That was to pretty much every club. Every club runs off sales instead of numbers.
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.
That was to pretty much every club. Every club runs off sales instead of numbers.
Bad wording, everyone knows how we got there, peoples opinion of whether we bent the rules to get there, depends on what's believed about sponsorship.
That was kind of my point, I'm living in the arse end of south western Ireland for years and after utd, Liverpool and arsenal shirts, city are prob as prominent as Chelsea, particularly on teens etc.. Signs of huge progress even if said supporters were chelsea, arsenal or utd previously. Maybe barca and real too.
Glory hunters but new supporter's none the less.
Jesus want's alot more than 100K. Mansour is not going to squabble over paying an extra 10k a week to get the kid signed up before the WC. You only have to look at the situation with an ounce of logic to see what's happening. If he has a good WC he will be looking to get alot closer to KDB's wage.
https://talksport.com/football/manc...-new-ps90000-week-contract-offer-180328277055
Sterling is refusing to sign a 300K a week contract. If he didn't think he could do better he would have snapped Mansours hand off. I don't see him moving though. He will also be aiming to use a good WC to leverage a bit extra for himself.
https://www.dreamteamfc.com/c/news-...he-highest-paid-player-in-the-premier-league/
You are backing the wrong horse in using attendance figures to project the image of yourselves as a big club. There are clubs in the Championship who could average higher attendances than City. The reason they don't is that they have smaller stadiums & don't have the backing of the Petro Dollar to expand. As it is you are failing to sell out the stadium for most games. The quoted attendance figures from the club are also highly dubious.
Using the Sun and talksport as your sources gives you zero credibility.
Which clubs in the Championship and what's your reasoning? Factual stuff would be helpful.
You're quoting the sun and talksport
All season cards are sold so that's 40k tickets sold straight away, if people don't turn up then that's up to them
You're quoting the sun and talksport
All season cards are sold so that's 40k tickets sold straight away, if people don't turn up then that's up to them
It’s quite difficult to turn up when you don’t exist.
It wasn't just the Sun & Talksport. There were other agencies reporting the same. Are you saying none of these were credible too.
I think most neutrals would say Villa, Leeds & Sunderland would be averaging higher attendances than you if they were in your position. There would likely be others. It can't be said as fact as you are the only state funded club.
We averaged 28k in the third division, Leeds averaged 25k in the 3rd division, Sunderland averaged 27k last season and villa were averaging 32k last season last time we were in the first we averaged 33k
Also KDB has just gone upto £200k p/w so I find it very unlikely that we're offering sterling £300k
The talksport link you posted said over £100k a week for Jesus not even close to KDB money and it's talksport. No I don't think the Sheik was holding out on £10k, I think it was more a case of Jesus saying lets wait and see after the world cup.
The second link is from dreamteamfc according to The Sun... really... and comes with not a quote or source or anything... Living up to your username on this one bud. In fact anywhere you come across it there is no quote from agent or player or club.
We're not actually failing to sell out the stadium for most games, in fact we're selling at 98% of capacity. By comparison Anfield is running at 98.3%, the Emirates 98.4%, Old Trafford 99% and Stamford Bridge 99.2% but yeah keep making stuff up if it makes you feel better.
"Selling" tickets at 2-for-1 deals or corporate handouts isn't really indicative of attendance. Take an actual look at the Etihad stands.
Decent money for de bruyne, his weekly wage would pay one of the slave labour migrants in dubai for 52 years. Good guys, I'd love them to own United and say how great they are, now excuse me I'm going to read up on mr guardiolas political principles
I'm not sure how you are able to talk on behalf of most neutrals but so be it.
Its possible that without stadium constraints that those three clubs could average more than City if they were in identical circumstances, however, as we will never know its probably more prudent to look at actual and factual attendance figures. From 1970 for all clubs.
