City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[schfc6]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

FFP. Seems great to me, what can possibly go wrong. At the risk of being the subject of McNab's derision I'd like to add one thing..

A rule that prohibits investment and turns a blind eye to debt is arguably the stupidest rule of all time.


If it weren't for Sheikh Mansour and Abramovich our league would have gone the way of Scotland. If FFP was enforced United would be able to spend 20 times that of some of their league rivals.

If FFP is run to the letter ipof the law, Manchester United will win the league nearly every year, occasionally finishing second if they have an off year or a rival turns out an exception side. Look at the Dortmund and Bayern situation.
Bayern dominate, Dirtmund through a great coach and a great batch of exciting players they managed to win the league.

What happens next? Bayern sign their best two players. Nothing Dortmund can do, they are not allowed to compete thanks to 'the rules'.

It's ridiculous to suggest the rules are to protect anyone but the established elite. The rules will effectively finish Ajax, AC & Inter Milan, Valencia, the likes of Kiev & Shakhar will never be able to compete.

All European and domestic competetion will be effectively dead. Madrid or Barca in Spain, United perhaps Arsenal in England, Bayern in Germany & Juventus in Italy. United, Madrid, Barca & Bayern will fight it out for the CL.

If indeed Soriano is correct and we start to break even, our campus starts to produce not only first team players but sellable assets we maybe able to rival United. We need to grow rapidly in the next two years and I think the gate to the financial elite will close behind us.

We are growing faster than anyone, we have built some very solid foundations I think FFP will fortunately for us, close the door on the next City.

I think it benefits us in the medium and protects us long term and greatly increases our chance of immediate success, yet I still disagree.

The fans will suffer the most. Wenger can go on all he likes about fairness and financial doping, but I'm sure Arsenal fans would rather not pay £2000 a year for season tickets. United fans would prefer not to be forced to buy tickets to cup games. Although Moyes seems to have the fans interest at heart, he's keeping the costs down for the fans.

For FFP to work football will become an exclusive event, it will be like NFL, the super rich having a 'sky box' the rich having £3000 season tickets and your common man, the man in the street will have to pay through the nose for a friendly or a low profile cup game. Going go football will be something your regular football fan will do once a year.

Who or why will anyone bother supporting a less or smaller side? Take Bolton, FFP will prevent them from ever being competitive ever again. A Bolton fan won't even be able to dream about being bought. The dream will die.

For sets once double European champions will be confined to nothing more than a team making up the numbers. Any decent players not playing for the established will be snapped up.

Most Arse fans by far spend nothing like that. I pay £1,100 a season and for that I get every CL game, every FA Cup game and every PL game. Still expensive but few pay £2,000.

Fair enough, that's still double my ticket. But you can see what I'm saying? If a club needs to raise revenue, the fans are a great place to start.

I appreciate Arsenal feel City are buying our success, and the way you are ran I understand your frustrations. My bet is you'd feel worse if every time you challenged United they just bought your best players. Yes I understand we've done that. Nasri was the only one you actually still wanted. If we hadn't bought him, United would have.

If you and United are he only two realistic challengers, would you not be more annoyed if they just weakened you each summer? It's easier to stay ahead in a two horse race if you can out spend you closest rival. At least with City & Chelsea around completion is better.,

 

[Marvin]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

FFP. Seems great to me, what can possibly go wrong. At the risk of being the subject of McNab's derision I'd like to add one thing..

A rule that prohibits investment and turns a blind eye to debt is arguably the stupidest rule of all time.


If it weren't for Sheikh Mansour and Abramovich our league would have gone the way of Scotland. If FFP was enforced United would be able to spend 20 times that of some of their league rivals.

If FFP is run to the letter ipof the law, Manchester United will win the league nearly every year, occasionally finishing second if they have an off year or a rival turns out an exception side. Look at the Dortmund and Bayern situation.
Bayern dominate, Dirtmund through a great coach and a great batch of exciting players they managed to win the league.

What happens next? Bayern sign their best two players. Nothing Dortmund can do, they are not allowed to compete thanks to 'the rules'.

It's ridiculous to suggest the rules are to protect anyone but the established elite. The rules will effectively finish Ajax, AC & Inter Milan, Valencia, the likes of Kiev & Shakhar will never be able to compete.

