younothat
PREMIER
THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJOR LEAGUE SOCCER (MLS) & SOCCER UNITED MARKETING (SUM)"
https://twitter.com/danielworkman/status/1020151530320777218
in 2002, MLS owners formed Soccer United Marketing (SUM) to exploit the commercial value of soccer globally. MLS has licensed to SUM the exclusive right to sell MLS commercial rights, including sponsorship, broadcasting, digital, and consumer product rights.
Each Club operator owns the same share of MLS & SUM. MLS has a minority owner that is not a Club operator. Don Garber manages the day-to-day affairs of MLS & SUM. As Business Partners, Clubs provide MLS/SUM first right to participate in competitive business opportunities.
MLS // SUM operates under a unique "Single Entity" structure that includes the ownership of all Intellectual Property of its Franchises often (falsely) referred to as Clubs.
MLS signs all player contracts and employs all players. MLS controls all player transfers, not its member franchises.
The financials of SUM+MLS & its Franchises (Clubs) are an entangled mess. At the heart of the setup is complete & total control by the league.
What's not understood by most is that MLS would have gone out of business without creating SUM in 2002 to secure the ability to make money off of US Soccer & the Mexican National Teams. SUM later added CONCACAF to its portfolio in 2009. These are the money makers for SUM+MLS.
The financial arrangement between MLS+SUM & US Soccer began in 2002 & continues at least through 2022. It influences, & many would argue, compromises the USSF BoD. This No-Bid contract was awarded without scrutiny or competition.
The SUM deal diverts USSF profits that could go to our State Associations to lower the costs of participation in youth soccer & help fund needed programs to make soccer more accessible to more people in more places. Instead that money ends up in MLS owners' pockets.
Neuromancer @Neuromancer2000 Jul 20
The real issue is a non profit, USSF, being controlled by SUM. The rest of it is shady/monopolistic business practices with possible FTC issues, but the USSF and SUM no bid relationship is pure corruption and cronyism.
https://twitter.com/danielworkman/status/1020151530320777218
in 2002, MLS owners formed Soccer United Marketing (SUM) to exploit the commercial value of soccer globally. MLS has licensed to SUM the exclusive right to sell MLS commercial rights, including sponsorship, broadcasting, digital, and consumer product rights.
Each Club operator owns the same share of MLS & SUM. MLS has a minority owner that is not a Club operator. Don Garber manages the day-to-day affairs of MLS & SUM. As Business Partners, Clubs provide MLS/SUM first right to participate in competitive business opportunities.
MLS // SUM operates under a unique "Single Entity" structure that includes the ownership of all Intellectual Property of its Franchises often (falsely) referred to as Clubs.
MLS signs all player contracts and employs all players. MLS controls all player transfers, not its member franchises.
The financials of SUM+MLS & its Franchises (Clubs) are an entangled mess. At the heart of the setup is complete & total control by the league.
What's not understood by most is that MLS would have gone out of business without creating SUM in 2002 to secure the ability to make money off of US Soccer & the Mexican National Teams. SUM later added CONCACAF to its portfolio in 2009. These are the money makers for SUM+MLS.
The financial arrangement between MLS+SUM & US Soccer began in 2002 & continues at least through 2022. It influences, & many would argue, compromises the USSF BoD. This No-Bid contract was awarded without scrutiny or competition.
The SUM deal diverts USSF profits that could go to our State Associations to lower the costs of participation in youth soccer & help fund needed programs to make soccer more accessible to more people in more places. Instead that money ends up in MLS owners' pockets.
Neuromancer @Neuromancer2000 Jul 20
The real issue is a non profit, USSF, being controlled by SUM. The rest of it is shady/monopolistic business practices with possible FTC issues, but the USSF and SUM no bid relationship is pure corruption and cronyism.