Buying Success: Discuss

[George Hannah]

It's more important how the cash is invested than the amount....

I'd say equally but agree 100% otherwise

 

[Matty]

It's more important how the cash is invested than the amount....

I'd say equally but agree 100% otherwise

Yeah, I see what you mean, correctly investing £100 isn't going to get you very far!

Nice to know I'm right on the Optimus Prime front too.

 

[Centurions]

Ignoring the last five pages, because it's like my 4 year old having a paddy with his mate over which is the best Transformer, investment just gives you a chance of success, Leeds and Portsmouth showed just how easy it is to screw things up. The key is to have the right people at the helm to steer them in the right direction. Dippers were fine through Shankly to Dalglish, Scum struck lucky with Ferguson and we started along the road with Mancini and MP. Those that chop and change will fall by the side of the road, look at Spurs, should compete for everything but Levy is shortsighted and I really don't expect them to win anything in my lifetime or until he goes.

Cash just helps, but it doesn't win you anything.

Not in my lifetime? Careful, I'm sure someone once said similar about us...

 

[FanchesterCity]

A lifetime is a long time for many.

There's been a few 'didn't see that coming' cases in my life:

Forest's magnificent few years
Blackburn Rovers returning to the top
Leeds having a glimpse of former glory, then falling into near oblivion
Man United reigning for 25 years (nobody saw that coming back then)
Villa's European Success
Wimbledon's impressive spell
Oldham Athletic's impressive spell
Chelsea
City

There's plenty of other 'never thought I'd see that' instances. And there'll be more to come - although there's an argument to say that it's getting a LOT harder to upset the applecart due to the gulf in revenues between clubs these days.

 

[gouldybob]

Ignoring the last five pages, because it's like my 4 year old having a paddy with his mate over which is the best Transformer, investment just gives you a chance of success, Leeds and Portsmouth showed just how easy it is to screw things up. The key is to have the right people at the helm to steer them in the right direction. Dippers were fine through Shankly to Dalglish, Scum struck lucky with Ferguson and we started along the road with Mancini and MP. Those that chop and change will fall by the side of the road, look at Spurs, should compete for everything but Levy is shortsighted and I really don't expect them to win anything in my lifetime or until he goes.

Cash just helps, but it doesn't win you anything.

It's more important how the cash is invested than the amount. The issues Leeds and Portsmouth had were they were investing money they had to repay, whether it be to banks, financial institutions or a wealthy owner, when the success failed to materialise, as it did at Leeds, or when the owner wants his money back and won't pay anymore, as happened at Portsmouth, the wheels fall off very, very quickly indeed.

The situation at City is very different, and to anyone who isn't trying to be obtuse and look for ways to be critical of City, it's clear that we are in a very different situation to Leeds and Portsmouth. Our owner hasn't loaned us money with the intention of asking for it all back at some point, he's turned it into equity, and his actions both at City, and his involvement with MCC and the wider area, have made it abundantly clear he isn't looking to move on any time soon. The fact he's making City self reliant is the really important aspect here, he's lifted us up from a position of financial insecurity with his own wealth, but now he's strengthening the club itself to allow us to stand on our own two feet. When he eventually does sell the club, which happens to all clubs eventually, we won't still be reliant upon the Sheikh's deep pockets. We'll be a hugely successful club, with a wide array of revenue streams, and a strong future ahead of us.

In the short term you can "buy success" in the way people think City have been doing it (just throwing money at the problem with no thought of the future) however this is unsustainable and what you really need is a long term plan to maintain that success. United have long term success because they have turned themselves into a cash producing giant who isn't dependent upon an individual to support them (in fact they've been capable of surviving a leech of an owner and still been successful), City will be aiming to reach a comparable position of security. Ultimately both methods are "buying success", it just seems that one method is frowned upon whereas the other is lauded as the blueprint for success.

Oh, and it's clearly Optimus Prime and if your kid says anything else he's an idiot.

Wasn't looking particularly at where the money was from more what you did with it, Leeds especially failed on the pitch before failing off it, but I take your point. If Optimus Prime is the Red truck then he agrees with you.

 

[gouldybob]

Ignoring the last five pages, because it's like my 4 year old having a paddy with his mate over which is the best Transformer, investment just gives you a chance of success, Leeds and Portsmouth showed just how easy it is to screw things up. The key is to have the right people at the helm to steer them in the right direction. Dippers were fine through Shankly to Dalglish, Scum struck lucky with Ferguson and we started along the road with Mancini and MP. Those that chop and change will fall by the side of the road, look at Spurs, should compete for everything but Levy is shortsighted and I really don't expect them to win anything in my lifetime or until he goes.

Cash just helps, but it doesn't win you anything.

Not in my lifetime? Careful, I'm sure someone once said similar about us...

Yeah spotted that to late, but thanks for pointing it out now everybody knows my true identity . . . and my little secret.

 

[laserblue]

But with funds generated by the club.

That's the argument you need to destroy.

The more usual claim is that they're only spending their 'own' money. In fact, it's not their own money at all. It's the Glazers' money (and the banks' of course). The rags' spending is, and has been ever since they took over, nothing more than what the Glazers have graciously allowed them to spend. In recent seasons this has been capped at around £30 million but the Glazers are now sanctioning considerably more in a desperate attempt to ensure they at least finish in the top 4 next season.

 

[Balti]

A lifetime is a long time for many.

There's been a few 'didn't see that coming' cases in my life:

Forest's magnificent few years
Blackburn Rovers returning to the top
Leeds having a glimpse of former glory, then falling into near oblivion
Man United reigning for 25 years (nobody saw that coming back then)
Villa's European Success
Wimbledon's impressive spell
Oldham Athletic's impressive spell
Chelsea
City

There's plenty of other 'never thought I'd see that' instances. And there'll be more to come - although there's an argument to say that it's getting a LOT harder to upset the applecart due to the gulf in revenues between clubs these days.

indeed pal

but the rag cunts don't want to acknowledge that lol

we didn't start the fire.....

 

[jrb]

Think some of you might find this interesting.

A bit of time to kill. Figures taken from http://www.transferleague.co.uk/

Transfer spend so far this Summer of last seasons top 7 teams.

Arsenal.

Chelsea.

Liverpool.

Everton.

Manchester City.

Manchester United.

Spurs.

*Arsenal have since signed Calum Chambers for £16mill.
*City have probably signed Mangala. Waiting for the announcement. £30mill
*Liverpool would have signed Loic Remy(£8,5mill), but he failed a medical. I'm sure Liverpool will find a replacement.

 

[MaxCityBlue]

The reality is we are not allowed to spend what we (the club) really want to spend this season. We've been significantly hampered by Financial Fair Play (AKA: stop Manchester City dead in their tracks). You've got to hand it to those boys at UEFA though, they're determined not to allow anyone else to gatecrash their party.