Manchester City 17/18 discussion | "If you're here for the Champions clap your hands" (#6505)

If recent weeks are anything to go by we’ve got a tough run of games leading up to the trip to Anfield - Bmouth H, Newcastle A, Palace A, Watford H.

You’d expect City to win those but it doesn’t work like that does it. I’m always going in to games expecting to drop points now purely on the basis of law of averages.
Think Liverpool will beat City. Probably be with a fluky penalty at the Kop end but I'll take it as a United fan!
 
Yes they were. The song you are referring to was in no way related to the Manchester terror attack and anyone whom would claim otherwise is an idiot. A tragedy such as the aformentioned should be kept well away from football.

For what it's worth I agree with you. A few songs sung between the players in the spirit of banter is hardly something to get up in arms about. It isn't personal for either set of players, they are very likely good friends off the pitch.

Clearly it’s not related to the terrorist attack but the point that was made at the time was that not 48 hours earlier Manchester had been the target of a terrorist attack and both clubs had strived to put on a united front in the wake of that and done a fantastic job - they gauged the public mood perfectly. “Manchester - a City United” was trending all over the place, and for once the rivalry took a back seat. City’s official Twitter page congratulated United on their Europa League win seconds after the final whistle had gone in Sweden, then footage emerged of Lingard and chums singing that song. At any other time, I doubt any fooks would be given but the timing on this occasion was pretty poor.

Agree on the second bit though. Many of them will be good mates off the pitch.
 
Last edited:
David Silva is only City player I can't help but like. Always loved him from his time at Valencia - A genius on the pitch.

Hope these are bullshit - Can't see anything credible supporting these rumours.
 
I came on here as my first source and made the post to just have my consternation put to bed.
It must be trolls taking advantage of the current silence surrounding his absence. Sorry for any distress. Just couldn't function with the niggling feeling it may be true.
 
I came on here as my first source and made the post to just have my consternation put to bed.
It must be trolls taking advantage of the current silence surrounding his absence. Sorry for any distress. Just couldn't function with the niggling feeling it may be true.

No need to apologise mate. The way the players were celebrating the win didn’t give the impression that it’s anything like as bad as that. Twitter can be poison at times as we all know.
 
Too many people getting worked up about City's spending. Get a grip FFS. We dealt with Blackburn & Chelsea. We'll deal with these pretenders too. Clubs that are artificially built never go on to dominate.

They are having a great season where everything is going their way. They also have the greatest manager they'll ever have in our lifetimes. This is City though & there's a good chance they'll feck everything up themselves. If they don't then we'll be there to take everything from them anyway.

Let them enjoy the ride & their small time celebrations, as the fall will be that much harder for them. Never forget what & who we are. We always come out on top.
 
Folks, perhaps we're approaching the whole 'City issue' the wrong way.

Instead of moaning about their lottery win, we should accept it. Instead of wallowing in self-pity like the Scousers we purport to despite, let's talk constructively about ways we can beat City.

Yes we all know they're only dominating because of outrageous good fortune, through no merit whatsoever. But let's focus on the positive: it's going to be a brilliant rivalry and it'll bring the best out of United and, hopefully, Mourinho.

It's great that the City players are singing songs about United. I hope our lads do exactly the same next time we beat them or pip them to the title. We're in for some classic games, some brilliant chants and a kinds of managerial shenanigans. Let's just enjoy the ride.
 
Folks, perhaps we're approaching the whole 'City issue' the wrong way.

Instead of moaning about their lottery win, we should accept it. Instead of wallowing in self-pity like the Scousers we purport to despite, let's talk constructively about ways we can beat City.

Yes we all know they're only dominating because of outrageous good fortune, through no merit whatsoever. But let's focus on the positive: it's going to be a brilliant rivalry and it'll bring the best out of United and, hopefully, Mourinho.

It's great that the City players are singing songs about United. I hope our lads do exactly the same next time we beat them or pip them to the title. We're in for some classic games, some brilliant chants and a kinds of managerial shenanigans. Let's just enjoy the ride.
This. If the players and management had the same outlook on this as some posters we'd be fecked. When Chelsea emerged, if we had the same attitude then I doubt we would have recovered.
 
I came on here as my first source and made the post to just have my consternation put to bed.
It must be trolls taking advantage of the current silence surrounding his absence. Sorry for any distress. Just couldn't function with the niggling feeling it may be true.

Glad to hear it.
 
I feel like at some point the "they're not even that good" crowd will realise that in saying that, they're not disparaging City, as much as they're damning the rest of the league. "They're not even that good" and yet barring a meltdown or some uprising by the teams behind them, they're running away with it. Says a lot about how useless the rest are, huh?
 
Yeah I don't mind the chants at all. All part of football rivalries. Our players have sang about literally burning them and Liverpool in a bonfire soooooo we can't exactly about about it. But even then - it's what you do. Especially when you're better then the rest. You sing about shit like that to entice your rivals and piss them off.
 
There's some chatter on Twitter that Silva has contracted leukemia. Tell me I'm being trolled by children in Angola??

