You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
You'd think everything you say above is true, but paradoxically it isn't quite.
Yes, the courts are concerned about legality, but in their ruling they will judge whether something which prima facie is illegal (such as a rule that has the effect of artificially depressing salaries) is nevertheless justifiable in the context of the overall good of the game and for which no obvious legal alternative options are available. If the latter conditions are met, they may allow it even if it might otherwise be deemed illegal.
These aren't my thoughts btw. They are those of that Oxford professor of European law bloke who wrote a piece about FFP and the possibility of legal challenge.
So it isn't as black and white as you might imagine, and judgement about fairness may well come in to play.
Shaelumstash said:FanchesterCity said:whp.blue said:That isn't true they can compete at the highest level but it has been made much much harder
If any club was to bring through their own ranks a world class side money wouldn't be an issue just holding on to the youngsters whilst they progress
not easy or expected but not impossible (even if only just possible)
And that's one of the crux issues though... yes it's still technically possible, but if a group of clubs (or under the guise of UEFA) conspire to create a set of rules that severely diminishes competition, and cannot persuade a court is for the general welfare of the industry and consumer at large, then it has a problem.
They effectively deliberately create a barrier to entry.
It's like Warburtons and Tesco deciding that you have to 'earn' the right to buy an industrial breadmaker. Local bakers can't afford such a machine from the profits they make doing it by hand. IF they could borrow 100K to buy the machine, they could soon pay it back and compete with Warburtons and Tesco.
UEFA will argue that unfair competition (rich owners) devalues the sport and that's why they are 'safeguarding' the integrity of the game, which is a BENEFIT to consumers. In addition, they are preventing clubs from overstretching their finances and keeping more clubs in business.
It's easy for us to say UEFA are wrong, and we are right, but the arguments on both sides are quite strong (that's even before you start to look at how they go about implementing their 'safeguards').
Personally I expect FFP in principle will be approved by most courts, but the methods will be scrutinised and some aspects will be deemed illegal, or inappropriate. I can't see any ruling deeming it ALL to be wrong and totally scrapped, I just think it will be 'changed' (potentially significantly, and in our favour, but it could even get worse for us).
Remember, right now, and without FFP, one of our key advantages IS spending power. If the courts ruled that spending should be capped, even at Real, United, Barca et all, then we lose a lot of that advantage - and they have the advantage in 'heritage'.
We have to be very careful that changes to FFP don't end up being even worse for us!
I think you're making the often easy mistake of assuming courts are there as some kind of moral bastion to decide what is right and what is wrong, what is fair, and what isn't.
Unfortunately that's not the case. Courts are there to decide whether something is legal or illegal. I'm sure Dupont's case will be based around the fact that the current FFP rules are anti-competitive and restrict trade of private business.
UEFA's argument will probably be that the CL is an invitation only competition and they are free to decide who should qualify and how. It's going to be an interesting case, but I'm pretty confident the court won't be looking at this objectively about whether it's good for the spectacle of football.
You'd think everything you say above is true, but paradoxically it isn't quite.
Yes, the courts are concerned about legality, but in their ruling they will judge whether something which prima facie is illegal (such as a rule that has the effect of artificially depressing salaries) is nevertheless justifiable in the context of the overall good of the game and for which no obvious legal alternative options are available. If the latter conditions are met, they may allow it even if it might otherwise be deemed illegal.
These aren't my thoughts btw. They are those of that Oxford professor of European law bloke who wrote a piece about FFP and the possibility of legal challenge.
So it isn't as black and white as you might imagine, and judgement about fairness may well come in to play.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
I suppose our owners have a better chance to fight 'the establishment' than others, mainly because of Sheik M.'s investment in MCFC.
Establishments exist (and always have) irrespective of the area you care to look.
Politics, Religion, Business etc..
Even the legal profession has its elite companies who jealously protect their particular areas of influence.
I'm not saying they are all bad but where money can be made you will find some form of protectionism by the haves against the have nots and any pretenders.
We are a threat to the nice cosy expanding business the G14 see as their right so it is no wonder they are claiming foul.
Will there be splits in the G14 or even UEFA regarding our acceptance or will they remain united in their perceived collective strength, will the court case resolve anything or will it further cloud the issue.
