The Official Manchester City Thread

[carmine]

11 hours ago, BangrakBob said:

Yeah but you do have the highest wage bill, some 30M more than ours annually. United aren't far behind you though.

 

Isn't KDB on 350K a week? Same as Sanchez?

Yes it would be such a good argument ...that is if City hadn't spent 600m and pay the most outrageous wages!!!????  And just because United do too doesn't make it right.

[carmine]

10 hours ago, RickG16 said:

And Liverpool have by far the highest net spend last year, and the highest in Europe behind PSG. Let's just agree the top clubs spend a lot of money, and rightly so, because the money a club makes / has should be going back into football.

Not all the top clubs spend a lot of money.  

[carmine]

9 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

Wish we could mate. But some on here don't like the fact that they spend more than 90odd percent of other football clubs but then claim it's unfair that we have spent more than them. It's a constant battle

Oh really, check the premier league net spend and then retract that.  And lets not agree with either you or Rick because you are both making it up as you go along..

 

And you really do have to make up your mind whether we are, big spenders, tight wads or skirt and unable to spend through stadium debt.  I honestly can't keep up with you anymore!!!????

[Bredbury Blue]

"Wish we could mate. But some on here don't like the fact that they spend more than 90odd percent of other football clubs but then claim it's unfair that we have spent more than them. It's a constant battle"

 

I couldn't have said it better, particularly the last sentence.

They also only ever complain about City, NEVER about Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool (some kind of alliance going on there?) or ManU.

Thanks!

[mrbojangles]

1 hour ago, carmine said:

Oh really, check the premier league net spend and then retract that.  And lets not agree with either you or Rick because you are both making it up as you go along..

 

And you really do have to make up your mind whether we are, big spenders, tight wads or skirt and unable to spend through stadium debt.  I honestly can't keep up with you anymore!!!????

You added the "Premier League" bit. I said "other football clubs" which is why I used 90odd percent. I know you are not in the top 90odd percent of Prem League big spenders. But football in England has more clubs than just the Prem and they all look up at envy at the money generated from being in the Prem. I can now see why you can't keep up, as your tunnel visioned.

 

As for being tight. Well your owner proves that every year.

 

As for being unable to spend through stadium debt. Think you need to go back and look at what I actually said on the subject. In short, I never stated you wouldn't be able to. I simply asked a question as to with the increasing stadium costs are you Spurs fans concerned it could affect your ability to spend. And in usual Spurs fans style, you all went off on one. Honestly mate, go back in the old thread and have a read as to how it started and what was said. I'll ask again though. Do you think the increasing stadium costs will affect your ability to spend?

 

[mrbojangles]

1 hour ago, carmine said:

Not all the top clubs spend a lot of money.  

Sorry but 600, 700, 800m or whatever the figure for your stadium finally finishes at, is a lot of money.

[Bredbury Blue]

6 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Sorry but 600, 700, 800m or whatever the figure for your stadium finally finishes at, is a lot of money.

Mainly being reported at the 1bn mark these days.

 

Here's why Spurs could  spend Carmine but can't  spend currently Carmine:

 

"Spurs confirmed what has been rumoured for a while — that borrowing for the stadium has increased from the initial £400m deal. The Mail on Sunday put it at £500m, I’ve cited a figure of £560m — we were both wrong. In fact, the facility from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs and HSBC is now £637m. That’s an increase of almost 60 percent — I assume it will all be drawn eventually.

The structure of the facility remains the same — it is a five-year deal, which will then be refinanced. The terms of the initial five-year loan were not disclosed. The previous £400m facility was extremely cheap, at LIBOR + 3–2.5% — at time of writing, that’s a maximum interest rate of 3.68%.

What does this mean for fans? The bigger the loan, the greater the financing costs, which means less money available for things like central midfielders and community programmes."

[RickG16]

2 hours ago, carmine said:

Not all the top clubs spend a lot of money.  

You're not a top club.

[Bredbury Blue]

8 minutes ago, RickG16 said:

You're not a top club.

Poch confirmed that this week didn't he...glory days were in black and white he said

[Kadilo]

Just now, Bredbury Blue said:

Poch confirmed that this week didn't he...glory days were in black and white he said

I assume he never meant Newcastle. 

[ChipButty]

26 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Mainly being reported at the 1bn mark these days.

 

Here's why Spurs could  spend Carmine but can't  spend currently Carmine:

 

"Spurs confirmed what has been rumoured for a while — that borrowing for the stadium has increased from the initial £400m deal. The Mail on Sunday put it at £500m, I’ve cited a figure of £560m — we were both wrong. In fact, the facility from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs and HSBC is now £637m. That’s an increase of almost 60 percent — I assume it will all be drawn eventually.

The structure of the facility remains the same — it is a five-year deal, which will then be refinanced. The terms of the initial five-year loan were not disclosed. The previous £400m facility was extremely cheap, at LIBOR + 3–2.5% — at time of writing, that’s a maximum interest rate of 3.68%.

What does this mean for fans? The bigger the loan, the greater the financing costs, which means less money available for things like central midfielders and community programmes."

Higher ticket prices for the fans, plus season tickets

[smokie36]

Not this old cobblers again....the number of clubs who have spent way more than us and sitting below us is hilarious.