*edit this is just some twitter guff I've read. Don't want to alarm anyone. It's completely unverified.
I really hope this is just some distasteful joke based on his baldness.
 
They don’t generate the same income and their Ethiad sponsorship is a joke. .

I know I am wasting my time, because people will keep believing that self generated propaganda instead of engaging in a constructive argument, but I will give it a last try.

Could you please support your claim with evidence, as in how much is the Etihad deal worth, and how does it compare to the top 6?

All available data suggests it was in the region of 20-25M for the last 5 years, only raising to 35M starting this season, halfway through the current deal.

This is much less than United, less than Chelsea, on Par with Spurs, and only 5M more than Arsenal and Liverpool whose deal ends next year.

How does this really translate into a joke?

I can not imagine what is going to happen when the revenue increases by at least 30M next year, after replacing the cheap Nike deal. People will start inventing new theories.

On another note, people keep refering to running the football club as a business, but I struggle to find many businesses that grew up without significant investment.

This is the business model for football. You win trophies and produce a interesting product, then your value will go up.

Mansour is not someone who would pay 200M in cash just to receive 4-5M in annual divedends. He builds assets. He would pay 1.5B to build a 2B asset. Whether people agree or not, this is a business model.

Finally, if football clubs are businesses, why is it ok to finance operations through long term bank loans, but not through direct owner injection, which is interest free?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sultan
I used to feel this way, but if you actually think about it Man Utd only have the money because we were lucky we joined the money train with our successes at the right time. It's a bit like buying Bitcoin a few years back and selling now. Massive profits and no ordinary individuals can compete with that.
We went public and used the money from that to fund improvements to the squad/infrastructure of the club. It's similar to what happened to City and Chelsea.
 
I'm sure someone has put the Guardian link up there on the project that is Manchester City and their "associated" clubs.

They can sing "park the bus" all day long but everyone knows that Arab oil money is all down to their success as before the Arabs arrived they were losing 8-1 to Middlesbrough.
 
I feel like at some point the "they're not even that good" crowd will realise that in saying that, they're not disparaging City, as much as they're damning the rest of the league. "They're not even that good" and yet barring a meltdown or some uprising by the teams behind them, they're running away with it. Says a lot about how useless the rest are, huh?
They are actually very good. But as with all good teams opponents will find a way to stop them. Happened to United, barca, arsenal and so on.

You play open football, e.g. Spurs yesterday, they take you to the cleaners, play more defensive, e g. united, WHU, Huudersfield, Southampton, and you find they can be got at and it takes a bit of fortune for them to win.

That all said, they have very high confidence at the moment, playing very well and their desire to win gives them half a yard more than their opponents.
 
They press more effectively and keep the ball better. Like at Barcelona it's a deadly combination.

That's certainly a reason. Always impressive to see a team where when one player starts closing down gets into movement all over the pitch to also close down passing options for the player. And yes ball retention is also an important factor to conserve energy.
 
Finally, if football clubs are businesses, why is it ok to finance operations through long term bank loans, but not through direct owner injection, which is interest free?
That is a brilliant question.
 
Trolls on the internet say that whenever someone goes bald, that they have some sort of cancer. I've read from media that Silva was having another child and it was due today. We'll probably find out a few weeks later.
 
Finally, if football clubs are businesses, why is it ok to finance operations through long term bank loans, but not through direct owner injection, which is interest free?

Because loans are leveraged against the profit the club already makes, therefore you must have had some success and be of a certain size to get huge loans.

Also loans isn't an endless resource. If you've taken out a huge loan you can't go and do it again, without some serious consequence.

Meanwhile clubs like City and PSG can just keep returning to daddy for more sugar, totally detached from reality.
 
Really can't stand those City pricks.

Everyone of our legends was always a class act on and off the pitch. Can't say a bad word about Scholes, Giggs, Cantona, Charlton or Best.

:lol:

Cantona's flying kick, Giggs' womanising, and Best's alcoholism say hello.

Cracking players and club legends for sure, but show some objectivity when you post.
 
That makes no sense, there is no such thing as deserving it more when it comes to a league title. Each trophy has its history. Every team that end up winning it deserve it just as much as the previous winners.

Yeah, if you read back I was replying to someone claiming that this current city side would 'deserve it' more than any recent winners.

It's them you're essentially disagreeing with.
 
Because loans are leveraged against the profit the club already makes, therefore you must have had some success and be of a certain size to get huge loans.

Also loans isn't an endless resource. If you've taken out a huge loan you can't go and do it again, without some serious consequence.

Meanwhile clubs like City and PSG can just keep returning to daddy for more sugar, totally detached from reality.

I can not find evidence that City reverted to their owner for more sugar in the last 3 years.

Nevertheless, as a business owner, I would be enraged if someone prevented me from injecting cash into my own business! Especially if I am debt free.

Back to your point, so you believe banks, while recieving nice sums for the privilege, are more entitled to evaluate the business potential than the actual owners?
 
I can not find evidence that City reverted to their owner for more sugar in the last 3 years.

Nevertheless, as a business owner, I would be enraged if someone prevented me from injecting cash into my own business! Especially if I am debt free.

