B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 1 当年民主党的左棍觉得穷人买不去房啊，homeownership上不去啊，对国家不利啊，于
是搞个什么community reinvestment act，鼓励大家推行subprime mortgage,结果造成
了housing bubble，到头来违背市场规律的bubble破灭不但房子被foreclose还因为
recession连工作都没了，充分说明了违背市场规律的泡沫永远不可能给整个国家带来
什么实质性的好处。
现在某些人鼓吹要投入才能把足球提高和这个逻辑没有本质区别。一句话，你该拿多少
应该由市场决定，你能踢得和C罗梅西一样全世界的人都爱看，你能像英超那样拿上上
亿的转播合同市场自然决定你能拿那么高的收入。 看看中国球员不比日韩球员水平高
却比他们的收入绝对数都高，更不要说相比国民人均收入了，这不是某些人为了
political favor创造出的泡沫吗？一切泡沫最终都会破灭，而带来的伤害远比没有泡
沫更大。
这些人的逻辑就是我水平是不行，但是为了鼓励这个行业你必须高投入给我待遇好才能
有更多人投入这个行业，你们问问你们老板以这个理由给你们涨工资他们会不会答应，
老板的回答应该是if you want to increase your compensation by 1 dollar, show
me that you can create 100 more dollars of value (maybe even more).
Otherwise
you can go fuck yourself. 当然还有一部分人就是自high的广佬。 |
I******I
发帖数: 14241 | 2 不知道这些恒大球迷是憋的太久了，还是记性不好，还是九零后。
当时中国足球刚开始职业联赛那几年也是很红火，后来泡沫破了，不仅球迷嫌弃，连
CCAV都懒得转播。 |
u***t
发帖数: 5899 | 3 历史不是简单的重复....
【在 I******I 的大作中提到】
: 不知道这些恒大球迷是憋的太久了，还是记性不好，还是九零后。
: 当时中国足球刚开始职业联赛那几年也是很红火，后来泡沫破了，不仅球迷嫌弃，连
: CCAV都懒得转播。
|
f******n
发帖数: 33 | 4 拿多少这不恰恰是国内市场现状决定的吗？存在即合理，尽管俺老也觉得它们不值，但
是许老板，马云玩球本身就是一种商业行为，难道你要求它们为中国足球未来负责？
再说了，中前场外援多，难道足球不是十一个人踢的？占绝大多数的还是国产后卫，中
场，门将吧？难道它们一天和埃尔克森们踢，不是极好的提高机会？还是，低水平但便
宜的联赛好？
投入大，让更多人看到这件事赚钱也好，职业也好，有希望，水涨船高的道理。
当然，你要说不可能永远投入那么大，有可能，但是也有其他可能，对不？
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 当年民主党的左棍觉得穷人买不去房啊，homeownership上不去啊，对国家不利啊，于
: 是搞个什么community reinvestment act，鼓励大家推行subprime mortgage,结果造成
: 了housing bubble，到头来违背市场规律的bubble破灭不但房子被foreclose还因为
: recession连工作都没了，充分说明了违背市场规律的泡沫永远不可能给整个国家带来
: 什么实质性的好处。
: 现在某些人鼓吹要投入才能把足球提高和这个逻辑没有本质区别。一句话，你该拿多少
: 应该由市场决定，你能踢得和C罗梅西一样全世界的人都爱看，你能像英超那样拿上上
: 亿的转播合同市场自然决定你能拿那么高的收入。 看看中国球员不比日韩球员水平高
: 却比他们的收入绝对数都高，更不要说相比国民人均收入了，这不是某些人为了
: political favor创造出的泡沫吗？一切泡沫最终都会破灭，而带来的伤害远比没有泡
|
f******n
发帖数: 33 | 5 别忘了，职业联赛之前，电视更是基本不转播，现场球迷也少得可怜，个把前苏联老枪
都能横闯无敌。联赛搞起来的大环境和产业，要承认。
凡事要看利弊大小。
【在 I******I 的大作中提到】
: 不知道这些恒大球迷是憋的太久了，还是记性不好，还是九零后。
: 当时中国足球刚开始职业联赛那几年也是很红火，后来泡沫破了，不仅球迷嫌弃，连
: CCAV都懒得转播。
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 6 国内的现状是拿钱买political favor,可不是market driven，商业行为不代表是
capitalism,也可以是crony capitalism，你觉得哪个rational market会觉得于大宝值
5000万而香川当年几百万欧就去了多特蒙德？正因为国内球员身价虚高导致他们乐得在
国内自娱自乐反正拿钱多又有外援关键时刻解决问题出国又苦又累钱拿得还不够多，这
样水平就能提高？
【在 f******n 的大作中提到】
: 拿多少这不恰恰是国内市场现状决定的吗？存在即合理，尽管俺老也觉得它们不值，但
: 是许老板，马云玩球本身就是一种商业行为，难道你要求它们为中国足球未来负责？
: 再说了，中前场外援多，难道足球不是十一个人踢的？占绝大多数的还是国产后卫，中
: 场，门将吧？难道它们一天和埃尔克森们踢，不是极好的提高机会？还是，低水平但便
: 宜的联赛好？
: 投入大，让更多人看到这件事赚钱也好，职业也好，有希望，水涨船高的道理。