All European and domestic competetion will be effectively dead. Madrid or Barca in Spain, United perhaps Arsenal in England, Bayern in Germany & Juventus in Italy. United, Madrid, Barca & Bayern will fight it out for the CL.

If indeed Soriano is correct and we start to break even, our campus starts to produce not only first team players but sellable assets we maybe able to rival United. We need to grow rapidly in the next two years and I think the gate to the financial elite will close behind us.

We are growing faster than anyone, we have built some very solid foundations I think FFP will fortunately for us, close the door on the next City.

I think it benefits us in the medium and protects us long term and greatly increases our chance of immediate success, yet I still disagree.

The fans will suffer the most. Wenger can go on all he likes about fairness and financial doping, but I'm sure Arsenal fans would rather not pay £2000 a year for season tickets. United fans would prefer not to be forced to buy tickets to cup games. Although Moyes seems to have the fans interest at heart, he's keeping the costs down for the fans.

For FFP to work football will become an exclusive event, it will be like NFL, the super rich having a 'sky box' the rich having £3000 season tickets and your common man, the man in the street will have to pay through the nose for a friendly or a low profile cup game. Going go football will be something your regular football fan will do once a year.

Who or why will anyone bother supporting a less or smaller side? Take Bolton, FFP will prevent them from ever being competitive ever again. A Bolton fan won't even be able to dream about being bought. The dream will die.

For sets once double European champions will be confined to nothing more than a team making up the numbers. Any decent players not playing for the established will be snapped up.

Most Arse fans by far spend nothing like that. I pay £1,100 a season and for that I get every CL game, every FA Cup game and every PL game. Still expensive but few pay £2,000.

I didn't realise that your season tickets cover Champions League and FA Cup games. Nowhere near as bad as I thought.

 

[Neil McNab]

Re: Sunday Press.

We made fewer losses under every other regime that's ever been at the club, the revenue from direct football related activities has hardly changed, this increase in turn over looks impressive but it's from a very narrow base and incredibly fragile.
Having said that the Sum's revenue has been made up of similar deals for 20 years, what it's got to do with football is beyond me.
A lot of people on here talking about a subject they know nothing about and so don't understand the figures.
If you don't know the difference between an asset and an expense you can't possibly understand any of this, Mourinho made of ass of himself with his "we made a profit in January" claim because he sold Matta and purchased two players who cost less, it doesn't work quite like that.
I'd like to see UEFA challenged in court over this, I'm all in favour of rules to level the playing field for all clubs and it doesn't have to have anything to do with financial control, rules regarding the make up of a clubs squad could achieve this.
UEFA wouldn't go that route for two reasons, it would deflate the transfer market, less money for the pigs at the trough and it would remove the advantage that the "Big Clubs With History" have for good, it's the only reason they are trying to use financial control.

For those that think our revenue will keep increasing because we have new deals coming online, do realise that other deals come to an end.
For our club to be genuinely self sufficient it would have to be at a state where another party would buy it, I can't see that happening.
History shows clubs that have had huge investment withdrawn have never been able to maintain their new level of performance, City may buck that trend but it's will take a decade

A decade you say I say within 5 years if the scum can get a 70m shirt deal when frankly they are shite and won't be anywhere near top 4 for next few season we can easily get 50m a year one..

This guys a joke mate.The bit that I`ve highlighted shows his poor judgement,as it also means other deals will be of a higher calibre from the ones that come to an end.

You're the joke, get back in your cracker!
Don't worry about things you don't even want to understand.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

I didn't realise that your season tickets cover Champions League and FA Cup games. Nowhere near as bad as I thought.

They get the first 7 Cup games free I believe.

 

[Burtonblue]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Not sure if already posted but a great piece by Samuel in the Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-squealing-UEFA-THATS-RICH-MARTIN-SAMUEL.html

Thanks
Excellent read that Danamy
The tide is turning with the media too. Maybe something to do with the fact they've never seen a team like this!

 

[Gillespie]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

I didn't realise that your season tickets cover Champions League and FA Cup games. Nowhere near as bad as I thought.

They get the first 7 Cup games free I believe.

True and anything over that's gets added to next seasons renewal.