No doubt ADUG will be prepared for all eventualities and I doubt they will be unduly worried by whatever happens because I feel they are already reaping the rewards that investment in MCFC brings.
In a way I am attracted to the possibility that we may be excluded from ECL because the contingency plan would surely be of revolutionary proportions and may galvanise the Global (rather than European) approach ADUG are now taking.
I am particularly impressed by the fact that Projects of a diverse nature have been concurrently planned and executed rather than a 'lets see how it goes first' mentality.
Just an opinion of course.
I suppose our owners have a better chance to fight 'the establishment' than others, mainly because of Sheik M.'s investment in MCFC.
Establishments exist (and always have) irrespective of the area you care to look.
Politics, Religion, Business etc..
Even the legal profession has its elite companies who jealously protect their particular areas of influence.
I'm not saying they are all bad but where money can be made you will find some form of protectionism by the haves against the have nots and any pretenders.
We are a threat to the nice cosy expanding business the G14 see as their right so it is no wonder they are claiming foul.
Will there be splits in the G14 or even UEFA regarding our acceptance or will they remain united in their perceived collective strength, will the court case resolve anything or will it further cloud the issue.
No doubt ADUG will be prepared for all eventualities and I doubt they will be unduly worried by whatever happens because I feel they are already reaping the rewards that investment in MCFC brings.
In a way I am attracted to the possibility that we may be excluded from ECL because the contingency plan would surely be of revolutionary proportions and may galvanise the Global (rather than European) approach ADUG are now taking.
I am particularly impressed by the fact that Projects of a diverse nature have been concurrently planned and executed rather than a 'lets see how it goes first' mentality.
Just an opinion of course.
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Doesn't really matter for them though does it? They could afford to buy no-one for the next 3 years and still qualify for the Chimps League without breaking sweat, before then picking up where they left off. The competition in the Premiership is fierce though, and if you stand still 4 other clubs will overtake you. This is the danger for City
fbloke said:For all of PSG's bluster they arent exactly taking the piss this window.
Doesn't really matter for them though does it? They could afford to buy no-one for the next 3 years and still qualify for the Chimps League without breaking sweat, before then picking up where they left off. The competition in the Premiership is fierce though, and if you stand still 4 other clubs will overtake you. This is the danger for City
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Correct but Euro 2016 is coming. There are some big clubs in French football like Lyon, and Marseille and they've spent a lot of money on stadiums.Exeter Blue I am here said:fbloke said:For all of PSG's bluster they arent exactly taking the piss this window.
Doesn't really matter for them though does it? They could afford to buy no-one for the next 3 years and still qualify for the Chimps League without breaking sweat, before then picking up where they left off. The competition in the Premiership is fierce though, and if you stand still 4 other clubs will overtake you. This is the danger for City
FanchesterCity
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
The original G14 was 'roughly' the top 14 clubs in Europe (whilst trying to get representatives from the likes of France in the group too). But for all intents and purposes it was 'the famous names'. They can be found on Wiki, but they aren't necessary to name here.
The G14 has since disbanded (in name) but the beliefs they held still remain: Namely that the biggest clubs in Europe draw the most glamour to the sport, and bring the most fans to the table. As such, they believe they bring most of the revenue to the table, if not directly, then indirectly because they're the clubs fans want to see playing. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't - that's another debate it itself!
However, a club at the top of the G14 league (say Real), are unlikely to be too bothered about Manchester City replacing a club towards the bottom of it (say Porto). Of course, Porto themselves won't be too pleased, a few clubs around them like Inter Milan or Ajax might also be slightly concerned.
But the progress of clubs like City and PSG has continued, to the point where we're overtaking the likes of Juventus, Liverpool and AC Milan, Clubs are are traditional giants, but going through a lean period of success (by their standards). So inevitably, more and more clubs are going to object to the likes of City and PSG.
And now, whilst we aren't really anywhere near the level of Bayern, United, Real or Barca in terms of prestige / heritage, those clubs (particularly United) are slowly starting to see us affecting them, or becoming a potential threat in the near future. Those turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas either.
So all in all, probably the only allies we have are PSG, and we are only allies through selfish reasons, not some altruistic notion of fairness.
