Manchester City

[JacknDanny]

Quite a good article from Stuart Brennan on City and the FFP

"Two clubs in the same city. One has a rich owner promising to pump hundreds of millions of pounds into it and its community. The other has a rich owner, who has taken

millions out of it to pay off the debt incurred in buying it.

So which one are the wise old owls at Uefa set to investigate? That’s right, the one pouring money into the game.

And Uefa’s bizarre crusade is being conducted in the name of ‘fair play’!

City’s record-breaking £400m deal with Etihad should be embraced as a bold vision for the future, encompassing, as it does, community initiative, sporting advancement and regeneration of a neglected part of Manchester.

But even if it was a cynical attempt to pump in outside money to help level the uneven playing fields of European football, Uefa should not be sticking its snout in.

Clubs like Real Madrid and Barcelona have had an unfair advantage for years, taking full advantage of their huge political sway.

Did Uefa investigate when Madrid ‘sold’ their training ground to the city authorities for an inordinate amount of money to wipe out debt?

It seems Uefa reserve their ‘fair play’ for the nouveaux riche, so it increasingly looks like a means of preserving the status quo.

Imagine two runners, one a rich American, the other an orphan living in a shack on the side of an Ethiopian mountain.

The American kid can afford the latest in footwear technology, has access to the best sports scientists, can afford the correct nutrition and attends state-of-the-art facilities.

The African kid is half-starved, bare-footed, and unable to scrape together the money to attend the athletics academy in the nearest town.

One day, a rich benefactor, realizing his potential, decides to give him a helping hand, and whisks him off to Europe, where he gets the best of everything and is soon neck-and-neck with privileged Yank.

If Uefa was the regulator, the Ethiopian would be investigated because he had not ‘earned’ the money himself.

Of course buying success is unfair, but it has always gone on in football – it is just that the modern generation of football clubs have perfected the art.

Uefa want to replace one kind of unfairness with another. If they truly want a level playing field, they would introduce American-style player drafts and salary caps.

Apparently their investigation will compare Etihad’s deal to other ‘benchmarks’ in stadium naming rights and shirt sponsorship deals.

But this comes after years of being told that, in football – as in no other business – an asset is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

So, if Liverpool decide, beyond all reason, that Andy Carroll is worth £35m, that is what he is worth. No suggestion of Uefa looking into a transfer which skews the market and does nobody any good.

If Uefa truly wants to expose unfairness in football, it should look at the moral charnel-pit which is Fifa, into ticket pricing and the treatment of football fans, and into the meat market which trades in hopeful young footballers from Third World countries."

Similar article from Martin Samuel of the Mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-2013243/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Financial-fair-play-merely-stifle-Manchester-City.html

And now you have whinging Wenger calling foul! Tosser

[carmine]

Nice pr spin mr bj, couldn't have written a better csr piece myself.

Now back to tevez, stay or go, what's the word around Unity stadium?

How about just buy Sergio Aguero and another 40m striker and then who gives a <deleted>. With City's spending power it does'nt really matter does it.

[StevieH]

Quite a good article from Stuart Brennan on City and the FFP

"Two clubs in the same city. One has a rich owner promising to pump hundreds of millions of pounds into it and its community. The other has a rich owner, who has taken

millions out of it to pay off the debt incurred in buying it.

So which one are the wise old owls at Uefa set to investigate? That's right, the one pouring money into the game.

And Uefa's bizarre crusade is being conducted in the name of 'fair play'!

City's record-breaking £400m deal with Etihad should be embraced as a bold vision for the future, encompassing, as it does, community initiative, sporting advancement and regeneration of a neglected part of Manchester.

But even if it was a cynical attempt to pump in outside money to help level the uneven playing fields of European football, Uefa should not be sticking its snout in.

Clubs like Real Madrid and Barcelona have had an unfair advantage for years, taking full advantage of their huge political sway.