 

[Damocles]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

We made fewer losses under every other regime that's ever been at the club, the revenue from direct football related activities has hardly changed, this increase in turn over looks impressive but it's from a very narrow base and incredibly fragile.

Sorry but you really are a bit stupid. The reason the losses were lower is that we had no one to bankroll them and no one was investing money in the club. When you expand a business that isn't doing great to start with, you tend to make big losses. And we're now competing in the CL every season instead of breathing a collective sigh of relief that we've scraped to 40 points.

And in 2007, the last accounts we prepared as a public company, turnover was £57m from all sources. In 2012/13 it was £271m with £40m alone coming from tickets and £88m from TV revenues, whcih I'd class as direct football related activities.

Nonsense I'm afraid, if you want to understand, read up on the differences between assets, liabilities and expenses and then you'll understand where the losses come from.

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

I didn't realise that your season tickets cover Champions League and FA Cup games. Nowhere near as bad as I thought.

They get the first 7 Cup games free I believe.

Yep..

 

[oakiecokie]

Re: Sunday Press.

A decade you say I say within 5 years if the scum can get a 70m shirt deal when frankly they are shite and won't be anywhere near top 4 for next few season we can easily get 50m a year one..

This guys a joke mate.The bit that I`ve highlighted shows his poor judgement,as it also means other deals will be of a higher calibre from the ones that come to an end.

You're the joke, get back in your cracker!
Don't worry about things you don't even want to understand.

You`re the simpleton if you think that any new Sponsorship deals will not be at a higher rate than previously.But then again you know everything about anything dont you,Mr Gump ??

 

[schfc6]

Re: Sunday Press.

A decade you say I say within 5 years if the scum can get a 70m shirt deal when frankly they are shite and won't be anywhere near top 4 for next few season we can easily get 50m a year one..

This guys a joke mate.The bit that I`ve highlighted shows his poor judgement,as it also means other deals will be of a higher calibre from the ones that come to an end.

You're the joke, get back in your cracker!
Don't worry about things you don't even want to understand.

Surely McNab can appreciate that future deals will be of greater value to current deals? Our growth commercially which is quite frankly astonishing will allow us to sign bigger and better deals year on year. I would imagine that makes sense to just about anyone? Large fan base, large deals, larger fan base, larger deals. Simply really. As the club grows, the revenues will grow.

 

[Neil McNab]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

And a few facts - or did I miss the profits we made under Swales, Lee and Shinawatra?

Yes wages need to be controlled and the Club knows this. It will be some years before we are self-sufficient and there is a significant stadium expansion that will need to be paid for.

However, we could only dream of being in such a healthy position under other regimes. For example, we have reached a point where the Club can choose between a range of potential sponsors on things like the kit.

Other evidence of our progress is that we no longer seem to have to pay well over the odds to recruit good players. Negredo and Jesus come to mind and there are reports that Fernando is coming on a free.

We made fewer losses under every other regime that's ever been at the club, the revenue from direct football related activities has hardly changed, this increase in turn over looks impressive but it's from a very narrow base and incredibly fragile.
Having said that the Sum's revenue has been made up of similar deals for 20 years, what it's got to do with football is beyond me.
A lot of people on here talking about a subject they know nothing about and so don't understand the figures.
If you don't know the difference between an asset and an expense you can't possibly understand any of this, Mourinho made of ass of himself with his "we made a profit in January" claim because he sold Matta and purchased two players who cost less, it doesn't work quite like that.
I'd like to see UEFA challenged in court over this, I'm all in favour of rules to level the playing field for all clubs and it doesn't have to have anything to do with financial control, rules regarding the make up of a clubs squad could achieve this.
UEFA wouldn't go that route for two reasons, it would deflate the transfer market, less money for the pigs at the trough and it would remove the advantage that the "Big Clubs With History" have for good, it's the only reason they are trying to use financial control.

For those that think our revenue will keep increasing because we have new deals coming online, do realise that other deals come to an end.
For our club to be genuinely self sufficient it would have to be at a state where another party would buy it, I can't see that happening.
History shows clubs that have had huge investment withdrawn have never been able to maintain their new level of performance, City may buck that trend but it's will take a decade.

-- Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:20 pm --

Guilty of not holding on properly whilst on your high horse. ;-)

How high is the horse of predictive text induced error spotting, puck oft you aunt!

