Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, you are spot on; sometimes it’s outright, and sometimes subtle or ‘clever’.

I listened to the Monday night 5 live show a couple of weeks ago, and for 1 hour 55 mins it would be difficult to not see his point on a whole range of footy issues they discussed; I didn’t always agree with him, but no drama, sensible stuff.
However with 5 mins left, in the middle of a sentence about something else, he drops in that we are state owned, and continues on without pausing, as if it’s a given, an uncontested, uncontroversial point of fact, and means one of other panellists or host has to derail the conversation if they want to challenge it - with 5 mins left… That’s the sort of sly stuff that he does.
I’d still have liked the host or one of the others to pick him up on it, but they didn’t. On that occasion he tried his best to allow no time for it, but the presenter should still have picked him up on it.
Yes this:)

I linked a NYT transcript recently of an interview he had to be v careful he was factually correct. Surprise, surprise he described the legal ownership correctly but still managed a negative connotation,

It's like the repeated "we got off on a technicality" garbage they spout and the likes of Panja and him know this isn't the truth
 
860-ED8-F6-B6-C8-4-CB3-8259-70-E102-AF9823.jpg
Well said mate
 
That was my understanding. The Abu Dhabi Municipality own the infrastructure and the hotel company is the tenant or lessee.

Is it any different to Network Rail owning Piccadilly Station, which Sainsburys, Boots, WH smith and others rent space in?

Edit: Even if Network Rail entered into a joint venture with these companies to provide retail facilities at their mainline stations, they still wouldn't be responsible for how those companies spent their money.

Comparing apples and pears - we have no idea of the exact terms of the legal agreement or of any deal that might have been broked between the hotel group and the owner.

We do know if the sponsorship is over £1 million the PL will have a look :)
 
Comparing apples and pears - we have no idea of the exact terms of the legal agreement or of any deal that might have been broked between the hotel group and the owner.

We do know if the sponsorship is over £1 million the PL will have a look :)
It won't be for that much I'd imagine but even if they do look at it, decide it's not an "associated party", or it is but fair value, it still won't be accepted by those shouting about it.
 
This City hatred has definitely turned up a notch since we started to pull clear,and Saturday has just put the icing on the cake. Loving it, I just hope we keep getting under the skin of all and sundry, shows we're doing a hell of a lot right
 
Absolute bollocks, so utd who got rid of nobody in the summer but bought three high profile players on huge wages suddenly move down. Absolute horse shit by the lying DM
Their total wage bill for the year to June 2021 was £322m, whereas ours was £351m. That was before they bought Ronaldo, Sancho & Varane.

In the first quarter of the new financial year, to Sept 2021, which did include 3 months of their wages, the wage bill had gone up 25% compared to the previous year, to £88.5m. That extrapolates to a full year wage bill of over £350m.

Edit: However, if the overall wage bill in 2021 goes up the same percentage (although I don't think it will) then it could be a whopping £400m
 
Last edited:
Yes this:)

I linked a NYT transcript recently of an interview he had to be v careful he was factually correct. Surprise, surprise he described the legal ownership correctly but still managed a negative connotation,

It's like the repeated "we got off on a technicality" garbage they spout and the likes of Panja and him know this isn't the truth
I heard that and thought what a slime ball and weasel. Non of the other pundits or the host piked up on it or challenged it. It was so out of context that he had to squeeze it in just to
Keep his narrative. I get he does a lot of pods for Liverpool fc and every opportunity he gets he praises Klopp. Shame Micah is not clever enough and the other pundits indifferent to hold this tosser to task. I now refuse to listen to that show when this tosser is on it.
 
So according to that rag propaganda rag the Daily Mail, united now have only the 4th highest wage bill in the PL and City have the highest...


Those are published figures, just not necessary like-for-like. MU's is expected to be above City's now, and that City 351M includes the bonuses from the season. I guess bonus payments will be keeping MU's number down a bit!

Chelsea's is this year, the others are from last reports.


Their total wage bill for the year to June 2021 was £322m, whereas ours was £351m. That was before they bought Ronaldo, Sancho & Varane.

In the first quarter of the new financial year, to Sept 2021, which did include 3 months of their wages, the wage bill had gone up 25% compared to the previous year, to £88.5m. That extrapolates to a full year wage bill of over £350m.

Edit: However, if the overall wage bill in 2021 goes up the same percentage (although I don't think it will) then it could be a whopping £400m
Various media are reporting what are listed as real time salary figures for 21/22, from a site called Spotrac.

Do these look right @Prestwich_Blue?

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/payroll/


1Manchester United F.C.£227,686,200
2Chelsea F.C.£162,642,000
3Manchester City F.C.£143,156,000
4Liverpool F.C.£139,178,000
5Arsenal F.C.£99,765,273

The following are by annual salary for players at each club from the same site, these figures seem to be widely quoted across most media.

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/rankings/
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.