Media Thread 2017/18

[Shirley]

Too many gullible twats S.

Exactly, 659 million at the last count!

 

[Bluekiwi]

One of the things I found quite amusing at the start of the week on the ESPN web site.
NZ time.....................
Sunday morning lead story "Mou gets t right against Liverpool"
Monday morning lead story "Tottenham come from behind despite Kane injury" - or something like that
Tuesday morning story "Mou gets t right against Liverpool"; second story "City cruise after brace from Silva against Stoke"

But then on Wednesday it all went tits up as that "massive" club Sevilla dumps the reds. And Craig Burley had a field day. That was a good day to visit ESPN

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Has any one seen this, I am having a big argument with a Liverpool fan about it. What is the arquement against this artical

Thr argument against it is that it's got fuck all to do with City.

 

[The perfect fumble]

These type of pro rag articles usually appear during CL weeks, there was a spate of them when they were not in the competition and we were. It's the rags PR doing what they are good at.....fooling the masses.

This is corporate world. The rags are a huge money making monster, the Premier Leagues leading brand, outstripping its competitors where it matters, the bottom line. This bloated cash cow services the humungous debt the Glazers have run up in those ghost town strip malls that they're shackled to in the States, but there's still enough filthy lucre to bleach out for the hacks and hangers on. The rags commercial success means clicks and views for anyone willing to print puff pieces about how wonderful they are and as long as these parasites are willing to do that the rags will wine and dine and grant access.

In football politics the rags are the single most powerful player, the Premier League is in its pocket, and as Scudamore's job as head of the Premier League is primarily revenue driven, with success or failure judged entirely by revenue growth, and its number one growth driver is the rags, then from a business perspective, it is not desirable, for any length of time, for the rags to underperform. Fortunately for the rag board, the Glazers and Scudamore, Utd have successfully decoupled commercial success from their performance on the field, whether they can continue to pull this trick off is another matter, though Liverpool have made a fair fist of it, a fact that hasn't gone unnoticed by Woodward.

 

[The perfect fumble]

And just as they'll be puff pieces about the rags, there'll be arse wipe nonsense like this....

 

[Blue Til Death]

I

Clough's best ever quote:
" I may not be the best manager in the country, but Im in the top one."

I like the one where, when asked how he sorted out disagreements with his players, he replied... " We sit down and talk about it for 20 minutes, then we agree I'm right"... Love Cloughie... !

 

[SWP's back]

Star dust, which is basically, dust.

To be fair, as you elude to, everything and everyone is made of star dust.

 

[Rolee]

To be fair, as you elude to, everything and everyone is made of star dust.

Mind blown.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

This is corporate world. The rags are a huge money making monster, the Premier Leagues leading brand, outstripping its competitors where it matters, the bottom line. This bloated cash cow services the humungous debt the Glazers have run up in those ghost town strip malls that they're shackled to in the States, but there's still enough filthy lucre to bleach out for the hacks and hangers on. The rags commercial success means clicks and views for anyone willing to print puff pieces about how wonderful they are and as long as these parasites are willing to do that the rags will wine and dine and grant access.

In football politics the rags are the single most powerful player, the Premier League is in its pocket, and as Scudamore's job as head of the Premier League is primarily revenue driven, with success or failure judged entirely by revenue growth, and its number one growth driver is the rags, then from a business perspective, it is not desirable, for any length of time, for the rags to underperform. Fortunately for the rag board, the Glazers and Scudamore, Utd have successfully decoupled commercial success from their performance on the field, whether they can continue to pull this trick off is another matter, though Liverpool have made a fair fist of it, a fact that hasn't gone unnoticed by Woodward.

What you postulate about united’s hegemony is short sighted and lacks imagination. You appear to assume that united will be the biggest ticket financially for the foreseeable. Commercial history is littered with brands that once thrived that span into unexpected and irreversible decline. There is very good reason to believe that united will have less commercial draw and influence than City within a decade, possibly less. Anyone applying their mind to this, including Scudamore, would be foolish to think and act along the same lines as they did on 31st August 2008; not least because City’s rise (and united’s decline) has conflated with a period of unprecedented growth in the Premier League, especially in emerging markets. The notion, therefore, that the Premier League’s success is ineluctably linked to that of united is demonstrably wrong. Scudamore’s oft repeated quote was around seven years ago. What he said (and whatever he meant) is no longer particularly relevant, if at all.

It seems apparent to me, in terms of press coverage and our relative influence in the game, that the landscape has already hugely changed in the last 12 months and this process will only continue, barring some egregious force majeure, and with it, united’s power and influence will continue to diminish.

 

[The perfect fumble]

What you postulate about united’s hegemony is short sighted and lacks imagination. You appear to assume that united will be the biggest ticket financially for the foreseeable. Commercial history is littered with brands that once thrived that span into unexpected and irreversible decline. There is very good reason to believe that united will have less commercial draw and influence than City within a decade, possibly less. Anyone applying their mind to this, including Scudamore, would be foolish to think and act along the same lines as they did on 31st August 2008; not least because City’s rise (and united’s decline) has conflated with a period of unprecedented growth in the Premier League, especially in emerging markets. The notion, therefore, that united’s success is ineluctably linked to that of the Premier League is demonstrably wrong. Scudamore’s oft repeated quote was around seven years ago. What he said (and whatever he meant) is no longer particularly relevant, if at all.

It seems apparent to me, in terms of press coverage and our relative influence in the game, that the landscape has already hugely changed in the last 12 months and this process will only continue, barring some egregious force majeure and with it, united’s power and influence will continue to diminish.

I would like nothing more than Utd's commercial clout to fall off a cliff coupled with our meteoric rise and there is evidence that in overseas markets, which is where the growth is, we're doing well. But success not only brings its rewards in the short term, it brings them in the long term, and Utd's long term success, particularly in the Premier League era, means they've already a couple of generations of followers lost to us, who once committed, don't jump ship lightly.

The UK market is saturated, it will take many years before City can seriously dent Utd's hold here, it will happen, because change is inevitable, but I'm too old, I won't be around to see it.

Where I think you are getting it wrong is you don't fully appreciate the value of brands. Brand Utd is strong, as is, to a lesser degree, brand Liverpool, but Utd and Liverpool are not the most successful clubs on the field, right now that's us, so why isn't brand City stronger than brand Utd?

You know the answer.

Take a look at brand Liverpool, they've never won the Premier League and yet they are coining it still, a point not lost on Woodward.

What City is trying to do is circumvent a lot of this, they have a long term business plan of course and they're trying to be at the forefront of digital this and marketing that, but the lynch pin for them, the thing they think can get them to where they want to be faster than the more conservative commentators believe possible, is the style of winning.

All of our last three managers, different as they have been, have all emphasised in interview after interview that at City its not just about winning, but the manner of winning, the football we play, the style, the excitement.

You certainly can't say that about Utd!

Our club has set out to entertain its way to the head of the queue, to super charge brand City, I wish them luck, I for one would be happy to be proved wrong if they manage it before I'm pushing up the daisies.