Well Mr Mcnab, you seem awfully knowledgeable on financial matters at our club.
Infact if you are correct we are all screwed. Amazing that the richest man in the world seems to have been unable to get the correct advice and has landed himself in this mess.
Have you thought about offering your advice to those bunch if losers running our club or is it too late already?
Alternatively, you could just sit back and enjoy the ride and the amazing football like the rest of us simpletons ;-)

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

 

[Gillespie]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

FFP. Seems great to me, what can possibly go wrong. At the risk of being the subject of McNab's derision I'd like to add one thing..

A rule that prohibits investment and turns a blind eye to debt is arguably the stupidest rule of all time.


If it weren't for Sheikh Mansour and Abramovich our league would have gone the way of Scotland. If FFP was enforced United would be able to spend 20 times that of some of their league rivals.

If FFP is run to the letter ipof the law, Manchester United will win the league nearly every year, occasionally finishing second if they have an off year or a rival turns out an exception side. Look at the Dortmund and Bayern situation.
Bayern dominate, Dirtmund through a great coach and a great batch of exciting players they managed to win the league.

What happens next? Bayern sign their best two players. Nothing Dortmund can do, they are not allowed to compete thanks to 'the rules'.

It's ridiculous to suggest the rules are to protect anyone but the established elite. The rules will effectively finish Ajax, AC & Inter Milan, Valencia, the likes of Kiev & Shakhar will never be able to compete.

All European and domestic competetion will be effectively dead. Madrid or Barca in Spain, United perhaps Arsenal in England, Bayern in Germany & Juventus in Italy. United, Madrid, Barca & Bayern will fight it out for the CL.

If indeed Soriano is correct and we start to break even, our campus starts to produce not only first team players but sellable assets we maybe able to rival United. We need to grow rapidly in the next two years and I think the gate to the financial elite will close behind us.

We are growing faster than anyone, we have built some very solid foundations I think FFP will fortunately for us, close the door on the next City.

I think it benefits us in the medium and protects us long term and greatly increases our chance of immediate success, yet I still disagree.

The fans will suffer the most. Wenger can go on all he likes about fairness and financial doping, but I'm sure Arsenal fans would rather not pay £2000 a year for season tickets. United fans would prefer not to be forced to buy tickets to cup games. Although Moyes seems to have the fans interest at heart, he's keeping the costs down for the fans.

For FFP to work football will become an exclusive event, it will be like NFL, the super rich having a 'sky box' the rich having £3000 season tickets and your common man, the man in the street will have to pay through the nose for a friendly or a low profile cup game. Going go football will be something your regular football fan will do once a year.

Who or why will anyone bother supporting a less or smaller side? Take Bolton, FFP will prevent them from ever being competitive ever again. A Bolton fan won't even be able to dream about being bought. The dream will die.

For sets once double European champions will be confined to nothing more than a team making up the numbers. Any decent players not playing for the established will be snapped up.

Most Arse fans by far spend nothing like that. I pay £1,100 a season and for that I get every CL game, every FA Cup game and every PL game. Still expensive but few pay £2,000.

Fair enough, that's still double my ticket. But you can see what I'm saying? If a club needs to raise revenue, the fans are a great place to start.

I appreciate Arsenal feel City are buying our success, and the way you are ran I understand your frustrations. My bet is you'd feel worse if every time you challenged United they just bought your best players. Yes I understand we've done that. Nasri was the only one you actually still wanted. If we hadn't bought him, United would have.

If you and United are he only two realistic challengers, would you not be more annoyed if they just weakened you each summer? It's easier to stay ahead in a two horse race if you can out spend you closest rival. At least with City & Chelsea around completion is better.,

I was merely responding to an inaccuracy insofar as season ticket prices are concerned at the Emirates.

You have seemed it sensible to attribute views to me I don't hold.

Can I just make it clear that what I believe is as follows:

There are FFP rules now. If you comply I don't have a problem. I couldn't care less how much City spend. If its legal, it's legal. I don't care.

I am glad we sold Clichy to you ( a defensive liability if ever there was one).

I am glad we sold Adebayor to you, a troublemaker as found out by you, turfing him off to Spurs and still paying him £67k a week wages. (Actually, I do think thats wrong. Why should you be allowed to subsidise a club to loan a player they can't afford? I'd outlaw that).