: 当然，你要说不可能永远投入那么大，有可能，但是也有其他可能，对不？
|
f******n
发帖数: 33 | 7 当然能提高，也许你觉得放之全球市场，许老板花的价钱远远不值。但是现实情况下，
这是猛药。此外，恒大也花了不少钱搞足校，培养孩子们。
外援价格再虚高，技术再牛，球也是后场一脚一脚传上去的吧，再者，对方防守水平不
断提高，才没让这些外援进球如乱麻吧？再者，联赛精采多了，把很多让假球黑哨给打
炮的球迷实实在在的给拉回了球场，这也是事实吧。
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 国内的现状是拿钱买political favor,可不是market driven，商业行为不代表是
: capitalism,也可以是crony capitalism，你觉得哪个rational market会觉得于大宝值
: 5000万而香川当年几百万欧就去了多特蒙德？正因为国内球员身价虚高导致他们乐得在
: 国内自娱自乐反正拿钱多又有外援关键时刻解决问题出国又苦又累钱拿得还不够多，这
: 样水平就能提高？
|
u***t
发帖数: 5899 | 8 英特尔说以后雇员要搞AA，你觉得这是市场行为还是政治正确？
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 国内的现状是拿钱买political favor,可不是market driven，商业行为不代表是
: capitalism,也可以是crony capitalism，你觉得哪个rational market会觉得于大宝值
: 5000万而香川当年几百万欧就去了多特蒙德？正因为国内球员身价虚高导致他们乐得在
: 国内自娱自乐反正拿钱多又有外援关键时刻解决问题出国又苦又累钱拿得还不够多，这
: 样水平就能提高？
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 9 political favor和politically correct不是一码事，Intel执行AA是obey government
regulation，但是这个regulation不是为了给Intel谋political favor，totally
different issue.
【在 u***t 的大作中提到】
: 英特尔说以后雇员要搞AA，你觉得这是市场行为还是政治正确？
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 10 又回到了穷人买不起房下猛药搞subprime mortgage把homeownership percentage搞上
去的logic了。
【在 f******n 的大作中提到】
: 当然能提高，也许你觉得放之全球市场，许老板花的价钱远远不值。但是现实情况下，
: 这是猛药。此外，恒大也花了不少钱搞足校，培养孩子们。
: 外援价格再虚高，技术再牛，球也是后场一脚一脚传上去的吧，再者，对方防守水平不
: 断提高，才没让这些外援进球如乱麻吧？再者，联赛精采多了，把很多让假球黑哨给打
: 炮的球迷实实在在的给拉回了球场，这也是事实吧。
|
|
|
u***t
发帖数: 5899 | 11 本质上都是扭曲，一个潜在的，一个是写在纸面上的而已。
government
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: political favor和politically correct不是一码事，Intel执行AA是obey government
: regulation，但是这个regulation不是为了给Intel谋political favor，totally
: different issue.
|
f******n
发帖数: 33 | 12 可是许老板，马老板是穷人吗？
人家就想迅速搞出一只超强队(其实严格说也好几年了)，外援内援教练能买就买，冠军
拿到手软，以前不敢想的亚冠也拿了，还差点蝉联。换你说，商业目标在这了，许老板
该怎么玩？三十年发展大计？
再说了，今年还没开赛，花重金的还远不止恒大一家。就是底子薄的，也买了若干欧洲
小联赛金靴银靴，联赛值得期待，呵呵。
凡事都有两面，你只觉得是烧钱，而把其他客观事实忽略了。
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 又回到了穷人买不起房下猛药搞subprime mortgage把homeownership percentage搞上
: 去的logic了。
|
m******n
发帖数: 15691 | 13 人群不同， 同样的政策 效果不同，
下，
平不
给打
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 又回到了穷人买不起房下猛药搞subprime mortgage把homeownership percentage搞上
: 去的logic了。
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 14 First, AA is meant to be providing equal opportunities for American people,
which is one of the greatest American values. There is just too much abuse
in practice.
