You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
New Partnership - Citi Group
- Thread starter inbetween
- Start date
Keith Moon
Well-Known Member
The funny part is that Citigroup and Abu Dhabi Investment Authority are fighting a major legal battle at the moment. So I guess the deal pour some oil on troubled waters.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
all counts though, would rather have it than not
I agree, in fact I think it is much better commercial sense to balance out your major sponsors with as many other smaller as you can.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Not saying I wouldn't have it but just pointing out what the probable figure was.all counts though, would rather have it than not
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Not saying I wouldn't have it but just pointing out what the probable figure was.
Yes, apologies PB if my post inferred what you suggest.
I don't blame City for not revealing values after the FFP fiasco but we all need some guidance regarding the potential value each new sponsor is likely to be contributing so please continue to give us all your opinion.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Your post was right. Better to spread the revenue over a few smaller sponsorships than one bigger one. I don't think City need to guide us at all though as to the value of these. I'd imagine it's commercially sensitive to both us and the sponsor.Yes, apologies PB if my post inferred what you suggest.
I don't blame City for not revealing values after the FFP fiasco but we all need some guidance regarding the potential value each new sponsor is likely to be contributing so please continue to give us all your opinion.
The interesting thing, in the week that we've been discussing corruption at FIFA, is how many of these arrangements are connected to business the sponsor does or would like to do with Abu Dhabi? So Hays, who are one of our sponsors, have an exclusive contract with IPIC (Chairman: HH Sheikh Mansour) I believe. Was that connected to the sponsorship deal in some way? Obviously it's different to money going into someone's back pocket or Swiss bank account but the principle is the same. So my first thought on hearing this was "Are CitiBank about to settle their legal dispute in Abu Dhabi (where they appear to have been very naughty) and is this part of the settlement?"
So is it a clever bit of business or something a bit more sinister?
Not saying I wouldn't have it but just pointing out what the probable figure was.
i know you wasn't, just me being happy to have the more the merrier approach
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Your post was right. Better to spread the revenue over a few smaller sponsorships than one bigger one. I don't think City need to guide us at all though as to the value of these. I'd imagine it's commercially sensitive to both us and the sponsor.
The interesting thing, in the week that we've been discussing corruption at FIFA, is how many of these arrangements are connected to business the sponsor does or would like to do with Abu Dhabi? So Hays, who are one of our sponsors, have an exclusive contract with IPIC (Chairman: HH Sheikh Mansour) I believe. Was that connected to the sponsorship deal in some way? Obviously it's different to money going into someone's back pocket or Swiss bank account but the principle is the same. So my first thought on hearing this was "Are CitiBank about to settle their legal dispute in Abu Dhabi (where they appear to have been very naughty) and is this part of the settlement?"
So is it a clever bit of business or something a bit more sinister?
I'm sure that Sheikh M. had all his business deals in mind when he decided to buy City.
The criticism of early deals by ADUG was the perhaps over reliance on AD based Companies which passed FFP but were still AD related.
Your suggestion is that the reverse is now happening with sponsors seeing potential business with AD or our owners representatives by sponsorship. Frankly a win win for both parties.
We see ADUG financing deals with Manchester Council and University with no doubt similar local deals when CFG matures globally.
Add to that the profit City are now making and will continue to make and the overlap with business generally is vital with City at the hub of advertising AD and ADUG financial services at the same time as getting value for money for its major sponsor(s).
Regarding CitiBank specifically I doubt ADUG dare risk any involvement with them unless our owner either sees business as business (ie he will let the courts decide) or he has potentially reached agreement with them regarding the litigation.
Dribble
Well-Known Member
The last I heard was that ADIA was locked in a war of claim and counter-claim with Citibank albeit the feeling was that Citibank had been 'very naughty' as you put it.Your post was right. Better to spread the revenue over a few smaller sponsorships than one bigger one. I don't think City need to guide us at all though as to the value of these. I'd imagine it's commercially sensitive to both us and the sponsor.
The interesting thing, in the week that we've been discussing corruption at FIFA, is how many of these arrangements are connected to business the sponsor does or would like to do with Abu Dhabi? So Hays, who are one of our sponsors, have an exclusive contract with IPIC (Chairman: HH Sheikh Mansour) I believe. Was that connected to the sponsorship deal in some way? Obviously it's different to money going into someone's back pocket or Swiss bank account but the principle is the same. So my first thought on hearing this was "Are CitiBank about to settle their legal dispute in Abu Dhabi (where they appear to have been very naughty) and is this part of the settlement?"
So is it a clever bit of business or something a bit more sinister?
Is this now close to being settled?