Attendances - matchday income - directly affect a football clubs spending in the transfer market including Man City. It all relates.
Pep's spending is insane (£941m and counting at City)
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Attendances - matchday income - directly affect a football clubs spending in the transfer market including Man City. It all relates.
Depends on the circumstances. Midweek, back end of November, versus Southampton. Where expectations were that we should we win comfortably. Put all that together and by the 7th minute of injury time it’s not that unexpected that so many would’ve left. Christ, it sounds like I’m making excuses when I myself was gobbing off about the early leavers after Sterling scored!
I’m not protesting mate. Just correcting s few inaccuracies - namely that City are planning to expand the stadium again in the near future and John Terry has played in front of bigger crowds at Stamford Bridge than the highest crowd Villa attracted this season.
Anyway, if it’s as you say it is and our attendances are “to be expected” then why do you bother wanking off in multiple threads whenever you see empty seats at City’s home games?
That’s because some fans either can’t be arsed passing them on or failing that, can’t be arsed sticking their season tickets up for re-sale on the online ticket exchange. The latter is more baffling because if it sells they get money off next year’s season ticket.
Now I’m not saying for one minute that if every non-attending ST holder put their tickets up on the exchange that every single one of them would sell but a lot more gaps would be plugged if they did.
Anyway, like I said this isn’t just confined to City fans. My boss is a United fan and has supported them for 50 years. He’s also a long-standing season ticket holder. This last season, despite working just half a mile away from Old Trafford in Trafford Park he couldn’t be arsed going to some games and didn’t attempt to pass his ticket on. On one occasion - for the Friday night FA Cup game at home to Derby - he left work, went into Manchester on the piss with the intention of probably going, but in the end didn’t bother. But do you know something? Not once have I ever questioned his loyalty because I know he’s put the hard yards into following United in the past.
Well yeah, that’s exactly what you’re doing. Making excuses. Watch a few highlights, earlier in the game at the same end a few thousand must have went for a collective piss. Anyway like I said, the many empty blue seats aren’t something I’m hugely interested in and any discussion is best in another thread
That’s the family stand and usually the worst of the lot for empties. I’m perfectly aware that it wasn’t exactly bursting at the seams earlier in the match - just saying it was a lot more empty by the time the winning goal went in. Anyway, I was there at the end and that’s all that really matters to me in the grand scheme of things.
As you say though, it’s for another discussion. Back on topic, let’s just all agree that Pep has spent a shitload of money then we can move on.
A nice sentiment and one city fans seem willing to embrace nowadays. Not so much at all in the 90s and 00s
I’m not protesting mate. Just correcting s few inaccuracies - namely that City are planning to expand the stadium again in the near future and John Terry has played in front of bigger crowds at Stamford Bridge than the highest crowd Villa attracted this season.
Anyway, if it’s as you say it is and our attendances are “to be expected” then why do you bother wanking off in multiple threads whenever you see empty seats at City’s home games?
Wanking off? Jesus Christ
Who thought City fans would get so feisty over a few thousand empty seats!
I wouldn’t know - as I’ve stated on here before I’ve only been following City since the money came in.
Back to the spending - John Stones is really terrible. Was it 50+ million?
I’d say he’s worse than he was at Everton.
Now that is an insane buy.
I’d say he’s worse than he was at Everton.
Now that is an insane buy.
I don't know where you get your information from but it's way off. KDB is now on a basic £280K which with bonuses & image rights can increase to £350K.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ity-star-Kevin-Bruyne-signs-new-contract.html
You said Jesus wanted £100K. It is unfathomable that Mansour would not have agreed to this. The fact that Jesus is stalling intimates that he will be seeking substantially more than £100K.
Daily Mail have Sterlings new contact offer at £300K.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ws-Raheem-Sterling-Premier-League-earner.html
You are the only club in the top 6 who seem to have swathes of empty seats on PL match days. I am not making this up it's what i & many others see with our own eyes. The only times i've seen empty seats at OT & the Emirates was nearing the end of LVG & Wengers tenures. Don't ever recall seeing empties at Anfield, WHL & Stamford Bridge.
The fact that you had to explain that speaks volumes...
Never mind just buy 3 more for £60 million. Genius...
You're quoting the daily mail again..
Telegraph, Guardian and even the sun don't have it anywhere near that figure
Exactly, it’s no longer sport. Bernardo, Danilo, Laporte and Gundogan would start everywhere else in the league including Old Trafford, yet they’re spare parts at City. Same applies to Mahrez once he arrives. This is what happens when you let dubious people own football clubs.
Ferguson dominated English football and competed at the top table of European football with a conveyor of pretty mediocre squad players like Phil Neville, O’Shea, Gibson, Evans, Cleverley etc, plus very competent homegrown lads like Wes Brown and Fletcher.