Second, even if AA is abused, it does not gain any favor for Intel over
other competitors. Intel does not lobby for AA and does not gain any favor
from complying with AA.
【在 u***t 的大作中提到】
: 本质上都是扭曲，一个潜在的，一个是写在纸面上的而已。
:
: government
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 15 这和他们是不是穷人没关系，说得是任何违背自由市场竞争制造bubble的最终会适得其
反，历史上无数的bubble已经说明问题，英超每年都值得期待人家转播权卖了天价也阻
挡不了英格兰国家队在欧洲的地位，中超就算亚洲第一中国队充其量也就亚洲英格兰。
【在 f******n 的大作中提到】
: 可是许老板，马老板是穷人吗？
: 人家就想迅速搞出一只超强队(其实严格说也好几年了)，外援内援教练能买就买，冠军
: 拿到手软，以前不敢想的亚冠也拿了，还差点蝉联。换你说，商业目标在这了，许老板
: 该怎么玩？三十年发展大计？
: 再说了，今年还没开赛，花重金的还远不止恒大一家。就是底子薄的，也买了若干欧洲
: 小联赛金靴银靴，联赛值得期待，呵呵。
: 凡事都有两面，你只觉得是烧钱，而把其他客观事实忽略了。
|
j*******h
发帖数: 520 | 16 真有人喜欢AA啊，我以为只有有既得利益的人才喜欢AA，唉。。。。
,
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: First, AA is meant to be providing equal opportunities for American people,
: which is one of the greatest American values. There is just too much abuse
: in practice.
: Second, even if AA is abused, it does not gain any favor for Intel over
: other competitors. Intel does not lobby for AA and does not gain any favor
: from complying with AA.
|
j*******h
发帖数: 520 | 17 给个可行的建议，别老扯那些没用的，前面人也跟你说了，现行办法的各种好处，你来
说说看不这么整，怎么整？
。
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: 这和他们是不是穷人没关系，说得是任何违背自由市场竞争制造bubble的最终会适得其
: 反，历史上无数的bubble已经说明问题，英超每年都值得期待人家转播权卖了天价也阻
: 挡不了英格兰国家队在欧洲的地位，中超就算亚洲第一中国队充其量也就亚洲英格兰。
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 18 现行办法有什么好处？我恰恰说明了违背自由市场规律人为制造出的bubble就长久而言
只会带来更多坏处，正确办法当然应该按照自由市场规律办事，等人均收入上去了社会
保障上去了大家即便失业也过得很好自然愿意踢球的人多了水平也就上去了。
【在 j*******h 的大作中提到】
: 给个可行的建议，别老扯那些没用的，前面人也跟你说了，现行办法的各种好处，你来
: 说说看不这么整，怎么整？
:
: 。
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 19 我没说我喜欢AA,AA的出发点是好的不过在实际被abuse了，但是我的point是不管AA是
不是被abuse了，Intel does not gain any political favor over its competitors
from complying with AA。
【在 j*******h 的大作中提到】
: 真有人喜欢AA啊，我以为只有有既得利益的人才喜欢AA，唉。。。。
:
: ,
|
j*****0
发帖数: 208 | 20 @Bernake:
Which soccer league in the world follow marketplace? Most soccer league are
playground by the rich or supported by State/Corporation mainly for proud
and entertainment. If you think Chinese Super League is bubble, so are most
football leagues in the world. Only exception is maybe a couple of top EPL
teams or a couple of Germany league teams.
Example 1, Just look at most EPL teams. Vast majority of teams lost
millions and millions dollars every year. Chelsea lost $80 millions pound
last year. So are Manu city.
Example 2, If not for support big Korean companies like LG, whole Korean
football league will fold.
Sure, in the US, NBA, NFL are following marketplace. But NFL and NBA has
monopoly over talents. Even in that scenario, taxpayers of particular
franchise also provide millions of dollar taxpayer's money when a team
decided to build new stadium.
Soccer is different. MLS tried to follow marketplace, but it sucks because
it does not control talent. American who are good at soccer can find better
wage in Europe.
