwicklung u.v.m. gesetzt werden.

 

I'm so fed up with it, every few years someone argues how the limitation of investions would harm the competition of the Buli. Said people do so against empiricism as the exceptions, where the rule doesn't apply or is undermined, namely Leverkusen, Wolfsburg, Hoffenheim, and Leipzig didn't lead to a better competition. Still mesmerized to see those folks supporting this idea seem to fail to understand the dilution of the 50+1 rule only helps the bigger clubs to grow and to widen the gap to the smaller clubs outside DFL even more.

[nudge+]

3 hours ago, Rucksackfranzose said:

DFB task force recommended to weaken the 50+1 rule, arguing an adaption of the existing rule could be beneficial for competition within the DFL leagues. Here is the wording of their recommondation:

 

8. Evaluierung von Strukturen für kontrollierte strategische Investitionen im Rahmen von 50+1

• Die 50+1-Regelunghat aus Sicht vieler Teilnehmer*innen der Taskforce wesentlich zur Stabilität des deutschen Profifußballs beigetragen und sollte deshalb beibehalten werden.

• Beispiele in anderen europäischen Ligen haben jedoch gezeigt, dass das Engagement von professionellen Investoren für mehr Wettbewerb sorgen kann.

• Eine unvoreingenommene, offene Prüfung, ob unter Vorgabe transparenter Bedingungenbestimmten Investierenden, die ESG-Kriterien erfüllen oder verfolgen, der Weg in den Profifußball erleichtert werden kann, wird als sinnvoll erachtet.

• Ziele und Vorgaben für mögliche strategische Partnerschaften müssten von der DFL festgelegt werden (transparente Due Diligence Prozesse zur Überprüfung der Seriosität/ Integrität der Investoren).Dabei sollte auch auf nicht monetäre Unterstützung, wie z.B. zur digitalen Weiterentwicklung u.v.m. gesetzt werden.

 

I'm so fed up with it, every few years someone argues how the limitation of investions would harm the competition of the Buli. Said people do so against empiricism as the exceptions, where the rule doesn't apply or is undermined, namely Leverkusen, Wolfsburg, Hoffenheim, and Leipzig didn't lead to a better competition. Still mesmerized to see those folks supporting this idea seem to fail to understand the dilution of the 50+1 rule only helps the bigger clubs to grow and to widen the gap to the smaller clubs outside DFL even more.

I must admit I'm a bit confused with the wording and what exactly do they mean with "controled strategic investments" and "strategic partnerships". The part which particularly confuses me, is the one where they say that the 50+1 rule has contributed a lot and should be retained, and yet at the same time they speak out for making it easier for investors to get involved - how exactly do they expect it to work? I mean, as it stands now, investors are allowed as long as they don't hold the majority of the voting rights. So if they want to retain the 50+1, that means the investors will still not be able to acquire more than 49% - if that's the case, then what exactly changes? How do you "weaken" the rule but still keep it? Makes no sense to me. Unless they are talking about creating more loopholes that makes the rule a joke in the first place.

[Azeem]

Why don't they call it 52-1 rule? 

[nudge+]

4 minutes ago, McAzeem said:

Why don't they call it 52-1 rule? 

50+1 refers to the requirement for the club members association to hold 50% of voting shares + 1 additional share, in other words, the majority of the voting shares, in order to prevent private investors from taking over. 

[Faithcore]

1 hour ago, nudge said:

Unless they are talking about creating more loopholes that makes the rule a joke in the first place.

That's true. Would be a shame if any company (something like Red Bull) could just buy themselves a club and bring it to the Bundesliga. 

[Rucksackfranzose]

Think, I might fall in love with Bundeskartellamt. It examined the 50+1 rule and announced this rule would be in line with the German antitrust laws, but came to the conclusion that those exceptions , like eg Hoffenheim, are questionable under German antitrust laws. DFB have a contradicting legal opinion and are looking for dialogue with Bundeskartellamt.

[Rucksackfranzose]

Now, that's an unexpected twist. After all this talk, how the 50+1 rule wouldn't be contemporary, now it looks like one of  the clubs exploiting loopholes, would stop to do so, becoming one of those following this rule in the process. http://www.kicker.de/ueberraschende-wende-hopp-will-sonderstatus-zurueckgeben-939852/artikel