It's a step down the road towards us becoming a normal business. We should be in a position to sustain our progress.This is incredibly big news. The Sheikh has sold 13 % of City, lock stock and barrel. It is of course the easiest way to claw a bit of that cash back which he's spent, but I'm assuming that this will come with a big positive for City in terms of worldwide exposure. Wow. Not sure how I feel about this to be honest.
rags on it already and some know whats on the horizon even if the title is misleading
http://www.redcafe.net/threads/sheikh-mansour-sells-13-of-city-for-£265m.411960/
No, but it could still go the way of Arsenal. That said we are still a long, long way off that kind of ownership structure, and I doubt ADUG/SM would ever want to relinquish main control.
Simon Stone
BBC Sport
Posted at08:49
Big news coming out of Manchester City this morning with the club revealing a $400m investment from China.
I am told this should not be regarded as the start of an exit strategy from the current owners and that Sheik Mansour remains 100% committed to the club.
The way I see it, it's the price he's had to pay to get the most sought after agreement in football imo. He won't have wanted to give up any of the company, but to get the backing of China's leaders then you have to give them a proper taste. With now a vested interest in CFG, they really are commited to making City the dominant force in China, which he has seen as being worth the 13%.
This is incredibly big news. The Sheikh has sold 13 % of City, lock stock and barrel. It is of course the easiest way to claw a bit of that cash back which he's spent, but I'm assuming that this will come with a big positive for City in terms of worldwide exposure. Wow. Not sure how I feel about this to be honest.
It's a step down the road towards us becoming a normal business. We should be in a position to sustain our progress.
Haha, it's staggering that even now they are still in denial. "corrupt, money laundering, cheating ffp, bankrupt if the sheik leaves, no value in city brand, dodgy sponsors"
As I read it, he claws no cash back, because the sheik hasn't sold existing shares but instead, CFG have released additional shares which the Chinese have bought, hence the money going into CFG, not the sheik's hands
The sheik's holding is therefore diluted, but the overall entity is arguably worth more with the additional investment, hence overall a neutral move for the sheik personally from a financial perspective
As for questions from others about FFP or 'what percentage of this money belongs to city' - you are barking up the wrong tree. A holding company can choose to move that money into whichever subsidiaries it wishes, be it all to Manchester city, all to NY, split across several, create a new subsidiary, keep it at group level, etc.
You can spend whatever you like on players, providing that the bottom line meets FFP. As I said in the Messi thread, our net profit in the next financial year (2016/17) could be around £70m, meaning we could buy Messi and pay his wages anyway. But we've now got the cash in the bank to do this.
I didn't spot that having seen the news about 5 minutes ago and dived onto here. Will go and have a read now.
Doesn't FFP work on a 3 year rolling cycle?But FFP forces us to "break even", so in the scenario you mention that means City would have a net spend of £70m allowed on players (obviously this is £70 amortised spending, plus wages etc, but lets not confuse the matter!). The $400m is in the bank, but as it isn't actually part of the profit/loss figures does it really matter? We could have $1Billion in cash in the bank but, as far as FFP/UEFA are concerned, we can only spend what we have earned within 1 specific financial year.
That raises another question I have wondered about. Lets say, for ease of argument, that City make a profit of £100m next year. That's £100m we can spend on players if we want. However, after purchases/sales etc we actually on spend £60m. So we finish the year with a net profit of £40m. Next financial year we make a smaller profit, £10m. Under FFP can we only spend £10 net, or can we spend £50m net, as we've got leftover profit from the previous year?