The Great City Fire Sale, summer 2008

[Prestwich_Blue]

It would have been 36,637 if it wasnt for that Thai **** taking over :)

I take it you didn't taste his noodles?

I gave my STs up and didnt attend a game again until last season. I spent a lot of energy and emotion on here trying to make people see we were being taken over by a ****. A **** who nearly ruined us for his own political aims.

I can honestly say i hate the Thai **** with a passion.

Its a few years back now obviously and i dont recall much PBs posts on the matter as generally it was a handful of us against BM at the time night after night and it was vitriolic in the extreme and i ended up taking a sabbatical from BM as well

Perhaps i could have returned and gloated when things were going tits up but i didnt and even now im not totally enamoured with things now, purely from a political perspective though.

Interesting point that Russ. As bad as Swales was, we never had to deal with an owner like Thaksin before, who raised all sorts of moral questions. In fact I did write about TS quite a bit on here and in KOTK and I suppose my view hardened as time went on. I was in touch with David Conn quite a lot at the time of the takeover so was in no doubt about Thaksin's human rights record and certainly David was horrified that we'd do business with such a person. I know another journalistic Blue who was even more vituperative about Thaksin. The depth of his anger was quite staggering and very emotional.

I have to admit that I was nervous about him but open minded at first. Mainly because I'd had a message passed to me that he was keen to meet our group and I didn't want to rock the boat at that point. I also remember his interview on 5 Live where he came over really well and he certainly knew how to push the right buttons. I'm not really a 'black-and-white' person so I was torn between admiring the things he seemed to be doing for the club but, at the same time, unhappy that we'd put ourselves in the hands of someone who was clearly morally high-risk. Once it was clear that he was getting the club even deeper into the mire then I became much less ambivalent but still found something likeable about him. I think my final summation of him in KOTK after the ADUG takeover was that he was a "loveable rogue".

In May 2009. I was working down in London and was invited to a seminar at Birkbeck College about the development of the PL. David Conn was speaking and there were a number of interesting participants including a senior member of the Premier League. A few of us went to the pub afterwards and David & I had a lively discussion with the PL representative about the Fit & Proper Persons Test and how it should disbar people like Thaksin and Gaydamak of Portsmouth or even people like the Glazers, who weren't in it for the good of the game. His response was that they had to draw a line somewhere and couldn't stop people owning clubs on some vague grounds that were difficult to define. My response was that if the PL saw itself as a "global brand" with the clubs as the manifestation of that then it had to ensure it was protecting the brand.

It does raise the question of morality in football and how we should deal with questionable owners. Obviously this came up recently with our owners being highlighted over their human rights record, which isn't anywhere near as bad as many others but is still open to criticism. Where should the line in the sand be drawn?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Thanks for that interesting post PB.

In a sense the fourteen months of Taskin was a microcosm of the Swales' years: took over from a more steady predecessor ; promised a great deal; didn't put any of his own money in; spent big,mainly on crap; and then started asset stripping to pay the wages. Although I do concede that there is more than slight difference in their respective backgrounds: Prime Minister of Thailand and a sheet music shop owner from Altrincham don't have a lot of collective synergies.

One thing they did share in common, however, is that they were both deceitful megalomaniacs with appalling hairstyles.

The fact that we were so close to meltdown makes the last five years even more sweet. united fans would have been like pigs in shit if we'd gone into administration, or worse. When they say that it's hollow because of the way it's come about, never forget that they'd loaded the dice in their favour to keep little old City and their like firmly in their place. Shame that didn't work out for you quite as you planned.

Taskin, for me, was the last taunt of the footballing gods towards us as City fans, before they "got bored" and realised we'd suffered enough.

That said, if I owned a football club, I too would insist that everybody bowed when I came into the room, especially the players.

 

[rastus]

Theres a few Human Rights issues with our current owners, but as long as we win..hey ho

 

[1961_vintage]

I gave my STs up and didnt attend a game again until last season. I spent a lot of energy and emotion on here trying to make people see we were being taken over by a ****. A **** who nearly ruined us for his own political aims.

