Are City the only club to have received ‘controversial’ finance?

[Bozo]

 

[Fame Monster]

So it’s not just us allegedly financed indirectly by countries with dodgy human rights records?

We’ve got Liverpool currently financed indirectly by Malaysia, listed on most indexes as being below the UAE in terms of human rights. Yet the media didn’t breathe a word of this when their documentary came out.

We’ve got United currently financed indirectly via Vladimir Putin, one of many immoral characters to have financed the club throughout their infamous history.

And Arsenal, currently financed indirectly by Dubai and Rwanda, the latter being one of the worst human rights abusers in the world.

Strange that we’re singled out as recipients of controversial money when they’ve been doing it for a lot longer than us. So much for no agenda.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

George Reynolds deserves a special mention; as does Honoré de Balzac.

 

[cleavers]

They used to have Aeroflot as a major commercial partner.

All hale trump ;-)

 

[mccity]

There's been some idiotic, poorly-researched articles singling City out since the doc was released so I was just wondering whether we're the only club to have received morally controversial money seen as though it's never mentioned in relation to other clubs? That's if you put the law to one side and accept the premise that Sheikh Mansour is a shill and the entity that owns the majority shareholding is, ultimately, the sovereign wealth fund of Abu Dhabi.

Yes. All the fans of the other teams I have spoken to have assured me their income was all legit, and only ours is dodgy. What reason do I have to doubt them?

In fact, we became the first ever club to have morally questionable funding back when Thaksin was in charge, which is the precise reason that ADUG were so keen to take us over in the first place. My United supporting mate tells me that Jamie Paradise told him that, and Jamie's the most reliable author there is.

 

[NPBlue]

I can't say the double standards of supporters of other teams bother me that much. We live in a globalised world where their 'I'm disgusted' points of view are sent from Chinese made mobile phones or some other device where the components come from countries where child labour is rife or human rights are not an issue.

It's everything you buy and use these days.

Let them chew on that before they get on their moral high horse.

 

[petrusha]

Gary Lineker spot on here, IMO:

 

[SilverFox2]

Some people think the initial investment from ADUG was immoral because they believe it comes from Abu Dhabi, some people (myself included) don’t, whether or not it came from Abu Dhabi swf. Maybe controversial would have been a better term.

The point of course is that presumably someone bought the oil to sell to us all. I admit to putting petrol of questionable origin into my car so add that to the list.

 

[crazyg]

On the subject of Liverpool, don't forget that their success funded by the Moores family, came from money gambled by people most likely unable to afford it, in the hopes of winning a fortune.

EDIT: Not forgetting all those clubs, too numerous to mention, whose shirt sponsors are gambling companies.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I've always assumed that our loot came via 'black gold' outta the ground and was legitimately owned by the guys who had the land. Nothing questionable about it! The moral aspect is clearly raised by those who begrudge us the money.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Some people think the initial investment from ADUG was immoral because they believe it comes from Abu Dhabi, some people (myself included) don’t, whether or not it came from Abu Dhabi swf. Maybe controversial would have been a better term.

There can be little doubt that the Sheikh is the legal owner but that it's a strategic Abu Dhabi project. The fact that Khaldoon, the right-hand man of Sheikh Mohammed, and Simon Pearce, the key figure in Abu Dhabi's PR strategy, are both heavily involved is proof enough of that. There's other stuff as well, which I'm not going to go into on here but is available in the public domain if you know where to look.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Check this twat out ! Honestly , claiming to be a city fan and writing this shock, attention seeking pile of absolute shit ! I’m not joking when I say he deserves the Adam teese treatment

Simon Hattenstone long ago went down the path of Colin Schindler and David Conn. He’s done nothing but snipe since the takeover. City fan my arse

 

[Hart of the Matter]

