Luke Brattan: Who ??

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

So that confirms it, you simply don't understand it. The CFG is beyond your comprehension. You don't think having successful sides affiliated to City in other markets will be financially beneficial? Do you think United have the highest revenues because they sell the most chicken balti pies each week? Or do you think they have the highest revenues because they have a huge global fan base? A global fan base that allows them to sell their tat all over the world. Why do you think United can sell sponsorship for so much money? Chevrolet don't sell to the UK market yet pay United a ridiculous amount of money to have their name on their shirt.
Why? Because of a huge global fan base.

The sole purpose of CFG is to raise our global profile, that's how it benefits us.

It's honestly so simple.

No, it really isn't beyond my comprehension. Thanks.

So you're hypothesising that our links to the CFG, will earn us increased commercial revenue via just 'spreading the word' of MCFC?

So we'll sell more City shirts in New York because of NYCFC?

MCFC will get increased sponsorship deals from businesses wooed by the CFG?

All very nice in theory, and may prove true in time, but at the moment the CFG is a net drain to Manchester City; especially given we cannot include money generated via the other clubs in our calucations towards FFP. And that is the key point.

So at present, we are effectively subsiding the other clubs. That is what doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Lucky Toma]

RichardDunneOwnGoal is patently misguided to get so hot under the collar about this but I'm finding the broader arguments thrown back at him equally as preposterous, not to mention surprising.

Lost among the poster's misaimed ire he makes a pertinent point about United and the Glazers. Yet still the response from the rest of you has been 'We're just fans. We have no rights in financial matters concerning the club we support". Wow.

I'd say we have every right to hold an opinion on financial matters at the very least.

 

[Ducado]

There must be something in the water tonight, what a bizarre subject to be arguing about

 

[west didsblue]

RichardDunneOwnGoal is patently misguided to get so hot under the collar about this but I'm finding the broader arguments thrown back at him equally as preposterous, not to mention surprising.

Lost among the poster's misaimed ire he makes a pertinent point about United and the Glazers. Yet still the response from the rest of you has been 'We're just fans. We have no rights in financial matters concerning the club we support". Wow.

I'd say we have every right to hold an opinion on financial matters at the very least.

Anyone has a right to have an opinion on anything. No-one has a right to be consulted about a decision made by the club unless that person is a shareholder.

 

[Rolee]

No, it really isn't beyond my comprehension. Thanks.

So you're hypothesising that our links to the CFG, will earn us increased commercial revenue via just 'spreading the word' of MCFC?

So we'll sell more City shirts in New York because of NYCFC?

MCFC will get increased sponsorship deals from businesses wooed by the CFG?

All very nice in theory, and may prove true in time, but at the moment the CFG is a net drain to Manchester City; especially given we cannot include money generated via the other clubs in our calucations towards FFP. And that is the key point.

So at present, we are effectively subsiding the other clubs. That is what doesn't sit well with me.

Wasn't our tie-up with Nissan garnered on the back of our investment in Yokohama Marinos?

 

[schfc6]

No, it really isn't beyond my comprehension. Thanks.

So you're hypothesising that our links to the CFG, will earn us increased commercial revenue via just 'spreading the word' of MCFC?

So we'll sell more City shirts in New York because of NYCFC?

MCFC will get increased sponsorship deals from businesses wooed by the CFG?

All very nice in theory, and may prove true in time, but at the moment the CFG is a net drain to Manchester City; especially given we cannot include money generated via the other clubs in our calucations towards FFP. And that is the key point.

So at present, we are effectively subsiding the other clubs. That is what doesn't sit well with me.

Wow, you really don't get it do you? As you are obviously not up to speed here I'll leave it. I'll just say, have a look at the accounts, look at the global partners we are acquiring month on month. You don't think us acquiring a stake in Yokahama had anything to do with our Nissan deal?

Your gate money does not entitled you to have a say in how the club is ran, you like I hope that our hard earned is invested wisely, having read your posts, seen the reaction from litterally every other fan that has replied to you I'm much happier that ADUG are running MCFC and not you.

 

[citizen_maine]

RichardDunneOwnGoal is patently misguided to get so hot under the collar about this but I'm finding the broader arguments thrown back at him equally as preposterous, not to mention surprising.

Lost among the poster's misaimed ire he makes a pertinent point about United and the Glazers. Yet still the response from the rest of you has been 'We're just fans. We have no rights in financial matters concerning the club we support". Wow.

Not from me it hasn't. I've consistently asked him for evidence to back his belief that the club are financing this for the benefit of someone else. he has chosen to ignore my posts

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

Final point on this because we're never going to agree.

HH Sheikh Mansour owns the club. He's invested untold amounts of money into the club and it's his right as owner, to make the decisions for the club. He employees specialists in their fields to undertake the day to day operation of each department of the club, from the CEO, to the 1st Team Manager, to the head of the IT department. We, as fans, choose, as a hobby, to watch the team and we pay our hard earned to do so. That's it. Period. The people in charge of every other department report to their superiors until finally, it gets to the owner of the club. We have zero influence in any of that and that's how it should be. Our Season Ticket money does not give us entitlement to decide on the correct course of action of the business side of the club. It does, however, give us the entitlement to discuss who we feel should start against Palace.

On the issue at hand. You have absolutely no idea the structure of this particular deal, the motivations behind it for City, any of the CFA, Bolton, the player himself. People are employed by the club to make those decisions based on immensely more in depth knowledge and experience of running a football club.

For you to sit here and complain about your season ticket money being used to fund something you have absolutely no knowledge of apart from what you've read on the Internet is absolute beggar's belief.