Did Uefa investigate when Madrid 'sold' their training ground to the city authorities for an inordinate amount of money to wipe out debt?

It seems Uefa reserve their 'fair play' for the nouveaux riche, so it increasingly looks like a means of preserving the status quo.

Imagine two runners, one a rich American, the other an orphan living in a shack on the side of an Ethiopian mountain.

The American kid can afford the latest in footwear technology, has access to the best sports scientists, can afford the correct nutrition and attends state-of-the-art facilities.

The African kid is half-starved, bare-footed, and unable to scrape together the money to attend the athletics academy in the nearest town.

One day, a rich benefactor, realizing his potential, decides to give him a helping hand, and whisks him off to Europe, where he gets the best of everything and is soon neck-and-neck with privileged Yank.

If Uefa was the regulator, the Ethiopian would be investigated because he had not 'earned' the money himself.

Of course buying success is unfair, but it has always gone on in football – it is just that the modern generation of football clubs have perfected the art.

Uefa want to replace one kind of unfairness with another. If they truly want a level playing field, they would introduce American-style player drafts and salary caps.

Apparently their investigation will compare Etihad's deal to other 'benchmarks' in stadium naming rights and shirt sponsorship deals.

But this comes after years of being told that, in football – as in no other business – an asset is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

So, if Liverpool decide, beyond all reason, that Andy Carroll is worth £35m, that is what he is worth. No suggestion of Uefa looking into a transfer which skews the market and does nobody any good.

If Uefa truly wants to expose unfairness in football, it should look at the moral charnel-pit which is Fifa, into ticket pricing and the treatment of football fans, and into the meat market which trades in hopeful young footballers from Third World countries."

think that's a right load of parochial toss to be honest.

what 'unfair advantage' and 'political sway' have barcelona always had?

and andy carroll is worth 35m because that's what liverpool decided to pay to get him. same as city paid over 32m for the ridiculous robinho and chelsea paid 50m for fernando torres. transfer fees are set by the market and are balls all to do with this new city funding deal.

[Abrak]

If Uefa truly wants to expose unfairness in football, it should look at the moral charnel-pit which is Fifa, into ticket pricing and the treatment of football fans, and into the meat market which trades in hopeful young footballers from Third World countries."[/b]

I will be impressed if City look at these issues and do something about them.

One of the competitive problems that City has is that it earns 20m from match day receipts while Arsenal and ManU earn 100m.

Now under FFP the costs of building or expanding a stadium are not included, the match day revenues are.

So if City want to do something worthwhile with their money, they could consider expanding their stadium from 44,000 seats to 80,000 and then start match day tickets at 10 quid, children's season tickets at 50 quid a year etc. That would certainly be much fairer ticket pricing and it would do something for supporters. The costs do not count for FFP.

It would be interesting to watch what would happen if City were charging 10 quid a ticket and United continued charging 50 quid.

[SantiSuk]

I see our whinging manager is now trying to finger your lot for artificially inflating the contract for the Etihad stadium to up the thresholds for the fair play financial restrictions.

I do wish he would keep his moaning trap shut - looks so much like sour grapes whatever the potential veracity of the brickbat (come on - I know some of you guys have worked in that region haven't you?!)

[Abrak]

But this comes after years of being told that, in football – as in no other business – an asset is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

Look the problem here is that City are being sponsored by Etihad which is run by Mansour's brother. If my brother pays 10m for my car it doesnt mean it is worth 10m, it simply is a way of transferring 10m to me.

Of course buying success is unfair, but it has always gone on in football – it is just that the modern generation of football clubs have perfected the art.

True, But it doesnt mean it should continue. FFP is aimed at stopping owners buying football success. As they say buying success is unfair and clearly buying success when the rules are aimed at preventing it is even more unfair as well as cheating.

But even if it was a cynical attempt to pump in outside money to help level the uneven playing fields of European football, Uefa should not be sticking its snout in.