Instead of thinking soccer league is sport, think soccer league is
entertainment for the mass. What Chinese super league tried to do is to
increase entertainment value to the fan. So instead of watching EPL or
Spain league, most Chinese soccer fans can watch Beijing Guoan or Shanghai
ShenHua.
Also, the biggest problem for soccer in China to create true marketplace is
monopoly power of CCTV-5. Instead of getting millions of TV right for its
broadcast, Chinese super League got almost nothing. If EPL can got $40
millions from Chinese marketplace, Chinese super league, which has double or
triple tv rating of EPL, should got at least $100 millions or more every
year. |
|
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 21 很多英格兰俱乐部是上市公司，lose or making money是由董事会和股东决定的，如何
算得上bubble?皇马和巴萨是会员制的non-profit entity，如果挣钱太多就会lose non
-profit status.
韩国很多俱乐部是企业赞助，但是人家懂得按市场价支付运动员薪酬，韩国人水平比中
国球员高多了但是工资并不高就是明证。
美国就是free market,为什么年轻人不愿练足球？因为足球挣得不够多，为什么篮球和
棒球挣得多？因为美国人更愿意看，这就是market driven.
还有你最后那个比方很搞笑，英超在中国卖得低是为了在中国推广是一种打广告的行为
，你看看英超在欧洲卖了多少？论总转播权收入英超又有多少？中超出了中国有人看吗
？你单独在中国卖中超转播权能卖多少？没有CCTV还有地方台可以转，CCTV为什么当年
嫌中超转播权高不愿意买中超却愿意花高价买西甲？还不是觉得不值这个价，
are
most
EPL
pound
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: @Bernake:
: Which soccer league in the world follow marketplace? Most soccer league are
: playground by the rich or supported by State/Corporation mainly for proud
: and entertainment. If you think Chinese Super League is bubble, so are most
: football leagues in the world. Only exception is maybe a couple of top EPL
: teams or a couple of Germany league teams.
: Example 1, Just look at most EPL teams. Vast majority of teams lost
: millions and millions dollars every year. Chelsea lost $80 millions pound
: last year. So are Manu city.
: Example 2, If not for support big Korean companies like LG, whole Korean
|
j*****0
发帖数: 208 | 22 Most EPL companies are stock in name only. They are not what you called
regular stock. Please don't confuse sport stock with regular stock. Vast
majority of them are controlled rich people who has don't care about profit.
Stock offered to public has no voting power whatsoever. It is like Green
Bay Packers's stock. It is for collection item only, not trading value.
Check BBC report, most EPL clubs lost millions of dollars, year after year.
If regular company lose operating like that year a after year, they all
should close. To me, it is clearly bubble.
What's different between LG supports its team vs. Evergrande support its
team? So you are saying LG know market price but Evergrande does not know
the market price?
The reason why Chinese players transfer fees are higher because Chinese
super League only allowed 4+1 foreign players. Skill Chinese players are in
demand. That's why higher demand, higher transfer fee.
You think you missed the my final point. Of course, nobody cares about
Chinese super League besides Chinese. However, the fact is that Chinese
Super League TV rating is two or three times of EPL tv rating or any
European soccer leagues in China. Since CCTV-5 is only one who has national
reach and it is state owned, it uses it monopoly power to suppress the tv
right fee. If there is two or three sports national sports TV like CCTV5 in
China, the TV right for Chinese Super League will be way up.
Just check Australian A league TV right, with only 23 millions people, A
league got $40 million every year from its TV deal. And Soccer is not that
popular in Australia, way behind Rugby and Cricket. |
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 23 I know those stocks are a way of raising money. So what? People would like
to contribute money to it, pretty much like members of Barcelona and Real
Madrid contribute money to the club. Again, the point is people want to
contribute, not wasting taxpayers' money to create bubble to gain political
favor. And Man Utd is indeed a public traded company.
The second, yes, LG does have better sense about market prices.At least they
are not trying to create bubbles. That is why Korean Chaebols perform much
better than Chinese enterprises.
The third, you are totally missing the point. The reason that Australia
League is sold for so much is because Australian per capital income is much
higher than Chinese. TV ratings is not enough for determining value of TV
rights. You can have 100% people watching in a poor country and still cannot
sell much in terms of value of TV rights. Also, if you want to watch your
local team, just watch your local TV station and they still broadcast
Chinese Super League games. Why CCTV as a monopoly can suppress price of
Chinese Super League TV rights but not Spanish La Liga rights? There is a
good reason for it.
profit.
