Unnamed Trialist Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 1 hour ago, Bison44 said: Honestly....anyone who has kids in youth soccer out there (me included), my fees are due ASAP...if they were to increase 10$ would I freak like a addled brained parrot??? No I would not. Over the last 6-7 years the breakfast special has gone up, so has gas, rent, cable, etc etc etc. This is the usual morphing of what most people would consider a normal thing into a evil anti CSA/CSB/CPL dig by the feathered cassandra. What are the per player fee to CSA....9$?? What were they 20 years ago...5$???? I remember reading an article 20 years ago saying a 3$ a player hike would raise 2 million. You pair that with some actual money making friendlies in canada and you are a long way to making up the 4mil shortfall for 2024 projections. Settle the deals with the players (newsflash--your not going to get everything you want and still fund youth programs, you were a kid once too...get over it), force a renegotiation of the CSB deal to revenue share with CSA over a certain threshold and lets get working together to solve shit. The case of player fees--just wondering as I am assuming you have kid/s playing: -what is that as a fraction of overall cost of having a kid play soccer? Take a new pair of boots, if they are growing, yearly. The kit, which is usually annual. The fees to the club. Other charges that you could opt into, like special training sessions. Or a tournament you have to pay to enter. What else? There are inflationary pressures on all that. CSA fees do not represent more than 1% of total yearly costs, or am I wrong? What bothers me is that the provincial SAs complain about fees off the top going to the CSA, but often don't say a word when clubs are gouging, sometimes with no basis to justify whether the club's coaching and programmes are any good at all. Kadenge, TOcanadafan, narduch and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 3 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said: Our overall revenue is low, and clearly needs to be increased. One way to do it that does not go through CSB is home matches, in this case home friendlies. All indicators show that games that sell well make money, and in fact the agents arranging matches ensure this, that is their job. I suspect there will be no end of high profile nations wanting to play matches here, maybe not so much this summer/fall but next year as the World Cup gets closer, this happened prior to US 94! I realize this doesn't help us immediately but the planning and bidding can begin, this will be a huge opportunity to turn a profit with full stadiums! narduch, PegCityCam and Cheeta 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison44 Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said: The case of player fees--just wondering as I am assuming you have kid/s playing: HAHA, 9 year old, $40 for a spring session mid Apr-Jun, small town volunteer everything, club owned jerseys. He does get some street cred wearing his Valour and TFC gear. gator 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 17 hours ago, Watchmen said: The entire Conservative party platform is "Prices have gone up and you should be angry." So in this case, no. If the price goes up, you will absolutely have angry parents screaming about it. The droning on about the parents angle is a prime example of how certain people on here move the goalposts on you and build a strawman given this was in response to " amongst people who volunteer to run soccer at the grassroots level", i.e. the sort of people who make the decisions at the minor soccer association level where the tweet I highlighted is concerned. The levy on an individual player level may seem like loose change to some but certainly not all parents but by the time it accumulates for both outdoor and indoor registrations across an entire youth club, the people who see the annual sets of accounts will start thinking about how little they are actually getting back for that by now much larger sum of money and what else they could potentially be doing with it instead. Back in the day in London, Ont when I was a lot more actively involved the loonie for Holger (or was it a toonie, it's been a while) wasn't the main cause celebre on registration levies. The main cause of discontent was the OSA's registration levy being used to build the Ontario Soccer Centre in Vaughan that most London soccer people seldom went anywhere near and hence derived little to no benefit from. In response, the local district association arranged for an alternative on insurance and formed a separate parallel association for recreational level leagues running out of the same office and with much the same set of officeholders so more money would stay with the clubs in the London area. Any large sudden significant increase in registration levies risks that sort of backlash at the club and district association more than the parent level. There really isn't anything the provincial and national associations do for most of the players at the grassroots that can't easily be replicated locally, if the people at the top become too greedy and start to treat registration levies as a cash cow that can fund their pet projects with little in the way of accountability. Edited March 31 by Ozzie_the_parrot johnyb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Meanwhile gender equity in the treatment of CanPL and Project 8 is the issue that is lumbering over the horizon: There's no way that's going to be dealt with effectively from a PCI-linked increase in registration levies, so the statement from Kevin Blue appears to be the opening salvo in the process of persuading CSB to renegotiate the deal that was signed in 2018. CSB suffered a setback at the last CSA AGM when Project 8 was accepted into membership and officially became a thing. CSB having access to CWNT revenue streams out to 2037 will become completely untenable in optics terms if Project 8 manages to start actually playing games and survives its first season. johnyb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 It will not be difficult for the CSA to match giving Project 8 what they give to the CSB, since as far as I can tell, that is $0. CSB gives money to the CSA, not the other way round. If Project 8 is struggling and needs CSB funding to get off the ground, that is not a surprise and is fine with me, ideally all these groups should be working together anyway. narduch, gator, Bison44 and 3 others 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 44 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said: It will not be difficult for the CSA to match giving Project 8 what they give to the CSB, since as far as I can tell, that is $0. CSB gives money to the CSA, not the other way round. If Project 8 is struggling and needs CSB funding to get off the ground, that is not a surprise and is fine with me, ideally all these groups should be working together anyway. That is true, but in fairness, as much as I am in favour of the CSB deal because it got investors involved in starting a much-needed legitimate pro league, I can see where the women would be pissed and why their backs are up regarding the CSB and CPL (again, not that I agree with it). I believe (the hiring of Moscato at the onset of the deal shows it) that the CSB had full intention of starting a parallel women's league but a number of issues (pandemic primarily, profitability, Mediapro issues) kept them from doing so. The women got impatient, started on their own, and are now demanding gender equity in funding from the CSA. So I guess I actually agree with Ozzie in this aspect that Blue is trying to make everyone happy with this announcement while trying to secure more funding (philanthropically) and most likely, some concessions from the CSB. narduch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said: It will not be difficult for the CSA to match giving Project 8 what they give to the CSB, since as far as I can tell, that is $0. CSB gives money to the CSA, not the other way round. If Project 8 is struggling and needs CSB funding to get off the ground, that is not a surprise and is fine with me, ideally all these groups should be working together anyway. That will no doubt get you some green dots from the double digit IQ brigade but you know as well as I do that the CSA has handed over critical CMNT and CWNT revenue streams to CSB in exchange for the annual flat fee payment that flows in the other direction and that the point being raised is that CWNT revenue streams can't sensibly be exclusively propping up a men's pro league in that manner once a women's league also exists. Edited March 31 by Ozzie_the_parrot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narduch Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, Gian-Luca said: It will not be difficult for the CSA to match giving Project 8 what they give to the CSB, since as far as I can tell, that is $0. CSB gives money to the CSA, not the other way round. If Project 8 is struggling and needs CSB funding to get off the ground, that is not a surprise and is fine with me, ideally all these groups should be working together anyway. I wonder how much the CSA was spending when it was subsidizing the salaries of Canadians playing in the NWSL. Anyways this is a good thing if the CSA is going to help out Project 8. Ivan, Canuckia, gator and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyslexic nam Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 lol. “Double digit IQ brigade” For a guy who always claims moral high ground and openly decries the ad hominem attacks directed towards you, you sure don’t mind being a snide prick. RichV, gator, narduch and 6 others 7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narduch Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 25 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said: That will no doubt get you some green dots from the double digit IQ brigade.... Another example of why I don't take anything this poster says seriously Bigandy and Metro 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 53 minutes ago, narduch said: I wonder how much the CSA was spending when it was subsidizing the salaries of Canadians playing in the NWSL. Anyways this is a good thing if the CSA is going to help out Project 8. Great point about the NWSL subsidies! Forgot about that. So theoretically, the men should have been screaming for gender equity at that time! johnyb, Bison44, NVsoccer and 2 others 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, Ivan said: That is true, but in fairness, as much as I am in favour of the CSB deal because it got investors involved in starting a much-needed legitimate pro league, I can see where the women would be pissed and why their backs are up regarding the CSB and CPL (again, not that I agree with it). I believe (the hiring of Moscato at the onset of the deal shows it) that the CSB had full intention of starting