Fine. No problem. Lets not bother with FFP at all and carry on as before where clubs are free to be subsidized as much as they wish by their owners. At least we know where we all stand. But to bring in a set of rules and then say you should ignore them if they are broken does totally defeat the object of bringing them in, in the first place.

[mrbojangles]

think that's a right load of parochial toss to be honest.

You are allowed your opinion of course.

and andy carroll is worth 35m because that's what liverpool decided to pay to get him.

And the Etihad deal is worth that amount because that is what they decided to pay for it.

[mrbojangles]

So if City want to do something worthwhile with their money, they could consider expanding their stadium from 44,000 seats to 80,000 and then start match day tickets at 10 quid, children's season tickets at 50 quid a year etc. That would certainly be much fairer ticket pricing and it would do something for supporters. The costs do not count for FFP.

It would be interesting to watch what would happen if City were charging 10 quid a ticket and United continued charging 50 quid.

That has already been touted around as a possibility. Iwould think we would have to buy out the contract with the council first and own it in it's entirity though.

[mrbojangles]

But this comes after years of being told that, in football – as in no other business – an asset is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

Look the problem here is that City are being sponsored by Etihad which is run by Mansour's brother. If my brother pays 10m for my car it doesnt mean it is worth 10m, it simply is a way of transferring 10m to me.

Half brother actually. But why should that matter anyway? Etihad have been piling cash into all kinds of sports for a while now but nobody has cried foul. They sponsor sports from F1 to Hurling to Rugby (Harlequins) to the Etihad Stadium in Melbourne It has always been the big companies who have piled the big money into the top teams. This a partnership in which one of Mansours plans is to make City one of the biggest team in the Middle East. And let me tell you, since I have been here and he has taken over, City are rocketing in popularity with the Premier League crazy Saudi's.

Of course buying success is unfair, but it has always gone on in football – it is just that the modern generation of football clubs have perfected the art.

True, But it doesnt mean it should continue. FFP is aimed at stopping owners buying football success. As they say buying success is unfair and clearly buying success when the rules are aimed at preventing it is even more unfair as well as cheating.

Don't twist the words of the actual reasons it is being brought in to benefit your own view. One of the main reasons it has been brought in, is to crack down on debt laden clubs. If the likes of Abramovich who loaned the club money to buy players was to walk out, it could leave the club crippled. This ruling will not (or shouldn't) allow that to happen.

But even if it was a cynical attempt to pump in outside money to help level the uneven playing fields of European football, Uefa should not be sticking its snout in.

Fine. No problem. Lets not bother with FFP at all and carry on as before where clubs are free to be subsidized as much as they wish by their owners. At least we know where we all stand. But to bring in a set of rules and then say you should ignore them if they are broken does totally defeat the object of bringing them in, in the first place.

I agree in a way. But I still feel that these rules will just keep the big clubs big and the little clubs little. A level field will never be gained and the bigger clubs will stay up there earning the majority of the money.

[Abrak]

1) I think it should be investigated on the basis that it is not an arms length transaction and it is substantial (Etihad stadium in Aus is US$3m a year). I am not convinced that they have grossly overpaid. In any case UEFA wont cancel the deal they will simply not count the extent they feel it was non-commercial in FFP.

2) Actually Abromavich has converted all his loans into equity so Chelsea is not in debt. Rich benefactors dont usually bother with debt, it is the clubs that are faced with higher costs competing against them that tend to get themselves into debt. FFP restricts the amount of losses that a benefactor can write off with equity. But if the big clubs are at breakeven then it certainly helps the smaller clubs. Essentially the smaller clubs are losing money and getting into debt in order to try to stay up at the moment.

3) Yes FFP is not 'fair' in that it does not level the playing field. In fact it divides it more. Anyway UEFA have decided to go the FFP route so until they decide otherwise they should follow the rules.

