Benedito: “I'm still at L'Elefant Blau; I don't recognize Laporta”

Agustí Benedito (6-22-1964), businessman, receives AS at his electoral headquarters, at the top of the emblematic Carrer Pau Claris. He has been in the electoral world of Barça for more than 20 years and is heading towards his third election. His groundbreaking proposal is to cancel Espai Barça and demolish the Camp Nou to build one there or a new stadium in Sant Joan Despí. He defines Bartomeu as the worst president in the history of Barça with a “sure, sure, sure.” And go to Laporta with 30% guaranteed votes. He harshly criticizes the vote of no confidence that Farré and Font cast.

-The measure of throwing the Camp Nou is the most definitive that has been heard so far. Do you think the stadium is dead?

-It is 65 years old and is built on structures that have become obsolete. That is indisputable. What is under discussion are the measures to be taken.

– But for that was not Espai Barça?

-The Espai Barça is the option of the other candidates, but not mine, because we have followed the evolution, we have spoken with architects and engineers; and it is not as they presented the project.

– And the vote of the partner and the one that is pending?

-What they voted for did not exist. A project was voted on that they had no idea about and we worked on the consequences of the execution. It cannot be done on time or on budget and the uncertainties are enormous. If you want a stadium for the next 70 years over a 65 now, it gives you a 140-year field and the structure won't hold. It goes in price. And that that in four summers it will be ready without disturbing anyone, is not true. And it will be very expensive.

-Your option is not cheap either …

I don't have a project yet, but we have time not to do it. The best thing Bartomeu has done is not start this play. He has not done it due to disability. But if they had started it, it would be even more expensive.

– Your measure is real or an electoral strategy to break a deck, is it credible?

-Totally, at least for those who know me, because at the time I already voted against it and I have been studying it for many years. The referendum is out of date. I put it on the table because it is such a momentous measure that this must be done in an electoral campaign. I seek the legitimacy of the support of the social mass not by referendum, but by elections. As happened in 1953 with Miró-Sants against Casajuana.

-Being the only one who takes this measure and being the centerpiece of your project, it is understood that you will not agree with anyone, right?

-I'm the only one defending him … for now. I find it hard to understand that others defend him. I have spoken with architects and they agree that it is an outrage of 900 million euros. There has been no debate on this. The truth has not been told. I say things very clearly. This is a churro, a bad business. I don't know if it is electorally good or bad because I tell people that they are going to have to leave their home. If the others have not done it, it is due to neglect, the issue is not minor, they have not been informed.

-Do you see it as bad news?

-For whom.

-For the partner.

-I do not see it. The opposite means that they are going to change their seats and with my project they can stay at the Camp Nou if we build it in Sant Joan Despí until it is fully up.

Do you see popular taking the Camp Nou out of Barcelona?

-Those were discussed before when Sandro Rosell looked to take him to the university tracks. And something similar was done before when we went from Les Corts to Camp Nou, although now we see it close, at the time it was a big change, they went to a field. Taking it to Sant Joan we would maintain the heritage of Les Corts.

-In exchange for building a stadium in a poorly connected place …

That is not true. There is the Trambaix, which leaves you at the door; the Renfe to ten minutes; and we would put all the coaches that were necessary, and it would have parking.

-And the subway?

-Okay, but you have to see where the stadiums in the world are.

-Are you worried that with your idea, the derby against Espanyol will become metropolitan?

– That is why I formally propose a referendum, because it goes beyond technical questions. There is a component. emotional leaving Barcelona. That is why we can also do it in the same place and play a few years in Montjuïc.

– Are you personally more in favor of building it in Sant Joan Despí?

-From the heritage point of view, it is interesting to maintain 14 hectares of property in Les Corts.

-How would Núñez say, to make floors, is that it?

-No, the plan is approved for facilities and Espai Barça is only modified by the stadium. The new Palau will be done and fast.

-How do you combine that with the mandatory salary cut?

-Whatever you do, the pay cut is required.

-And how is all this paid for?

-In 12 months we will hold a referendum with a very detailed plan, I have done some management and the naning rigths partners prefer a new stadium to a renovated one. they want the best stadium for the best club. That will allow us to pull back the credit from Goldman Sachs.

-Let's go back to the wage bill.

– A compulsory reduction of at least 200 million euros must be made yes or yes and we all know what that means.