Green
.
know
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: Most EPL companies are stock in name only. They are not what you called
: regular stock. Please don't confuse sport stock with regular stock. Vast
: majority of them are controlled rich people who has don't care about profit.
: Stock offered to public has no voting power whatsoever. It is like Green
: Bay Packers's stock. It is for collection item only, not trading value.
: Check BBC report, most EPL clubs lost millions of dollars, year after year.
: If regular company lose operating like that year a after year, they all
: should close. To me, it is clearly bubble.
: What's different between LG supports its team vs. Evergrande support its
: team? So you are saying LG know market price but Evergrande does not know
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 24 I forgot to respond to your point about this.
The reason why Chinese players transfer fees are higher because Chinese
super League only allowed 4+1 foreign players. Skill Chinese players are in
demand. That's why higher demand, higher transfer fee.
If the good itself is garbage with zero value but lots of value for gaining
political favor, it doesn't matter how many skilled players are there. If
soccer club is really treating the club as a business, then the player's
value should be determined based on a benefit-cost analysis. Clearly, there
isn't much sports benefit of even winning a Championship other than gaining
political favor. So the high transfer fee is clearly a bubble. |
i*****t
发帖数: 9074 | 25 关键是就算是泡沫，能把中国足球搞上去也行。你想美国01经历了网络泡沫以后，互联
网在泡沫中得到了长足的发展。但中国足球呢？现在是花了这么多钱，中国足球还是上
不去。别说中国足球基础差，在亚洲，可真不算差 |
h****e
发帖数: 374 | 26 说得好。
男篮和男足都是一个样子，现在CBA就是靠着NBA淘汰的外援撑着，国家队的水平正在飞
速向国足的水平堕落。
：当年民主党的左棍觉得穷人买不去房啊，homeownership上不去啊，对国家不利啊，于
：是搞个什么community reinvestment act，鼓励大家推行subprime mortgage,结果造
成了housing bubble，到头来违背市场规律的bubble破灭不但房子被foreclose还因为
：recession连工作都没了，充分说明了违背市场规律的泡沫永远不可能给整个国家带来
：什么实质性的好处。
：
：现在某些人鼓吹要投入才能把足球提高和这个逻辑没有本质区别。一句话，你该拿多
少应该由市场决定，你能踢得和C罗梅西一样全世界的人都爱看，你能像英超那样拿上上
：亿的转播合同市场自然决定你能拿那么高的收入。 看看中国球员不比日韩球员水平高
……
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: I forgot to respond to your point about this.
: The reason why Chinese players transfer fees are higher because Chinese
: super League only allowed 4+1 foreign players. Skill Chinese players are in
: demand. That's why higher demand, higher transfer fee.
: If the good itself is garbage with zero value but lots of value for gaining
: political favor, it doesn't matter how many skilled players are there. If
: soccer club is really treating the club as a business, then the player's
: value should be determined based on a benefit-cost analysis. Clearly, there
: isn't much sports benefit of even winning a Championship other than gaining
: political favor. So the high transfer fee is clearly a bubble.
|
j*****0
发帖数: 208 | 27 1) How do you know rich owned sports team do not get politic favor or
social connection in its country? LG/GoldStar wasted $20 to $40 millions a
year for FC Seoul certainly not just for its vanity.
2) All soccer entertainment are bubble to me. Very few clubs ever made any
money. Vast majority cannot survived by its own business model and relied
on rich owner and/or government support. It is matter of degree.
3) CCTV-5 is monopoly for all sports in China in the national level. Local
sports channel (like JiangSu Sports) is monopoly for local sport level.
Since there is only player in marketplace, all sports tv right got
shortchanged in China. |
j*****0
发帖数: 208 | 28 To me, the idea of "market place" and soccer should not never associated
together. Soccer in anywhere, is not related to marketplace. It is waste
of time to talk about this nonsense. |
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 29 1) Which country is most notorious for giving political favor? China or
South Korea?
2) The degree is much worse in China, considering China has personal income
that is much lower than the U.S.. Free market is an objective and people
should at least try hard to move towards it, not away from it.
3) You still have not answered my question. Why CCTV as a monopoly is
willing to pay much higher for La Liga rather than Chinese Super League? Is
that an indication of how much each league is worth?
a
any
relied
Local
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: 1) How do you know rich owned sports team do not get politic favor or
: social connection in its country? LG/GoldStar wasted $20 to $40 millions a
: year for FC Seoul certainly not just for its vanity.