4) It just seems to me UEFA should look into it and decide where the parameters lie and they might as well tell everyone now rather than waiting until they decide who qualifies for CL in 3 years. Is Abromavich allowed to announce that his company Sibneft is doing a 500m sponsorship of Chelsea.

Personally I dont see how UEFA is in a position to judge the deal noncommercial and I think it is valid under FFP but until UEFA make it clear how they are going to interpret the rules it is bound to be controversial.

[SantiSuk]

Selling Shay for £3.5m to Villa are you? Seems like a knock-down price even though he is 35 now. Perhaps the rheumatism set in while sitting on too many cold EPL benches.

[smokie36]

Selling Shay for £3.5m to Villa are you? Seems like a knock-down price even though he is 35 now. Perhaps the rheumatism set in while sitting on too many cold EPL benches.

Not old for a keeper though...look at Van der Sar.

[MrRed]

So if City want to do something worthwhile with their money, they could consider expanding their stadium from 44,000 seats to 80,000 and then start match day tickets at 10 quid, children's season tickets at 50 quid a year etc. That would certainly be much fairer ticket pricing and it would do something for supporters. The costs do not count for FFP.

It would be interesting to watch what would happen if City were charging 10 quid a ticket and United continued charging 50 quid.

That has already been touted around as a possibility. Iwould think we would have to buy out the contract with the council first and own it in it's entirity though.

Yes it is still called the "City of Manchester stadium" is it not?

Or has the council been payed a hefty sum of money to keep quiet about that something not quite correct in these contracts,or have you evidence Mr Bo of the agreement between the three party's involved?? You have received a lot of sponsorship money for a stadium and its name that actually is not yours,or am i reading in-between the wrong lines?

Clarification is needed here i think!

[carmine]

Selling Shay for £3.5m to Villa are you? Seems like a knock-down price even though he is 35 now. Perhaps the rheumatism set in while sitting on too many cold EPL benches.

Not old for a keeper though...look at Van der Sar.

OLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He's young enough to be Friedals son!!!

[mrbojangles]

So if City want to do something worthwhile with their money, they could consider expanding their stadium from 44,000 seats to 80,000 and then start match day tickets at 10 quid, children's season tickets at 50 quid a year etc. That would certainly be much fairer ticket pricing and it would do something for supporters. The costs do not count for FFP.

It would be interesting to watch what would happen if City were charging 10 quid a ticket and United continued charging 50 quid.

That has already been touted around as a possibility. Iwould think we would have to buy out the contract with the council first and own it in it's entirity though.

Yes it is still called the "City of Manchester stadium" is it not?

Or has the council been payed a hefty sum of money to keep quiet about that something not quite correct in these contracts,or have you evidence Mr Bo of the agreement between the three party's involved?? You have received a lot of sponsorship money for a stadium and its name that actually is not yours,or am i reading in-between the wrong lines?

Clarification is needed here i think!

Yes you are reading betwen the wrong lines Red. Do you really think City could get something like this under the radar. The Council are behind it all and the leader Sir Howard something or another was actually at the press conference with Cooke and the Etihad chairman. Manchester Council are getting approx 20mil quid and regeneration out of this.

[MrRed]

Regeneration?

20 million?

How much are City geting and over how long is the deal?

[smokie36]

Regeneration?

20 million?

How much are City geting and over how long is the deal?

City fans are to receive inside toilets at long last.

Might be something of a shock for an ex Sunningdale resident I know....

[Lotusbluete]

Hallo friends of British soccer,

just heard rumours that Jerome Boateng (former player of Hamburger SV) might sign a contract with Bavaria Munich (Bayern Muenchen). Anybody can confirm this?

Hallo City fans,

just heard that the deal to transfer Jerome Boateng back to the German Bundesliga has been confirmed. Bavaria Munich (Bayern Muenchen) is supposed to pay about EUR 13.5 Mill.