Pep’s ‘achievements’ can’t be compared, as he’s flat-pack purchased a squad to succeed in the weakest Premier League era - the two previous winners in Leicester and a turd Chelsea team underline how poor it is. Only morons regard this team and title win as comparable to the valid ones of the past.
Love that from @Denis_unwise
Don’t know where you’re getting your information from but here is two Daily Mail articles.
Don’t know where you’re getting your information from but here is two Daily Mail articles.
What’s the point in discussing wages with quotes from the daily mail when every club has to publish their wage bill through their annual accounts, you know, with factual figures. Those figures show that City are comparable with the other top clubs as you’d expect.
I'm more inclined to believe the word of a respected national newspaper. They have no reason to lie. This is especially so seeing as Mansour has the financial clout to turn off their lights.
We cannot trust your accounts or the auditors. When your accounts were investigated the Etihad deal was deemed fair & in now way related to your owner. All this despite the fact that the owner of Etihad is Mansours half-brother. If UEFA are willing to swallow that then what else are they allowing to be swept under the carpet.
Do any City fans, looking at things objectively, believe that the accounts being posted are the whole truth. It must surely seem as absurd to you as it does most neutrals. The club was mostly unknown outside of Mcr up to 2008. You have had a limited amount of success in the following decade. You are (according to your accounts) on course to post world record revenues in the next couple of years.
Are you suggesting that City has both willingly and knowingly partaken in questionable sponsorship dealings and they are, in fact, exploiting the system as a means to cheat FFP regulations? That's a ludicrous suggestion. Such a theory has no place in modern society. You should be locked up.
Since when did the Daily Mail become a respected National newspaper? If that’s your bible though then here you go, they’ve listed the top 10 wage bills just for you from 2017. 2018 will be out later this year, in the clubs annual accounts.
www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5080981/amp/Top-wage-bills-European-football-PSG-Barcelona.html
I think that's it really.
If United had signed a 50+ million pound player and he wasn't playing/playing like Stones the media would go berserk. This goes unmentioned. The same way you have £20+m players sitting on the bench like Danilo, Gundogan and £30+m players like Mangala going out on loan...and no one bats an eyelid.
The spending is crazy.
It is crazy just as Jose's is, United have a £50m player like Martial on the bench and then £25m+ players like shaw, Lindlhof and Mata sitting on the bench.
It was accepted Stones was playing very well till he got injured just before Christmas then he came back to early and I agree he looked shite, played ok last few games of the season. He interesting how he does next season as I think that will be his make or break season at City.
What a daft post!
How many times?!
Jose didn’t sign Martial! Didn’t sign Mata! Didn’t sign Shaw!
Lindelof was bought to ease in and he has been eased in. He didn’t cost over 50 million.
You're wasting your time here.
Plus the fact Martial is in the headlines each week for not playing (despite playing more than Stones) as are Lindleoff and Shaw suggests @Thunderhead didn't read the post.
Martial, Shaw and Lindelof were purchased with the future in mind. That they spend a lot of time as bench warmers is to be largely expected.
Martial cost £35 million (plus addons that failed to materialize) and in fairness the fee was a relative steal considering he was widely regarded as one of Europes brightest prospects at the time of signing. Shaw was another top prospect and one that was beginning to realize his potential before his career was cut short due to an injury he is yet to recover from. As for Lindelof... meh.
The Mata signing was bourne of desperation rather than a planned strategy and his impact on the club reflects that. Plus any transfers made by Moyes are instantly null and void on the grounds that the guy is a fecking idiot.
Not to mention that all of the above signings were purchased via legally generated means - merchandising, ticket sales, broadcasting deals, transfer outgoings and various other means of commercial revenue - rather than the procurement of frankly suspect sponsorship deals that The Shiek has tied City too. Looking forward to the day the shit hits the fan on that one.
Hang on, you can’t say City don’t get stick for playing Mangala and then say “well Martial wasn’t signed by Mourinho”
It also seems very arbitrary to list 50 million as the price, I would rather have stones than Bailly and Linderlof.
Quoted wrong guy sorry.
That means we have had a limited amount of success in the last ten years ( we have one just one more trophy).
To be fair in terms of premier league clubs they have been the third most successful in the last 10 years in terms of trophies won.
Chelsea 10 trophies
Us 8 trophies
City 7 trophies
Arsenal 3 trophies
Leicester 1 trophy
Wigan 1 trophy
Swansea 1 trophy
Birmingham 1 trophy
Liverpool 1 trophy
no one else has won a trophy
oops my original list missed out liverpool and birmingham
Last edited:
Guardiola, the genius, won bugger all in his first season. Went out and spent big again taking his spend at three clubs to over a billion pounds gross. Sean Dyche could have won the league if he’d had the Sheiks credit card. It isn’t difficult is it. City spent the most, won the PL. We spent second most and finished second.
