Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
blueste41 said:
So at what level does this start at-cleaner, catering assistant, production assistant? What your suggesting is a nonsense, my wife is an exec at the BBC if the salary wasn't commensurate to the industry she wouldn't be there.
Click to expand...
The PM gets 160k a year to run the country, is this a nonsense?

So now we see that you've actually got a bias in the argument, it is a bit pointless continuing tbh
 
jrb said:
It's all over Manchester - Twitter (latest tag)

The c*nts are pushing it like f*ck.

View attachment 50459



Link to the article via Twitter. It might not work after more than 1 view.

www.theguardian.com

How a great English city sold itself to Abu Dhabi’s elite – and not even for a good price | Aditya Chakrabortty

Manchester’s Labour council let Sheikh Mansour buy up acres of public land for seemingly a fraction of its worth, says Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

The Athletic are all over it as well. F*ck them and the Guardian, which is a much more indepth article.

Here's the Athletic article, minus 1 word, so it's not the full article. Word missing at the start.

-------

** independent report has found the sale of public land from Manchester City Council to the Abu Dhabi-based owners of the reigning Premier League champions was “too cheap” and “difficult to justify”.

The research, carried out jointly by the Centre for Research on Accounting & Finance in Context (CRAFIC) and the Urban Institute, concludes the relationship “has the potential to become an ethical, political and economic liability”.

Research focuses on the Manchester Life scheme, launched in 2014, a £1billion deal between the city council and the club’s owners to regenerate swathes of brownfield land.

However, the report claims this land, comprising nine sites, was sold to City owner Sheikh Mansour at a price well under market value, and on unusually long 999-year leases. The typical lease length is between 150 and 250 years.

They argue that the benefits of this sale were “asymmetric”, with the report’s authors “not able to identify any income received by the council… despite being exposed to some of the risks of the project”.

Investment has so far delivered 1,468 housing units, with rental proceeds going to the development’s Abu Dhabi-based landlords. Further construction is planned.

“Our assessment of the Manchester Life development is that Manchester City Council ‘sold the family silver too cheap’,” the report summarises. “It represents a transfer of public wealth to private hands that is difficult to justify as prudent.”

Due to Abu Dhabi’s human rights record, there are also concerns over how the relationship affects Manchester’s image.

The Abu Dhabi United Group investment fund, which owns City, is technically independent of the Gulf nation’s government. However, as well as owning City, Mansour is deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.

In addition, German newspaper Der Spiegel published allegations in April, summarised by The Athletic here, that Mansour disguised millions of pounds in additional funding to the club by sending the money via UAE-based companies linked to the state. City have not commented on Der Spiegel’s latest allegations.

The UAE has been accused by Amnesty International of being “one of the most brutal police states in the Middle East,” while homosexuality is punishable by death.

The report concludes: “Longer-term, it raises questions about what values — and whose values — the city represents.

“The potential for the relationship to become an ethical, political and economic liability are growing against the backdrop of concerns about the foreign policy and geo-politics of authoritarian regimes.

“Manchester’s self-image as a vibrant, open, tolerant city may be compromised if the council is seen as aiding elites from authoritarian regimes to generate investment returns that shore up their political and economic power back home.”

E31-AA589-49-CB-4-AAD-842-A-9-D6-A44391-A9-D.png


Can't find the report. Probably not uploaded yet.

www.sheffield.ac.uk

Centre for Research into Accounting and Finance in Context

CRAFiC is at the heart of the debate about the role of accounting and finance in the development of inclusive and sustainable societies
www.sheffield.ac.uk www.sheffield.ac.uk
Click to expand...

Hahah what is this shit?

Written and shared by a bunch of lying cunts who have a negative angle on all things MCFC and Abu Dhabi.

Investing in Manchester is now a bad thing. Or should I say the blue side.

The sheikh has seriously put the shit up a lot of influential people of a certain colour and they use the most biased powerful platform at their disposal the corruptible media.

Run along you lying lackies, run along.
 
hertsblue said:
Oh look, Dippers play a friendly and a report on main BBC page almost immediately where our game had nothing at all on the main pages
Click to expand...

Frankly, did you expect anything different ? How many times do we have to win this league in order to be respected as The Champions ? For the media it's all about clicks nowadays. I've given up caring about it anymore.
 
blueste41 said:
So at what level does this start at-cleaner, catering assistant, production assistant? What your suggesting is a nonsense, my wife is an exec at the BBC if the salary wasn't commensurate to the industry she wouldn't be there.
Click to expand...
Ask her why they sent Stone thousands of miles to cover United friendly games then when he’s meant to be a Manchester football correspondent. And why I can find any mention of the champions’ friendly score on their football page yet there’s loads of incidental stories from Stone about their friendly games.