I find some responses on here disappointing. It can be summed up 'as the world is a bad place, we have bad people running our club but so does everyone else. So what!'
I have worked at a senior level, directly for a Royal Family in the middle east and taken the Royal Penny and had an excellent living in that time. I hope SWP can back me up on some of this. Many of the Royals have had an expensive private education in Britain or America, there are strong liberlising elements within them as a result. They, however have to introduce change in an incremental fashion and their ability to do so fluctuates with the national and international climate (Trump is playing into the hands of those that want to resist change and even radicalise). The religious factions are fighting for control and carry a lot of weight. It all adds upto a careful balancing act. The fact that City is a leading light in community projects, womens football and embraces LGBT camaigns is no coincidence. It raise uncomfortable questions in the Arab states, ones which our owners seem happy to have raised in their club. I do care about equalities and would not want to live or visit most middle east countries if i were gay or trans. Football, however is equally backward in these aspects. No opennly gay footballers. What does that say about the culture in ALL football clubs. The treatment of political disadents is equally an issue. Hope no one has been on holiday in Spain recently, or Turkey or Amerca etc... That is a real issue we cannot avoid about our owners but as others have pointed out we live in a global economy and all consume gas, oil, petrol from similar places. So, when asked if we have dirty money, ask the others if they believe sport is a power for good, change and breaking down barriers? I believe it can be.

 

[ancoats]

football and the best teams need a big money backer and the big fan base myth is bollocks

liverpool in the late 1960s/70s/80s was backed by littlwoods/vernons pools money and was a big money spending team of there time and they bought the history, united and from 1992 was backed by the fake share holding and murdoch sky tv money and was there ever a weekend that united was not shown on skysports so hand in glove with printing there own money that bought there history

the myth that manchester city have no fan base and without the money would be still a yoyo club just makes me laugh and you only have to go and look and the transfer records of liverpool and united to see how they won so many titles and silverware, it was defo not on the back of there fan base and gate revenue each season

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Two words - Michael Knighton.

That ended well. That 1989 summer United spent £2.3m on Pallister, £2m on Neil Webb, £1.8m on Paul Ince and some Tiger Tokens on Danny Wallace on the strength of that crook taking over.

Whenever United fans bring up our owners' debate just remind them of the time the Stretford Bell Ends cheered and clapped as Knighton came out all full kit wanker and did keepy uppies for their delight.

 

[pavelsrnicek]

There can be little doubt that the Sheikh is the legal owner but that it's a strategic Abu Dhabi project. The fact that Khaldoon, the right-hand man of Sheikh Mohammed, and Simon Pearce, the key figure in Abu Dhabi's PR strategy, are both heavily involved is proof enough of that. There's other stuff as well, which I'm not going to go into on here but is available in the public domain if you know where to look.

I wonder if that is something that was the original intention or evolved as the ownership of City has become largely positive for Abu Dhabi. From the outset it was Sheikh Mansour with Al Fahim as front man. Al Fahim was a loudmouth spoofer so they replace him with a safe pair of hands. I've heard that the association with City has surprised Abu Dhabi with the amount of largely positive PR so it would make sense for Abu Dhabi to assist Sheikh Mansour in any way possible.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

George Reynolds deserves a special mention; as does Honoré de Balzac.

I always have to go away and play with my Google after you’ve posted. I like that!

 

[The Colonel]

The biggest benefactors of a wealthy owner has been our neighbour, believe it or not.

The 'United Ground' (which is the original name of OT because the cricket ground had already claimed the name for itself) was built on land owned and paid for by John Davies, wealthy brewer and Chairman of Newton Heath/MUFC. He kept the club afloat when it was broke, masterminded and part funded the move from Bank Street.

Of course most rags wont know about this or will be in denial...

Not the only time either. James Gibson’s money saved them from bankruptcy before the war. Again most fans have no knowledge of this part of their history.

 

[Chris in London]

Well there’s Chelsea and the enduring suspicions that Roman’s wealth isn’t entirely his.

.

Fixed.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I wonder if that is something that was the original intention or evolved as the ownership of City has become largely positive for Abu Dhabi. From the outset it was Sheikh Mansour with Al Fahim as front man. Al Fahim was a loudmouth spoofer so they replace him with a safe pair of hands. I've heard that the association with City has surprised Abu Dhabi with the amount of largely positive PR so it would make sense for Abu Dhabi to assist Sheikh Mansour in any way possible.

That's entirely possible. I've also heard the same story that all anyone wanted to talk about at official meetings involving the Abu Dhabi government was City. Even the Queen mentioned us in her speech during their state visit.