Their financial results beg to differ, but what do I know. I’m sure a few Mancs hopping on a flight every now and then must have them bathing in Kristal in Abu Dhabi.
I think you’re possibly confusing Etihad’s profitability and it’s brand exposure.
“A few Mancs hopping on a flight every now and then” is clearly not enough to make a premium class Middle Eastern long haul airline profitable.
But I think you’re being a bit naive if you think Etihad’s sponsorship of City was with the intention of making that money back through “Mancs hopping on a plane to Abu Dhabi”.
Clearly the bigger picture with sponsoring City was to get exposure for the brand in the UK and pretty much anywhere the PL is watched worldwide. I’d never heard of Etihad before they sponsored us. My friends and family hadn’t. I’d expect they weren’t a particularly well known airline accross the UK when they sponsored us.
But now they are very widely known accross the country. Ask a thousand people accross the UK what’s the first thing you associate with Etihad, I’ll bet you the top answer will be Manchester City. I’ve no doubt that pattern would be repeated all over the world where the PL is popular.
There are a thousand variables that go in to making an airline profitable, you’re far more qualified than me to know what they are. Brand recognition isn’t the only one. But brand recognition is the only one that the City sponsorship has got anything to do with. And in terms of increasing exposure and awareness for the Etihad brand, the sponsorship of City has been a monumental and unqualified success.
Khaldoon himself says that when he goes in to meetings around the world on Abu Dhabi state business, the first thing people mention to him is Manchester City. It’s a great opening, a conversation starter. I have no doubt the same thing happens with Etihad executives.
You’re seeing Etihad sponsor City and Etihad not being profitable and linking the two things together. But as the old cliché goes, correlation does not imply causation.