SOME clubs in the G14 (especially the top ones) might buy into us bringing more glamour to the table and thus helping THEM to earn more money. In that situation, the'll willingly throw a lesser member of the G14 overboard in favour of City. But ONLY if they believe we're not an actual threat to their success. And therein lies the problem.
We DO bring something new to the CL, in the same way Chelsea did. We're good for the CL, in the same way the original G14 argued - we have top players, we are exciting, we're good for sponsorship etc. But we're a a threat too. Not an immediate threat to the very top clubs, but a potential one they'd rather not have.
UEFA's prestige is brought about the prestige of the CL, which is brought about by the prestige of the G14 (the G14's original argument all along). Platini's existence at UEFA is sustained largely but the support of the G14. He dare not challenge them in any significant way, or he faces losing their support, and being ousted one way or another).
It's a self-perpetuating boys club who ARE prepared to change their membership as and when it suits (losing the weakest members and replacing them with stronger ones), but a club with seemingly unlimited budget, and who have already started to demonstrate significant growth and increased success will NOT be welcomed easily (if at all). And that club is us.
I feel PSG is an oddball. In theory Paris should be one of the world's great footballing cities, but it's not. The French League is their Achilles heel. City's world wide exposure is as much through PL as it is through CL.
PSG rely on CL alone for most of their exposure, and it's hard to attract fans across the globe when your domestic league isn't popular.
Ultimately, I think this is why City are seen as a bigger threat than PSG. The French League simply doesn't cut the mustard (pardon the pun) and it ultimately be the factor that makes PSG less attractive than City for sponsors, players, and fans.
The original G14 was 'roughly' the top 14 clubs in Europe (whilst trying to get representatives from the likes of France in the group too). But for all intents and purposes it was 'the famous names'. They can be found on Wiki, but they aren't necessary to name here.
The G14 has since disbanded (in name) but the beliefs they held still remain: Namely that the biggest clubs in Europe draw the most glamour to the sport, and bring the most fans to the table. As such, they believe they bring most of the revenue to the table, if not directly, then indirectly because they're the clubs fans want to see playing. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't - that's another debate it itself!
However, a club at the top of the G14 league (say Real), are unlikely to be too bothered about Manchester City replacing a club towards the bottom of it (say Porto). Of course, Porto themselves won't be too pleased, a few clubs around them like Inter Milan or Ajax might also be slightly concerned.
But the progress of clubs like City and PSG has continued, to the point where we're overtaking the likes of Juventus, Liverpool and AC Milan, Clubs are are traditional giants, but going through a lean period of success (by their standards). So inevitably, more and more clubs are going to object to the likes of City and PSG.
And now, whilst we aren't really anywhere near the level of Bayern, United, Real or Barca in terms of prestige / heritage, those clubs (particularly United) are slowly starting to see us affecting them, or becoming a potential threat in the near future. Those turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas either.
So all in all, probably the only allies we have are PSG, and we are only allies through selfish reasons, not some altruistic notion of fairness.
SOME clubs in the G14 (especially the top ones) might buy into us bringing more glamour to the table and thus helping THEM to earn more money. In that situation, the'll willingly throw a lesser member of the G14 overboard in favour of City. But ONLY if they believe we're not an actual threat to their success. And therein lies the problem.
We DO bring something new to the CL, in the same way Chelsea did. We're good for the CL, in the same way the original G14 argued - we have top players, we are exciting, we're good for sponsorship etc. But we're a a threat too. Not an immediate threat to the very top clubs, but a potential one they'd rather not have.
UEFA's prestige is brought about the prestige of the CL, which is brought about by the prestige of the G14 (the G14's original argument all along). Platini's existence at UEFA is sustained largely but the support of the G14. He dare not challenge them in any significant way, or he faces losing their support, and being ousted one way or another).
It's a self-perpetuating boys club who ARE prepared to change their membership as and when it suits (losing the weakest members and replacing them with stronger ones), but a club with seemingly unlimited budget, and who have already started to demonstrate significant growth and increased success will NOT be welcomed easily (if at all). And that club is us.
I feel PSG is an oddball. In theory Paris should be one of the world's great footballing cities, but it's not. The French League is their Achilles heel. City's world wide exposure is as much through PL as it is through CL.
