PC: Alternate schemes to repay the Fourth Crusade

[Beefhammer]

So shortly before Constantinople was sacked over Alexios IV's inability to pay the Crusaders what he had promised them, the emperor the Crusaders were hired to overthrow, Alexios III, was contesting his nephew's counter-coup from his power base in Thrace, and at the same time Leo Sgouros was in rebellion and actively expanding his rule across southern Greece:

So my question is: could Alexios IV have potentially worked out a deal with the Crusaders whereby they would lead the campaign against his uncle in exchange for first dibs on all war booty taken, and if they're still short on the 100,000 silver marks he owed them after that they repeat the process against Leo Sgouros? Would the Crusaders and the Venetians likely have accepted that as a way to get not only the money they were promised, but also the manpower (500 heavy cavalry and 10,000 other soldiers, according to Wikipedia) and supplies they were offered for war against the Ayyubids?
If they accepted it, could the Byzantines have subsequently provided the offered military support once the Crusaders had their money?
And how much success could the Crusader-Venetian-Byzantine army have had against the Ayyubid Sultanate, either in their original gameplan of landing in Egypt and marching on Cairo or in a less ambitious plan of landing in the crusader states and retaking ground from there?

 

[Beefhammer]

bump

 

[Elfwine]

Given the tensions between the Crusaders (and Venetians) and Alexios IV, I suspect that they would reject the deal. Especially if it involves "and campaign for me even longer for no additional reward (vs. Sgouros) than what I still haven't paid."

With more trust in place, it might not be entirely impossible - but with more trust in place, I'm not sure he'd need to make the offer.

 

[Beefhammer]

Given the tensions between the Crusaders (and Venetians) and Alexios IV, I suspect that they would reject the deal. Especially if it involves "and campaign for me even longer for no additional reward (vs. Sgouros) than what I still haven't paid."

With more trust in place, it might not be entirely impossible - but with more trust in place, I'm not sure he'd need to make the offer.

Was thinking Sgouros was only if they still didn't have the money. But they'd be entitled to the loot from Alexios III, who apparently took a lot of the treasury with him when he fled. Maybe mentioning that could grease the wheels...?

 

[Elfwine]

It's something of a - to my eyes - "If we still don't have the money, that means we trust you and want to campaign to further your goals even less than we do right now, which is pretty slight." situation.

"My uncle ran off with most of the treasury." seems like something that would be easy for suspicious men fed up with the Byzantines to not believe or not regard as a justification for Alexios paying them already, even though it's true.

.