Read our financial accounts from 2006/2007. Then read 2014/15. Then take your head for a shake and re-think your position on this.

"We have zero influence in any of that and that's how it should be"

And there it is.

We fundamentally disagree.

And I guarantee you your position would be different if our present ownership model wasn't as beneficial to us as it is at present.

As I said, we were very fortunate that Thaksin sold up when he did, and to who he did, as I doubt you'd be advocating the complete disassociation of the club from its supporters in any other scenario.

And that's your hypocrisy.

I accept the foreign ownership model, as long as it's responsible like ours, I just think the supporters should be recognised as a greater core of the club than you do.

Supporters in this country have an increasingly insignificant voice, and that isn't how football should be. Football clubs are more than corporations and franchises, beneath all of your posturing you know this, and that's your inherent dishonesty.

 

[Yates]

There must be something in the water tonight, what a bizarre subject to be arguing about

Very much so although I'm enjoying reading it regardless

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

RichardDunneOwnGoal is patently misguided to get so hot under the collar about this but I'm finding the broader arguments thrown back at him equally as preposterous, not to mention surprising.

Lost among the poster's misaimed ire he makes a pertinent point about United and the Glazers. Yet still the response from the rest of you has been 'We're just fans. We have no rights in financial matters concerning the club we support". Wow.

I'd say we have every right to hold an opinion on financial matters at the very least.

They don't even see what they've become.

 

[malg]

Not happy about this, at all.

It's Manchester City football club who will be charged with this lad, not the CFG or Melbourne. It's money that'll be taken from our pockets. Marked up on our books.

Are we subsidising the tinpot clubs in the CFA now?

This is were a percentage of our season ticket renewals are being siphoned off to? The regular ticket price increases are going towards? Money from our pockets going towards some tinpot club in Melbourne/New York?

Do we receive any income whatsoever from the other clubs in the CFG?

As far as I know even if we did we wouldn't be able to count it under FFP, so it'd be more or less an irrelevance to us.

Really don't like this.

Christ, that comes across as really fucking arrogant. 'Some tinpot club'........haven't City become the big I am.

 

[S04]

This is like some guy liking Coca-Cola having issues with The Coca-Cola Company manufacturing Fanta, Sprite and Orange juice as well..

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

Not from me it hasn't. I've consistently asked him for evidence to back his belief that the club are financing this for the benefit of someone else. he has chosen to ignore my posts

It's a stupid point.

We're all speculating to a degree, none of us are in full possession of Manchester City's financial accounts.

I'm talking hypothetically fundamentally: what I believe to be right, and what I don't.

I think the core supporters of this club are more than faceless consumers for a corporate franchise, patently many here disagree, much to my amazement.

 

[markbmcfc]

We're just fans. We have no rights in financial matters concerning the club we support". Wow.

....but we don't have rights? We're not employed by the club and we're not shareholders.

We can have our opinions, but we have no rights to influence policy and our season ticket purchases don't give us the authority to odd judgement on transactions we know nothing about.

If he'd said "I don't like this, don't see the point and can't see how this player will have a future at City, strange decision by the club", I doubt his post would have even seen a reply never mind prompted such a debate.

There's a very fine line between opinion and entitlement. He's the wrong side of it.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Gold haven't seen a bunch of you being Clarkied and wound up by comedy like this in ages! Nice work Dunnie

 

[Utter bobbins]

Gold haven't seen a bunch of you being Clarkied and wound up by comedy like this in ages! Nice work Dunnie

You think, you have given him an ideal get out

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

Christ, that comes across as really fucking arrogant. 'Some tinpot club'........haven't City become the big I am.

A club that's existed 5 minutes and has a large proportion of fans who can't stand MCFC and its supporters, and another that was founded 6 years ago?

Yes, tinpot clubs.

 

[Lucky Toma]

....but we don't have rights? We're not employed by the club and we're not shareholders.

We can have our opinions, but we have no rights to influence policy and our season ticket purchases don't give us the authority to odd judgement on transactions we know nothing about.

If he'd said "I don't like this, don't see the point and can't see how this player will have a future at City, strange decision by the club", I doubt his post would have even seen a reply never mind prompted such a debate.

There's a very fine line between opinion and entitlement. He's the wrong side of it.

Accept and agree with that Mark. But felt the opposing view strayed over the line too into unquestioning subservience.

 

[markbmcfc]

"We have zero influence in any of that and that's how it should be"

And there it is.

We fundamentally disagree.

And I guarantee you your position would be different if our present ownership model wasn't as beneficial to us as it is at present.

As I said, we were very fortunate that Thaksin sold up when he did, and to who he did, as I doubt you'd be advocating the complete disassociation of the club from its supporters in any other scenario.

And that's your hypocrisy.

I accept the foreign ownership model, as long as it's responsible like ours, I just think the supporters should be recognised as a greater core of the club than you do.

Supporters in this country have an increasingly insignificant voice, and that isn't how football should be. Football clubs are more than corporations and franchises, beneath all of your posturing you know this, and that's your inherent dishonesty.

You're completely missing the point.

This has absolutely nothing to do with fans and the closeness to the club. You will find that City engage with its supporters impressively more than most clubs do.

This is about your earlier comments and you believing your season ticket money entitled you to make a judgement on the decision making process at the top level. Mainly on a decision you have no actual knowledge of its reasoning.

It's lunacy and that's what people are trying to get across to you.

 

[EalingBlue2]

You think, you have given him an ideal get out

If it isn't a Clarkie that would be even funnier