– Discounts or rescissions?

-If the players agree to reduce their salary, fucking great; or if not, the other way. Barça already pre COVID had a negative working capital of 270 million. The accounts for 19-20, which have to be reformulated, foresee losses of 450 million. Whoever enters the club will lack 400 million to meet the obligations of creditors. The situation is critical.

-Contest of creditors?

-In the case of talking about a commercial company, we would already be in competition. 300 million cannot be paid in June because we will not have them. That is speaking out. Bartomeu has done a spectacular destruction. He has financially destroyed the club. We are to be rescued.

-And you still want to be president?

-Sure, I want to do it. I see myself able to reduce expenses.

-And what role does Messi play in this equation, is it better to have him as an asset to stop recovering or to do without him because of his cost?

-Barça needs a franchise player, be it Messi or another, because if not this will fall.

-But could I earn the same?

-No, but it's a huge exception. He is the best and has been with the club for 20 years. The franchise player will stand out above the rest in salary compensation. You have to trust him to change his mind first, because his words in the summer were shocking, but he loves the club and understands this situation and is no stranger to the fact that the situation is competitive and dramatic. If you want to finish this precious story it won't be a money problem, but if you don't change your mind we can't do crazy things.

-Do I foresee a crossing of the desert?

It depends on the COVID. If they tell me when the pandemic ends, a projection can be made. If it ended in the 22nd it would be a year not of crossing the desert, but of forced commitment to the quarry.

-Does that mean lowering the competitive bar for a while?

-We will not have Coutinhos or Dembélés, nor will we be able to pay transfers of 100 million. If we call that crossing the desert, then yes. But the bet is Pedris and Minguezas and instead of Firpo, stay with Cucurella. We will try in four months to recover the damage that Bartomeu has done in five years.

-Not afraid of losing players?

-What are we talking about?

-That teams arrive and tempt Ansu or Pedri.

-There is a higher margin of amortization in those cases, but I hope that those of the house stay, those of outside … I have said enough.

-Therefore, Neymar not even in paint?

-Sportively we can have a franchise player, two not. Neymar could be because he is from PSG, but we have Messi. You have to convince Leo not to leave, but when I heard Nweynar talk about playing together, I thought that in the face of their 2022 World Cup, Qatar has spent 200,000 million dollars and it would not be strange if before celebrating it, he wanted to reunite these two players in their club of reference in Europe. If that is put to them they put them between eyebrows and they go for Messi we will not be able to compete. It depends on him.

-Will Messi not end up in Qatar with Xavi with Al Sadd?

-I think Messi really wants to stay. I mean it.

-You explain that the 2010 elections were going to be won by Rosell de calle and that those of 2015 were won by Bartomeu for the triplet, but the fact is that his number of votes decreased by five thousand in five years. How can you handle an election if the trend is down?

-Nothing trend. You have to understand well what we are talking about. I cast eight thousand votes because Laporta did not appear in 2010. In 2015 Laporta appeared. I say things that make sense. I did 3,400 because Laporta was there. I appeared against Jaume Ferrer, who was Laporta's substitute, and I got many votes. The circumstances are different. What happened? I say it in another way. I give a piece of information that I have not given yet, Laporta has, according to the first polls, a 28-30-33% intention to vote. It's where the polls agree. That means that there is 70% that Laporta will not vote. If in that 70% you have a Rosell like in 2010 who takes it to the street, and you have a triplet that takes it to the street in 2015, how are you going to pull the pussy trend. If in 2021 there is no one who takes 27,000 out of 30,000. How do you distribute the 70 percent of votes that will not go to Laporta? I don't see anyone. Rather, I see myself. And because? Because he competed with Freixa, who is a rival, and I doubled him in votes. And because Font, which will be putting everything in its place, because the Font thing beyond newsworthiness cannot be supported with any technical data. It is not that there is a continuista vote and a Laportista vote, it is not true.

-And so?

-There is a Laporta vote and an anti-Laporta vote, which is not the same. And in the non-Laporta vote, there is a range of former Laporta voters who will no longer vote for Laporta. They are talking to a guy who has been in the ranks of Laporta for 20 years, I mean that, in this aspect, if there are 45,000 participants and I have 15,000, of those two thirds that remain, if someone takes 16,000, they have won the elections. So, can I aspire to aspire to make 16,000 if I know that I have 5,000 or 6,000 votes if I compete against Farré, Rousaud …? I certainly have more options than in 2015.

