Those internet, TV and radio deals - all paid for by advertising. Yes, we have advertising but my very limited understanding of it is that there's a fundamental difference in that the US economy is so dependent on it. Perhaps Swarbs can explain it better than I.
No no, I will take your more enlightened word for it matey. I have already have had enough money talk.
Marketing can be applied no matter what country your in.You just follow the same principles. Liverpool due to the size of the brand don't need much advertising.Thus cutting out the expense. FSG already have a marketing company therefore they can market the Liverpool brand and tap into un-tapped areas and sell the club therefore increasing revenue.They will make Liverpool successful,because a successful Liverpool will generate funds for them,and its a win-win situation.The more successful Liverpool are...they more successful they are.Thats the reason why they are clever enough to ''speculate to accumulate''In ''Marketing speak'' its called ''Milking the cash-cow''.
speaking of advertisng and sports, has anyone ever tried to watch an American Football game, there are adverts right the way through it! I'm not a huge fan but I was well pleased the superbowl was on the BBC this year as it cut to punditry instead, is it the same for baseball?? (I've never watched a game but was looking to maybe trying to watch a redsox game at some point)
There are plenty of breaks for ads in baseball. It's so long they have a break for the crowd in the 7th inning to stretch the legs and sing, "Take me out to the ballgame."
As a stakeholder it is in our interest to debate about sums of money spent. If we spend too much, then we lose money. They're professionals, but it would be boring to take everything at face value wouldn't it?
The only really fundamental difference is that advertising to 300 million people >> advertising to 60 million people. Bigger audiences, so more value in the advertising. Also there's no public service broadcaster in the US so people get used to watching loads of adverts on every channel. Although that said the Yankees only make slightly more revenue than United - around £300 million ($441m) to United's £290 million. The Red Sox only make around £180 million ($266m) and only spend around £100 million ($145m) on wages, which is less than the top 5 spenders in the PL. IIRC that's cos the individuals are much more important in baseball - the left sided fielder is the one that a right handed batsman usually hits the ball too so you need a top class player there. The right sided fielder probably earns much less. In EPL terms, that would be like Suarez earning £250k a week, whilst Kuyt earned about £20k. You should try watching Fox Soccer Channel. Halftime is about 12 minutes of adverts and three minutes of Warren Barton. Advert break, messages from sponsors etc. It must be even worse in baseball, where the field resets after every hit. That's another difference in American sports - more breaks in play so more opportunities for adverts.
I have watched that, myp2p, fk sky sports setanta espn, and sky in general you need to get all the games you wanna see, complete fking ripoff, not paid a penny for 2 years fk am I funding those ridiculous wages. The adds are lunacy on American channels, and I thought the acting in our adds was bad Even the navy adds are ike something from starship troopers "The American Navy A Force for Good in the World" LMFAO O'fence D'fence lol
just came back from florida and there was a red sox game on in the restaurant we were in.One minute you are watching the game (which is,like most american sports,very stop start) next there is something else on,then adverts then back to the game.However,having said that I quite like watching baseball its quite a thrill seeing a home run !!
Have you ever watched the Hockey? The games are played in quarters not halves.When I lived in Canada,I was at a Montreal Canadiens game,and although it was only an exhibition the best thing about it was the fight in the middle.