As for the empty seats at the Emptyhad, I wouldn’t be surprised if commercial pressure is put on some businesses associated with City and the Sheik (builders, estate agents and the like) to buy season tickets to keep UEFA off their backs. They are a joke. ‘Sell out’ games and hundreds if not thousands of empty seats even on European nights. Maybe the buses don’t run from Stockport on those nights
As for the empty seats at the Emptyhad, I wouldn’t be surprised if commercial pressure is put on some businesses associated with City and the Sheik (builders, estate agents and the like) to buy season tickets to keep UEFA off their backs. They are a joke. ‘Sell out’ games and hundreds if not thousands of empty seats even on European nights. Maybe the buses don’t run from Stockport on those nights
Since when did the Daily Mail become a respected National newspaper? If that’s your bible though then here you go, they’ve listed the top 10 wage bills just for you from 2017. 2018 will be out later this year, in the clubs annual accounts.
www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5080981/amp/Top-wage-bills-European-football-PSG-Barcelona.html
This is all getting muddled. The point my original reply was making has been lost on you. I was stating that rather than big name players squabbling over playing time, it will likely be players complaining about money that disrupts the dressing room. Youv'e gone off on a tangent about club wage bills. As it is the article you posted just poses more questions than answers. Why are none of your summer signings included in the accounts? Why are severance payments to Bony, Nasri & the other leavers not included.
We did have a pretty good period & dominated the PL over 2 decades. This is what enabled us to grow our revenue. The only dominance City have shown over the league in the last decade is in spending power. This will obviously bring interest to the club. It is on field & sustained success that enables clubs to build revenues as we have. I don't think we've seen this from City.
Whats sustained success? The most successful over how long?
They are the most successful over the past 5 years (as two of my daughters are happy to tell me)
When we were the most successful in the 1990's (from not being really successful in the previous 20 years) our revenue rise was huge and dwarfed every other team, including the team that had dominated and built their revenues over the proceeding 20 years . How is cities rise in revenue any different when you factor in general football income now to then (it is more than 20 times the 1990 values) and that they have havent been as successful as we were in the 90's but then again haven't overtaken the previous dominant team, Us.
Would you like to double check that statement regarding the add ons?
I would say that of the 3 add ons in his transfer fee one has already been triggered and there’s a good chance a second one will.
Your postings are full of guesswork, supposition and hope.
Only one of Martial's clauses has been fulfilled which is 25 goals for United in 4 seasons. Martial is unlikely to fulfill his other 2 clauses, 1 of which is 25 caps for France and the other is being nominated for the Balondor.
Sustained success would be dominating the PL, & success in Europe. City have yet to retain the PL or contest a European final.
We had millions of fans worldwide & were a huge club before the Sky money. We were not unknowns in world football. When we achieved sustained success we were able capitalize. City have gone from nothing to posting huge revenues in under a decade. In a couple of years they will likely be posting world record revenues. I don't know how anyone could say this is in any way believable.
If you knew anything about accounting standards, you would know why Etihad wasn’t deemed to be a related party. UEFA follow International Accounting Standard 24 (IAS24) which covers related party transactions when determining what is and isn’t a related party. Using the guidelines set out in IAS24, Etihad isn’t classed as a related party. However, 2 other second tier sponsorship deals were classed as related parties and part of the FFP settlement agreement in 2014 was that City agreed not to negotiate an increase in the value of those 2 deals over a period of time determined by UEFA.
You can read more about IAS24 and related party transactions here:
https://www.iasplus.com/en-gb/standards/ias/ias24
Regards the addons, I checked and you are right (I really should learn to do my homework)
As for the bolded. It's a well-established fact that City is cheating the system and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, at least until the governing body gets their act together and begins a thorough investigation into the goings on at your club. I believe the Spanish league president is actively pursuing this situation as we speak. To no avail. Shocker.
In any case it's the supposed proud City fans such as yourself who refuse to acknowledge these shady business dealings or what is infinitely closer to the truth, disbelieve it entirely, that I genuinely cannot understand. Do you even care anymore?
Yep it's not even well hidden. Since the ffp penalty was applied to City they've got slightly smarter with their "sponsorships".
They may as well rebrand to UAE FC because they share no resemblance with the old City. Real old time City fans should be able to acknowledge this even if they're currently enjoying the trophies.
United as a company is registered in the Cayman Islands and listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Caymen Island FC or USA FC? You pick.....
He needs 7 more appearance in 12 months to trigger another c8 million quid clause.
If he were to break back into the French team and play well that may indeed be activated. He’s on the standby list for the WC squad so it’s not too much of a stretch to see him play the requisite number of games.
Whether he does or not the other poster made an incorrect statement and has admitted it so we move on.