 

If we identify the right target and can afford transfer fee and wages he'll be bought.

 

Other clubs have a scattergun policy which we cannot afford is the only difference.

 

Signings like Janssen can do one....I'd much rather the boss sit on the cash if needs be.

 

Anyway...is Son back in the squad tonight?

Edited January 27, 2019 by RonniePickering22

[Rc2702]

2 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

Not this old cobblers again....the number of clubs who have spent way more than us and sitting below us is hilarious.

 

If we identify the right target and can afford transfer fee and wages he'll be bought.

 

Other clubs have a scattergun policy which we cannot afford is the only difference.

 

Signings like Janssen can do one....I'd much rather the boss sit on the cash if needs be.

 

Anyway...is Son back in the squad tonight?

You mean you learned your lesson with the scattergun policy when you blew 85m from sale of bale and spent 11m wisely.

[smokie36]

12 minutes ago, Rc2702 said:

You mean you learned your lesson with the scattergun policy when you blew 85m from sale of bale and spent 11m wisely.

 

Well Lamela and Eriksen a decent deal from 85m quid really.

[Bredbury Blue]

2 hours ago, Kadilo said:

I assume he never meant Newcastle. 

Pretty bad isnt it when your own manager is sticking the boot in.

 

"In an impassioned answer Pochettino pointed out Tottenham’s glory days had come during the era of black and white TV – they did the league and FA Cup double under Bill Nicholson in 1961, an achievement recalled in the dramatic big-screen montage before home matches.

 

Pochettino noted Spurs had “no history of winning”, with the subtext he ought not to be blamed for a lack of trophies. In the last 34 years the club have won the FA Cup once and League Cup twice."

[Rc2702]

5 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Well Lamela and Eriksen a decent deal from 85m quid really.

Lamela ain't sheet. 

[wilai]

Everton v City re-scheduled for Wednesday 6th Feb

Edited January 28, 2019 by mrbojangles
Date change at the request of the op

[Bredbury Blue]

11 hours ago, wilai said:

Everton v City re-scheduled for Wednesday 6th May

Has April Fools come early?

[carmine]

22 hours ago, RickG16 said:

You're not a top club.

That makes two of us then.  You are a shadow of your former selves.  Fergusons gone, remember!!????

 

Best not try and mix it mate, you ain't got the wit.

 

 

Edited January 28, 2019 by carmine

[mrbojangles]

16 hours ago, wilai said:

Everton v City re-scheduled for Wednesday 6th Feb

Brought forward over 2 weeks at very short notice cos we’re in the Carabao cup final and it’s smack bang in the middle of us playing Arsenal and Chelsea in the premier League. We really didn’t need that

[RickG16]

19 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Brought forward over 2 weeks at very short notice cos we’re in the Carabao cup final and it’s smack bang in the middle of us playing Arsenal and Chelsea in the premier League. We really didn’t need that

Who has the easiest run in (April / May), you or scousers?

[wilai]

57 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Brought forward over 2 weeks at very short notice cos we’re in the Carabao cup final and it’s smack bang in the middle of us playing Arsenal and Chelsea in the premier League. We really didn’t need that

S'okay as you get a rest midweek vs Trickies ????

[BangrakBob]

1 hour ago, mrbojangles said:

Brought forward over 2 weeks at very short notice cos we’re in the Carabao cup final and it’s smack bang in the middle of us playing Arsenal and Chelsea in the premier League. We really didn’t need that

If it's still close they'll probably forfeit

[mrbojangles]

33 minutes ago, BangrakBob said:

If it's still close they'll probably forfeit

I’m not proud. I’ll take any help we can get

[mrbojangles]

4 hours ago, RickG16 said:

Who has the easiest run in (April / May), you or scousers?

For the last 5 games we have:-

 

Palace away

Spurs home

Burnley away

Leicester home

Brighton away

 

 

Liverpool have:-

 

Chelsea home

Cardiff away

Huddersfield home

Newcastle away 

Wolves home

[Kadilo]

3 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

For the last 5 games we have:-

 

Palace away

Spurs home

Burnley away

Leicester home

Brighton away

 

 

Liverpool have:-

 

Chelsea home

Cardiff away

Huddersfield home

Newcastle away 

Wolves home

Pretty even that I would say. 

[RickG16]

7 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

For the last 5 games we have:-

 

Palace away

Spurs home

Burnley away

Leicester home

Brighton away

 

 

Liverpool have:-

 

Chelsea home

Cardiff away

Huddersfield home

Newcastle away 

Wolves home

About even then... you can do it! 

[mrbojangles]

2 hours ago, Kadilo said:

Pretty even that I would say. 

Yeah pretty much...……..on paper

[mrbojangles]

2 hours ago, RickG16 said:

About even then... you can do it! 

Looking at it, the next 10 games are pivotal and we need Liverpool to drop points. If we go into the last 5 games on the same points it'll be very nervy. If they go into the last 5 ahead, I reckon they'll do it

[Bredbury Blue]

Reckon the Arsenal (h), Everton (a) and Chelsea (h) week is pivotal. You'd expect us to drop points and Liverpool to increase their lead but...