: 2) All soccer entertainment are bubble to me. Very few clubs ever made any
: money. Vast majority cannot survived by its own business model and relied
: on rich owner and/or government support. It is matter of degree.
: 3) CCTV-5 is monopoly for all sports in China in the national level. Local
: sports channel (like JiangSu Sports) is monopoly for local sport level.
: Since there is only player in marketplace, all sports tv right got
: shortchanged in China.
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 30 That is just your personal opinion and your opinion may not be the right
opinion.At least soccer in the U.S. is related to market place. And if you
think this is nonsense, why do you spend so much time talking about it? In
any circumstance, using taxpayers' money to win political favor and to
create bubbles is not the right way.
waste
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: To me, the idea of "market place" and soccer should not never associated
: together. Soccer in anywhere, is not related to marketplace. It is waste
: of time to talk about this nonsense.
|
|
|
A*****a
发帖数: 52743 | 31 泡不泡沫跟你有什么关系，不懂你操哪门子心。信仰危机了？
【在 B******e 的大作中提到】
: That is just your personal opinion and your opinion may not be the right
: opinion.At least soccer in the U.S. is related to market place. And if you
: think this is nonsense, why do you spend so much time talking about it? In
: any circumstance, using taxpayers' money to win political favor and to
: create bubbles is not the right way.
:
: waste
|
j*****0
发帖数: 208 | 32 MLS in US is based on salary cap. All players' right owned by one single
entity and it is socialist model that prevent true competition. It is one
of few leagues that's profitable but it is not free market place at all.
Players may plan to strike this year if the contract between union and
association is not reach.
The reason why CCTV 5 paid higher fee for Spain football league is due to
leverage. Spain league does NOT depend on CCTV 5 for its right. At worst,
Spain football league does not broadcast on CCTV 5, no big loss for Spain
league. CCTV 5 coverage to Spain league means very little in big picture.
However, compared to spain league, Chinese Super League does not have any
leverage at all. If CCTV 5 does not broadcast Chinese Super League, Chinese
Super league will lose its only national coverage and lose support from its
sponsors. In the game of chicken, CCTV 5 got the upper hand. |
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 33 Why does Spanish La Liga has leverage? Because other TV stations want to
broadcast La Liga. Why do other TV stations want to? Because people like to
watch it. Why does CCTV has leverage over Chinese Super League? Because no
TV station outside China wants to broadcast it.
,
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: MLS in US is based on salary cap. All players' right owned by one single
: entity and it is socialist model that prevent true competition. It is one
: of few leagues that's profitable but it is not free market place at all.
: Players may plan to strike this year if the contract between union and
: association is not reach.
: The reason why CCTV 5 paid higher fee for Spain football league is due to
: leverage. Spain league does NOT depend on CCTV 5 for its right. At worst,
: Spain football league does not broadcast on CCTV 5, no big loss for Spain
: league. CCTV 5 coverage to Spain league means very little in big picture.
: However, compared to spain league, Chinese Super League does not have any
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 34 和老子没关系老子就没有说的自由了？NBA和你有狗P关系你TMD不每天看得那么起劲，
乱给别人扣帽子你TMD又是什么毛病？
【在 A*****a 的大作中提到】
: 泡不泡沫跟你有什么关系，不懂你操哪门子心。信仰危机了？
|
B******e
发帖数: 16928 | 35 People can choose not to join MLS or not. That is still free. Salary cap is
present in every major sports league in the U.S. and its intention is to
prevent big city teams dominating the league thus promoting competitiveness
inside the league, which may be better off for the long-term value of the
league. There is always a tradeoff between free market and preventing
monopolies because free market has certain deficiencies, but promoting
bubbles for political favor is certainly not the right cure.
,
【在 j*****0 的大作中提到】
: MLS in US is based on salary cap. All players' right owned by one single
: entity and it is socialist model that prevent true competition. It is one
: of few leagues that's profitable but it is not free market place at all.
: Players may plan to strike this year if the contract between union and
: association is not reach.
: The reason why CCTV 5 paid higher fee for Spain football league is due to
: leverage. Spain league does NOT depend on CCTV 5 for its right. At worst,
: Spain football league does not broadcast on CCTV 5, no big loss for Spain
: league. CCTV 5 coverage to Spain league means very little in big picture.
: However, compared to spain league, Chinese Super League does not have any
|