I have no problem selling Kolo either. He was past his best.

I was disappointed. We sold Nasri. He was a good young developing prospect but hey, shit happens.

City are buying success, but what the fuck do you think happened with United, Chelsea previously?

Every club, by and large, buys success. That's the way it is.

Lastly, I think it's good to have wider competition. Who wants to see just one team win everything every year.... Boring and it will ultimately kill the competition.

 

[Burtonblue]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

We made fewer losses under every other regime that's ever been at the club, the revenue from direct football related activities has hardly changed, this increase in turn over looks impressive but it's from a very narrow base and incredibly fragile.
Having said that the Sum's revenue has been made up of similar deals for 20 years, what it's got to do with football is beyond me.
A lot of people on here talking about a subject they know nothing about and so don't understand the figures.
If you don't know the difference between an asset and an expense you can't possibly understand any of this, Mourinho made of ass of himself with his "we made a profit in January" claim because he sold Matta and purchased two players who cost less, it doesn't work quite like that.
I'd like to see UEFA challenged in court over this, I'm all in favour of rules to level the playing field for all clubs and it doesn't have to have anything to do with financial control, rules regarding the make up of a clubs squad could achieve this.
UEFA wouldn't go that route for two reasons, it would deflate the transfer market, less money for the pigs at the trough and it would remove the advantage that the "Big Clubs With History" have for good, it's the only reason they are trying to use financial control.

For those that think our revenue will keep increasing because we have new deals coming online, do realise that other deals come to an end.
For our club to be genuinely self sufficient it would have to be at a state where another party would buy it, I can't see that happening.
History shows clubs that have had huge investment withdrawn have never been able to maintain their new level of performance, City may buck that trend but it's will take a decade.

-- Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:20 pm --


How high is the horse of predictive text induced error spotting, puck oft you aunt!

Well Mr Mcnab, you seem awfully knowledgeable on financial matters at our club.
Infact if you are correct we are all screwed. Amazing that the richest man in the world seems to have been unable to get the correct advice and has landed himself in this mess.
Have you thought about offering your advice to those bunch if losers running our club or is it too late already?
Alternatively, you could just sit back and enjoy the ride and the amazing football like the rest of us simpletons ;-)

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".<br /><br />-- Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:31 am --<br /><br />

Well Mr Mcnab, you seem awfully knowledgeable on financial matters at our club.
Infact if you are correct we are all screwed. Amazing that the richest man in the world seems to have been unable to get the correct advice and has landed himself in this mess.
Have you thought about offering your advice to those bunch if losers running our club or is it too late already?
Alternatively, you could just sit back and enjoy the ride and the amazing football like the rest of us simpletons ;-)

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".

Oh, and by the way I trust the richest man in the world to know what he is doing and get better advice than you. So does just about everybody else here in case you haven't noticed and it's not me that started the argument and accusations in case it's slipped your non simpleton attention.

 

[Neil McNab]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Sorry but you really are a bit stupid. The reason the losses were lower is that we had no one to bankroll them and no one was investing money in the club. When you expand a business that isn't doing great to start with, you tend to make big losses. And we're now competing in the CL every season instead of breathing a collective sigh of relief that we've scraped to 40 points.

And in 2007, the last accounts we prepared as a public company, turnover was £57m from all sources. In 2012/13 it was £271m with £40m alone coming from tickets and £88m from TV revenues, whcih I'd class as direct football related activities.

Nonsense I'm afraid, if you want to understand, read up on the differences between assets, liabilities and expenses and then you'll understand where the losses come from.

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

I'd suggest that what you find hilarious is a little different to me then, bank rolling investment doesn't create larger losses, if a break even company invests in assets the cost of those assets doesn't get deducted and create a loss so his suggestion was incorrect . It is solely the wage inflation that has created the losses.

 

[Damocles]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Nonsense I'm afraid, if you want to understand, read up on the differences between assets, liabilities and expenses and then you'll understand where the losses come from.

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

I'd suggest that what you find hilarious is a little different to me then, bank rolling investment doesn't create larger losses, if a break even company invests in assets the cost of those assets doesn't get deducted and create a loss so his suggestion was incorrect . It is solely the wage inflation that has created the losses.

