You can believe what you want. I actually work for the agency most effected by both policies and have a little more than "CNN/Fox knowledge", it just irritates me when people (general public and media) parrot non-truths.
The bottom line FIFA as it stands right now chases money, that is the only reason for the expanded WC and when it comes to money know bid will be more capable of handling the expanded field or be as financially successful.
Thanks, I was waiting for your permission to believe what I want. And when you "actually work for the agency" which believes a border wall in its intended context doesn't mean fortification, and a travel ban targeting Muslim countries that will do little to stop terrorism doesn't mean Muslim Ban, be sure to notify me with another post. Mmm'kay?
"The bottom line is FIFA as it stands right now" is not chasing money, and has never been concerned about profits for FIFA. So you are wrong again. As long as the brand was at least stable, FIFA had to actively try to screw up incoming profits and jeopardize their ability to enrich their personal interests. They accomplished that with the last host selections, and are operating at a 9 figure loss. Continuing with a damaged brand will lead to being dissolved and the vehicle used to line their pockets removed. Therefore, working toward a huge revenue boost
NINE YEARS IN THE FUTURE is polishing the brass on the Titanic instead of taking measure to insure they don't hit an iceberg. FIFA needs a PR boost to reestablish stability, increase credibility, and let the world know change is being implemented. Announcing an expanded field will increase excitement from other countries and will signal changes brought about by new management. That is the "only reason for the expanded WC" announcement and its timing.
Is that a little clearer for you? Because the one thing we do have in common is "when people parrot non-truths."
