![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
redfiona99[Error: unknown template qotd]
I'm not sure either of them is really the answer, I mean, I know far too many clever people who are deeply bitter because they feel that life has not rewarded them for their braininess, but at the same time, someone who is stupid and has lots of money is not going to keep having money for long. Personally, I need my brains more, and would be more than happy with an average amount of money.
~~~~
Speaking of fools who are soon parted from their money, I need some information on how US (and Canadian) sports teams are run. It's this fiasco at Liverpool (and, to a lesser degree, Manchester United).
The reason I'm wondering is because, over here, it's sort of a fait accompli that if you buy a sports team, you will end up poorer at the end of your term of ownership than when you started, and the Russian oligarchs and the various Sheikhs seem to understand that (ignoring Portsmouth, because well, Portsmouth is a terrible thing to happen to anyone's hypothesis), but the various American owners don't seem to. This lead me to wondering if it is because you can turn a profit owning a sports company in the US. Any thoughts are greatly welcomed.
I'm not sure either of them is really the answer, I mean, I know far too many clever people who are deeply bitter because they feel that life has not rewarded them for their braininess, but at the same time, someone who is stupid and has lots of money is not going to keep having money for long. Personally, I need my brains more, and would be more than happy with an average amount of money.
~~~~
Speaking of fools who are soon parted from their money, I need some information on how US (and Canadian) sports teams are run. It's this fiasco at Liverpool (and, to a lesser degree, Manchester United).
The reason I'm wondering is because, over here, it's sort of a fait accompli that if you buy a sports team, you will end up poorer at the end of your term of ownership than when you started, and the Russian oligarchs and the various Sheikhs seem to understand that (ignoring Portsmouth, because well, Portsmouth is a terrible thing to happen to anyone's hypothesis), but the various American owners don't seem to. This lead me to wondering if it is because you can turn a profit owning a sports company in the US. Any thoughts are greatly welcomed.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-10-07 05:41 pm (UTC)Canadian sports work along the same lines, just on a smaller scale. One of the recurring controversies, for example, is whether and when the Canadian Football League will expand into Atlantic Canada: one of the major obstacles to that expansion is concern over whether it would be financially viable (read: profitable).
What the real differences are between the two sides of the pond, I don't know. Professional sports in the US are huge business with massive marketing and merchandising sales, as well as high ticket prices. I don't know how much sports brand marketing goes on over there or what tickets cost. Maybe Americans are simply willing to spend more money on spectator sports. There are some deeply ingrained cultural aspects of it to help that along, too.
no subject
Date: 2010-10-07 07:19 pm (UTC)But then again, there's no salary cap over here and it's very much a free agent market, and you have to compete with the European teams which are either nationally bankrolled (why yes, Real Madrid, I am looking at you) or bankrolled by whole companies (i.e. Juventus is the Fiat team because they're the big company in Turin).