[SantiSuk]

We Gooners join you sky blues in celebrating the announcement of the retirement of Patrick Viera - a truly great defender in his time and another of Wenger's inspired frog buys many moons ago. Nice of you to find him a job at the Etihad stadium too.

Soon all the top 4 stadia will be named after the top 4 Arab airlines. Old Trafford will obviously become New Qatar Stadium and my money is on Kuwait Bridge for the blues (Bridge Over the River Kuwait anyone?). Aeroflop Bridge doesn't quite make it somehow. Royal Jordanian Stadium sounds more classy, but there's not enough oil money in Jordan.

Of course give it 5 to 10 years and the EPL will be to the hock of the Chinese rather than Arabs, Russians and Yanks

[SantiSuk]

Hallo friends of British soccer,

just heard rumours that Jerome Boateng (former player of Hamburger SV) might sign a contract with Bavaria Munich (Bayern Muenchen). Anybody can confirm this?

Hallo City fans,

just heard that the deal to transfer Jerome Boateng back to the German Bundesliga has been confirmed. Bavaria Munich (Bayern Muenchen) is supposed to pay about EUR 13.5 Mill.

Jerome who? Did he get a game at City?

[StevieH]

We Gooners join you sky blues in celebrating the announcement of the retirement of Patrick Viera - a truly great defender in his time and another of Wenger's inspired frog buys many moons ago. Nice of you to find him a job at the Etihad stadium too.

midfielder, dude.

but yes, one hell of a player and some career he had.

[mrbojangles]

Old Trafford will obviously become New Qatar Stadium

Do you think they will put on flights to take fans from Uniteds ground into Manchester

[MrRed]

Old Trafford will obviously become New Qatar Stadium

Do you think they will put on flights to take fans from Uniteds ground into Manchester

We can walk it

Funny isn't it how United have never sold the stadium name off like most!

"Theater of dreams" is just about it i think.

[mrbojangles]

Old Trafford will obviously become New Qatar Stadium

Do you think they will put on flights to take fans from Uniteds ground into Manchester

We can walk it

Funny isn't it how United have never sold the stadium name off like most!

"Theater of dreams" is just about it i think.

So you renamed Old Trafford to that and never even made any money out of it.

[smokie36]

We can walk it

<deleted>!

[mrbojangles]

Regeneration?

From vital football and there is more on the City website:-

"Residents living near Manchester City's Etihad Stadium have today been receiving pamphlets written by Chief Executive Garry Cook that reveal details on just how huge the new youth development and training facility near Eastlands will be.

By all accounts up to 5.5 acres of land will be used for the following:

New Academy for up to 400 young players.

Learning facility for 200 Academy players.

Accommodation for 40 Academy players.

First team building with changing room, gym, refectory, injury and rehab centre, 32 bedrooms.

Eight youth development pitches.

Eight first team football pitches.

A 7,000 capacity stadium for youth matches and community use.

Office space for football club employees.

Media centre.

Customer service centre.

A new footbridge linking the centre to the Etihad campus."

[delboy]

Was this proposed by the same person that designed the Tardis?

1 football pitch is roughly 1.75 acres, so how is it possible to fit all of that into 5.5 acres ?

[smokie36]

Its not much regeneration for the benefit of local people....where's the needle exchange and methadone centre then?

[JacknDanny]

Its not much regeneration for the benefit of local people....where's the needle exchange and methadone centre then?

Thats just down the road in Beswick

[SantiSuk]

"Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger has criticised Roberto Mancini after the Manchester City boss said he was hopeful of signing midfielder Samir Nasri by the end of the month."

I'm no apologist for our whinging mangenger but I think he is right on this occasion. Managers should speak with their chequebooks in the transfer market, not with their mouths. The Beeb article goes on to reveal that Mancini doesn't even know whether Man City have made any bid!

Put up or shut up please Mancini. SAF wants him equally badly but is showing far more class with the media.

Edited July 18, 2011 by SantiSuk