Wow. Why do you go to that extreme? What did you know that some of us either didn't or chose to ignore?

Would the fact that i will never buy any City stuff that is Nike branded help?

Its hard to walk away from something you love so dear but i did so knowing i had a clear conscience and i certaily do not expect others to see the world through my parameters and i do not think ill of those who stayed and supported the team.

We all make choices about things

True - and from your posts on BM I can imagine it was a huge one for you to make.

My recollection of the pro TS spin at the time was that any "human rights" criticism of him was initiated by his polical opponents and even then was in response to his attempts to clean-up the drug dealers (to whom he afforded no human right as he felt they didn't deserve any).

I just wondered how you got beyond that spin to the point that made you walk away.

 

[Gary James]

A few of us went to the pub afterwards and David & I had a lively discussion with the PL representative about the Fit & Proper Persons Test and how it should disbar people like Thaksin and Gaydamak of Portsmouth or even people like the Glazers, who weren't in it for the good of the game. His response was that they had to draw a line somewhere and couldn't stop people owning clubs on some vague grounds that were difficult to define. My response was that if the PL saw itself as a "global brand" with the clubs as the manifestation of that then it had to ensure it was protecting the brand.

It does raise the question of morality in football and how we should deal with questionable owners. Obviously this came up recently with our owners being highlighted over their human rights record, which isn't anywhere near as bad as many others but is still open to criticism. Where should the line in the sand be drawn?

I totally share your views... football clubs will always go for the quick-fix, big money buyer without properly looking into who they are handing their businesses over to (although John Wardle talks with a passion that he did do that and that it was absolutely right to sell to Thaksin - I interviewed John extensively and quoted him in "Manchester The City Years" on this very point, pages 521-528 if anyone wants to look; he said some very interesting stuff which I was able to quote and he claimed Thaksin did what he said he would do during that time). That's why the PL and the FA (and UEFA/FIFA) need to really get control of this. They need fit and proper tests that work and protect clubs. Everything that happened to Portsmouth could happen to another club tomorrow. It has to be the governing bodies that control this - clubs and fans want anyone who can promise success and club owners often see short team aims or financial gains above all else.

In terms of morality... it's a minefield. As you say there have been questions about Abu Dhabi human rights. Thaksin would argue that in Thailand he won the country's general election while in Abu Dhabi citizens do not have that opportunity. Similarly, some believe that a democratic electoral system isn't right for every country. How can we in the UK dictate to any country what's right or wrong? Obviously, abuses against the general population or individuals have to be challenged etc. but look at the minefield that is Syria and the multitude of angles. The whole ownership of football clubs issue is one which only 20 years ago was fairly easy to control (though they didn't!) but today it brings so many dilemmas. Are the Glazers more 'fit and proper' than Sheikh Mansour simply because they are American businessmen who come from a democratic country rather than a member of a ruling family in a country without elections where there are accusations of human abuses? Specifically in terms of football the Glazers have not been as 'fit and proper' as the Sheikh, but in terms of politics it could be argued that they are saints in comparison, so what's right and what's wrong for football? If we now said the Sheikh was unfit because of the accusations David Conn reported on in his newspaper article would it be right to close down MCFC as a result, or flog the club on to someone who may do what the Glazers have done to Utd? It's such a difficult area and one the authorities have to be clear on and act accordingly.

Specifically on City during that amazing period when we went from a club close to dying which was being hawked to Russian oligarchs and other dubious characters around the world to one that can now seriously challenge... there are so many angles to this and it truly is fascinating. The role of the shareholders trust is one that hasn't been properly documented (although I did include a few quotes from PB on page 535 of Manchester The City Years about the Trust and their role in trying to save the club if it went into administration), so it is great that PB has explained it all here, but there are other elements that need to be remembered. When Thaksin took over City his plans were definitely not short term. He inevitably wanted to gain positive PR and make money out of the club (and so does Sheikh Mansour of course), but his plans were certainly longer term than the year he stayed. His plan was to see City grow and there were various documents, presentations and meetings held which talked of spreading the City brand. This was from day one.