Back to your point, so you believe banks, while recieving nice sums for the privilege, are more entitled to evaluate the business potential than the actual owners?

My point was that a club being run as a club, with income and expenditure and having to balance these two, is a different prospect from a club funded by an owner with indefinite money.

United is just like any other business. If our income severely decreases and our expenditure increases we'll go bankrupt. Or at the very least it will stop all investment in the squad, and we'll naturally decline, with the result of our income taking a further hit.

Also transfer spendings are decided by our income, we don't have an owner that will put his own money in, either through direct injection or souped up sponsorship deals. In our owners take out money from the club through dividends.
 
I know I am wasting my time, because people will keep believing that self generated propaganda instead of engaging in a constructive argument, but I will give it a last try.

Could you please support your claim with evidence, as in how much is the Etihad deal worth, and how does it compare to the top 6?

All available data suggests it was in the region of 20-25M for the last 5 years, only raising to 35M starting this season, halfway through the current deal.

This is much less than United, less than Chelsea, on Par with Spurs, and only 5M more than Arsenal and Liverpool whose deal ends next year.

How does this really translate into a joke?

I can not imagine what is going to happen when the revenue increases by at least 30M next year, after replacing the cheap Nike deal. People will start inventing new theories.

On another note, people keep refering to running the football club as a business, but I struggle to find many businesses that grew up without significant investment.

This is the business model for football. You win trophies and produce a interesting product, then your value will go up.

Mansour is not someone who would pay 200M in cash just to receive 4-5M in annual divedends. He builds assets. He would pay 1.5B to build a 2B asset. Whether people agree or not, this is a business model.

Finally, if football clubs are businesses, why is it ok to finance operations through long term bank loans, but not through direct owner injection, which is interest free?

Because Mansour is basically using UAE state funds to fund City and using so called sponsorship from a company they basically own to bypass UEFA’s financial fair play rules.
 
Because Mansour is basically using UAE state funds to fund City and using so called sponsorship from a company they basically own to bypass UEFA’s financial fair play rules.

Except none of what you've written there is actually true. He's used his own money, doesn't have any stake in Etihad and the sponsorship deal is well within the limits that UEFA deem to be acceptable for FFP.
 
Except none of what you've written there is actually true. He's used his own money, doesn't have any stake in Etihad and the sponsorship deal is well within the limits that UEFA deem to be acceptable for FFP.
No point in arguing. A lot of our fans now feel powerless watching City and so they resort to attacking the club without facts. Our net spend is identical so when they talk about City spending a fortune they forget that little fact. Ignore them and enjoy the ride. The way some of our fans are behaving reminds me of Liverpool fans in the 90s. It's actually troubling...
 
My point was that a club being run as a club, with income and expenditure and having to balance these two, is a different prospect from a club funded by an owner with indefinite money.

United is just like any other business. If our income severely decreases and our expenditure increases we'll go bankrupt. Or at the very least it will stop all investment in the squad, and we'll naturally decline, with the result of our income taking a further hit.

Also transfer spendings are decided by our income, we don't have an owner that will put his own money in, either through direct injection or souped up sponsorship deals. In our owners take out money from the club through dividends.

That is the point though, United’s a mature business that is more likely to pay divedends to its owner.
You can not expect someone to earn sustainable similar divedends from a smaller company.

You are repeatedly ignoring to discuss the business model, by discussing annual income and ignoring Enterprise Value, as if there is no value in what Mansour is doing.

I am not going to present a deep financial analysis, but in a conservative layman summary, City’s accumulated losses since the takeover is less than 600M. For avoidance of doubt, I am going to add the Etihad campus cost of 200M, and another 100M taking it to a toal investment of 900M.

Mansour already sold a 13% stake to China for 265M, funding City’s international businesses wich all contributes to the overall asset value.

The sale valued City at 2B, a valuation also shared by Forbes and KPMG.

If Mansour was to exit today, without a premium, and in fact with 90% of the current valuation, he would still make 75% return on his investment in 10 years. That is better than average annual returns from rental yields, bonds, and stocks (4-6%)

Now it all comes down to your “souped up sponsorship deals” reference, as mentioned by many others posters.

City’s Etihad deal to revenue ratio is 8%, less than United and Liverpool (10%), Chlesea (12%), and Spurs (16%).
How can anyone claim City is reliant on that deal is beyond me.

The business is there, but everyone will keep ignoring it and talk about the same myths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fortitude
Except none of what you've written there is actually true. He's used his own money, doesn't have any stake in Etihad and the sponsorship deal is well within the limits that UEFA deem to be acceptable for FFP.

He’s a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and deputy prime minister of the UAE. He’s a royal, politician and businessman roled in to one.
 
Ederson Moraes completed more passes (26) than both Christian Eriksen (24) and Dele Alli (17) during Manchester City 4-1 Spurs.

That is a damning stat for the Spurs midfield, but also praise to Ederson where it's due. He really is the perfect 'keeper for their system. No wonder Bravo won't get a chance with this team anymore.
His 60 yard pass to Sterling out right was ridiculous. His accuracy is excellent, and he’s shown he’s a decent shot stopper too. Really excellent signing.