Complete waste of licence money. I stopped paying after this. The sooner it crashes the better. There’s a reason two million people stopped paying last year.
 
manchester blue said:
Ask her why they sent Stone thousands of miles to cover United friendly games then when he’s meant to be a Manchester football correspondent. And why I can find any mention of the champions’ friendly score on their football page yet there’s loads of incidental stories from Stone about their friendly games.

Complete waste of licence money. I stopped paying after this. The sooner it crashes the better. There’s a reason two million people stopped paying last year.
Click to expand...
To be fair it was a blessing in disguise ... for Pep.
 
BBC Football reporting at it's best.

Explains it all.

The Reds face RB Salzburg in their next pre-season game on Wednesday before playing Manchester City in the Community Shield at Wembley on Saturday, 30 July.

Oh!

Nunez scored 4 goals in the 2nd half, so you can imagine the match report and the giddy Scouser comments.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Now I have read the whole report. It is comprehensive but very biased because it does not include any of the benefits brought into Manchester because of the regeneration which has happened. Its entire focus is on the income from housing and the so-called human rights record of Abu Dhabi (which as others have pointed out is much better than most other Middle East countries and places like China and the USA.)
I am certain that the whole focus of the council's involment in this deal from day one was not to provide housing income but to help regenerate the City of Manchester. That regeneration has been a staggering success which has been lauded across the world.
The only section of this report which would alarm me is the way most of the finances are apparently handled offshore which means that only a tiny amount of corporation tax is being paid by the Manchester Life Venture. No mention is made of council tax and business rate income though and this would presumably benefit the City Council directly.
It is a hatchet job. Without the investment from Sheikh Mansour Ancoats and surrounding area would still be a waste land and Beswick would still be dominated by disused industry and chemical pollution. I notice that the research has been funded by two quangos which are heavily funded by public money. Are the researchers arguing that the huge investment in East Manchester should have been paid for purely by the taxpayers and ratepayers?
Click to expand...
I think the labels you are looking for at the end are Western and Caucasian.

Assuming that all of this land was available at such an 'undervalued' price, makes you wonder why no-one else decided to invest in it really................
 
Ubiquitous said:
I did a bit of digging and the hit-piece report was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. So that means the report was paid for by taxpayer money to the tune of £458K. Nice one - we could have paid for nine coppers or nurses for a year the price of this one report.

‘orrible lot, those London-based snide journalists. Our council has done a lot wrong but the partnerships they have fostered to help develop and improve our city are to be admired and defended, not subject to Tax-payer funded hit-pieces.
Click to expand...
Can't wait for the public funded report and in depth articles on Rat-Boys investments into the City.

What do you mean I shouldn't be holding my breath.................!?!
 
halfcenturyup said:
Had a quick read through it. It's all the University of Sheffield, FFS. Both these "independent researchers" CRAFiC and Urban Institute are UoS organisations. Isn't that where one of these new sports finance experts sits, pontificating on City?

Anyway, the report isn't that bad, apart from over-emphasising the human rights aspects and potential political fallout from a relationship with AD. "May affect the city's ability to attract talent". In what universe?

Typical intellectual stuff written by people who don't have the responsibility to regenerate a City quickly in a frighteningly difficult economic environment. I suspect they all wear sandals.

Can't really argue with the conclusions, though, as far as they go, but posters on here have already raised some issues that don't seem to have been properly taken into account in the report, imo.
Click to expand...
The bit in bold deserves special praise - lovely bit of writing...........
 
halfcenturyup said:
Had a quick read through it. It's all the University of Sheffield, FFS. Both these "independent researchers" CRAFiC and Urban Institute are UoS organisations. Isn't that where one of these new sports finance experts sits, pontificating on City?

Anyway, the report isn't that bad, apart from over-emphasising the human rights aspects and potential political fallout from a relationship with AD. "May affect the city's ability to attract talent". In what universe?

Typical intellectual stuff written by people who don't have the responsibility to regenerate a City quickly in a frighteningly difficult economic environment. I suspect they all wear sandals.

Can't really argue with the conclusions, though, as far as they go, but posters on here have already raised some issues that don't seem to have been properly taken into account in the report, imo.
Click to expand...

I was an export rep for the Middle East for many years, equipped neonatal units in hospitals all over the region. I've been to the UAE over thirty times and Abu Dhabi around twenty times as that's where the decisions are made. The company I worked for manufactured incubators, ventilators and whatnot out of Philadelphia.

Philadelphia is a human catastrophe, Abu Dhabi is not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top