It all changed for Thaksin when the political noose tightened and his assets were frozen and so on. That's when he finalised his signing of Garry Cook who believed he was coming to further develop the brand but ended up spending much of his time presenting ideas to potential buyers.

Whether it was right that the PL and FA allowed Thaksin to buy City or not (and clearly they should not have allowed him to buy the club!) it has to be remembered that his initial plan was to be here longer (I reckon about 5 to 10 years, because ultimately he wanted to return to politics in Thailand). His first months were marked by their longer term plans, not a quick get in, rob the club of its assets and then get out. We are now blessed with an owner who does have the ability to make a long term vision viable for the club but we must continue to look at his record, his interest and his plans and ensure we are happy with the direction we are going in. I think we are in for a great future, with an owner who ultimately sees the club as an investment which must bring returns (that must not be forgotten), but our club will change beyond all recognition in the next decade. Some of that will be good for some of us, some will be bad for some of us.

 

[Chris in London]

And of course the way it all ended was with this letter:

Dear fellow Manchester City fans,

There has been much written about the purchase of Manchester City over the last few weeks and so now I am delighted to tell you that negotiations are complete and the transfer of ownership will take place next Tuesday (September 23rd, 2008). With the agreement finalised I would like to tell you directly a little about who we are and what we have planned.

Firstly I would like to thank you for the many expressions of good will and joy we have received since our wish to purchase the Club was announced. We are deeply touched and now have some great personal experience of what so many people have told us for a while now.......you are the greatest fans in the world.

Like you, we are excited about the future of the club, and we hope the securing of Robinho as a Manchester City player during the transfer window is seen as a signal of our very real intent. It has been an exciting two weeks for all of us all.

My intention is that Manchester City has the very best people at its disposal, both on and off the field. For that reason I have asked my friend Khaldoon Al Mubarak, to take on the position of Chairman of the Club. My request to him has been to put together a board and executive team that is worthy of the heritage and potential of Manchester City.

Khaldoon and I have agreed that the we will not be making any more announcements for a while as we really now need to sit down with the manager, Executive Chairman and key staff and put together plans that will, over time, get the Club to where we want it to be. That is the stage we are entering now and as anyone who runs a business knows, this involves a lot of listening, and a lot of talking to many stakeholders and research and discussion before plans can be announced.

As part of that, we will absolutely spend time listening to you the fans about what you think about the future of the club. We are very aware that without you there would not be a club to buy, and your voice will be heard by the organisation at the highest level. We also want to make it clear that Mark Hughes is absolutely integral to our plans. We are lucky to have someone who we believe is the best young British manager; someone who has been successful on the global stage, the Premier League and of course as a player.

We are ambitious for the club, like you, but not unreasonably so and we understand it takes time to build a team capable of sustaining a presence in the top four of the Premier League and winning European honours. We know a little of the history at City also and whilst we want to bring in the best players in the world, we also want to see the academy continue to develop talent and give Mark Hughes the chance to bring home-grown players into the team. We consider Mark Hughes to be one of the prime assets of the club. We will back his judgement in what players to bring in and we look forward to working more closely with him in the future. We are building a structure for the future not just a team of all-stars.

In cold business terms, Premiership football is one of the best entertainment products in the world and we see this as a sound business investment. That being said, we understand that we need to put money in to get the club to where we believe it can be -and where we think you the fans want it to be.

We are aware also that the club has a significant role in the community going back years. As newcomers, we don't pretend to understand all of this yet, but we will make sincere efforts to back these initiatives and ensure that Manchester City loses none of its role in Manchester beyond football and we want the club to continue to contribute to the community it represents.

I should perhaps also explain that despite what you may have read, I have bought the club in a private capacity and as part of my personal business strategy to hold a wide portfolio of business investments. I am a football fan, and I hope that you will soon see that I am now also a Manchester City fan. But I am also a long-term investor and that is probably more important to the club and to you because it means we are here for the long haul and that we will act always in the best interests of the club and all of its stakeholders, but especially you the fans.