-It is interesting that concept that opens the falsehood of bipolarity between continuity or laportismo.

-It's not true.

-It is therefore understood that there are people who will vote for Laporta and people who will never vote for Laporta. Thus, there is no clear alternative candidate. Is that?

-Jordi Roche, for two years, set up a candidacy with Sandro Rosell that could aspire significantly to the space of continuity. Roche makes the decision not to go … It remains open for the rest of those who are not in the Laporta world.

-Roche will not go, but Sandro Rosell may appear.

-I don't think I will make an appearance to sponsor a candidate. For sensations, Rosell will want Laporta to win before Font. I have no doubt, regardless of the meetings they have had. Rightly or wrongly, Sandro respects Laporta. And who will not give support is Font.

– Sensations and data?

-You know more. I haven't talked to Rosell for ten years. I do not meet him, to see if I am the only one.

– And the sociological nuñismo?

– That of the nuñismo is no longer basic. Toni Freixa may be the representative of that and if he does it is by electoral strategy. More than Rosell. Another thing is the electoral strength it has. But going back to the vote no Laporta, which is my space, the 3,400 members who voted for me in 2015, clearly did not want to vote Laporta, They are a specter. And there were 27,000 who voted for Bartomeu, by a polarized vote. I estimate that I lost 4,000 partners so that Laporta did not win. We will see who reaches the end, who passes the signatures. They are more open than in 2010 and 2015.

-Have you met with Puigdemont?

-I have not met or spoken with him. Freixa must be interested in knowing specifically that two candidates have met with a pro-independence politician. I say this because other candidates may have met with other politicians and this does not say. Freixa's comment is not just because. Focus the name of that politician on two candidates and not talk about other politicians.

But would you meet, do you think that is part of the job a candidate should do? Not because of ideology, but because of being able to meet everyone, whatever ideas you have.

Ah, okay. Yes, I can tell you from experience. In both 2010 and 2015 I had a lot of pressure from politicians to meet with me. And in some cases I agreed. In 2010 in a political sense, in 2015 in another … But it is normal. Is that Barça is a square is very important and it is normal that politicians want to make you see their vision of the play. There is nothing wrong with that. The bad thing is when a meeting of those can affect the president or candidate. But, for God's sake, why don't you go meet a politician? With whoever. And in the case of Puigdemont, you are talking about a former president of the Generalitat, how are you not going to talk to him? Is that Freixa … If he has met with Puigdemont, what? They have also met with politicians of another sign and Toni does not reflect it. It can be, right?

-You live in the electoral world of 1997. For all you know about the electoral fabric, is it going to take an alliance to win Laporta or can everyone get it from the candidacy?

-I just do not know. That it affects me, surely not. That I can think by the logic of experience, that there may be an alliance … well, it may be, in the block of 30,000. It would make sense.

-In your last electoral campaign I got an offer at the last minute to agree with Laporta.

-Not in the last minute. The whole campaign and very insistently. The penultimate day especially. And I said I wouldn't make the deal and I didn't. Do you know what happens to me with Laporta? Which is that I have known him since 1996. I have spent six years with him at the club. We have a different club model. I remember the years of L'Elefant Blau. I remember a lot of what we were talking about … a lot. I believe that I am still there, and that he has changed. Being president and that experience has perhaps conditioned him in some way. I believe a lot in a popular Barça. Barça is a unique club in the world, it belongs to the people. That makes us different? There are many with 300 million spectators, with the best in the world … United, City … They all have the best players in the world. There are clubs also with political aspirations. The big difference with Barça is that it belongs to the people, not just in name. Barça is open. People leave the facilities, they are in contact with the society that votes for them, with initiatives, they get into society. That is why it is a month that a club. I believe in a Barça that breathes and lives with the people. Obviously, I am in a different plane from Font, in another orbit

-And Unicef.

-Well, after trying Viagra … He suddenly suggested a stock thing that he hadn't seen in his first five years different. He has a different way of doing, of managing …

-Do you consider that Bartomeu is the worst president in the history of Barça?

