Khaldoon's End of Season Interview

[supercity88]

So:



Then:


Right Tebas.... because City are owned by a state and have had massive losses bailed out by our owner?



Sponsorship isn't funding? Barca haven't been Sponsored by Qatar for several years up until recently? Real aren't currently sponsored by a Dubai government own company for almost as long as City have been owned by Sheikh Mansour?

Didn't both Real and Barca get sanctions for some state related income?

Real and Barca are political tools for Spain and Catalunya and always have been. To say these two have never been state funded is absolute bollocks. The state has used Real Madrid as a tool of power and foreign sponsorships linked to other states will have done deals exactly like Etihad did with us.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Tebas hits back.

It is in the Daily Fail.

Don’t normally link that Rag and Scouse paper.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...hester-City-chairman-Khaldoon-Al-Mubarak.html

If the gloves really come off, then this Tebas clown will be one of the casualties. I'm sure there's plenty of skeleton's just waiting to be dug up.

 

[Metalartin]

If none of our journos pick up on and call him out on all of the holes even we can see from general knowledge, then they can have no complaints if we continue to view them as puppets for the cartel.

 

[Rolee]

This interview has caused a lot of debate on Twitter, the bit surrounding inflation/distorting the market seems to be the main bone of contention.

I came across this thread which sums it up rather nicely (and deserves more attention).

 

[Mike N]

If none of our journos pick up on and call him out on all of the holes even we can see from general knowledge, then they can have no complaints if we continue to view them as puppets for the cartel.

Where are those bastions of truth David Conn and Miguel Delaney when you need them?

 

[Canyouseethesky]

If none of our journos pick up on and call him out on all of the holes even we can see from general knowledge, then they can have no complaints if we continue to view them as puppets for the cartel.

We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped. It's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.

 

[Rolee]

We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped. It's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.

We pay to play in that stadium, as do West Ham in theirs.

 

[Metalartin]

We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped.
's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.

Ah the defence of the journos is here.

We've already paid off the stadium, the government are in profit on what the stadium cost to build if I remember right and more importantly, this was not in anyway against the rules of the game what Barca and Real got was(cheats?). The Man City and West Ham situation was a solution that suited both parties(club and council)... I don't think you can say the same for what happened in Spain and Catalonia.

That was just one small part of my point too, there are many holes that should be addressed if they do not have an agenda(how both clubs have received millions from Qatar and the UAE themselves, how Tebas has a links to an anti-muslim group in Spain and so on).

Lastly, glass houses is exactly why they should be mentioning all of it, he threw the first stone(long before the interview). They would if someone City related came out with such a shit argument full of hypocrisy and untruths.

So with that said... any sign of a critical response to Tebas' words? Not that it would change much it's just yet another nail in the coffin for any journo who did respond in that way to the interview. In a like for like comparison, Khaldoon's comments and points made, piss all over Tebas' for holding water.

 

[jrb]

We play in a stadium built and paid for by the state, it's not unreasonable to assume our owners wouldn't be here without that stadium. There are plenty of arguments to fight but this isn't one of them, countries/councils have always "helped" club's that benefit them. West Ham got handed a stadium, Everton sold their training ground to the council, the same council approved compulsory purchase orders to knock down people's houses for Anfield to be redeveloped. It's laughable what he said but people in glass houses and all that.

The stadium wasn’t built for City by the Government/state. Please get your facts right.

The stadium was built for the 2002 Commonwealth Games.

City agreed to move to the now Etihad stadium so it didn’t become a white elephant after the games. City gave MR and the surrounding land away for free to the council. It’s now houses.

City paid for the NS to be built after the games, It cost City £22mill. During the games it was a temporary stand.

City lease the stadium and pay rent to Sport England and Manchester City Council. The lease is for 250 years. City now pay £4mill a year to lease/rent the stadium. You do the maths. Up to £1bill, depending on further rent/lease increases. That £4mill per a year goes back to the local community, blue and red.

City have spent millions on the stadium, including the expansion of the stadium.

City have an option to buy the stadium out right.

 

[Metalartin]

This interview has caused a lot of debate on Twitter, the bit surrounding inflation/distorting the market seems to be the main bone of contention.

I came across this thread which sums it up rather nicely (and deserves more attention).

I was looking at it myself, the fullback position is the only place they can make that case but we needed to replace our fullbacks fast, with quality and experience of a type that is in short supply.

This will be their sticking point despite all the above positions you mention and there will probably be comparisons to Liverpool because it suits their narrative. Liverpool got lucky though with their fullbacks. Robertson was a hopeful punt that paid off, Arnold is the first academy product they've had make the grade in years unless you count Sterling who only spent 2 years there before going pro. They were also allowed to ease them in from a position of no pressure, we had no such luxury after our first season under Pep, it needed rectifying fast.