Ok. Can you please explain the concept of amortisation of intangible assets to people please?

 

[oakiecokie]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Nonsense I'm afraid, if you want to understand, read up on the differences between assets, liabilities and expenses and then you'll understand where the losses come from.

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

I'd suggest that what you find hilarious is a little different to me then, bank rolling investment doesn't create larger losses, if a break even company invests in assets the cost of those assets doesn't get deducted and create a loss so his suggestion was incorrect . It is solely the wage inflation that has created the losses.

Whats it like up there ?? I`m talking about your arse,as you appear to have you fucking head stuck that far up it.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Nonsense I'm afraid, if you want to understand, read up on the differences between assets, liabilities and expenses and then you'll understand where the losses come from.

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

I'd suggest that what you find hilarious is a little different to me then, bank rolling investment doesn't create larger losses, if a break even company invests in assets the cost of those assets doesn't get deducted and create a loss so his suggestion was incorrect . It is solely the wage inflation that has created the losses.

For your information, I'm well aware of the difference between revenue and capital spending. But both have to be financed somehow.

If we turnover £200m and spend £220m on operating expenses then we've lost £20m and someone, somehow has to finance that loss. Usually that's via the shareholders (via cash injections or reduction in shareholder funds) or external sources of finance.

If we turnover £200m and spend £180m on operational costs but also spend £50m on capital projects then we've made a profit but still need to find the cash to finance the shortfall on capital spending.

What i was saying, which you clearly don't understand, is that in the last few years we've been able to sustain huge losses on the P&L account (ignoring any capital spending) because Sheikh Mansour has covered those losses. So we can pay wages higher than our total revenue because we know there is no financial risk. When John Wardle was the majority owner, we couldn't do that as we'd reached the limit of what he was prepared to put in. That's why we nearly went into administration in 2008 as more money was going out than coming in and we had no one to finance those losses, even though they were significantly smaller.

 

[Neil McNab]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Well Mr Mcnab, you seem awfully knowledgeable on financial matters at our club.
Infact if you are correct we are all screwed. Amazing that the richest man in the world seems to have been unable to get the correct advice and has landed himself in this mess.
Have you thought about offering your advice to those bunch if losers running our club or is it too late already?
Alternatively, you could just sit back and enjoy the ride and the amazing football like the rest of us simpletons ;-)

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".

-- Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:31 am --

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".

Oh, and by the way I trust the richest man in the world to know what he is doing and get better advice than you. So does just about everybody else here in case you haven't noticed and it's not me that started the argument and accusations in case it's slipped your non simpleton attention.

I think your first sentence should have ended "better advice than you could provide" I am not advice, I am a human.
At no point have I said our owner doesn't have good advice, I commented on fans understanding of the clubs position not our owners understanding of it.
Good luck with the grammar, your spelling is wonderful though!

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

Calling PB somebody who speaks nonsense and doesn't understand the state of the pre-takeover City is just the singularly most hilarious comment I think I've ever seen on here and I used to argue with pauldominic.

I'll let PB tell you why.

I'd suggest that what you find hilarious is a little different to me then, bank rolling investment doesn't create larger losses, if a break even company invests in assets the cost of those assets doesn't get deducted and create a loss so his suggestion was incorrect . It is solely the wage inflation that has created the losses.

Whats it like up there ?? I`m talking about your arse,as you appear to have you fucking head stuck that far up it.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: Sunday Press. "City may face Euro Expulsion"

The amazing ride on the pitch I am enjoying thanks, us none simpletons can take an interest in the other progress the club is making too.
If you have the attitude that the richest man in the world must know what he is doing then why discuss it in this forum.

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".

-- Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:31 am --

Mate, for a "none simpleton" you should really have better spelling.
It's "non".

Oh, and by the way I trust the richest man in the world to know what he is doing and get better advice than you. So does just about everybody else here in case you haven't noticed and it's not me that started the argument and accusations in case it's slipped your non simpleton attention.

I think your first sentence should have ended "better advice than you could provide" I am not advice, I am a human.
At no point have I said our owner doesn't have good advice, I commented on fans understanding of the clubs position not our owners understanding of it.
Good luck with the grammar, your spelling is wonderful though!

Do you, by any chance, have a micro-penis?