– Sure, sure, sure. Is that the destruction … Gaspart charged 10,000 million pesetas for Figo, went to London and spent 8,000. The equivalent that Bartomeu did was to take 10,000 and spend 15,000 million. There is a before and after that they are interested in PSG buying Neymar.

-Believe so?

-It's good to hide it. Of course. That operation gives them capital gains. It suited them to square the numbers. And executives who did business with Qatar. That was the final rampage. I put a vote of no confidence in him in 2017, which comes from the pact with the prosecution for the Neymar case. Which also makes him the worst president in the history of a club. You can not go for roses.

-Would you put a liability action on Bartomeu and his Board?

-It's just, excuse me, I heard Laporta say on the day of his presentation that it's time to look ahead and not look back … And I'm hallucinating. I don't recognize it. Because it makes me think, not bad. But I don't get it. What do you mean that it is time to look forward? Let Font say it, I understand. It fits me. Let Freixa say it, I won't even explain it to you, and Rousaud. But Laporta? Not looking back with everything you've done? This club is convicted of a double tax offense. That is antecedents. I don't want to think about another problem. And we have Barça bankrupt, in bankruptcy. And that has a person in charge above all, Josep Maria Bartomeu, who due to the vote of no confidence and the resignation is about to leave without any responsibility.

-Who will take responsibility?

-Depends how the numbers are closed. They have approved a cumulative 200 million benefits. They approved the accounts for 2019-20 in which they have 96 million losses. If the elections had been in March, the whole exercise would have been his. And this year 300 million or more are going to be lost … And they were all his. And the new Board, starting on July 1, reformulated and passed all the responsibility to them. Now it turns out that you have to vote in January, that since October there are no responsible parties and that the exercise of January 24 is swallowed up by the Board that enters. Spectacular…

-What did you like about a candidate?

-They have caused me few surprises. I know Font. I remember him competing hard with England … I've been living it for years. You can foresee what its evolution will be. I was surprised by Emili Rousaud, who has spoken with everyone. I was pleasantly surprised. I'm not talking about the hand in the box or I3 Ventures, but I was surprised by the truth. There is no agreement.

-And Jordi Farré?

-I already know him, from 2015. I think this has not changed, this one does not deceive. And I say one thing. Will do many signatures.

-Do you say it with seconds?

-No. He has cast a vote of no confidence, he and Font. Let's be clear. To collect data for the January elections. Farré makes a hell of a strategy with the aim of making signatures. It has a strategy. It has been developed with the aim of obtaining signatures. I'll do it like in the last two, but he does it in two phases. And I think the cut will pass. Another thing is that you believe you can win.

– Win or not, how do you think the team will end the season?

I have to say that Koeman was my coach in 2015. And I am very much of him, I really think about it. He thought that Luis Enrique should not renew. There is little patience but he is a brave guy. I think he is a guy who can manage the decisions that have to be made from June, because what comes next year is complicated. And I don't want to give up anything for lost. I mean it honestly. Liverpool was a devil's stick. We were one corner from great things. And a 20-year-old boy had mischief and ours looked I don't know where. We still have Messi and I'm hallucinating with Pedri. Because I speak little about soccer. But I'm not that pessimistic. And the Champions …

-How do you see the Super League?

Do not know him. I have no approach to the subject beyond the political. It is moved by money but I have no information, it would be free.

– Do you think like Freixa that the VAR with Madrid is a scandal?

-Each one makes the strategy he wants, each one sends his messages. It is true that there have been decisions that, shit … In our position they are more wrong than they are right. But it is difficult for me to say that there is an instruction to arbitration. Perhaps Freixa is right, but I refuse to think that it is possible. It is true that there are days when you say: if not, it seems a lot.

-What day did you think you wanted to be president and what keeps your dream alive?

I left Barça after six years with Laporta. The day I resigned to his secretary was Friday afternoon. It was because of the Uzbekistan issue. And then we started talking to a group of people in the summer. People who came from the world of Laporta. And at a dinner for 12 or 14 people, we talked about it and that's where it started. There were talented people. It started there.

And here it continues.

I know that nobody looks down on anyone but a few thousand members have voted for me to preside over the club. And for sure

Do you think you don't have antis, unlike others?

It may be that he has never jeopardized anyone's success. I believe that, since it was not the focus of the media, no one has campaigned against me. No one has been afraid of me. If they attack me now, we are doing well.