PSG rely on CL alone for most of their exposure, and it's hard to attract fans across the globe when your domestic league isn't popular.
Ultimately, I think this is why City are seen as a bigger threat than PSG. The French League simply doesn't cut the mustard (pardon the pun) and it ultimately be the factor that makes PSG less attractive than City for sponsors, players, and fans.
St Helens Blue (Exiled)
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2011
- Messages
- 13,601
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Martin Samuel at last saying it as it is...:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ir-Play-gift-club-owners-buy-Aston-Villa.html
Martin Samuel at last saying it as it is...:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ir-Play-gift-club-owners-buy-Aston-Villa.html
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Villa, the biggest club in Britain's second city, are struggling to find a buyer
UEFA claim financially astute clubs will thrive under FFP laws
But without heavy investment there is no way into the top 6 for Villa
Relative to Fabio Borini's £14m price tag, Luis Suarez is a snip at £75m
Yaya Toure will be staying at Man City, and perhaps should be given a Bafta for his outbursts via his shameless agent Dimitri Seluk
New Newcastle signing Remy Cabella has been written off as too frail, but Luka Modric got the same treatment only to prove his doubters wrong
England plummeted to 20th in the FIFA rankings, a more accurate placing
Ravindra Jadeja made England look silly with bat and ball on Saturday
Each January, the Birmingham Post publishes its rich list. The last one contained 20 names of Midlands business folk that, by the calculations of its experts, could afford to purchase Aston Villa outright. Yet still, nobody has.
Lord Bamford, chairman of JCB, prefers collecting vintage Ferraris. Sir Peter Rigby, founder of what is now Europe’s largest independent IT company, likes to fly helicopters and listen to classical music. Steve Morgan already has his hands full with Wolverhampton Wanderers. These are the breaks.
Even so, considering the Premier League broadcasts to a global market, one would think a buyer for the biggest club in Britain’s second city would not be so hard to find.
VIDEO Scroll down to watch Newcastle signing Cabella freestyling with France team-mates
+20
Hot property? Aston Villa - the second city's biggest club - are still on sale with no sign of a buyer
+20
Getting rid: Randy Lerner (left) put the club up for sale in May after eight years of mixed success at Villa Park
Yet, still, the For Sale sign resides on the unkempt lawn, as it has all summer. As it has since 2010, really, considering that was the year Martin O’Neill, Villa’s manager, walked out, unable to accept the significant shift in transfer policy that was the first indication of changing times.
Until that point, the owner, Randy Lerner, had shown great ambition in trying to drag Aston Villa into the elite. O’Neill spent over £80million net, achieving three consecutive sixth-place finishes, but faced with repeating that in a final push for glory, Lerner balked and instead implemented a sell-to-buy regime. This soon became more of a selling regime, by which time O’Neill was long gone.
Lerner was looking to follow almost from that point. Not as openly as now, true, but it has been rumoured for several years that he would be interested if the right buyer at the right price came along. Everton is on the market in a similar way, with Bill Kenwright accepting the financial reality of his stewardship.
So, a quick question for Michel Platini and the members of his UEFA brains trust: if Financial Fair Play is the gift to football club owners that you would have us believe, where is the queue of local businessmen seeking to take advantage of this windfall with Aston Villa?
In a matter of months of hard selling the asking price has already dropped by a quarter, to £150m. Yet still nothing. No rich Arabs, no interest from China, tumbleweed blows across America. Most importantly, no Brummies. Not even a sniff from the names on the Birmingham Post rich list, from Pete Waterman to Sir Euan Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe.
Towards the end of May, there was a briefly flickering light on the horizon. Tevfik Arif, a Kazakh-born property mogul and business associate of Donald Trump, was announced as a front-runner in the acquisition of Aston Villa. Bank of America Merrill Lynch, who are handling the sale, would not confirm Arif’s involvement, but did not deny it either. He was supposed to be No 1 in a list of six to eight suitors.
+20
Kitty: Martin O'Neill spent £80million net attempting to get Villa into the Champions League
+20
Bottled: Villa's best chance came in 2009, but they fell away despite a healthy advantage over Arsenal
Arif’s interest in sports business was said to include a share of Doyen Capital, a London-based hedge fund that has stakes in professional footballers, including Radamel Falcao. It all seemed to be falling into place. And then, within a week, the following announcement.