a parallel women's league but a number of issues (pandemic primarily, profitability, Mediapro issues) kept them from doing so. The women got impatient, started on their own, and are now demanding gender equity in funding from the CSA. So I guess I actually agree with Ozzie in this aspect that Blue is trying to make everyone happy with this announcement while trying to secure more funding (philanthropically) and most likely, some concessions from the CSB. Yes, but this is what I was saying as well - all these parties should be working together, and as you say the CSB was interested in starting up a women's league and wanted to make sure that it was set up correctly with a view to sustainability (given the history of failed soccer leagues in this country) rather than rushing into it. As far as I can tell, the only people who are or were against CSB involvement in a women's league were the people involved in Project 8 who wanted to go their own way. If they have changed their tune on that and want to work with CSB, that is indeed good news. What this effectively amounts to is the CSA asking CSB if they can spend money/invest in a women's league, which they were interested in and which means bringing them on board with Project 8. Presumably not even the single-digit IQ posters will be against this from happening. 😉 Ivan, johnyb, ray and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 55 minutes ago, narduch said: I wonder how much the CSA was spending when it was subsidizing the salaries of Canadians playing in the NWSL. We will get this information if the same women's players who were getting their salaries subsidized by the CSA continue with their absurd lawsuit arguing that such decisions to pay their salary constitute evidence of bad faith by the CSA board members who voted in favour of this. I'll be amazed if it gets to trial though. h coach, Ivan, narduch and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmen Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 43 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said: Yes, but this is what I was saying as well - all these parties should be working together, and as you say the CSB was interested in starting up a women's league and wanted to make sure that it was set up correctly with a view to sustainability (given the history of failed soccer leagues in this country) rather than rushing into it. As far as I can tell, the only people who are or were against CSB involvement in a women's league were the people involved in Project 8 who wanted to go their own way. If they have changed their tune on that and want to work with CSB, that is indeed good news. What this effectively amounts to is the CSA asking CSB if they can spend money/invest in a women's league, which they were interested in and which means bringing them on board with Project 8. Presumably not even the single-digit IQ posters will be against this from happening. 😉 I think I've always sort of understood both sides of the CSB/CWNT players debate though: the CSB might have liked to start up a women's league, but they're already taken on an enormous financial risk with the CPL so the timing isn't right for them. But for the women, we hosted the WWC in 2015 and they won Gold in 2021, so there's a reasonable "if not now, then when?" question from them. It's why I've never begrudged Project 8 and another group of investors making an attempt. As you say, it would be ideal if all parties worked together to make it happen. We'll see. Kent 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, Gian-Luca said: We will get this information if the same women's players who were getting their salaries subsidized by the CSA continue with their absurd lawsuit arguing that such decisions to pay their salary constitute evidence of bad faith by the CSA board members who voted in favour of this. I'll be amazed if it gets to trial though. IIRC, weren't they subsidizing 10 players, $60,000 per year? So, $600K per year? Don't recall how long that went on. narduch and johnyb 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 1 hour ago, Watchmen said: I think I've always sort of understood both sides of the CSB/CWNT players debate though: the CSB might have liked to start up a women's league, but they're already taken on an enormous financial risk with the CPL so the timing isn't right for them. But for the women, we hosted the WWC in 2015 and they won Gold in 2021, so there's a reasonable "if not now, then when?" question from them. It's why I've never begrudged Project 8 and another group of investors making an attempt. As you say, it would be ideal if all parties worked together to make it happen. We'll see. Agreed. I don't begrudge Project 8 or a separate group investors in their attempt. I hope they are successful. What I do begrudge, however, is the attempt by a group representing the CWNT(and probably Matheson and Project 8 attempting to bring down the CSB/CPL in an "if we don't have a league, either should the men" sort of way. And (I suspect) the feeding of extremely one-sided information to a well known investigative sports journalist is even more disgusting, if true. Edited March 31 by Ivan removed emoji that somehow appeared gator, HochelagaFC, RichV and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison44 Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 HEHE, the rumbling gender equality problems....and this is the guy who claims everyone else is moving the goalposts. He railed against the