Chinese Consortium invests $400m in CFG

coleridge said:
TBH I just used the last line version to calculate $3bn.
Click to expand...
MMM shows a high level of correlation between theoretical values and achieved sales, whereas things like Deloitte Rich List only looks at revenue and Forbes (which seems to use the Enterprise Value metric) doesn't show such a high correlation. Simoly speaking EV uses debt as a positive, which adds to value, whereas MMM treats it as a negative, meaning the Forbes valuation of heavily leveraged or indebted clubs tends to be significantly higher than the MMM one.

Interestingly, Tom Markham valued us at just under £1bn based on last year's accounts but I think he excluded the stadium, which he claims is rented and that we aren't responsible for the upkeep of. While he's right that we don't own it, we operate it via a finance lease rather than rent it, which effectively gives us the benefits and risks associated with ownership.
 
bluezippy said:
Yes, I must be a Rag, because I have an opinion on something, that is slightly different than your own!.... Idiot!
Click to expand...
Was just being honest pal.
Your response sounded like it came from a rival fan jealous of us.
Wasn't expecting your post and it sounded like you was trying to cause a reaction and it did from me.
 
Gary James said:
I think it's pretty clear to anyone who has watched NYCFC play that the ambition of the CFG is huge and that all these clubs will grow and develop. MCFC will be one part of this but if income, support etc in NYCFC or elsewhere eclipses MCFC then that club would be potentially more significant to the global business. However, the PL remains the leading League in terms of income and attractiveness to overseas markets. While that scenario exists then MCFC will be the dominant force. Personally, if every part of the group grows and MCFC's income is not as great as NYCFC then I'd only worry if MCFC were failing, but my gut feel is that no matter how the global businesses grow MCFC will also continue to grow and develop. If my club was being asset stripped to fund developments in other businesses I'd worry but actually all of this is benefitting MCFC. Good time to launch a new badge of course!
Click to expand...
Hope that doesn't mean the new badge has a big fucking wall on it Gary
 
manimanc said:
This is from the same subject on ragcafe. Come on own up, which one of you is this?
Fantastic response has got their knickers in a right twist.
I think a few of them are having a proper meltdown.
Can't stop laughing.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that Barca84 can show his face on any City related thread when 2 blues completely and utterly destroyed him some months back after he tried to take the moral high ground regarding our owner and human rights, only to be exposed as a blatant hypocrite by one of those blues who rifled through his post history and found a comment relating to a rumoured Qatari takeover of United which he (Barca84) was largely supportive of! I've never seen someone disappear from a thread so quickly but I've noticed he's started to sneak back on the City threads of late spouting his usual nonsensical bullshit. This is someone who never fails to miss an opportunity to rant about empty seats yet told everyone on there last week that as long as van Gaal remains manager he isn't going to be attending any United matches. The **** should be on stage.

Anyway, talking of moral high ground this comment made me laugh - the only surprise is that it wasn't posted by Barca84:

What would bother me far, far more than that if I were a City fan is that the royal family are able to pump 1bn into a football club in Northern England, but not spare a penny to take in a single Syrian or Yemeni refugee. But Mansour's a classy guy right?
 
How mad is that though, Mansour has sold 13% and it's more than what he paid for Man City back in 2008. The Utd fans in denial can't deny that fact.
 
Long time lurker, only a marginal poster but the value of CFG implied by this deal is more than $3.0 billion. The Chinese have paid for a minority share of 13%, which carries less rights than a majority shareholder would have. Once you add a 'control premium' in the order of 10-30%, the real value of the 100% shareholding would be significantly higher.
 
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.