‘Mr Tevfik Arif has today asked us to make clear that other than being an avid sports fan himself, he: has no experience of running football clubs; has never met Randy Lerner; and neither he, nor any members of his family, or anyone acting on his behalf has any interest in acquiring Aston Villa Football Club; in addition, he has no involvement in any sports related businesses. We are happy to set out Mr Arif’s position.’
Since when, nothing. No more from Arif, silence from the six or so names in that evaporating queue behind him. Lerner must be concerned. Villa are not such a rotten proposition. They have a fine ground, a European pedigree in the pre-Champions League era, a loyal following.
Prince William supports them. So does Tom Hanks. They are centrally located in England, next to a major motorway, and easily accessible, and are the first, best- supported club of a major European city. They could be very big.
+20
Staying put: Lambert (right) and assistant Roy Keane are in charge while Villa's future remains uncertain
+20
Default: Villa eventually stayed up last term, but clocked up fewer than 40 points doing so
+20
Limited budget: Villa have had to look for cheaper signings this summer, with Joe Cole coming in
What the average fan might see as irrelevant beside the identity of the manager or the make-up of the first-team squad has value to a buyer. Paul Lambert, Christian Benteke or Ron Vlaar are passing through but a future king on the firm might put your club on the global map. Glamour, history, location, the trivial happenstance of the odd famous fan — these can all be useful selling factors.
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:Martin Samuel at last saying it as it is...:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ir-Play-gift-club-owners-buy-Aston-Villa.html
Villa, the biggest club in Britain's second city, are struggling to find a buyer
UEFA claim financially astute clubs will thrive under FFP laws
But without heavy investment there is no way into the top 6 for Villa
Relative to Fabio Borini's £14m price tag, Luis Suarez is a snip at £75m
Yaya Toure will be staying at Man City, and perhaps should be given a Bafta for his outbursts via his shameless agent Dimitri Seluk
New Newcastle signing Remy Cabella has been written off as too frail, but Luka Modric got the same treatment only to prove his doubters wrong
England plummeted to 20th in the FIFA rankings, a more accurate placing
Ravindra Jadeja made England look silly with bat and ball on Saturday
Each January, the Birmingham Post publishes its rich list. The last one contained 20 names of Midlands business folk that, by the calculations of its experts, could afford to purchase Aston Villa outright. Yet still, nobody has.
Lord Bamford, chairman of JCB, prefers collecting vintage Ferraris. Sir Peter Rigby, founder of what is now Europe’s largest independent IT company, likes to fly helicopters and listen to classical music. Steve Morgan already has his hands full with Wolverhampton Wanderers. These are the breaks.
Even so, considering the Premier League broadcasts to a global market, one would think a buyer for the biggest club in Britain’s second city would not be so hard to find.
VIDEO Scroll down to watch Newcastle signing Cabella freestyling with France team-mates
+20
Hot property? Aston Villa - the second city's biggest club - are still on sale with no sign of a buyer
+20
Getting rid: Randy Lerner (left) put the club up for sale in May after eight years of mixed success at Villa Park
Yet, still, the For Sale sign resides on the unkempt lawn, as it has all summer. As it has since 2010, really, considering that was the year Martin O’Neill, Villa’s manager, walked out, unable to accept the significant shift in transfer policy that was the first indication of changing times.
Until that point, the owner, Randy Lerner, had shown great ambition in trying to drag Aston Villa into the elite. O’Neill spent over £80million net, achieving three consecutive sixth-place finishes, but faced with repeating that in a final push for glory, Lerner balked and instead implemented a sell-to-buy regime. This soon became more of a selling regime, by which time O’Neill was long gone.
Lerner was looking to follow almost from that point. Not as openly as now, true, but it has been rumoured for several years that he would be interested if the right buyer at the right price came along. Everton is on the market in a similar way, with Bill Kenwright accepting the financial reality of his stewardship.
So, a quick question for Michel Platini and the members of his UEFA brains trust: if Financial Fair Play is the gift to football club owners that you would have us believe, where is the queue of local businessmen seeking to take advantage of this windfall with Aston Villa?