CPL/CSB and took up the womens equality cause only when it suited his little farm club/bus league fantasy. And his example is 2 posts that dont have a basic grasp on whats going on and seem to be taking the Westhead slant on things. CSB is being paid by the CSA...ughhhhh. If project 8 wants a CSB type deal, they need to pay them for rights, not the other way around. Then maybe they can support the league off those rights they paid cash for if the product is good enough...same as the men. Nothing got handed over for free no matter how many times people call it "siphoning". Of course they would need to break the CSB deal first, and how do you do that, umm mb slanted TSN articles with glaring factual errors muddying public opinion and a large nuisance lawsuit against the board members that brought the deal in. The picture kind of clears up when you put together the pieces. And of course this makes sense to our avian friend, tear down the mens league (which is destined to fail in current form according to him) and instead build up a womens league which would have the same problems the mens league only multiplied. Of course he wouldnt support the womens league any more than he has supported the CPL so what is the difference??? Unnamed Trialist, Bigandy, gator and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kacbru Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 I may have single-digit IQ, but I know one thing. Incessant squawking and shit everywhere - never get a parrot. Bigandy, gator and narduch 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red card Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Canada Soccer does provide money to the CPL but not onerous to match for P8. 350k appears to be coming from Canada Soccer generated revenues. 650k comes from FIFA Forward program that has been largely used to fund referee training, pay, travel and lodgings/per diems. So, at the minimum Canada Soccer would need to take care of referees for P8. And apply for additional funds from FIFA if they don't want to dip into their own revenues. Canada Soccer funded the bulk of the salaries of up to max 16 players in the NWSL from 2013-2021. The amount varied per year as the number of players changed. It was also dependent on the player's NWSL salary which wasn't negotiated by Canada Soccer. Min/max NWSL salaries also increased over this period. In 2021, there were 10 players. https://canadasoccer.com/news/canwnt-2021-nwsl-allocation-list/ narduch, Ivan, dyslexic nam and 5 others 7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 8 hours ago, red card said: Canada Soccer does provide money to the CPL but not onerous to match for P8... Do you honestly believe that what you describe would satisfy the CWNT and P8 in gender equity terms and that they would just ignore the fact that sponsorship and broadcast revenue streams related to the CWNT have been signed over to CSB out to 2037? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unnamed Trialist Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 10 hours ago, red card said: Canada Soccer does provide money to the CPL but not onerous to match for P8. 350k appears to be coming from Canada Soccer generated revenues. 650k comes from FIFA Forward program that has been largely used to fund referee training, pay, travel and lodgings/per diems. So, at the minimum Canada Soccer would need to take care of referees for P8. And apply for additional funds from FIFA if they don't want to dip into their own revenues. Canada Soccer funded the bulk of the salaries of up to max 16 players in the NWSL from 2013-2021. The amount varied per year as the number of players changed. It was also dependent on the player's NWSL salary which wasn't negotiated by Canada Soccer. Min/max NWSL salaries also increased over this period. In 2021, there were 10 players. https://canadasoccer.com/news/canwnt-2021-nwsl-allocation-list/ Refs and disciplinary committee work would be assigned by the CSA. Actual payment of reffing teams would be determined by the league. In our economy of scale, not doubling up resources between the two leagues would be terrible financial management, but since Matheson is doing business courses as her retirement project she must surely know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aird25 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 5 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said: Do you honestly believe that what you describe would satisfy the CWNT and P8 in gender equity terms and that they would just ignore the fact that sponsorship and broadcast revenue streams related to the CWNT have been signed over to CSB out to 2037? Do you know how much the CWMT sponsorship and broadcast revenue typically is from year to year? narduch, ray, Bigandy and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eramosat Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 On 3/31/2024 at 10:32 AM, narduch said: Another example of why I don't take anything this poster says seriously thank you for allowing others to exercise the useful blocking mechanism without which, the site might be littered with pointless back-and-forth. while continuing to provide some hopeful push-back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver 2.0 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Meanwhile, Lothar Matthaus says Davies is a shadow of his former self. (I'll see if I can find the link to the article.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now