Leeds first, for whatever reason the size of Leeds as a club is grossly overstated on this site. Even though Elland Road held over 50,000 for a lot of this period Leeds have never had an average attendance over 40k, in fact I don't think they have sold out Ellland Road once in the last twelve years. If we look at Leeds last success, the year they won the league they had an average of 29440, City, finishing 5th averaged a mere 1800 less. So Leeds, in a season of unprecedented glory averaged only slightly higher than City. Its also worth noting that Leeds' highest ever crowd is just 57k, City's is 85k. Leeds have historically had worse crowds than City and there is no evidence of that changing.
Aston Villa, surely one of the most fickle fan bases in the UK. The best comparison is the seasons between City leaving Maine Road and the post-takeover success. During this period Villa and City were broadly similar in league positions (around mid-table), yet City's attendances were higher than Villas every single season, on a couple of occasions City's average was over 8k better. Some of the difference was down to the Etihad being slightly better but again there is no evidence of Villa's actual crowds being larger, never mind significantly larger. They definitely have the fan base and catchment area to draw much larger crowds. How much bigger, who knows. Lets not forget that City could also draw far more than they currently do. Just wait till the stadium expansion takes place to see.
Finally, Sunderland. I've got a lot of time for Sunderland and think their support is excellent. Current attendances though show you that their hardcore support is around the 20k mark. Its hard to compare (I don't know Roker's capacity for the last few years) other than to say that City's crowds are usually larger, sometimes much larger. I would also suspect that because of the club's geographical position (ie a small town in close proximity to Newcastle and Middlesbrough) that they couldn't go much higher than the current 48k capacity at the SoL.
So, in my opinion, based on actual facts, I disagree that the three clubs you mention would be drawing higher crowds were they in the same position as City.
I don't think it's any secret that City's success has out grown their fanbase. This is what happens when you get a cash injection and rapid growth. Also doesn't help them that they share a city with United.
Saw an interesting fact about John Terry. Despite playing for and winning the lot with Chelsea this season at Villa was the biggest home crowd he's played infront of.
Obviously stadium restrictions and the like might effect this but let's be honest at City you couldn't increase the capacity as we all know it's very rarely full.
Saw an interesting fact about John Terry. Despite playing for and winning the lot with Chelsea this season at Villa was the biggest home crowd he's played infront of.
Obviously stadium restrictions and the like might effect this but let's be honest at City you couldn't increase the capacity as we all know it's very rarely full.
Give it 3 years and it will be increased again. The North Stand will be expanded, taking capacity to around 62,000. In fact, you can add another 3000-4000 to that if safe standing gets the go ahead because any proposed expansion will make provision for that.
By all means, feel free to bookmark this post for the summer of 2021 in case it hasn’t happened by then.
Villa's biggest crowd this season gone was 41,745. Chelsea have had dozens of bigger crowds than that with Terry playing. Therefore making your post nearly 100% incorrect.
I just checked a random Chelsea season and within seconds found that their very first home game of that season topped that Villa attendance. Their game at home to Spurs several weeks later pulled in more and overall there were plenty of Chelsea home games that season that attracted a bigger crowd than 41,745:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004–05_Chelsea_F.C._season
I agree. Shame that we have no money to spend ):
Ditto. My random season was 2011/12 and their home against Swansea which had a higher crowd!
People can quote attendance figures and reference articles all they want. All you have to do is watch their games and bar a few exceptions empty seats are dotted all over the place.
Are you really trying to suggest there's some crazy demand for city tickets and you'd currently full that?
Let's not be silly. Obviously the club will grow, and fanbase, but as true attendance figures show you're currently at the right size and even struggle with that at the moment.
https://amp.hitc.com/en-gb/2018/02/...-front-of-his-biggest-home-attendance-in-clu/
42,785 is villa park
The bridge is 41,631
Villa park was at capacity this season for the derby.
the article says the attendance was 41322
If you're sitting arguing about your clubs attendance or using it's capacity as some sort of metric of success, it kind of proves you're not a big club. If that conversation is involving Sunderland and Leeds, it proves you're a lower premier league or championship club that lucked into a rich owner.