In a matter of months of hard selling the asking price has already dropped by a quarter, to £150m. Yet still nothing. No rich Arabs, no interest from China, tumbleweed blows across America. Most importantly, no Brummies. Not even a sniff from the names on the Birmingham Post rich list, from Pete Waterman to Sir Euan Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe.
Towards the end of May, there was a briefly flickering light on the horizon. Tevfik Arif, a Kazakh-born property mogul and business associate of Donald Trump, was announced as a front-runner in the acquisition of Aston Villa. Bank of America Merrill Lynch, who are handling the sale, would not confirm Arif’s involvement, but did not deny it either. He was supposed to be No 1 in a list of six to eight suitors.
+20
Kitty: Martin O'Neill spent £80million net attempting to get Villa into the Champions League
+20
Bottled: Villa's best chance came in 2009, but they fell away despite a healthy advantage over Arsenal
Arif’s interest in sports business was said to include a share of Doyen Capital, a London-based hedge fund that has stakes in professional footballers, including Radamel Falcao. It all seemed to be falling into place. And then, within a week, the following announcement.
‘Mr Tevfik Arif has today asked us to make clear that other than being an avid sports fan himself, he: has no experience of running football clubs; has never met Randy Lerner; and neither he, nor any members of his family, or anyone acting on his behalf has any interest in acquiring Aston Villa Football Club; in addition, he has no involvement in any sports related businesses. We are happy to set out Mr Arif’s position.’
Since when, nothing. No more from Arif, silence from the six or so names in that evaporating queue behind him. Lerner must be concerned. Villa are not such a rotten proposition. They have a fine ground, a European pedigree in the pre-Champions League era, a loyal following.
Prince William supports them. So does Tom Hanks. They are centrally located in England, next to a major motorway, and easily accessible, and are the first, best- supported club of a major European city. They could be very big.
+20
Staying put: Lambert (right) and assistant Roy Keane are in charge while Villa's future remains uncertain
+20
Default: Villa eventually stayed up last term, but clocked up fewer than 40 points doing so
+20
Limited budget: Villa have had to look for cheaper signings this summer, with Joe Cole coming in
What the average fan might see as irrelevant beside the identity of the manager or the make-up of the first-team squad has value to a buyer. Paul Lambert, Christian Benteke or Ron Vlaar are passing through but a future king on the firm might put your club on the global map. Glamour, history, location, the trivial happenstance of the odd famous fan — these can all be useful selling factors.
keith's curle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jun 2014
- Messages
- 633
Re: City & FFP (continued)
It's odd that having the need, and being allowed, to pump hundreds of millions into a club just to try to get your money back - and if you're very lucky a good bit more - makes a club a more attractive proposition. Odd, but true. Football was seriously messed up before FFP, FFP is just the ridiculous cherry on top.
It's odd that having the need, and being allowed, to pump hundreds of millions into a club just to try to get your money back - and if you're very lucky a good bit more - makes a club a more attractive proposition. Odd, but true. Football was seriously messed up before FFP, FFP is just the ridiculous cherry on top.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Re: City & FFP (continued)
Just wondering what value it is to the ADUG to have MCFC 'accepted' within the elite club 'old boys club' ?
Seems they all have something to fear from MCFC's current progress so why should ADUG aspire to belong with them ?
Nice from a status point of view I suppose but ADUG are not really interested in status are they, surely they are doing things differently and gaining kudos from all areas for putting their money into proper investments.
Sponsors recognise this, elite owners are fearing it and we are proud of it.
OK they are using our club as a vehicle to advertise their investment capability but we knew that from day one and our club was chosen as the best target for takeover.
Just wondering what value it is to the ADUG to have MCFC 'accepted' within the elite club 'old boys club' ?
Seems they all have something to fear from MCFC's current progress so why should ADUG aspire to belong with them ?
Nice from a status point of view I suppose but ADUG are not really interested in status are they, surely they are doing things differently and gaining kudos from all areas for putting their money into proper investments.
Sponsors recognise this, elite owners are fearing it and we are proud of it.
OK they are using our club as a vehicle to advertise their investment capability but we knew that from day one and our club was chosen as the best target for takeover.