I cannot be at the game against Portsmouth on Sunday, but like many of you I will be glued to the screen and cheering the team on. The club's new Chairman will be there and I ask you to welcome him. I will be at Eastlands soon and am really looking forward to sampling the famous City atmosphere.

Thank you again for the good wishes and your support.

Yours,

Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan

It is quite interesting to compare the way that ADUG has delivered on its promises with the way that TS (like Swales before him as GDM says) promised so much and delivered so little.

In particular this remark

We are aware also that the club has a significant role in the community going back years. As newcomers, we don't pretend to understand all of this yet, but we will make sincere efforts to back these initiatives and ensure that Manchester City loses none of its role in Manchester beyond football and we want the club to continue to contribute to the community it represents.

has I think been justified in spades, not to mention this statement:

But I am also a long-term investor and that is probably more important to the club and to you because it means we are here for the long haul and that we will act always in the best interests of the club and all of its stakeholders

As Dave says in the OP the summer of 2008 was a quite remarkable time in our history, starting with a eight goal thrashing at Middlesbrough and ending with us being the most financially powerful club in the world.

Talk about a white knuckle ride.

 

[SuperYaya]

I gave my STs up and didnt attend a game again until last season. I spent a lot of energy and emotion on here trying to make people see we were being taken over by a ****. A **** who nearly ruined us for his own political aims.

Wow. Why do you go to that extreme? What did you know that some of us either didn't or chose to ignore?

Maybe the fact he was accused of killing thousands of people?

Rubbish. His 'human rights record' is just an excuse for the coup. It really has a lot more to do with the fact that he brought in radical policies to help the poor. He pissed off the 0.1% of Thailand who have 99% of the wealth and was punished for it.

His sister is now the democratically elected prime minister of Thailand, so obviously killing thousands hasn't damaged the families reputation.

 

[Blue Smarties]

This thread is such an eye opener, scary to think about what could have been.

 

[moomba]

Didnt Zaba get bought the same day Corluka was sold?

If it was I can't see the situation being that dire.

 

[supercity88]

It was a very strange time for the club. Little has been made of these events except for by people very close to the club. Only City fans themselves - and even then, only those interested in the history and politics of the club, will know about what went on.

I remember when Thaksin bought us, it was a jovial time. The Frank Sinatra comments were typically humourous and "City-esque". Sven was in charge, we bought numerous players and at the time I was extremely excited. "Shukar" had an incredible derby at the Boleyn ground. And people began to notice City - and began to correctly call him Elano. Things began to go wrong, but very quietly. I think it had been evident for some time that the club was struggling. The money spent had never been there - not in liquid form in any case. The Thai authorities were closing in on Thaksin and he knew he was in trouble. I think there were a lot of legal cases looming in terms on money owed and when the whole squad was put up for sale (albeit not publicly) then things were really up shit creek. It was when Corluka left that I was really shocked. He had been one of our better players and moved to a club we were directly competing with. Then news that Ireland was to be sold came about and things really started to hit home. There was clearly something wrong. Thaksin's situation was making international headlines but it was always more about him than what the implications would be for Manchester City football club.

Credit to Hughes for staying and fighting, I don't know how much he knew, but he showed some loyalty to us to stay throughout that process. In terms of the sale of the club to ADUG it is my knowledge that Thaksin was friends, or at least had known of the group and their interest in the Premiership and he called on them to buy us. I am not sure whether this is true but it is what I was led to believe. Either way we are in so much gratitude to our current owners for not only buying us in the first place, but paying off all of those debts and saving us from liquidation. I believe the situation we were in was worse than the case of Portsmouth. Without a huge investment from ADUG I do not see who or what could have saved us and bailed us out.

Their statement in the transfer window, their investment in players and infrastructure have been phenomenal. We went from one extreme to the other and have done so very quickly. It does make me feel for the likes of Portsmouth where they didn't get so lucky.