CFG acquire Mumbai City - Yokohama J league champions

Marvin said:
Are City greater as the kingpin of an international group, or are we weakened by subsidising loss-making international ventures?

There was much excitement when the $500m investment in CFG was announced, but this is the background: investments in clubs other than Man City. I can see that clubs like NYC may benefit from being linked to Man City, but do Man City see benefits?

I can think of the odd player e.g., Aaron Mooy, but generally, it looks like City are pumping money into overseas football clubs. There must be some synergies but they are vague. MBappe in a Man City shirt would not be vague.

I do like the idea of City being part of a big family of international clubs, but about 0.0001% of my emotional investment is vested with the overseas clubs, and the rest is with Man City. From what I understand all but Girona are loss-making, (and they were relegated and part-owned anyway), so wouldn't the fans of Man City be happier still if the US$500m went direct into Man City?

As we see with Man Utd, a poorly managed club can haemorrhage money. Can CFG really effectively managed a huge number of overseas football clubs? I doubt this model has much chance of success. People think Khaldoon etc is a genius, and super intelligent guy, well he may be but he only has two eyes and one brain and limited capacity to focus.

Generally, financial markets frown massively on companies that aggressively expand overseas because it is a managerial disaster.
Click to expand...

I see it as a carpet bagging strategy across the various big global leagues. Give it 20 or 30 years and one or two of the leagues outside of Europe might be massive - they have the scope to be massive if you consider consolidation. The European league are longstanding and there is massive resistance to change but we all see the potential for a Europe wide super league.

I could see that happening quite easily in Asia. Take the biggest clubs from Australia, China, India, Thiland etc. Right now these clubs have very little recognition but the scope for fans is massive / off the scale big. Who knows how each league will develop / will they consolidate / How big will they get. CFG have all the biggest leagues covered now so if it blows up they are in a great position.

That is my take on the business model. A punt on one or more of these leagues/clubs getting really big.
 
oakiecokie said:
Your negativity at times is unbelievable.
Click to expand...
You can call it negativity, I would call it asking a legitimate question about City's international business strategy.

City's managerial focus and resources are being spread around the globe in the expectation that the whole becomes larger and each club benefits. That's extraordinarily difficult to do and most commercial companies which try this expensive expansion plan fail because they become overstretched and their management lacks focus on the local area in which they are operating.
 
Good addition.

India is a huge market , with football growing there. As others have said , this is marketing / PR as well , with a view to increase the fan base and other sponsorship activities
 
Marvin said:
Are City greater as the kingpin of an international group, or are we weakened by subsidising loss-making international ventures?

There was much excitement when the $500m investment in CFG was announced, but this is the background: investments in clubs other than Man City. I can see that clubs like NYC may benefit from being linked to Man City, but do Man City see benefits?

I can think of the odd player e.g., Aaron Mooy, but generally, it looks like City are pumping money into overseas football clubs. There must be some synergies but they are vague. MBappe in a Man City shirt would not be vague.

I do like the idea of City being part of a big family of international clubs, but about 0.0001% of my emotional investment is vested with the overseas clubs, and the rest is with Man City. From what I understand all but Girona are loss-making, (and they were relegated and part-owned anyway), so wouldn't the fans of Man City be happier still if the US$500m went direct into Man City?

As we see with Man Utd, a poorly managed club can haemorrhage money. Can CFG really effectively managed a huge number of overseas football clubs? I doubt this model has much chance of success. People think Khaldoon etc is a genius, and super intelligent guy, well he may be but he only has two eyes and one brain and limited capacity to focus.

Generally, financial markets frown massively on companies that aggressively expand overseas because it is a managerial disaster.
Click to expand...
I think being part of a larger group gives us huge leverage to increase sponsorship and allows us to build awareness of City across the world.
Being part of a larger group also allows us to hugely reduce costs in back-office-functions etc. That's a major advantage for us against our rivals.
It will be a long time before any overseas leagues overtake the financial power of the Premier League. Given the huge growth in the USA it is possible the MLS could one day be a major player in world football. It would be interesting to see what happens if that happens and whether New York City FC then becomes the CFG kingpin but this would take decades. Certainly some of this new investment will fund a new stadium in New York and the new events arena at the Etihad campus. We can only spend direct football income on new players so we will have to keep growing the Manchester City brand overseas to flourish.
 
Marvin said:
You can call it negativity, I would call it asking a legitimate question about City's international business strategy.

City's managerial focus and resources are being spread around the globe in the expectation that the whole becomes larger and each club benefits. That's extraordinarily difficult to do and most commercial companies which try this expensive expansion plan fail because they become overstretched and their management lacks focus on the local area in which they are operating.
Click to expand...

it’s a good job our owner understands globalisation and has an insight into how the future of football broadcasting will develop in the 5G world and beyond. You come over as having as agile a relationship with the future as the Brexit Party (sorry). Silver Lake are visionaries and they’ve sunk a huge stake into CFG - with a view to making a hefty return. What does that tell you about their expectations for our income over the next 10 years - given they only have 10 percent of the growth - CFGs income will be billions in 10 years time - sit back and enjoy the ride as we become a unique global sports and broadcasting franchise.
 
Gaudion M said:
I see it as a carpet bagging strategy across the various big global leagues. Give it 20 or 30 years and one or two of the leagues outside of Europe might be massive - they have the scope to be massive if you consider consolidation. The European league are longstanding and there is massive resistance to change but we all see the potential for a Europe wide super league.

I could see that happening quite easily in Asia. Take the biggest clubs from Australia, China, India, Thiland etc. Right now these clubs have very little recognition but the scope for fans is massive / off the scale big. Who knows how each league will develop / will they consolidate / How big will they get. CFG have all the biggest leagues covered now so if it blows up they are in a great position.

That is my take on the business model. A punt on one or more of these leagues/clubs getting really big.
Click to expand...
Maybe City's Indian or Chinese clubs will be successful and City will have regional super-powers as brothers. Obviously that is the hope, but it feels like roulette to me.

What is the source of City's success? It's down to capital investment and good management. Get the best sporting director, the best coaches, buy the best players. But this depends on really knowing your environment. Man Utd etc tried this to but their judgment was flawed. The safe-bet is to concentrate on your core holding.

You see analogies in business all the time. Companies like Tesco become the dominant players in their own market and try and replicate their model overseas. They buy up similar businesses overseas in the states, rebrand them, and years later sell out with massive losses because they don't know the market in which they are operating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.