Watch sterling's oh so historic winner versus Southampton in front of half a stand. No unverified stats needed
Watch sterling's oh so historic winner versus Southampton in front of half a stand. No unverified stats needed
As per that actual article the attendance was 41,322.
I’m confident we’d fill it for some games, yes. Barca and Real Madrid don’t fill their grounds for every game so what’s the issue really? Either way, I’ve got more of an inside track on what the club’s plans are for future stadium expansion than you and I can tell you for now that what I said is very much on the cards.
Time and time and time again this past season the away team hasn’t taken up their full allocation and those tickets in the 3rd tier of the South Stand have gone back on sale to home fans and been snapped up. As for empties elsewhere in the stadium, it’s not the club’s fault that some season ticket holders decide not to show up for certain games, an issue that afflicts all clubs by the way as a United fan himself confirmed on this very thread. Perfect example of this from a City point of view was the match against Watford on 2nd January. A Tuesday night game just after Christmas where there were plenty of no shows. However, fast forward 4 days to Saturday 6th January and the FA Cup 3rd round tie against Burnley - a match that sold out 3 days in advance and there was hardly an empty seat in sight. Check out the footage if you want and compare it to that Watford game.
Last edited:
Scored in the 97th minute when half the crowd had fooked off home. Their loss as the celebrations were understandably manic. Even better as all the early leavers meant I had more room to go off my head
41,322 v Birmingham as el magico said. Villa’s highest crowd was against Derby but still lower than plenty of Chelsea crowds Terry played in front of.
Scored in the 97th minute when half the crowd had fooked off home. Their loss as the celebrations were understandably manic. Even better as all the early leavers meant I had more room to go off my head
Find the stetford end empty when drawing 1-1,or the bernebeu or nou camp. Watch highlights, that game had large amounts of blue seats. There’s enough evidence on a regular basis for ths is discussion to be redundant, I won’t join in with you guys any further
I'm not sure why you protest so much?
You're not one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the country (or in MCR)
Your attendance figures are to be expected?
Official figures are more important than video evidence. Also, match going City fans swear on their life that theres only a few empty seats at the ground.Must be an optical illusion
Yeah this is what puzzles me as well. Every televised match I see them there are loads of empty seats.
Attendances and what constitutes a big club was raised (as always) by a poster of the Red persuasion. The resident Blues just try to add some context or debunk some myths.
This thread has gone the way of so many others and has veered away from the point-City's spending.
It depends on what you choose to believe, or rather what you choose to accept as the truth. Its a well known 'fact' that City is able to circumvent FFP by signing inflated sponsorship agreements with companies heavily linked to their owners. These 'sponsorship deals' make absolutely no sense economically and they lack any notion of fair play regards the rest of the playing field. I mean how is it fair that City is able to make DRASTIC losses on a year to year basis which should, by all rights and regulations in accordance with UEFA's rules on this particular subject, see them fall foul of FFP and receive the appropriate punishment. Not to mention how a state-funded football club utterly distorts the transfer market across Europe, creating an inflationary spiral that only serves to harm the future of the football industry as a whole. But nothing happens, they get away with it time and again. The whole thing stinks to high heaven of corruption.
You can choose to either believe or disbelieve the above.
don’t think youl like what people have to say about that either. Think a city fan mentioned a new stand is being built and another said there’s lots of teenagers in countries buying city shirts. Sounds like a well thought out project by the owners.City. The only club in the league where everyone buys season tickets but for whatever reason doesn't bother to go to the games.
But what about Pep's insane spending? That's what this thread is supposed to be about.
There are other threads to discuss attendances/stand extensions/doping etc.
Think more people seem to be wearing city shirts as they are less ashamed to show it. Not sure they are glory hunters coz most are in around Manchester.
Still more united shirts on show
Still more united shirts on show
You'd think these season ticket holders would sell their tickets on to other fans for games they can't make. Perhaps the issue is what we all know; that there is simply no demand...
We've already come to a conclusion. United spend a lot as well and the Glazers are from America and America is a big meanie. Simple really.
I agree. I opted out of the empty stands discussion